BigBendFishing.Net

Hey, let's all come back here in about 100 years and see who was right?



Dubble

How about around September y'all send some of that global warming my way!!!

There is no "global warming".
It is now officially "climate change".
That term everyone must agree with.
It changes seasonally everywhere.
Hour to hour in some places.

It's a gradual thing. It doesn't happen overnight. It's kinda of like fishing regs. It happens over a period of time.

If a scientist said so....it must be true.

This is an example of the type of "The sky is falling" headlines, but yet later in the story and you read different.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -seas.html
-----
Dr Ford said climate change is causing sea levels to rise at an increasing rate and the phenomenon poses a serious threat to the islands. But, he said, the damage that has occurred so far has been due to “inappropriate” construction, while some islands have grown due to natural accretion and endlessly shifting shorelines.
-----
Yep, islands have done that for years!


Dubble

I would love to continue this discussion but have better things to do than point out the obvious. If you can believe that a volcano erupting can change the climate but find it impossible to believe that coal plants and cars can't do the same, albeit on at a more gradual rate, this debate is not one worth having. Have a good Sunday.

It is only obvious if you have an agenda. What is obvious is that if one major volcanic eruption can put more "scientific" defined pollutants into the air than man has in all of man's existence and then couple that with the fact that there is usually at least one major eruption per year somewhere in the world and sometimes several, you start to realize that man's activities are like the proverbial pebble dropped into the ocean. As an accountant would say, it is not a material affect. It certainly does not mean that the sky if falling.

opps ... double down

So liberals have an agenda, so our opinions are junk, but conservatives have the answers and it's not an agenda? Nice the way that works. We are messing up the planet, sir. Have you seen the plastic junk in the oceans? Have you ever taken the time to research the number of coal plants in China? Checked out the pictures of the smog over there? Look at what Chernobyl looks like all these years later. And that's not affecting the planet? It's not a pebble, it's a cinder block.

Humans are changing the face of the planet, there is no question of that, and it's possible that our presence and our activities are affecting the atmosphere and the weather. However I don't necessarily agree that we humans are "messing it up". The earth is resilient, that has been proven over and over again throughout time. The earth has been much hotter than it is now, and the earth has been much colder than it is now. Water has covered the planet and then receded, probably more than a few times. Animal extinctions have happened over and over. Whole classes of animals have dominated the planet, and then completely vanished. All of this occurring before man ever purposely built a fire and started warming the atmosphere.

Personally I think that if mankind was going to unite around a cause to save the planet as we know it, it should be something more definitive than global warming.
We really need to figure out how to redirect or blow up a huge asteroid. I think that all scientists agree that it's only a matter of time before a big space rock comes through the ozone depleted, CO2 laden atmosphere and makes a crater the size of Delaware somewhere. This would, in an instant, drastically change the world as we know it, and cure the planet of any global warming that we had caused up to that point.

reelhandy wrote:Humans are changing the face of the planet, there is no question of that, and it's possible that our presence and our activities are affecting the atmosphere and the weather. However I don't necessarily agree that we humans are "messing it up". The earth is resilient, that has been proven over and over again throughout time. The earth has been much hotter than it is now, and the earth has been much colder than it is now. Water has covered the planet and then receded, probably more than a few times. Animal extinctions have happened over and over. Whole classes of animals have dominated the planet, and then completely vanished. All of this occurring before man ever purposely built a fire and started warming the atmosphere.

Personally I think that if mankind was going to unite around a cause to save the planet as we know it, it should be something more definitive than global warming.
We really need to figure out how to redirect or blow up a huge asteroid. I think that all scientists agree that it's only a matter of time before a big space rock comes through the ozone depleted, CO2 laden atmosphere and makes a crater the size of Delaware somewhere. This would, in an instant, drastically change the world as we know it, and cure the planet of any global warming that we had caused up to that point.

Actually, one place I could think of for it to hit is actually not too far from Delaware!

Dubble

Gumbo wrote:So liberals have an agenda, so our opinions are junk, but conservatives have the answers and it's not an agenda? Nice the way that works. We are messing up the planet, sir. Have you seen the plastic junk in the oceans? Have you ever taken the time to research the number of coal plants in China? Checked out the pictures of the smog over there? Look at what Chernobyl looks like all these years later. And that's not affecting the planet? It's not a pebble, it's a cinder block.

Liberalism is a disease according to several studies. As for the rest of this, let me respond as follows:

1) The bulk of the scientific evidence does not support that human activities are a major cause of damage to the atmosphere and what there is mainly points to the reduction in forests by humans. Nearly every scientist who came out screaming they had the evidence of global warming due to humans has been found to be a fraud. So to continue that hoax shows an agenda.

2) Like a typical liberal, if you can't win the argument on the topic, change the topic. We were discussing global warming and you switch to plastic waste???? We (Americans) are not messing up the planet so much these days. We, Americans, did, but our footprint has gotten smaller and we allowed the earth to cleanse itself. I doubt you were alive when our waters were badly polluted. They are remarkably clean now. I agree that we have more "reasonable" work to do, including limiting plastics in the ocean.

3) We, America, can't control China. They are doing what we did years ago and if it affects their public health as it did ours, they will have to change.

4) Chernobly now is not even a speck on a fly's rear with regard to the earth.

5) As for the cinder block, chicken little must have been an early liberal.

Opppssss, a glacier that has been a posture child for global warming not melting due to global warming, but due to geothermals instead:

http://phys.org/news/2014-06-major-west ... ermal.html

http://www.inquisitr.com/1299796/climat ... hink-tank/

A professor who raised questions about the man-made climate change movement in relation to its impact on Africa was reportedly fired by a progressive think tank.

Caleb Rossiter, an adjunct professor at American University, was apparently sacked by the Institute for Policy Studies where he was an associate fellow just two days after publishing an OpEd piece in the Wall Street Journal called “Sacrificing Africa for Climate Change,” that also claimed that climate change is an “unproved science.”

Rossiter, a long-time progressive activist who stated in the editorial that he spent his entire career “on the foreign policy left,” questioned what he deemed the well-intentioned campaign for so-called climate justice. Explained Rossiter, in part:

And I oppose the campaign even more for trying to deny to Africans the reliable electricity — and thus the economic development and extended years of life — that fossil fuels can bring. The left wants to stop industrialization — even if the hypothesis of catastrophic, man-made global warming is false.”