The Global Warming Debunk List - Massive!

The founder of The Weather Channel, John Coleman, called global warming the "Greatest scam in history." He said scientific data has been manipulated by scientists with an agenda. He went on to say:

Now their ridiculous manipulated science has been accepted as fact and become a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, the Democratic Political Party, the Governor of California, school teachers and, in many cases, well informed but very gullible environmental conscientious citizens.
 
Ummm.. I can't believe this but on this issue I am how can I say closer side to Fossten...

Global warming is a natural effect that has been happening since the last ice age. Just wait until we have Global Cooling again...

I'm sorry but our 4.5 billion year old world has gone through many changes. I'm living on the bottom of an old riverbed or glacial run off from about 10,000 years ago.

And the bluffs around here date back to about 245,000,000 million years ago.
 
Ummm.. I can't believe this but on this issue I am how can I say closer side to Fossten...

Global warming is a natural effect that has been happening since the last ice age. Just wait until we have Global Cooling again...

I'm sorry but our 4.5 billion year old world has gone through many changes. I'm living on the bottom of an old riverbed or glacial run off from about 10,000 years ago.

And the bluffs around here date back to about 245,000,000 million years ago.

:D Rich is just trying to provoke me...
 
I'm living on the bottom of an old riverbed or glacial run off from about 10,000 years ago.

so you'll be one of the first to go... :)


I tend to agree that for the most part, global warming is part of a natural cycle. That doesnt mean we dont need to be conscience of the enviroment though. Ive said before that I think its good to think along the lines of enviromental responsibility, we just dont have to make knee jerk reactions to things.
 
:D Rich is just trying to provoke me...

Trying to provoke you hell I was agreeing with you for once... I crossed the line...

so you'll be one of the first to go... :)


I tend to agree that for the most part, global warming is part of a natural cycle. That doesnt mean we dont need to be conscience of the enviroment though. Ive said before that I think its good to think along the lines of enviromental responsibility, we just dont have to make knee jerk reactions to things.

I agree 100% Joey... We do add to the speed of the problem but when Al Gore claims that we started it.. sorry that's not true.. We've been on a warming trend for the last 10,000 years.

I wonder what they are going to say when the Poles Switch Polarity.
 
Trying to provoke you hell I was agreeing with you for once... I crossed the line...

I agree 100% Joey... We do add to the speed of the problem but when Al Gore claims that we started it.. sorry that's not true.. We've been on a warming trend for the last 10,000 years.

I wonder what they are going to say when the Poles Switch Polarity.
Please cite factual (unmanipulated) scientific data which shows that humans are in any way causing global warming. Humans produce a mere 4% of total worldwide atmospheric CO2--The rest is produced naturally.

Where is the scientific data showing that the 4% human produced CO2 is causing global warming?
 
Please cite factual (unmanipulated) scientific data which shows that humans are in any way causing global warming. Humans produce a mere 4% of total worldwide atmospheric CO2--The rest is produced naturally.

Where is the scientific data showing that the 4% human produced CO2 is causing global warming?

For that matter, please show ANY factual data that PROVES that CO2 is causing global warming and not the other way around.

And Rich, I was just referring to the age of the earth that you cited. I thought you were needling me. It's no biggie, really. I'm glad you agree with me on Global Warming. It's all good. :cool:
 
Please cite factual (unmanipulated) scientific data which shows that humans are in any way causing global warming. Humans produce a mere 4% of total worldwide atmospheric CO2--The rest is produced naturally.

Where is the scientific data showing that the 4% human produced CO2 is causing global warming?

Looks like you can't ever please the Right... agree with them and they still try to shoot you down..

Well Fossten I tried agreeing with you... but some of you buddies just don't like it when the more central thinking people agree with you...

Sorry MAC1 I guess you are the fact God.. I worship you.... and your factual greatness...

I never said the humans are causing global warming... I disagreed with Al Gore's claim that humans have caused global warming.. Wasn't that what I said or can't you read...

I only said we add to it's progression ... Which any increase will do... that's just common scense... Take the human's out and we add nothing... put humans in and we add what we add...

