|
 Harry_Ba11sach
cannoisseur
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal 
|
 Re: Isn't extinction a good thing?  [Re: THEBats]
#358420 - 02/06/10 12:15 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Of course, by the very nature of global climate change then the extremes on both ends of the spectrum will increase. the warm will be warmer and the cold will be colder. 
It's actually extremely accurate to extrapolate past temperature patterns through ice cores because the heavier molecular weight of water composed with delta18-O oxygen affects the rate of evaporation. by measuring the concentration of water made with d18-O atoms versus standard atomic oxygen we can very accurately calculate what the temperature was at that point. further, when the majority of the 16-O has been evaporated and stored on land in snow pack then the concentration of d18-O in the ocean is significantly higher. Foraminifera and diatoms within the ocean use oxygen, silicon and carbon (all three of which have temperature sensitive isotopes) to form their shells, so combining the ratios of isotopic oxygen within their shells on the ocean floor combined with isotopic concentration in ice cores is an extremely accurate and entirely errorless way of calculating past temperatures. the 1700's is just the start of it, we've accurately mapped temperatures for the last couple hundred thousand years, and at this point we're only limited by our extraction technology. the only reason we haven't mapped farther is because we haven't drilled deep enough.
--------------------
|
 THEBats
The Bridge Master
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 8,488
Last seen: 11 years, 5 months
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: Harry_Ba11sach]
#358454 - 02/06/10 12:39 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Harry_Ba11sach said:
Of course, by the very nature of global climate change then the extremes on both ends of the spectrum will increase. the warm will be warmer and the cold will be colder.
I'm not sure if I really understand this. If we are exponentially increasing the amount of co2 in the atmosphere shouldn't the temperature follow the trend if it's the cause?
Quote:
Harry_Ba11sach said:
It's actually extremely accurate to extrapolate past temperature patterns through ice cores because the heavier molecular weight of water composed with delta18-O oxygen affects the rate of evaporation. by measuring the concentration of water made with d18-O atoms versus standard atomic oxygen we can very accurately calculate what the temperature was at that point. further, when the majority of the 16-O has been evaporated and stored on land in snow pack then the concentration of d18-O in the ocean is significantly higher. Foraminifera and diatoms within the ocean use oxygen, silicon and carbon (all three of which have temperature sensitive isotopes) to form their shells, so combining the ratios of isotopic oxygen within their shells on the ocean floor combined with isotopic concentration in ice cores is an extremely accurate and entirely errorless way of calculating past temperatures. the 1700's is just the start of it, we've accurately mapped temperatures for the last couple hundred thousand years, and at this point we're only limited by our extraction technology. the only reason we haven't mapped farther is because we haven't drilled deep enough.
As far as this I would need to read into it more. I'm still not quite understanding how that could translate into a mean global temperature. Aren't most ice core samples taken from the poles? I would also need to see examples of present day temperature being successfully predicted using this method; ie taking samples over a period of time and those predictions matching actual recorded data.
--------------------
kickin-two-hundo said:
you know what i did in english class? I came to class stoned out of my mind every day, i chugged vodka in the back of class, i put dead fish in the ceiling tiles. i put a gallon of old milk and orange juice in the file cabinet before winter vacation. i brought snakes in a tied up sweater and let them loose during class. i didnt go to school to learn, i went because i had to. i didnt care, and i didn't fucking listen to that stupid bitch. and i still don't fucking care. i tore the pages out of her books and burned them, and threw away all the books in the class, two books per day. 
|
Harry_Ba11sach
cannoisseur
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: THEBats]
#358461 - 02/06/10 12:52 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Ice from the poles comes from water evaporated from every ocean on the globe. by using ice in greenland, nova scotia and Antarctica as well as chile, tibet etc... we can get some pretty accurate numbers. plus like I said, the shells of foraminifera are all over the planet on the sea floor so that can give us a spot-location reading as well.
if you do some searching you can find MILLIONS of examples of this being used to extrapolate data. it's hardly breaking technology, they've been doing it for years and the math is very sound and accurate. google it out if you're curious
--------------------
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 4,781
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: THEBats]
#358464 - 02/06/10 12:58 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THEBats said:
I'd also like to pose the question on how we are getting reliable global temperature data as far back as 1700.
