Global Warming

[Palpatine001 57]

Ok it looks like someone has to be the devils advocate and come in Turbolasers blazing as normal, might as well be me!

First of all I have to first laugh, pinch myself then recompose myself as I read through this and see the Green Lobby has most people here by the... well you get the jist

I am going to say and stand by the point of

GLOBAL WARMING is NOTHING but ALL HOT AIR used by the Green Lobby (with political agendas) to scare everyone silly.

Climatic Change is REAL however 95% is natural and 5% human made!

So let me post the REAL facts

I start with an piece from www.nzherald.com that was posted on Climate Change

Anthony Farrell

Ten facts about global warming: 

1. Britain is one degree Celsius cooler now than it was at the time of the Domesday book.

2. Greenland got its name from the verdant pastures that attracted the Norse settlers under Eric the Red in 986. They carried on their normal way of life (based on cattle, grain, hay and herring) for 300 years until the Little Ice Age, when they were driven off by the encroaching ice and the Inuit took over. The ice and the Inuit are still there.

3. Carbon dioxide is a minor greenhouse gas. In the atmosphere there is over a hundred times the concentration of water vapour, which is the dominant greenhouse gas.

4. Without the Greenhouse Effect there would be no life on Earth.

5. Temperature measurements by satellite, radio sonde balloons and well maintained rural surface stations in the West show no significant warming.

6. The only evidence of significant warming comes from mainly non-western stations that are probably ill maintained or those that are contaminated by the Urban Heat Island Effect.

7. Computer models of the climate are worthless, as they are based on many assumptions about interactions between climate factors that are still unknown to science. They are generally unstable and chaotic, giving a wide variety of answers depending on the input assumptions.

8. The Kyoto agreement would have a devastating effect on the world economy but, since carbon dioxide is a minor greenhouse gas, an undetectable effect on the climate.

9. The IPCC (the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has been the main engine for promoting the global warming scare. It has become notorious for its corrupt practices of doctoring its reports and executive summaries, after they have been approved by the participating scientists, to conform to its political objectives

10. The really big lie about man-made global warming is that almost all scientists accept it. More than 4,000 scientists from 106 countries, including 72 Nobel prize winners, signed the Heidelberg Appeal (1992), calling for a rational scientific approach to environmental problems. Many senior scientists have also supported The Statement by Atmospheric Scientists on Greenhouse Warming (1992), The Leipzig Declaration (1997) and finally the Oregon Petition (1998) which received the signatures of over 19,000 scientists.

That can be found here http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/466/story.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10420297 but it becomes pay for view after the  28/1/07

Now I will back that as being in The University of Auckland studying Geography and Politics, I have access to readings, research and material to make my own independent claim and statements in this sorry saga

I see someone posted a Temperture:CO2 Chart and say there is a link, congrats you have just shown the infamous Hockey Stick Model which we are told and hammered by our lecturers to IGNORE at all costs. That model has been discredited so many times for woeful wrongness as the models had far to many variables in them to make a credible conclusion.

This is the REAL story

CO2 is the 2nd biggest greenhouse gas after water vapor, her volume is in saturation point in the atmosphere so adding more CO2 will do NOTHING in rasing temperature, Solar Radition (sun) is the main cause as well as the fluxing water vapour in the atmosphere. Also I have proposed a research paper with the university looking into CO2:Water Vapour fluxes and temperature fluxes seen over the last 65 million years. I believe if anything we are doing the planet a FAVOUR pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.

Explaining: Plants in the world are only receiving 1/2 the amount of CO2 needed for full optimum growth, green house experiments show that increased CO2 = better photosynthesis = better plant growth = better food production = better O2 output = better quality of life as more food is around.

With water vapour in the atmosphere, studys on that and her relation to green house gases are not conclusive enough and water vapour fuels STORMS etc, might want to look there

We just have no idea what the climate can do, evidence suggest Earth has been warmer than now, sea levels higher, ice caps non existant and vice versa, our models have far too many variables and politics now contaminates sound independent science.

