Local News: Cairo, Egypt 

 | 

Sign Up

 | 

Sign In

NASA: Human Activity, Not Solar Activity, Drives Global Warming and...

Posted in the Alternative Energy Forum

Read

70 Comments

More Alternative Energy Discussions »

Comments (Page 2)

Showing posts 21 - 40 of70
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Be true to yourself.”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

3

2

1

LOL, I'm still laughing at the Hansen gang and Joe Romm.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

4

3

2

SoE wrote:
<quoted text>
..........
You do seem to be behind in it all...
Leaning to the left ?
Straighten up your monitor...
Monitor is level and your upset that I just don't click on the link, read, and then proclaim that your right. Instead I go further and find out about the people who wrote it. See if they have an agenda and what else they have written. To find out more than you were telling me. So, am I really guilty of falling behind or looking behind the curtain and discovering that your show is an illusion.

You should of not be surprised that skeptics examine more than just what is presented. After all, it is what makes us skeptics. The inability to accept things at face value. The urge to dig deeper.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Fr3eth1nker wrote:
I think there was a massive boom in population during the ice age. The smoke from their campfires caused the environment to change and melted the ice. I think that's how the ice age ended. Perhaps there were gas powered vehicles at the time.
Humor alert

It could of been gassy wolly manmoths.

End humor alert

Since: Aug 11

Woodridge, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Global warming is caused by human activity, right? Those damn cavemen caused the ice to melt.
Northie

Spokane, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

5

5

4

Fr3eth1nker wrote:
Global warming is caused by human activity, right? Those damn cavemen caused the ice to melt.
Nope.

http://www.amnh.org/education/resources/rfl/w...
SoE

Clearfield, UT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Monitor is level and your upset that I just don't click on the link, read, and then proclaim that your right. Instead I go further and find out about the people who wrote it. See if they have an agenda and what else they have written. To find out more than you were telling me. So, am I really guilty of falling behind or looking behind the curtain and discovering that your show is an illusion.
You should of not be surprised that skeptics examine more than just what is presented. After all, it is what makes us skeptics. The inability to accept things at face value. The urge to dig deeper.
Well, you have certainly gone as far back as the darvonian here.
Some things can obviously be taken at face value
then again some faces have no value...I'll not interject assumptions
SoE

Clearfield, UT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Humor alert
It could of been gassy wolly manmoths.
End humor alert
Oh, i doubt it's the end...

Since: Aug 11

Woodridge, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Northie wrote:
So the tilt of the earth was caused by humans? That makes a lot of sense. Dont you think?
Sign up for Top Picks deals email
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

2

fr3eth1nker wrote:
I think there was a massive boom in population during the ice age. The smoke from their campfires caused the environment to change and melted the ice.
The best presentation of AGW denier theory ever set forth in a pee-reviewed unscientific dock u mint!

Since: Aug 11

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

There are many evidence provided on the internet. Many of which are biased towards either side of the paradigm.

With that said, the ice on the glaciers are melting today. Emmisions on vehicles are being regulated so that us humans do not further contribute to the aftereffects of our actions.

The question remains, is humanity the cause of the ice age to end? Perhaps not; perhaps it did. Either way, we weren't there to witness. My sense humor should tell you which side of the paradigm I'm leaning towards.

Since: Aug 11

Woodridge, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
The best presentation of AGW denier theory ever set forth in a pee-reviewed unscientific dock u mint!
At what point did I call anyone "names?" Are you trying to get your message across? Do you believe that your message will be heard by me if you enact on name calling. I refuse to be rude towards others that I don't know personally. Don't be that type of person. There seems to be over population on the internet of the likes.

Im trying to understand both sides of the paradigm. If one wants to get a specific a message across towards others who are in oppose of certain topic, why not speak respectfully.

