Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 28 Jul '09 03:31
    All very interesting, and ultimately terrifying.
    They should strap Shrub to a melting ice block and let him either drown or be eaten by a starving polar bear.
    Der Swaurtz Schitter, I hope you are reading this and hanging your head in shame.

    "..scientists were saying that America, the world's scientific superpower, was virtually blinding itself to climate change by cutting funds to the environmental satellite programmes run by the Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Nasa..."

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/26/climate-change-obama-administration
  2. 28 Jul '09 04:15
    Originally posted by howardgee
    All very interesting, and ultimately terrifying.
    They should strap Shrub to a melting ice block and let him either drown or be eaten by a starving polar bear.
    Der Swaurtz Schitter, I hope you are reading this and hanging your head in shame.

    "..scientists were saying that America, the world's scientific superpower, was virtually blinding itself to cli ...[text shortened]... ..."

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/26/climate-change-obama-administration
    lol,this is a joke ?
  3. 28 Jul '09 13:20
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    lol,this is a joke ?
    If it was, it would be the least funny joke of all time.

    The planet's ecology is in free fall, and Dubya, the man who is to blame most of all, cheerfully covered up the fact that his administration knew all about it.
  4. Standard member Wulebgr
    Angler
    28 Jul '09 14:27
    This is news?

    Bush suppressed multitudes of scientific studies that refuted the junk science propping up his policies, and even ignored common sense: remember the staffer, who with the blessings of the boss, stated during the fiasco in the Klamath basin that we weren't certain what would happen if the salmon had no water. Even more remarkable is that even Bush softened his opposition to the science of climate change just before Senate Republicans stepped up their recruitment of so-called scientists willing to either lie, or remain ignorant, in order to argue not with the scientists they were addressing in Oslo, but against Al Gore's most problematic exaggerations as if those represented the state of science.

    With the legacy of arrogant ignorance that characterize the Bush years, almost making those in Dayton, Tennessee circa 1925 appear enlightened in comparison, what significance can be attached to a handful of unreleased photos?
  5. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    28 Jul '09 14:30 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by howardgee
    All very interesting, and ultimately terrifying.
    They should strap Shrub to a melting ice block and let him either drown or be eaten by a starving polar bear.
    Der Swaurtz Schitter, I hope you are reading this and hanging your head in shame.

    "..scientists were saying that America, the world's scientific superpower, was virtually blinding itself to cli ...[text shortened]... ..."

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/26/climate-change-obama-administration
    The retreating ice sheets is news all of a sudden? Every Fall, we get bombarded by images and charts and graphs showing the exact extent of the ice retreat as compared to every year dating back to the dawn of time. Incidentally, the retreat in 2007 was greater than the retreat in 2008.

    The Bush administration was trying to hide the fact that the polar ice cover is retreating? LOL.

    In other news, the Bush administration tried to hide the fact that it gets hot in the summer by refusing to add 8 zillion dollars to the NOAA budget.

    Please, give us something better than that. Please.
  6. 28 Jul '09 20:35
    Originally posted by howardgee
    All very interesting, and ultimately terrifying.
    They should strap Shrub to a melting ice block and let him either drown or be eaten by a starving polar bear.
    Der Swaurtz Schitter, I hope you are reading this and hanging your head in shame.

    "..scientists were saying that America, the world's scientific superpower, was virtually blinding itself to cli ...[text shortened]... ..."

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/26/climate-change-obama-administration
    Interesting, in the 1970's the said there was going to b e global freezing, now 30 years later, there's going to be global warming? It's odd, they weren't right the first time, you think they are going to be this time, plus in the paper I saw Obama shaking hands with somebody the headline? "Doubts about global warming".
  7. 28 Jul '09 20:40
    Originally posted by daniel58
    Interesting, in the 1970's the said there was going to b e global freezing, now 30 years later, there's going to be global warming? It's odd, they weren't right the first time, you think they are going to be this time, plus in the paper I saw Obama shaking hands with somebody the headline? "Doubts about global warming".
    and then we have this nice article on "How Global Warming May Cause the Next Ice Age..."


    http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0130-11.htm
  8. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    28 Jul '09 21:04 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    and then we have this nice article on "How Global Warming May Cause the Next Ice Age..."


    http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0130-11.htm
    Two things:

    1) What's almost certain is that if nothing is done about global warming, it will happen sooner rather than later.

