This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Keith Grossman on 02 August 2012 - 14:08
Especially when you pick and choose only those that support your preconceived notions. Not exactly what I'd call critical thinking but pretty typical.
by Ninja181 on 02 August 2012 - 15:08
Follow the money $$$$$$$$$:
A large percentage of so called global warming experts are working on government grants to study global warming.
So if they say they don't believe in global warming they kill the cash cow, bye, bye paycheck. LOL
Conflict of interests comes to mind.
A large percentage of so called global warming experts are working on government grants to study global warming.
So if they say they don't believe in global warming they kill the cash cow, bye, bye paycheck. LOL
Conflict of interests comes to mind.
by Keith Grossman on 02 August 2012 - 15:08
Logocal conjecture based on overwhelming observable evidence...walk outside.
by Ninja181 on 02 August 2012 - 15:08
You should really take a look at a graph displaying world temperatures and sunspot activity.
They almost mirror each other for about a hundred years, until the global alarmist started pushing global warming. All of a sudden they head in different directions, for the first time ever. Manipulating the data to suit your own objectives comes to mind. LMAO
They almost mirror each other for about a hundred years, until the global alarmist started pushing global warming. All of a sudden they head in different directions, for the first time ever. Manipulating the data to suit your own objectives comes to mind. LMAO
by joanro on 02 August 2012 - 15:08
Ninja, can you post such a graph? I'm genuinely interested. I don't know what is causing 110 degree temps in OKC, or 115 degrees in Tulsa, as predicted for today, weeks of 100+ here in NC. But I have notice a correlation or perhaps coincidence when massive sunspot activity is mentioned on the news. Thanks.
by Blitzen on 02 August 2012 - 16:08
Maybe there is global waming, maybe not. I just don't understand why anyone would want to dismiss that possibility. Why would you want to just step back and allow industry to continue to put higher and higher levels of Co2 into the air becuase of the BS from a bunch of politicians who are funded by special interest groups?
by Blitzen on 02 August 2012 - 16:08
Interesting statistics on Obama's race. That gives the lunatic fringe even more reasons to try to make him seem "different".
by Keith Grossman on 02 August 2012 - 17:08
"Interesting statistics on Obama's race. That gives the lunatic fringe even more reasons to try to make him seem 'different'."
What is truly interesting is how much time people who are constantly bleating about how it isn't a race issue with them spent to figure all of that out.
What is truly interesting is how much time people who are constantly bleating about how it isn't a race issue with them spent to figure all of that out.
by joanro on 02 August 2012 - 17:08
Blitzen, personally, I don't think it wise to dismiss the pollution emitted by industry...I'm pretty certain it causes many,many problems along with gw.
by joanro on 02 August 2012 - 17:08
Just read something on sunspots and solar flares. the sunspots supposedly can cause lower earth temps because they are cooler than sun surface (mini ice age). Magnetic fields surrounding them protect them from heat of sun. These magnetic fields somehow interact with mag fields inside spot and solar flares erupt. The flares cause problems on earth in the way of power grids, etc since the earths mag field is not as strong as those sent into space by the flares. So, I didn't see anything in the article pertaining to increased temps caused by solar flares, but it was not what I would consider an in-depth article as I was able to understand it (wasn't over my head). So back to greenhouse effect.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top