Yes we have to move away from oil, but not due to this scare mongering

I can go on and bring sea levels into here but I won't yet apart from the sea is rising at 0.2cm a year while most land masses rise 0.3cm a year, so you work that out! I'll post a piece on sea levels soon

I'll be watching here closely

[UltraGIR XL 3]

Originally posted by: coolotter88 The Day After Tomorrow is only a movie, it's been elaborated on and the director has taken poetic licence...or whatever it's called. if you did some research on the real life phenomenon, you'd find out that it would not cause a giant chunk of ice to crush the northern hemisphere. we'd get colder, drier weather but that's about it.

Besides, tell me why I should care about rising sea levels? The complete meltdown of the antarctic and greenland ice would raise sea levels by nearly 70 meters as predicted by scientists...How long do you think it would take to do that? it's a lot of ice to melt. This would probably take the next 1000 years to melt everything. In fact, in my lifetime, Nothing really bad will happen so why should I care? After I die, it's another generation's problem.quote>

"The Day After Tomorrow" was merely a hyperbolic example.

And... wow. I mean, no offense, to say you'd put the fate of the world on the hands of another generation just because it doesn't affect you... is kind of selfish. Seriously.

It'd take far less time than 1000 years, I assure you. Look at current trends: this ice is melting faster and faster.

Still... all the people that could eventually be affected, the animals...

That doesn't concern you?

[UltraGIR XL 3]

Originally posted by: Palpatine001 Ok it looks like someone has to be the devils advocate and come in Turbolasers blazing as normal, might as well be me!

First of all I have to first laugh, pinch myself then recompose myself as I read through this and see the Green Lobby has most people here by the... well you get the jist

I am going to say and stand by the point of

GLOBAL WARMING is NOTHING but ALL HOT AIR used by the Green Lobby (with political agendas) to scare everyone silly.

Climatic Change is REAL however 95% is natural and 5% human made!

So let me post the REAL facts

I start with an piece from www.nzherald.com that was posted on Climate Change

Anthony Farrell

Ten facts about global warming: 

1. Britain is one degree Celsius cooler now than it was at the time of the Domesday book.

2. Greenland got its name from the verdant pastures that attracted the Norse settlers under Eric the Red in 986. They carried on their normal way of life (based on cattle, grain, hay and herring) for 300 years until the Little Ice Age, when they were driven off by the encroaching ice and the Inuit took over. The ice and the Inuit are still there.

3. Carbon dioxide is a minor greenhouse gas. In the atmosphere there is over a hundred times the concentration of water vapour, which is the dominant greenhouse gas.

4. Without the Greenhouse Effect there would be no life on Earth.

5. Temperature measurements by satellite, radio sonde balloons and well maintained rural surface stations in the West show no significant warming.

6. The only evidence of significant warming comes from mainly non-western stations that are probably ill maintained or those that are contaminated by the Urban Heat Island Effect.

7. Computer models of the climate are worthless, as they are based on many assumptions about interactions between climate factors that are still unknown to science. They are generally unstable and chaotic, giving a wide variety of answers depending on the input assumptions.

8. The Kyoto agreement would have a devastating effect on the world economy but, since carbon dioxide is a minor greenhouse gas, an undetectable effect on the climate.

9. The IPCC (the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has been the main engine for promoting the global warming scare. It has become notorious for its corrupt practices of doctoring its reports and executive summaries, after they have been approved by the participating scientists, to conform to its political objectives

10. The really big lie about man-made global warming is that almost all scientists accept it. More than 4,000 scientists from 106 countries, including 72 Nobel prize winners, signed the Heidelberg Appeal (1992), calling for a rational scientific approach to environmental problems. Many senior scientists have also supported The Statement by Atmospheric Scientists on Greenhouse Warming (1992), The Leipzig Declaration (1997) and finally the Oregon Petition (1998) which received the signatures of over 19,000 scientists.