    What arrogance! This guy thinks he knows what's almost certain!?

    2) The spring would come late, and summer would never seem to really arrive, with the winter snows appearing as early as September. The next winter would be brutally cold, and the next spring didn't happen at all, with above-freezing temperatures only being reached for a few days during August and the snow never completely melting.

    The difference in temperature between what we have now and an ice age is roughly 5 or 6 degrees C. But, okay, let's say for the sake of argument that it's 10 degrees C. Right now, the average July high temperature in, say Berlin (just to make sure we pick a relatively northern city) is roughly 27 degrees C. Is that about right? Okay. If we decrease the temps by 10 Degrees C, then that makes the average high 17 degrees C. Even if the cooling accelerates towards the poles and the European temp decrease is 15 degrees, that still makes an average July high of 12 degrees C.

    "Above -freezing temperatures only being reached for a few days during August"?

    I don't think so.
  9. 28 Jul '09 21:45 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by sh76
    Two things:

    1) What's almost certain is that if nothing is done about global warming, it will happen sooner rather than later.

    What arrogance! This guy thinks he knows what's almost certain!?

    2) [i]The spring would come late, and summer would never seem to really arrive, with the winter snows appearing as early as September. The next winter wou zing temperatures only being reached for a few days during August"?

    I don't think so.
    [/i]I suppose we could just "burn baby burn" and hope that everything works out okay. In the year 2525, if man is still alive, people will look back at the global warming alarmists and mock them......IF man is still alive...

    Who knows, maybe if we can create enough warming to offset the ice age effects, the two will cancel each other out....or maybe not...
  10. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    29 Jul '09 00:41
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    [/i]I suppose we could just "burn baby burn" and hope that everything works out okay. In the year 2525, if man is still alive, people will look back at the global warming alarmists and mock them......IF man is still alive...

    Who knows, maybe if we can create enough warming to offset the ice age effects, the two will cancel each other out....or maybe not...
    If he's still alive in 2525, I want some of what he's eating.
  11. Standard member Wulebgr
    Angler
    29 Jul '09 03:07
    Originally posted by sh76
    If he's still alive in 2525, I want some of what he's eating.
    Kale and chard with a little olive oil, some anchovies, and a tall glass of red wine.
  12. 30 Jul '09 04:18
    Originally posted by Wulebgr
    This is news?

    Bush suppressed multitudes of scientific studies that refuted the junk science propping up his policies, and even ignored common sense: remember the staffer, who with the blessings of the boss, stated during the fiasco in the Klamath basin that we weren't certain what would happen if the salmon had no water. Even more remarkable is that eve ...[text shortened]... nlightened in comparison, what significance can be attached to a handful of unreleased photos?
    Ha, yes it IS news to people like daniel58 who have posted after you on this thread.

    I find it amazing that with all the evidence, and all the evidence of evidence being suppressed for the obvious financial gain of the petroleum industry who were bank-rolling the suppressors, we still have people doubting man-made global warming is taking place.

    So what DOES happen to salmon if there is no water? :-0
  13. 30 Jul '09 04:55
    Originally posted by howardgee
    Ha, yes it IS news to people like daniel58 who have posted after you on this thread.

    I find it amazing that with all the evidence, and all the evidence of evidence being suppressed for the obvious financial gain of the petroleum industry who were bank-rolling the suppressors, we still have people doubting man-made global warming is taking place.

    So what DOES happen to salmon if there is no water? :-0
    You got the evidence of evidence being suppressed part backwards.
    Man-made global warming is a myth.We have gone over this several times in the past couple of months ad nausea. But, if you really want too..I am game
  14. Standard member Wulebgr
    Angler
    30 Jul '09 05:46 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    Man-made global warming is a myth.We have gone over this several times in the past couple of months ad nausea.
    I didn't see it. But, go ahead, reference the thread. I'll be happy to take a look. It won't take long to find your errors. The talking points of the naysayers regarding climate change are well known and easily defused.
  15. 30 Jul '09 09:41
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    You got the evidence of evidence being suppressed part backwards.
    Man-made global warming is a myth.We have gone over this several times in the past couple of months ad nausea. But, if you really want too..I am game
    Please enlighten me.