Cause they make up numbers
to fit their theories ...
not the other way around
Here is a list from NASA on yearly temps
year Annual_Mean 5-year_Mean
---------------------------------
1880 -.36 *
1881 .18 *
1882 .10 -.27
1883 -.75 -.32
1884 -.50 -.45
1885 -.60 -.52
1886 -.50 -.48
1887 -.27 -.35
1888 -.54 -.22
1889 .16 -.19
1890 .05 -.25
1891 -.33 -.27
1892 -.59 -.27
1893 -.64 -.41
1894 .18 -.30
1895 -.66 -.19
1896 .22 -.09
1897 -.06 -.20
1898 -.12 .06
1899 -.36 .04
1900 .61 .05
1901 .12 -.04
1902 -.01 -.04
1903 -.55 -.24
1904 -.34 -.26
1905 -.40 -.28
1906 .02 -.14
1907 -.14 -.11
1908 .17 .05
1909 -.19 .08
1910 .37 -.06
1911 .16 -.12
1912 -.84 -.07
1913 -.10 -.18
1914 .05 -.31
1915 -.15 -.33
1916 -.50 -.31
1917 -.97 -.34
1918 .05 -.39
1919 -.12 -.07
1920 -.41 .16
1921 1.12 .13
1922 .15 .02
1923 -.08 .18
1924 -.68 -.04
1925 .38 -.03
1926 .05 .00
1927 .18 .03
1928 .06 -.03
1929 -.54 .16
1930 .11 .12
1931 1.00 .24
1932 -.03 .59
1933 .65 .58
1934 1.22 .41
1935 .03 .39
1936 .16 .41
1937 -.14 .32
1938 .77 .32
1939 .80 .39
1940 .02 .43
1941 .51 .30
1942 .03 .15
1943 .13 .13
1944 .04 .16
1945 -.05 .16
1946 .64 .12
1947 .06 .15
1948 -.09 .11
1949 .17 -.10
1950 -.23 -.05
1951 -.39 .14
1952 .28 .27
1953 .87 .30
1954 .82 .43
1955 -.06 .40
1956 .26 .24
1957 .13 .11
1958 .05 .07
1959 .15 .02
1960 -.23 -.01
1961 -.01 .02
1962 -.01 -.03
1963 .18 -.01
1964 -.11 -.06
1965 -.13 -.07
1966 -.23 -.17
1967 -.09 -.19
1968 -.30 -.19
1969 -.20 -.17
1970 -.14 -.21
1971 -.11 -.10
1972 -.31 -.03
1973 .24 -.04
1974 .19 -.07
1975 -.20 .07
1976 -.25 -.07
1977 .37 -.22
1978 -.48 -.13
1979 -.56 .05
1980 .25 -.09
1981 .67 .01
1982 -.32 .13
1983 .00 .00
1984 .04 .02
1985 -.37 .24
1986 .75 .32
1987 .80 .29
1988 .38 .55
1989 -.09 .54
1990 .91 .45
1991 .70 .30
1992 .36 .43
1993 -.36 .33
1994 .55 .18
1995 .43 .14
1996 -.06 .47
1997 .14 .58
1998 1.31 .63
1999 1.07 .83
2000 .69 .93
2001 .92 .81
2002 .68 .72
2003 .69 .76
2004 .61 .84
2005 .92 .88
2006 1.31 .77
2007 .88 .70
2008 .12 *
2009 .25 *
link
Looks like things are cooling off to me
--------------------
The Ego is a pathological conditionlike a calcareous tumor or cystthat begins growing in the personalityin the absence of hallucinogenic substances-Terence McKenna-
|
TomCollins
Registered: 10/06/09
Posts: 2,943
Last seen: 1 year, 13 days
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: niteowl]
#358469 - 02/06/10 01:24 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
niteowl said:
Quote:
THEBats said:
I'd also like to pose the question on how we are getting reliable global temperature data as far back as 1700.