That can be found here http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/466/story.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10420297 but it becomes pay for view after the  28/1/07

Now I will back that as being in The University of Auckland studying Geography and Politics, I have access to readings, research and material to make my own independent claim and statements in this sorry saga

I see someone posted a Temperture:CO2 Chart and say there is a link, congrats you have just shown the infamous Hockey Stick Model which we are told and hammered by our lecturers to IGNORE at all costs. That model has been discredited so many times for woeful wrongness as the models had far to many variables in them to make a credible conclusion.

This is the REAL story

CO2 is the 2nd biggest greenhouse gas after water vapor, her volume is in saturation point in the atmosphere so adding more CO2 will do NOTHING in rasing temperature, Solar Radition (sun) is the main cause as well as the fluxing water vapour in the atmosphere. Also I have proposed a research paper with the university looking into CO2:Water Vapour fluxes and temperature fluxes seen over the last 65 million years. I believe if anything we are doing the planet a FAVOUR pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.

Explaining: Plants in the world are only receiving 1/2 the amount of CO2 needed for full optimum growth, green house experiments show that increased CO2 = better photosynthesis = better plant growth = better food production = better O2 output = better quality of life as more food is around.

With water vapour in the atmosphere, studys on that and her relation to green house gases are not conclusive enough and water vapour fuels STORMS etc, might want to look there

We just have no idea what the climate can do, evidence suggest Earth has been warmer than now, sea levels higher, ice caps non existant and vice versa, our models have far too many variables and politics now contaminates sound independent science.

Yes we have to move away from oil, but not due to this scare mongering

I can go on and bring sea levels into here but I won't yet apart from the sea is rising at 0.2cm a year while most land masses rise 0.3cm a year, so you work that out! I'll post a piece on sea levels soon

I'll be watching here closely

quote>

Those facts are entirely flawed and completely biased. Besides, what would the Green Lobby have to gain? Book sales? The world economy's failure  would affect them as everyone else, and believe me--- capping greenhouse gas emmissions will not destroy the world's economy (look at Japan). It'd take complete embargos and sanctions.

Tests have been done to show  that the combinations of methane and CO₂ being added the atmosphere create artificial photosystemesque structures that accept sunlight but don't give it up..

Even if Global Warming is "full of hot air," why not stop the acid rain that destroys thousands of acres of woodland? Why not increase the quality of our air? Stop for money? If Global Warming proves true, there might not be much of a world LEFT to have an economy.

[Palpatine001 57]

"The Day After Tomorrow" was merely a hyperbolic example.

And... wow. I mean, no offense, to say you'd put the fate of the world on the hands of another generation just because it doesn't affect you... is kind of selfish. Seriously.

It'd take far less time than 1000 years, I assure you. Look at current trends: this ice is melting faster and faster.

Still... all the people that could eventually be affected, the animals...

That doesn't concern you?quote>

[coolotter88 2]

are you talking about the earth's geodynamo? google that word and you'll see true results on switching poles. And I doubt there will be much heating going on when we don't have a magnetic field, just more cases of skin cancer....

[UltraGIR XL 3]

Originally posted by: Palpatine001

NOPE NOT AT ALL as sea levels will only rise 1.8m maximum by 2200 and the land would of risen on average double that

None of this 70m rise junk

Put Ice into a glass of water, let it melt and see how much it rises by?quote>

Where are you getting your facts from? FOX News?

And to compare the Earth's water and ice volume to that of a glass of water is a horrible comparison.

[coolotter88 2]

animals, survival of the fittest, if you can't adapt to human changes (which are natural too, all changes are I suppose) THEN DIE! we should have a day where we help remove animals from the endangered species list....the other way. but on a more serious note...considering how the increase in the increase in sea level is merely .0013 mm give or take .0006, I'd say that this is not "faster and faster" and would probably take the greater part of this next millenia for the greenland ice and antarctic ice to melt.