I dont mean to sound serious. You know I have sense of humor.
Ex Machine Operator

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fr3eth1nker wrote:
Global warming is caused by human activity, right? Those damn cavemen caused the ice to melt.
You shouldn't be so 'open minded' that the brains leak out..
alternative meds

Nha Trang, Vietnam

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Are... r u saying,'I Am Who Em I'
i thinke U is so busy typin yo Thesis Paper...i correct yo spellinkey..hop it"s ok4u!! hav U heard Scienteethy Bible termonologee yet? ;-000
alternative meds

Nha Trang, Vietnam

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37
Feb 13, 2012
 
SoE wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you have certainly gone as far back as the darvonian here.
Some things can obviously be taken at face value
then again some faces have no value...I'll not interject assumptions
i c on TV dat UT had much of Uraniumist reserve!!! is dat wny Mitt BYU tryin to tap two compete with Iruniummie!! ;-0000
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

5

3

3

Northie wrote:
http://www.amnh.org/education/resources/rfl/w ...
///////
freeztodeath wrote:
So the tilt of the earth was caused by humans? That makes a lot of sense.
///////
litesong wrote:
Alert! Alert!
Really stupid understanding of science by an AGW denier.
YouHelpFixIt

Nottingham, MD

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

litesong wrote:
Northie wrote:
http://www.amnh.org/education/resources/rfl/w ...
///////
freeztodeath wrote:
So the tilt of the earth was caused by humans? That makes a lot of sense.
///////
litesong wrote:
Alert! Alert!
Really stupid understanding of science by an AGW denier.
You are babbling again.

Since: Aug 11

Woodridge, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Ex Machine Operator wrote:
<quoted text>
You shouldn't be so 'open minded' that the brains leak out..
Id rather be "open minded" than "close minded."

How about taking the time to respond by my main point. What caused the ice age to end? If global warming is caused by human activity, does the same goes to my main point? I'm not being sarcastic. I'm just using logical thinking.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Man had nothing to do with the end of the ice age. CO2 and climate continued to change at the same rate until industrialization.

CO2 works as an intensifier. Ice cores from both Antarctica and Greenland show that the last ice age started to become milder 19,000 years ago, completely in accordance with increased solar radiation from the earth’s favorable orientation in its orbit around the sun.

There was dramatic climate variation as abrupt climate shifts in the ice age. The climate, especially in the high northern latitudes had up to 30 such sudden shifts in Greenland. These shifts cannot be explained by solar radiation. The shifts are much stronger in the north with a temperature change of 10-18 degrees; but in the south they are between 3-5 degrees. The changes are not simultaneous either. When it is cold in the north it is warmer in the south and when it is warmer in the north is colder in the south. These “climate ripples”, the bipolar swings, can be explained through an interaction between the atmosphere and ocean currents.

The last cold ripple ended 11,711 years ago because this ripple lies so close to the ice age’s general end. The ice age never returned and there have not been any ripples since. Fortunately. It takes about 10,000 years for an ice age to come to an end gradually but for a climate ripple (such as the end of the Younger Dryas) the change in weather took, 25 years later, just one year, temperature wise.

Source: Jørgen Peder Steffensen, PhD. Centre for Ice and Climate, Niels Bohr Institute
Ex Machine Operator

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fr3eth1nker wrote:
<quoted text>
Id rather be "open minded" than "close minded."
Sure. I'm liberal to some degree. But I still keep my critical thinking skills in order.
Fr3eth1nker wrote:
<quoted text>
How about taking the time to respond by my main point. What caused the ice age to end?
Surely you have heard of the Milankovitch orbital cycles?

http://geography.about.com/od/learnabouttheea...

They make a small difference each year but it can feedback (snow reflects sunlight so a small increase in snow cover leads to cooling, etc. Same with the return to interglacial.

Note that solution of GHGs (i.e. CO2) in the cooler oceans occurs as ice ages start and similarly are release from warming oceans when temperatures rise. This forms a positive feedback that amplifies the Milankovitch response as well. That is why the exit from ice ages are delayed by about 800 years as the CO2 is trapped in the deep cold ocean currents and it takes about 800 years for them to reach the endpoints where they rise to the surface again to be warmed by the rising surface temperatures.

We may be exiting the climate region where such small effects can lead to such extreme amplification as glaciation. Note that there was NO ice ages for a long time before the rise of the isthmus of Panama about 2.5 mya, which blocked the circum-equatorial current from moderating the temperatures in the Atlantic.
Fr3eth1nker wrote:
<quoted text>
If global warming is caused by human activity,
The science has evaluated why we have a sudden temperature peak AT the warmest times ( i.e. the Holocene interglacial) and there is no serious doubt that the MAJORITY of the warming is from human activity.
Fr3eth1nker wrote:
<quoted text>
does the same goes to my main point?
You didn't have a point. The climate response over many millennial to orbital cycles was responsible for the purely 'natural' exit from an ice age, just as it was for every OTHER ice age (and there
have been PLENTY of them).

