re: Can we agree that Global Warming is a hoax.

Snow Piercer had a similar climate

I don't agree with global warming, but I do think there is climate change. More catastrophic weather events, droughts, etc. I can't help but think the human population has a part in it with our overall disregard for the environment, but we're not the only, and not really the main factor.

quote:

---

Probably not at all. It's laughable, when this huge cyclic star hovers in our horizon, that people think we can change anything climate-wise. I suppose people should start concerning themselves with a cooling sun and a mini ice age.

---

Yeah, anytime someone suggests that we can't change the planet I go ahead and point toward an exoatmospheric nuclear weapon detonation.



Humans have a lot more power than people give us credit for.

quote:

---

Yeah, anytime someone suggests that we can't change the planet I go ahead and point toward an exoatmospheric nuclear weapon detonation.

---

If you're going to sway the discussion to a nuclear holocaust, I'd say you moved the goal-posts. Surely you understood I was speaking in terms of human emitted CO2 being the cause of warming trends.

quote:

---

If you're going to sway the discussion to a nuclear holocaust, I'd say you moved the goal-posts. Surely you understood I was speaking in terms of human emitted CO2 being the cause of warming trends.

---

That's not shifting the sands at all if your premise is that we don't have the capacity to actually do harm to the planet or fluctuate the weather patterns.

I believe we absolutely have that capacity, the amount and degree of the impact is debatable.

The fact that the oceans are warmer and have been gradually getting warmer in conjunction (not to be conflated with causation) with the rise of humanity is interesting, to say the least, and can't be purely coincidental.

It also can't be completely ruled out because us feeble humans couldn't possibly produce enough toxins to pollute the Earth.

We should be wary, and react accordingly, however, and not be so dismissive -- especially when the scientific community is almost unanimous.

If someone were to legitimately disprove Global Warming, there'd be award after award given to the man or woman.

It's not bullshite, increased CO2 would certainly have a warming effect. Of course the sun burning a little hotter would have an effect too. More active volcanic vents (literally magma) would add heat to the oceans as well.

It's too complex of a system to really say for sure. The better argument from the environmental side would be attempting to use each bit of energy as efficiently as possible than to completely abandon fossil fuels.

Conservatives should be down with getting more work out of each gallon of fuel just like libs will enjoy less carbon emitted per gallon of fuel.

Are you suggesting energy companies wouldn't cum their pants if global warming was proven false? Is academia more powerful than Exxon?

Both sides of this are just a giant smoke screen designed and propagated to prevent us from discovering the reptilians who run the world.

quote:

---

the amount and degree of the impact is debatable.

---

Highly debatable.

quote:

---

and not be so dismissive -- especially when the scientific community is almost unanimous.

---

So,

1) correlation does not equal causation 2) despite mounds of government-funded research, man's cause, impact, potential outcome, and solution is highly debated


IMO until that changes, we should be dismissive when it comes to public policy. How can we make decisions when we don't know what they'll do? Let it be a scientific endeavor, stop taxing me and stop busting our industries' balls.

quote:

---

Both sides of this are just a giant smoke screen designed and propagated to prevent us from discovering the reptilians who run the world.

---

We should have been listening to Sleeping Tiger all along