Cause they make up numbers
to fit their theories ...
not the other way around
Here is a list from NASA on yearly temps
year Annual_Mean 5-year_Mean
---------------------------------
1880 -.36 *
1881 .18 *
1882 .10 -.27
1883 -.75 -.32
1884 -.50 -.45
1885 -.60 -.52
1886 -.50 -.48
1887 -.27 -.35
1888 -.54 -.22
1889 .16 -.19
1890 .05 -.25
1891 -.33 -.27
1892 -.59 -.27
1893 -.64 -.41
1894 .18 -.30
1895 -.66 -.19
1896 .22 -.09
1897 -.06 -.20
1898 -.12 .06
1899 -.36 .04
1900 .61 .05
1901 .12 -.04
1902 -.01 -.04
1903 -.55 -.24
1904 -.34 -.26
1905 -.40 -.28
1906 .02 -.14
1907 -.14 -.11
1908 .17 .05
1909 -.19 .08
1910 .37 -.06
1911 .16 -.12
1912 -.84 -.07
1913 -.10 -.18
1914 .05 -.31
1915 -.15 -.33
1916 -.50 -.31
1917 -.97 -.34
1918 .05 -.39
1919 -.12 -.07
1920 -.41 .16
1921 1.12 .13
1922 .15 .02
1923 -.08 .18
1924 -.68 -.04
1925 .38 -.03
1926 .05 .00
1927 .18 .03
1928 .06 -.03
1929 -.54 .16
1930 .11 .12
1931 1.00 .24
1932 -.03 .59
1933 .65 .58
1934 1.22 .41
1935 .03 .39
1936 .16 .41
1937 -.14 .32
1938 .77 .32
1939 .80 .39
1940 .02 .43
1941 .51 .30
1942 .03 .15
1943 .13 .13
1944 .04 .16
1945 -.05 .16
1946 .64 .12
1947 .06 .15
1948 -.09 .11
1949 .17 -.10
1950 -.23 -.05
1951 -.39 .14
1952 .28 .27
1953 .87 .30
1954 .82 .43
1955 -.06 .40
1956 .26 .24
1957 .13 .11
1958 .05 .07
1959 .15 .02
1960 -.23 -.01
1961 -.01 .02
1962 -.01 -.03
1963 .18 -.01
1964 -.11 -.06
1965 -.13 -.07
1966 -.23 -.17
1967 -.09 -.19
1968 -.30 -.19
1969 -.20 -.17
1970 -.14 -.21
1971 -.11 -.10
1972 -.31 -.03
1973 .24 -.04
1974 .19 -.07
1975 -.20 .07
1976 -.25 -.07
1977 .37 -.22
1978 -.48 -.13
1979 -.56 .05
1980 .25 -.09
1981 .67 .01
1982 -.32 .13
1983 .00 .00
1984 .04 .02
1985 -.37 .24
1986 .75 .32
1987 .80 .29
1988 .38 .55
1989 -.09 .54
1990 .91 .45
1991 .70 .30
1992 .36 .43
1993 -.36 .33
1994 .55 .18
1995 .43 .14
1996 -.06 .47
1997 .14 .58
1998 1.31 .63
1999 1.07 .83
2000 .69 .93
2001 .92 .81
2002 .68 .72
2003 .69 .76
2004 .61 .84
2005 .92 .88
2006 1.31 .77
2007 .88 .70
2008 .12 *
2009 .25 *
link
Looks like things are cooling off to me
It looks like an up and down pattern to me. Steadily increasing.
--------------------
andyistic said:
Ok so let me bring you idiots up to speed.
The admins are tired of this shitfest being made the joke of the weed community on the Internet.
|
Harry_Ba11sach
cannoisseur
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: niteowl]
#358473 - 02/06/10 01:35 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
niteowl said:
Quote:
THEBats said:
I'd also like to pose the question on how we are getting reliable global temperature data as far back as 1700.