[Palpatine001 57]

I stand by what I claim and more and more evidence from the universities will back my claims

Methane as it is a heavy gas acts as a reflector to shortwave raditation (sunlight) thus is been sighted as a cooler not a warmer to the Earth (cows are good for something?) And the Green have everything to gain, make enough noise, make enough "reports" and money floods in.

As for Acid Rain, a different area that required other measures

Yes we need to wean off oil (I might of said that already ^^) I admit that, what I want swallow is the crap the IPCC produces

[UltraGIR XL 3]

Originally posted by: coolotter88 animals, survival of the fittest, if you can't adapt to human changes (which are natural too, all changes are I suppose) THEN DIE! we should have a day where we help remove animals from the endangered species list....the other way. but on a more serious note...considering how the increase in the increase in sea level is merely .0013 mm give or take .0006, I'd say that this is not "faster and faster" and would probably take the greater part of this next millenia for the greenland ice and antarctic ice to melt.quote>

Your .0006 was the rate of the '80s. That's doubled since. If Antarctica and Greenland melt, the world will be in chaos.

Go ahead with survival of the fittest, but if we helped cause this, than that's not natural selection. That's self-inflicted doomsday.

[coolotter88 2]

We should burn ethanol instead. the US produces crap...I mean truckloads of corn, grass, wheat, corn, corn, and more corn byproducts. we should just have a GIANT ethanol fermentation plant in Iowa (Grassley would be happy) and burn it all for power. In fact, we could fly a prefabricated/modular vodka factory from Russia or something, Vodka is basically ethanol! The best part is, ethanol produces no gain in greenhouse gases when burned.

read what I wrote please, I didn't say .0006, it was room for error of .0006 mm.

[UltraGIR XL 3]

Originally posted by: Palpatine001 I stand by what I claim and more and more evidence from the universities will back my claims

Methane as it is a heavy gas acts as a reflector to shortwave raditation (sunlight) thus is been sighted as a cooler not a warmer to the Earth (cows are good for something?) And the Green have everything to gain, make enough noise, make enough "reports" and money floods in.

As for Acid Rain, a different area that required other measures

Yes we need to wean off oil (I might of said that already ^^) I admit that, what I want swallow is the crap the IPCC producesquote>

And I will stand by Doctors Meijer and Bahr. The 70 m increase is possible with Greenland and Antarctica together.

Chemical pollutants in the air may also help melt ice.

Methane is close to the ground as ozone isn't. Ozone traps heat and methane reflects it. The more ozone there is, the more heat is trapped. The more methane there is the more is reflected. More of each affects global wind patterns. That in turn is dependent on CO₂ levels. Heat will be distributed differently. We may get warmer, we may get colder. Water levels will surly rise.

No matter what the theat, humans are playinga  role in the speeding up of whatever is happening.

[Palpatine001 57]

Originally posted by: UltraGIR XL

Originally posted by: Palpatine001

NOPE NOT AT ALL as sea levels will only rise 1.8m maximum by 2200 and the land would of risen on average double that

None of this 70m rise junk

Put Ice into a glass of water, let it melt and see how much it rises by?quote>

Where are you getting your facts from? FOX News?

And to compare the Earth's water and ice volume to that of a glass of water is a horrible comparison.quote>

 

I was going to ask you the same thing, all you are pumping out comes from FOX

I get my information from The University of Auckland which connected to the other Univerisities of the world. Papers and Reports from the Uni's are highly vetted and peer reviewed for maintain balance and intergrety. Information I review and critique as I study!

Thus I stand by my claim and will be laughing in 2050 when the world see it as a JOKE

[UltraGIR XL 3]

Originally posted by: coolotter88 We should burn ethanol instead. the US produces crap...I mean truckloads of corn, grass, wheat, corn, corn, and more corn byproducts. we should just have a GIANT ethanol fermentation plant in Iowa (Grassley would be happy) and burn it all for power. In fact, we could fly a prefabricated/modular vodka factory from Russia or something, Vodka is basically ethanol! The best part is, ethanol produces no gain in greenhouse gases when burned.

read what I wrote please, I didn't say .0006, it was room for error of .0006 mm.quote>

Sorry 'bout that then.

