• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Human caused global warming- True or False?

True or False?

  • True

    Votes: 45 66.2%

  • False

    Votes: 23 33.8%
  • Total voters
    68
You wanna know why the planet's getting hotter? It's because of friction -- friction between Moonzzz's holes and multiple cocks. Back and forth like a rock on a flint stone. There's a forest fire in his ass. And when that hot molten liquid is expelled all over his cheeks, things get even hotter.
 
Marquee Moon said:
Not so fast hippies:

http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/08...-agemuch-colder-wintersdramatic-consequences/
Click to expand...

Here, allow me to pat myself on the back. I first introduced you college dullards to Hans Svensmark. You gulls took the bait...now you will slowly be forced to regurgitate all that warmist manure which so easily penetrated your common-senseless minds. Alas, there is no more gullible crowd than the hack-profs of academia.

I look forward to delivering multiple servings...It's sandwich time!
 
The Bugs have more of an impact than we do. Check out the biomass. We are just arrogant.

We're Outnumbered
Kathy Keatley Garvey
Author: Kathy Keatley Garvey
December 15, 2008

We’re outnumbered.


Plain as day. And they’re not going away.



The estimated ratio of insects to humans is 200 million to one, say Iowa State University entomologists Larry Pedigo and Marlin Rice in their newly published (sixth edition) textbook, Entomology and Pest Management. Rice is the 2009 president of the Entomological Society of America.



There's an average of 400 million insects per acre of land, they say.



400 million!



Per acre.



“The fact is, today’s human population is adrift in a sea of insects,” they write in their introduction.



Well, what about biomass? Surely we outweigh these critters?



No, we don't. The United States “is home to some 400 pounds of insect biomass per acre, compared with our 14 pounds of flesh and bone,” they write. “Another amazing statistic is that in the Brazilian Amazon, ants alone outweigh the total biomass of all vertebrates by four to one. Based solely on numbers and biomass, insects are the most successful animals on earth!”
 
Lectro said:
Here, allow me to pat myself on the back. I first introduced you college dullards to Hans Svensmark. You gulls took the bait...now you will slowly be forced to regurgitate all that warmist manure which so easily penetrated your common-senseless minds. Alas, there is no more gullible crowd than the hack-profs of academia.

I look forward to delivering multiple servings...It's sandwich time!
Click to expand...

Henrik (btw) is a professor. Does he fall into this category?
 
Last edited:
Sgt Hulka said:
The Bugs have more of an impact than we do. Check out the biomass. We are just arrogant.

We're Outnumbered
Kathy Keatley Garvey
Author: Kathy Keatley Garvey
December 15, 2008

We’re outnumbered.


Plain as day. And they’re not going away.



The estimated ratio of insects to humans is 200 million to one, say Iowa State University entomologists Larry Pedigo and Marlin Rice in their newly published (sixth edition) textbook, Entomology and Pest Management. Rice is the 2009 president of the Entomological Society of America.



There's an average of 400 million insects per acre of land, they say.



400 million!



Per acre.



“The fact is, today’s human population is adrift in a sea of insects,” they write in their introduction.



Well, what about biomass? Surely we outweigh these critters?



No, we don't. The United States “is home to some 400 pounds of insect biomass per acre, compared with our 14 pounds of flesh and bone,” they write. “Another amazing statistic is that in the Brazilian Amazon, ants alone outweigh the total biomass of all vertebrates by four to one. Based solely on numbers and biomass, insects are the most successful animals on earth!”
Click to expand...

When the insects have their industrial revolution, we are screwed.
 
Lectro said:
Here, allow me to pat myself on the back. I first introduced you college dullards to Hans Svensmark. You gulls took the bait...now you will slowly be forced to regurgitate all that warmist manure which so easily penetrated your common-senseless minds. Alas, there is no more gullible crowd than the hack-profs of academia.

I look forward to delivering multiple servings...It's sandwich time!
Click to expand...

Oh, sweet irony.
 
every half year os so this comes up, and i see I'mtheCapt has naturally interviened.

we as a board collectively went over this, taking just a few facts, and then DEDUCTIVELY reasoned out the possible causes. the best explanation for such accelerated changes to the natural cycles other than human induced climate change were changes in the sun....and frankly the sun does not change all that fast either...it's gonna take it another 7 billion years to get to the next appreciable stage in it's life.

obviously cows and volcanoes put out much more CO2 than humans. but the rate of increase is higher than earth's history suggest it should be. So you're really left with human behavior accelerating this (and there are many many times more cows alive today than there have ever been and that is also due to humans anyway.

btw, the earth is 4.5B years old and only 1/10th of it's entire surface volume can sustain life. for more than 4.4999B of those years, the surface of the earth looked nothing like it does now. look at mars and look at venus...in its history earth has looked a lot like one of those planets more often than not.
 
Last edited:
waity wait wait 11 peeps said the earth isn't getting warmer? or 11 people said humans were having no impact on the? the former is something a retard would say. the latter is something debatable (albeit from a weak position)
 
1150956_10151703950568647_538108619_n.jpg


You rang?
 
Last edited:
dmcheatw said:
waity wait wait 11 peeps said the earth isn't getting warmer? or 11 people said humans were having no impact on the? the former is something a retard would say. the latter is something debatable (albeit from a weak position)
Click to expand...

slippery use of language can be a problem, there's room for considerable difference between "human caused global warming" and "humans were having no impact"
 
Humans definitely have an impact. Causation is a pretty difficult thing to prove in this case.
 
these threads of willful ignorance just piss me off the point where I'm not that interested in participating but the bottom line is that the planet is changing, it's been changing dramatically since the industrial revolution, it's changing faster than it has changed in the past, and we don't know what all the impacts will be.

I'd encourage anyone curious and/or dubious about the science to check out this site: and watch some of the videos. The movie is basically a long cut of all the videos together, but it's 8 bucks. It really does a great job of breaking down what the research is actually looking at and how it's done. Some of the scientists definitely come off alarmist but I think that was an attempt to be earnest.
 
At the same time certain people will bitch about the amount of debt we will leave to our grandkids as a reason to take immediate action, the same people have no problem with the environment/planet we leave for them...eh...no biggie
 
A late surge by the deniers puts us neck-and-neck with the doughy Republicans. 72.22% vs. 70%
 
ONW said:
At the same time certain people will bitch about the amount of debt we will leave to our grandkids as a reason to take immediate action, the same people have no problem with the environment/planet we leave for them...eh...no biggie
Click to expand...

I agree. Was just making the point about causation. We are certainly contributing or escalating however you want to define it. We should be placing a greater concern on all areas that we pass down to the next generation.

I am by no means an environmental nut but to me it doesn't make sense not to place an emphasis on environmental impact as the worst case scenario is we were too cautious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top