Cause they make up numbers
to fit their theories ...
not the other way around
Here is a list from NASA on yearly temps
year Annual_Mean 5-year_Mean
---------------------------------
1880 -.36 *
1881 .18 *
1882 .10 -.27
1883 -.75 -.32
1884 -.50 -.45
1885 -.60 -.52
1886 -.50 -.48
1887 -.27 -.35
1888 -.54 -.22
1889 .16 -.19
1890 .05 -.25
1891 -.33 -.27
1892 -.59 -.27
1893 -.64 -.41
1894 .18 -.30
1895 -.66 -.19
1896 .22 -.09
1897 -.06 -.20
1898 -.12 .06
1899 -.36 .04
1900 .61 .05
1901 .12 -.04
1902 -.01 -.04
1903 -.55 -.24
1904 -.34 -.26
1905 -.40 -.28
1906 .02 -.14
1907 -.14 -.11
1908 .17 .05
1909 -.19 .08
1910 .37 -.06
1911 .16 -.12
1912 -.84 -.07
1913 -.10 -.18
1914 .05 -.31
1915 -.15 -.33
1916 -.50 -.31
1917 -.97 -.34
1918 .05 -.39
1919 -.12 -.07
1920 -.41 .16
1921 1.12 .13
1922 .15 .02
1923 -.08 .18
1924 -.68 -.04
1925 .38 -.03
1926 .05 .00
1927 .18 .03
1928 .06 -.03
1929 -.54 .16
1930 .11 .12
1931 1.00 .24
1932 -.03 .59
1933 .65 .58
1934 1.22 .41
1935 .03 .39
1936 .16 .41
1937 -.14 .32
1938 .77 .32
1939 .80 .39
1940 .02 .43
1941 .51 .30
1942 .03 .15
1943 .13 .13
1944 .04 .16
1945 -.05 .16
1946 .64 .12
1947 .06 .15
1948 -.09 .11
1949 .17 -.10
1950 -.23 -.05
1951 -.39 .14
1952 .28 .27
1953 .87 .30
1954 .82 .43
1955 -.06 .40
1956 .26 .24
1957 .13 .11
1958 .05 .07
1959 .15 .02
1960 -.23 -.01
1961 -.01 .02
1962 -.01 -.03
1963 .18 -.01
1964 -.11 -.06
1965 -.13 -.07
1966 -.23 -.17
1967 -.09 -.19
1968 -.30 -.19
1969 -.20 -.17
1970 -.14 -.21
1971 -.11 -.10
1972 -.31 -.03
1973 .24 -.04
1974 .19 -.07
1975 -.20 .07
1976 -.25 -.07
1977 .37 -.22
1978 -.48 -.13
1979 -.56 .05
1980 .25 -.09
1981 .67 .01
1982 -.32 .13
1983 .00 .00
1984 .04 .02
1985 -.37 .24
1986 .75 .32
1987 .80 .29
1988 .38 .55
1989 -.09 .54
1990 .91 .45
1991 .70 .30
1992 .36 .43
1993 -.36 .33
1994 .55 .18
1995 .43 .14
1996 -.06 .47
1997 .14 .58
1998 1.31 .63
1999 1.07 .83
2000 .69 .93
2001 .92 .81
2002 .68 .72
2003 .69 .76
2004 .61 .84
2005 .92 .88
2006 1.31 .77
2007 .88 .70
2008 .12 *
2009 .25 *
link
Looks like things are cooling off to me
First off read my posts to see how the numbers are NOT made up.
secondly, if you had actually looked at the numbers you posted you would see that it actually displays an increase as well. import those numbers into excel and graph it and tell me what you find
--------------------
|
DudeTron
Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 407
Last seen: 10 years, 11 months
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: Harry_Ba11sach]
#358489 - 02/06/10 02:24 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I think it's a waste of time to address this issue from a standpoint of 'fact-checking' and name dropping and 'credibility' of sources etc.
There's too much money involved in being he who decides the current paradigm. If your science beats his science then you get the grants, and your science becomes even more concrete. The way that we operate our intense scientific endeavors has become extremely politicized, monetary, and cultural... Science is our latest religion, and don't forget that some people know and exploit that.
As far as global warming/climate change I think it's wrong to assume we know what's going on. More so when we really on figures and organizations whose drive to discover and enlighten is outweighed by their need to promote agendas and make money.