Oh, but there's another problem.

Believe it or not, but the US hasn't enough corn to meet its energy demands. We'd have to invest in sugarcane and switchgrass.

[UltraGIR XL 3]

Originally posted by: Palpatine001

Originally posted by: UltraGIR XL

Originally posted by: Palpatine001

NOPE NOT AT ALL as sea levels will only rise 1.8m maximum by 2200 and the land would of risen on average double that

None of this 70m rise junk

Put Ice into a glass of water, let it melt and see how much it rises by?quote>

Where are you getting your facts from? FOX News?

And to compare the Earth's water and ice volume to that of a glass of water is a horrible comparison.quote>

 

I was going to ask you the same thing, all you are pumping out comes from FOX

I get my information from The University of Auckland which connected to the other Univerisities of the world. Papers and Reports from the Uni's are highly vetted and peer reviewed for maintain balance and intergrety. Information I review and critique as I study!

Thus I stand by my claim and will be laughing in 2050 when the world see it as a JOKEquote>

And I stand by my claims when in 2050 we'll be worrying for our children..

I get my information from the Univerity of Michigan and the University of Illinois.

I critique this just as much as you do.

The information has endless interpretations. Methane, ozone, nitrous oxide and CO₂ produce adverse effects. It's all a matter of who you listen to. Everything we've been saying to eachother has been contradictedwith the next post, though I stand by my belief that greenhouse gases trap heat, furthering the melting of icecaps. Greenhouse gases are produced by humans. Two separate experiments in the University of Michigan prove their powers, not to mention the fact that the entire planet Venus can act as some proof (I say some, for sulfur isn't as plentiful as other gases).

[football_fever 6]

wow, we need to chill out here. The lore in iceland was that vikings discovered iceland and greenland...iceland is green and greenland is ice. Being the real-estate experts that they were, they named the beautiful island they wanted for themselves iceland to keep people away, and the frigid one they didn't want they named greenland to get people to move there. hahaha

It sure is weird to have evangelicals telling the administration was to do, rather than the other way around. It was getting rediculous for awhile there...

[Jasoncw 11,840]

The icecaps melting isn't something gradual, it's a threshold.  The ice is bright, and reflects heat.  Once it gets thin enough to get slightly darker, it absorbs more heat and melts faster, and then gets darker and absorbs more, etc.  Chunks break off and go south, melting.  The icecaps cover a large area, and the darker water absorbing everything that hits all of that area will make the water warmer in general.  It's a huge surface area and deflects a ton of heat.

Also, weather patterns depend on the north and south water being cold.

Coolotter88, EVERYTHING is pointing towards global warming being true, but you just keep on saying it's not good enough.  But when it comes down to it, no matter what anyone says, you're going to say it's not good enough.  That's very clear if everything that's known about global warming isn't good enough for you already.

[kurtvedder 4]

How many people on this forum are environemental sceintists? Not many (if any). All of the infromation you guys call "evidence" come straight out of channels like NBC and ABC or websites like Wikipedia, which were written by individuals like all of you who let their emotions get in the way of the true facts.

[UltraGIR XL 3]

Originally posted by: kurtvedder How many people on this forum are environemental sceintists? Not many (if any). All of the infromation you guys call "evidence" come straight out of channels like NBC and ABC or websites like Wikipedia, which were written by individuals like all of you who let their emotions get in the way of the true facts.

quote>

No, we don't. On behalf of both Mr. Palpatine and myself, we study university reports. ABC, FOX, CBS... they're all too biased, and wikipedia's hardly a reliable source.

