Climate Change Report

[m444w]

It always makes me laugh that every single one of these studies put out really only look at CO2. They ignore methane.
Ever wonder why that is?
Because it's easy to point at Big Oil and say "they make to much money, lets stop them!!". Then it is to point at the supermarket and say "No more Beef or Pork for you!"

The level of pseudo-science in this thread is astounding, and if nothing else exposes some serious issues with education in American.

Natural gas and petroleum systems are the largest source of CH4 emissions from industry in the United States. Methane is the primary component of natural gas. Some CH4 is emitted to the atmosphere during the production, processing, storage, transmission, and distribution of natural gas. Because gas is often found alongside petroleum, the production, refinement, transportation, and storage of crude oil is also a source of CH4 emissions.

CH4 is methane by the way.

There is no real debate in the scientific community on human driven climate change.

...in the same way that there is no real debate in science about whether creationism is true or not.

...in the same way that there is no real debate on cigarettes being carcinogenic.

...in the same way that recreational marijuana use isn't "the devil's work" or eroding society.

Of course there is no way to change the firmly established zealotic factionalism with the way these topics are approached, so you essentially have to wait for that generation to die out.

We've seen it with tobacco, we're seeing it with marijuana law, and yet somehow creationism has surged against the expectations.

I imagine the misinformation firms behind creationism will be influencing future tactics on generating debate where none exists.

The sad uniqueness of human driven climate change in this regard is that in waiting for this generation be overtaken, they may end up doing irreparable damage to the planet for generations to come.

[Ashliana]

Well, we could just ask Ashliana to keep talking, all that hot air should help some.

Likewise, it amazes me how you basically spout the party line (like most of your fellow neocons on the board do), are totally incapable of critical thinking, and at this point--you don't even try to mount a defense of your "arguments." You come here for the enjoyable experience of confirmation bias. Must be nice to just, y'know, give up on having to think and evaluate your position. Enjoy being ignorant, and certain in your willful ignorance.

[Johnny Five]

Maybe global warming is being caused by aliens that are slowly terraforming our planet to be hospitable for them!

[Jarvan]

The level of pseudo-science in this thread is astounding, and if nothing else exposes some serious issues with education in American.

Natural gas and petroleum systems are the largest source of CH4 emissions from industry in the United States. Methane is the primary component of natural gas. Some CH4 is emitted to the atmosphere during the production, processing, storage, transmission, and distribution of natural gas. Because gas is often found alongside petroleum, the production, refinement, transportation, and storage of crude oil is also a source of CH4 emissions.

CH4 is methane by the way.

There is no real debate in the scientific community on human driven climate change.

...in the same way that there is no real debate in science about whether creationism is true or not.

...in the same way that there is no real debate on cigarettes being carcinogenic.

...in the same way that recreational marijuana use isn't "the devil's work" or eroding society.

Of course there is no way to change the firmly established zealotic factionalism with the way these topics are approached, so you essentially have to wait for that generation to die out.

We've seen it with tobacco, we're seeing it with marijuana law, and yet somehow creationism has surged against the expectations.

I imagine the misinformation firms behind creationism will be influencing future tactics on generating debate where none exists.

The sad uniqueness of human driven climate change in this regard is that in waiting for this generation be overtaken, they may end up doing irreparable damage to the planet for generations to come.

So why are you still using a computer?

Or is your computer powered by a bicycle?

Natural gas and Petroleum is 30% of all CH4, Coal is 11%. so 41% is fossil fuels. laving 59% non Fossil Fuel.

As for Pot eroding society... your right. I mean, I see nothing wrong at all with people killing other people over Pot. Nope. Not at all. Also see nothing wrong with people spending more on pot then they do feeding and clothing their kids (My Sister's Ex Husband). Nope.. nothing wrong.

As for debate in science about creationism... that is the stupidest thing I ever heard of.

That's like if I said... in the same way that there is no real debate in the college of cardinals about the existence of God.

and yes, there IS real debate on human driven climate change. People like you just ignore it, or say they are GOP/Conservative dogs out to help big oil.

But you know what.. I'll make a pledge.

If you stop wearing clothes, eating food, turning on electricity, or driving a car. So will I.


didn't think so.

[Jarvan]

Likewise, it amazes me how you basically spout the party line (like most of your fellow neocons on the board do), are totally incapable of critical thinking, and at this point--you don't even try to mount a defense of your "arguments." You come here for the enjoyable experience of confirmation bias. Must be nice to just, y'know, give up on having to think and evaluate your position. Enjoy being ignorant, and certain in your willful ignorance.