It's silly to assume we don't affect the Earth, though to what degree is debatable. We're trying to predict the future, and we've never been very good at that... It's still a matter of opinion and faith when we try to state what's going to happen to Earth because of us. My personal opinion is that our system is just not that fragile.. Life is robust and extremely persistent.
|
b0b gnarley
Registered: 04/21/08
Posts: 5,663
Last seen: 13 years, 7 months
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: niteowl]
#358501 - 02/06/10 02:54 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Gaia hypothesis, motherfucker, learn it.
|
DudeTron
Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 407
Last seen: 10 years, 11 months
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: b0b gnarley]
#358511 - 02/06/10 03:11 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
He [James Lovelock] claims that Gaia's self-regulation will likely prevent any extraordinary runaway effects that wipe out life itself, but that humans will survive and be "culled and, I hope, refined."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis#The_Revenge_of_Gaia
|
b0b gnarley
Registered: 04/21/08
Posts: 5,663
Last seen: 13 years, 7 months
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: DudeTron]
#358527 - 02/06/10 03:18 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Lovelock is a faggot
earth as an organism FTW
|
FurrowedBrow
Free yourself from yourself
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 12,045
Loc: Carpal Tunnel
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: DudeTron]
#358535 - 02/06/10 03:22 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Do we really need to use global warming to catalyze moral behavior? Isn't it obvious that spewing all sorts of chemicals into a formerly pristine atmosphere will cause damage to some degree? Are we going to debate to what degree of damage is necessary before we change things?
Niteowl, should we change our current coal burning ways in favor of a more sustainable alternative?
If you say yes to that question, does the global warming debate become irrelevant? This isn't the fucking debate that should be going on. We should be debating the economics and feasibility of alternative methods of energy production and reduction.
|
b0b gnarley
Registered: 04/21/08
Posts: 5,663
Last seen: 13 years, 7 months
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: FurrowedBrow]
#358539 - 02/06/10 03:27 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
WE WIL;L BECOME BELL CURVE
|
DJ_avocado
myco-botanist
Registered: 11/21/09
Posts: 147
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: FurrowedBrow]
#358581 - 02/06/10 04:49 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I'm not going to miss polar bears or vampire squid. I'm not FOR their extiction either. The variety of life on earth is SO vast, it seems almost natural for one species to dominate all of life on earth. It is still sad...but I believe it is natural. Especially (and unfortunately) when human nature is taken into account.
Quote:
FurrowedBrow said:
I dont even know where to begin with this thread. So i will put it shortly. There can really be no debate about human's contributions to our environment effecting it in a negative way. Look at the way we completely exploit a resource and then move on to the next one. That's been going on since well before the industrial revolution. The scientific community doesn't view this as something that's debatable. The media outlets love to make it something that can be questioned. Money will make people say anything. Yes, extinction is necessary, so long as it's caused naturally. Now, if the squid existed for 350 million years and now it'd dying (lets say hypothetically from increased water temperature in their habitat) surely we can attribute that rise in temperature to something, and i would suspect it would be from our actions over the last 200 years. So, when we can partially attribute a life forms extinction to OUR behaviour then extinction is not a good thing as bats said, it'll fuck up our ecosystems and could eventually get back to us. denying global warming is like being a prohibitionist. throw out reason and science for political gain. pffft!
ABSOLUTELY. It will definitely bite us in the ass. But I have faith in nature to adapt beyond our destructive nature. What did vampire squid do for me? What did polar bears do for me? Nothing, that's what. Selfish Mo'fuckin bears.
|
FurrowedBrow
Free yourself from yourself
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 12,045
Loc: Carpal Tunnel
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: DJ_avocado]
#358595 - 02/06/10 06:17 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
the food chain is very complex. You may benefit in many many ways, indirectly and covertly from their current and continued existence.
|
DJ_avocado
myco-botanist
Registered: 11/21/09
Posts: 147
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: FurrowedBrow]
#358647 - 02/06/10 09:09 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I don't have a knife to a polar bears throat man! I'm just saying what ever happens happens. I'm just trying to jokingly imitate someone "oblivious to wildlife". I was watching Dave Attenborough in "The Private Life of Plants", "Branching Out", and the relationships that some plant species have with their enviroment is insanely fragile. Check'em out.