[kibblewitbit 0]

one question to ultra gir xl do u drive a hybrid car, does all of your home's energy and heating come from a zero emission source have never been in an airplane, ridden in a bus, or eaten beef (from methane producing cows of course) theres probably a lot more i could put onto this but i gtg

[UltraGIR XL 3]

Originally posted by: kibblewitbit one question to ultra gir xl do u drive a hybrid car, does all of your home's energy and heating come from a zero emission source have never been in an airplane, ridden in a bus, or eaten beef (from methane producing cows of course) theres probably a lot more i could put onto this but i gtgquote>

I do take the bus, though, I'm a vegetarian who lives in an area powered by a nuclear facility for energy. I rarely drive, but when I do it's in an old VW.

[Palpatine001 57]

I think the safest thing to do between UltraGIR XL and my self is to agree to disagree. Both of us are entrenched worse than the British and Germans in World War One and with both of us connected through universities, the shells will continue firing. UltraGIR XL The best thing for both of us is to continue to research into this and give the world answers to mitigate for climate change

However any passing shots back my way and I will open fire again and dump everything I have back into here!

In the mean time I melted some ice in a glass of salt water, and no rise at all. So the ice caps won't cause a rise and there is not enough land ice to rise it that much, thermal expansion can cause a rise, how much is unknown but best estimates are 0.2cm a year at maximum. Dont forget tectonic uplift of land as well.

Thats all from me for now

[UltraGIR XL 3]

Originally posted by: Palpatine001 I think the safest thing to do between UltraGIR XL and my self is to agree to disagree. Both of us are entrenched worse than the British and Germans in World War One and with both of us connected through universities, the shells will continue firing. UltraGIR XL The best thing for both of us is to continue to research into this and give the world answers to mitigate for climate change

However any passing shots back my way and I will open fire again and dump everything I have back into here!

In the mean time I melted some ice in a glass of salt water, and no rise at all. So the ice caps won't cause a rise and there is not enough land ice to rise it that much, thermal expansion can cause a rise, how much is unknown but best estimates are 0.2cm a year at maximum. Dont forget tectonic uplift of land as well.

Thats all from me for nowquote>

A real gentleman!

I shall make one final suggestion, in my defence--- try a tank with simulated land and a mass of ice-- remember, these sheets are massive beneath themselves. See how much land had been engulfed upon melting: even a miniscule amount's enough to fell New York.

It's been a pleasure and a challenge debating with you, sir!

[football_fever 6]

hmm...but who is the english and who is the germans?

[DOXXP29 5]

I've been reading the above postings and find the facts and figures presented interesting. I know a lot of time and research went into them and I, for one, appreciate your efforts. Frankly, I'm not sure if the scientific community is sure exactly what is going on and to what degree. Based upon all of the observations and occurances, I think it is pretty evident that SOMETHING is going on, although the degree and the acceleration of the trends may be argued and disputed by those doing the research. 

Sorting out the political agendas, the pandering for grant money, the extremist views and the actual facts is something I may never be able to accomplish. My own view is that something is going on with this planet and it's not good. Whether it is something that is going to become an immediate crisis or something that will take ages, the fact remains that if precautions are not taken as well as steps to prevent any serious escalation of the problem, it is going to have some long term implications because this is something that is not just going to clear up and go away on its own.

This is our planet. We LIVE here! Does it not make sense to keep the planet clean and safe as we do with our own homes? I'd rather have a dirty house and a clean, safe planet than the other way around.

[paperboy15 4]

Originally posted by: UltraGIR XL

Originally posted by: Palpatine001

NOPE NOT AT ALL as sea levels will only rise 1.8m maximum by 2200 and the land would of risen on average double that

None of this 70m rise junk

Put Ice into a glass of water, let it melt and see how much it rises by?quote>

Where are you getting your facts from? FOX News?

And to compare the Earth's water and ice volume to that of a glass of water is a horrible comparison.quote>

 

That's where I get all my favorable facts from! I just employ wikiality, then voila, facts!

Originally posted by: football_fever hmm...but who is the english and who is the germans?quote>

 

Don't you mean the english and french? Perhaps I am horribly confused...