Totally different causes and totally different effects (AGW is much faster or extreme in terms of changing temperature vs time)
Fr3eth1nker wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not being sarcastic. I'm just using logical thinking.
No. You are not using even reasoned thinking. The idea that a population in the hundred thousands with nothing more than cook fires could make a climate change is silly. Climate is only responding now to emissions of 7 billion people averaging several tons of GHGs per year. Nothing anthropogenic in the paleolithic could even measure on that scale. And the Milankovitch cycles are certainly not causing WARMING at this time. They 'peak' at the interglacial level which we entered several millenia ago. They cannot drive further warming.

P.S. Reason is the touchstone. Logic just derives unstated facts from what you ASSUMED in the first place. As one person put it, it is a way to go wrong with confidence.

Since: Aug 11

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
Feb 13, 2012
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Ex Machine Operator wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure. I'm liberal to some degree. But I still keep my critical thinking skills in order.
<quoted text>
Surely you have heard of the Milankovitch orbital cycles?
http://geography.about.com/od/learnabouttheea...
They make a small difference each year but it can feedback (snow reflects sunlight so a small increase in snow cover leads to cooling, etc. Same with the return to interglacial.
Note that solution of GHGs (i.e. CO2) in the cooler oceans occurs as ice ages start and similarly are release from warming oceans when temperatures rise. This forms a positive feedback that amplifies the Milankovitch response as well. That is why the exit from ice ages are delayed by about 800 years as the CO2 is trapped in the deep cold ocean currents and it takes about 800 years for them to reach the endpoints where they rise to the surface again to be warmed by the rising surface temperatures.
We may be exiting the climate region where such small effects can lead to such extreme amplification as glaciation. Note that there was NO ice ages for a long time before the rise of the isthmus of Panama about 2.5 mya, which blocked the circum-equatorial current from moderating the temperatures in the Atlantic.
<quoted text>
The science has evaluated why we have a sudden temperature peak AT the warmest times ( i.e. the Holocene interglacial) and there is no serious doubt that the MAJORITY of the warming is from human activity.
<quoted text>
You didn't have a point. The climate response over many millennial to orbital cycles was responsible for the purely 'natural' exit from an ice age, just as it was for every OTHER ice age (and there
have been PLENTY of them).
Totally different causes and totally different effects (AGW is much faster or extreme in terms of changing temperature vs time)
<quoted text>
No. You are not using even reasoned thinking. The idea that a population in the hundred thousands with nothing more than cook fires could make a climate change is silly. Climate is only responding now to emissions of 7 billion people averaging several tons of GHGs per year. Nothing anthropogenic in the paleolithic could even measure on that scale. And the Milankovitch cycles are certainly not causing WARMING at this time. They 'peak' at the interglacial level which we entered several millenia ago. They cannot drive further warming.
P.S. Reason is the touchstone. Logic just derives unstated facts from what you ASSUMED in the first place. As one person put it, it is a way to go wrong with confidence.
My friend, I understand what you're trying to say. I'm sure you're well educated when it comes to believing that global warming is real. The internet has abundance of info towards the argument for both sides. The problem is that there's just as many "respected scientists" to argue for either side.

It gets very confusing when you read their findings because one is just as believable as the other. In other words, trying to give you a link to counter your point is useless. With that said, I can't fully believe that global warming is real; and neither can I fully believe that it isn't. What I'm trying to say is that I will not just carelessly destroy the environment. I used to drive an SUV. Now I drive a Prius to honor global warming out of fear. I'm sure you know that fear is a great tool to control the masses. Just think of it as fear-based religions. Fear can enslave us. I believe that it would be foolish of us to be careless of our environment.

I'm sure that you're starting to see my standpoint on this matter.

Wether our actions contributes to global warming or not, it doesnt matter. We shouldn't be careless either way. Global warming is either a propaganda to scam(cash in) or the other.

I hope there's a better clarity of my point of view based on what I said:)

Tell me when this thread is updated:
(Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker

Send me an email

Showing posts 21 - 40 of70
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Daily Horoscope for June 2

Cancer

You have a tendency to go overboard today Cancer, whether it's eating too much food, drinking too much or taking on more than you can handle at work. You simply won't know when to stop! You're in a very sociable mood and you're also feeling very easy-going, prepared to take people at face value and to turn a blind eye to their faults and foibles. And you hope they'll do the same for you.

Get your Horoscope »