I find this shit AMAZING.  Sooo stoned right na.
|
b0b gnarley
Registered: 04/21/08
Posts: 5,663
Last seen: 13 years, 7 months
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: DJ_avocado]
#358652 - 02/06/10 09:22 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
check out life in the undergrowth
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 4,781
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: FurrowedBrow]
#358677 - 02/06/10 10:01 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DudeTron said:
As far as global warming/climate change I think it's wrong to assume we know what's going on. More so when we really on figures and organizations whose drive to discover and enlighten is outweighed by their need to promote agendas and make money.
It's silly to assume we don't affect the Earth, though to what degree is debatable. We're trying to predict the future, and we've never been very good at that... It's still a matter of opinion and faith when we try to state what's going to happen to Earth because of us. My personal opinion is that our system is just not that fragile.. Life is robust and extremely persistent.
That's pretty much how I feel about the issue.
There isn't enough evidence to say how the climate works
Assuming that humans are drastically affecting global climates
in my opinion is an overly arrogant stance to take
we simply do not have enough data to say one way or another
how the planets weather is supposed to play out
Quote:
FurrowedBrow said:
Do we really need to use global warming to catalyze moral behavior? Isn't it obvious that spewing all sorts of chemicals into a formerly pristine atmosphere will cause damage to some degree? Are we going to debate to what degree of damage is necessary before we change things?
Niteowl, should we change our current coal burning ways in favor of a more sustainable alternative?
Of course, when have I said otherwise?
Why is it when I disagree with the human based global warming theory
that people instantly believe that I am some how pro oil
x10
Fossil fuels are a finite source of energy, they will run out one day
and we need to find a cleaner better source of energy that is abundant
it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that simple fact
Quote:
If you say yes to that question, does the global warming debate become irrelevant? This isn't the fucking debate that should be going on. We should be debating the economics and feasibility of alternative methods of energy production and reduction.
Actually this debate was about animals going extinct
Some people got their panties all wadded up
when I said it was a good thing and
spun off on a rant about human based global warming
being the reason for these recent extinctions
I have never supported the theory of human based global warming
I do believe that the planet has been moving out of an ice age, so a warming is expected
I have simply not seen any real evidence of humans having a dramatic affect on this system
the only people pushing this issue are ones with an underlying agenda of getting reelected
hence my suspicions
--------------------
The Ego is a pathological conditionlike a calcareous tumor or cystthat begins growing in the personalityin the absence of hallucinogenic substances-Terence McKenna-
|
TomCollins
Registered: 10/06/09
Posts: 2,943
Last seen: 1 year, 13 days
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: niteowl]
#359808 - 02/08/10 02:42 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
niteowl said:
Actually this debate was about animals going extinct
Some people got their panties all wadded up
when I said it was a good thing and
spun off on a rant about human based global warming
being the reason for these recent extinctions
Lol but you posted a vid of an animal, who's existence was threatened by pollution and asked isn't extinction a good thing.
No one got their panties wadded up and the conversation did not spin off. You evidently started it poorly. All I did was give an example of an animal that is threatened due to "possible" global warming, and you said global warming is a government conspiracy. 
--------------------
andyistic said:
Ok so let me bring you idiots up to speed.
The admins are tired of this shitfest being made the joke of the weed community on the Internet.
|
Yrat
Happy Planting
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 886
Last seen: 10 years, 10 months
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: Harry_Ba11sach]
#359829 - 02/08/10 06:02 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Harry_Ba11sach said:
If you had done even the slightest bit of research on the topic you would know that the current warming trend is 100% NOT natural. sure in the past there have been wide range temperature fluctuations, but the speed of the current trend is thousands of times faster than anything experienced in the past. additionally, we can say with 100% certainty that CO2, methane and water vapor are extremely potent greenhouse gases so it's a rather logical conclusion that dumping thousands of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is going to have a discernible impact.
actually...
--------------------
 "Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." - Abraham Lincoln
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root"
~ Henry D. Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 4,781
|
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: Yrat]
#359928 - 02/08/10 11:47 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
great vid Yrat
Proved most of my points
The only people pushing for the human based global warming theory are
politicians who think they can cash in on the fear created by the theory
--------------------
The Ego is a pathological conditionlike a calcareous tumor or cystthat begins growing in the personalityin the absence of hallucinogenic substances-Terence McKenna-
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