So.. ever heard of something called the Sun?

as for confirmation bias on these boards??? Are you seriously fucking nuts?? there are what.. 5 MAYBE non liberals that seriously post here? There are what.. 20-30 Liberals? I would be better off posting on the NY Times then here for confirmation bias.

Want to know the reason why no study has ever had even a remotely correct outlook on the "impact of humans on the environment"? because it can't. We don't have enough data. Not even remotely. Not to mention, every fucking person int he universe is biased moron. One scientist puts data into his 'program" he will get out a different outlook then another scientist that puts it into his.

it's ok, keep sucking the tailpipe of YOUR party.

Until then.. why are you not doing something to save mother earth? Like.. NOT FUCKING USING A COMPUTER. it would sure help us all out.

[waywardgs]

So why are you still using a computer?

Or is your computer powered by a bicycle?

Natural gas and Petroleum is 30% of all CH4, Coal is 11%. so 41% is fossil fuels. laving 59% non Fossil Fuel.

As for Pot eroding society... your right. I mean, I see nothing wrong at all with people killing other people over Pot. Nope. Not at all. Also see nothing wrong with people spending more on pot then they do feeding and clothing their kids (My Sister's Ex Husband). Nope.. nothing wrong.

As for debate in science about creationism... that is the stupidest thing I ever heard of.

That's like if I said... in the same way that there is no real debate in the college of cardinals about the existence of God.

and yes, there IS real debate on human driven climate change. People like you just ignore it, or say they are GOP/Conservative dogs out to help big oil.

But you know what.. I'll make a pledge.

If you stop wearing clothes, eating food, turning on electricity, or driving a car. So will I.


didn't think so.

You know, there are other options we can explore before we all start walking around naked.

Hyperbolic nonsense is hyperbolic.

[cwolff]

Well it happened again. See below.

it's ok, keep sucking the tailpipe of YOUR party.

Homeboy Jarvan is assuming that you are a democrat who's opinion is formed solely on the basis of fighting the GOP at the next election. That's the US vs. Them I've been harping on. It just keeps coming up. Not just by Jarvan, but he provides good examples.

as for confirmation bias on these boards??? Are you seriously fucking nuts?? there are what.. 5 MAYBE non liberals that seriously post here? There are what.. 20-30 Liberals? I would be better off posting on the NY Times then here for confirmation bias.

Is this the general consensus? That the PC forums are overrun with liberals. Interesting concept.

[Johnny Five]

The problem with threads like this is it always turns political and in general, always a waste of time. It's generally the same 5-10 people arguing the same points they argued a month ago. It's nice to have a different point of view but when it's always fueled by your political view (This goes for both sides) then there is no point in discussion. D will always argue A and Repubs will always argue B. So in the end lets just do this. Stop posting shit global warming/climate threads on the PC. Thank you for your time.


P.S.
You post a link, someone else will post a link against it. But both are scientists so they must both be right!

[Wrathbringer]

Everyone knows global warming is caused by farting. We've got to change the minds of people everywhere about farting. It's just not funny anymore.

[cwolff]

The problem with threads like this is it always turns political and in general, always a waste of time. It's generally the same 5-10 people arguing the same points they argued a month ago. It's nice to have a different point of view but when it's always fueled by your political view (This goes for both sides) then there is no point in discussion. D will always argue A and Repubs will always argue B. So in the end lets just do this. Stop posting shit global warming/climate threads on the PC. Thank you for your time.


P.S.
You post a link, someone else will post a link against it. But both are scientists so they must both be right!

This is one thing I find interesting about the global warming/climate change debate. It sounds to me like 90 some % of the science says it's man-made and is going to be a real problem with real consequences yet we still have this 50/50 debate. 1/2 saying it's a liberal blah blah blah and 1/2 saying it's not just blah blah blah it's going to hurt.

There's really only a few ways this can go. 1) it's real and it's a big ass problem 2) it's fake and in 30 years we'll laugh about it. That doesn't even take into account other phenomena that can do more damage in one event than everything we've done to date. We may be sitting around arguing about what kinds of tracks we're looking at when we all get hit by a train.

Jarvans earlier point is, for me, the vicious reality. We've just got too many people and we use too much stuff. In some way shape or form this is going to have to change.