Originally posted by: DOXXP29

This is our planet. We LIVE here! Does it not make sense to keep the planet clean and safe as we do with our own homes? I'd rather have a dirty house and a clean, safe planet than the other way around.quote>

 

As much of a crock I think global warming is, I can agree with this. I'm not so sure about the safe part because danger is more interesting, but it works.

[coolotter88 2]

I'd like to poke holes in palpatine's simulation....considering how you melted the ice while it is IN the cup of water, OF COURSE there won't be any change in water level. right now you are simulating what would happen if all the sea ice were to melt. Sea ice is ALREADY FLOATING on the water. right now that ice is displacing the water it would displace if it were to melt so if all the world's sea ice were to melt, the change in sea levels would be negligible. However, if the ice on antarctica and greenland were to melt off, there would be considerable increases in sea level because the ice was not displacing any water before (since it was on land) but is displacing water AFTER it melted. So in order to simulate ice melting off of antarctica and greenland, you would have to melt the ice cube in a cup (land, and so you don't make any mess) then pour the water from the melted ice into a second filled cup (the ocean). But in my opinion, having all the ice melt off of antarctica and greenland would take quite a while.

[Micah 16]

Topic Summary of the three threads:

Wow... okay.

The information and data of several Global Warming threads that were spread throughout this forum have been combined into one massive thread.

Let me clearify the topic of this thread and the other two on this page:

-This thread is about the actual debate and discussion of Global Warming.

-MrFingers' thread is about his Global Warming paper for school (It's school, right?)

-And the "Global Warming, yea or nea?" thread is a vote on whether you think Global Warming is true or not.

Sorry for the strange error on the homepage and, no, not all of these posts were written in a single minute.

[coolotter88 2]

/me confused

did you just stick all the posts of the other 2 threads at the beginning or in the middle somewhere?

have all the posts been dispersed all over? ahh!!

edit: okay...wow, the other 2 threads have been blown up and bits and pieces of them have been strewn all over this thread...eek, extra confusing...

[GMT 389]

and ths old vw is much more polluting than any modern car, no matter if its an 80hp hybrid or a 500hp sportscar

global warming is happening. no way around this.

but you will find proving facts for EVERY theory, anthropogenic, all natural, even religious reasons, maybe all of them together.

its fact that humanbeings play a role in global warming, how big this role is a matter of speculation und unbiased studies... but NOBODY trusts in science cuz 6.5 billion people think whatever they want, just like "I've got my opinion and now don't baffle me with facts"...

all ahead those who think scientific facts are nothing but a made-up lie of a member of the opposition to attract voters...

and I was as stupid as to believe the times of people thinking the world is made of politics only is over.

There's more to it than politics... and there's more to global warming than an al gore running around scaring people to get some more votes.

start using your brain to think instead of your political affiliation

I don't wanna claim al gore to be 100% right, and even if it's nothing but a lie, lies allways have a truth behind them

so, if human-made co2 emmision plays a role in global warming, no matter if it's the mayor role or the minor, why don't solving it to slower the warming at least a little to keep up living as we know it?

EDIT: to palpatine:

1: ice melting inside the water don't cause the water to rise, but ice melting outside the water (=land) causes the water to rise as soon as the melt water reaches the oceans

2: about tectonic land rise: it's like a ballance, rising on one side causes a lowering on the other side, so if you have an area rising due to tectonics, you ALLWAYS have an area lowering (=depression) e.g. the death valley, CA,  or the netherlands

[Micah 16]

/me confused

did you just stick all the posts of the other 2 threads at the beginning or in the middle somewhere?

have all the posts been dispersed all over? ahh!! quote>

I simply merged several recent threads that were from February to now. Sorry if it's confusing, but it needed to happen because the amount of threads with the same exact topic was getting rather ridiculous. However, the other two that are remaining have different topics, but are Global Warming related. 

Edit:

edit: okay...wow, the other 2 threads have been blown up and bits and pieces of them have been strewn all over this thread...eek, extra confusing... quote>

Huh?  Nothing has been done to those two other threads except for a topic summary change.