Joey slap me next time I come into this forum... :slap:
 
And Rich, I was just referring to the age of the earth that you cited. It's all good. :cool:

That's just a matter of faith and Interpretation but that's a different discussion and I'm not going into that one ... I doubt I'll be visiting you in hell for that one ... :shifty:

It's amazing that people can find common ground..:)
 
Looks like you can't ever please the Right... agree with them and they still try to shoot you down..

Well Fossten I tried agreeing with you... but some of you buddies just don't like it when the more central thinking people agree with you...

Sorry MAC1 I guess you are the fact God.. I worship you.... and your factual greatness...

I never said the humans are causing global warming... I disagreed with Al Gore's claim that humans have caused global warming.. Wasn't that what I said or can't you read...

I only said we add to it's progression ... Which any increase will do... that's just common scense... Take the human's out and we add nothing... put humans in and we add what we add...

Joey slap me next time I come into this forum... :slap:
Is it your "common scense" position that humans are not causing global warming, rather, only contributing to global warming? I simply asked you upon what scientific basis are you claiming that humans "add to it's progression." It's apparent that you have nothing to support your position.

Sorry MAC1 I guess you are the fact God.. I worship you.... and your factual greatness...
Good one! :rolleyes:
 
Looks like you can't ever please the Right... agree with them and they still try to shoot you down..

Well Fossten I tried agreeing with you... but some of you buddies just don't like it when the more central thinking people agree with you...

Sorry MAC1 I guess you are the fact God.. I worship you.... and your factual greatness...

I never said the humans are causing global warming... I disagreed with Al Gore's claim that humans have caused global warming.. Wasn't that what I said or can't you read...

I only said we add to it's progression ... Which any increase will do... that's just common scense... Take the human's out and we add nothing... put humans in and we add what we add...

Joey slap me next time I come into this forum... :slap:
I've got news for all of you...if it weren't for CO2, we wouldn't have any oxygen to breathe.

And that's just what the ecowackos want - to "take out the humans."
 
so you'll be one of the first to go... :)


I tend to agree that for the most part, global warming is part of a natural cycle. That doesnt mean we dont need to be conscience of the enviroment though. Ive said before that I think its good to think along the lines of enviromental responsibility, we just dont have to make knee jerk reactions to things.

:I

It is unquestionable to anyone who is capable of basic thought that the earth heats and cools because that is a natural cycle of this planet. There is NOTHING man can do to stop the cycles. It is unreasonable, however, to think our actions are entirely benign.

With this said, black things attract heat. I'm still not prepared to drive dirt roads in spite of the fact that black-top (asphalt) is a contributor. I am prepared, however, to do anything I reasonable can to mitigate my own contribution to global warming. Why not?
 
:I

It is unquestionable to anyone who is capable of basic thought that the earth heats and cools because that is a natural cycle of this planet. There is NOTHING man can do to stop the cycles. It is unreasonable, however, to think our actions are entirely benign.

With this said, black things attract heat. I'm still not prepared to drive dirt roads in spite of the fact that black-top (asphalt) is a contributor. I am prepared, however, to do anything I reasonable can to mitigate my own contribution to global warming. Why not?

The key here is "reasonable." Not burning your trash in your backyard is reasonable. Being told you MUST buy stupid twisty lightbulbs, can't drive on blacktop, must ride a bike to work, and must keep your thermo at 62 during the winter, is unreasonable. But don't tell Al Gore that.
 
The key here is "reasonable." Not burning your trash in your backyard is reasonable. Being told you MUST buy stupid twisty lightbulbs, can't drive on blacktop, must ride a bike to work, and must keep your thermo at 62 during the winter, is unreasonable. But don't tell Al Gore that.

Why not? Compact florescents have their place but if he's gonna ram it down our throats (like our idiot parliamentarians here in Ontario) why should be screw them into their ... ummm ... y' know.
 
4% is a big number. not that ive done anything to help. i dont hug trees, but i do recycle steel and alum. but look at the sunspot factor when you talk on this subject. records prove it has something to do with little ice ages and so forth. dont attack me for the first sentence, but 4% is a big number. i also believe in atlantis and things like that. we are not the first group of humans to have come this far.:bash: :bash:
 
and in the case of the poles changing polarity. that was the downfall off atlantis look at your globe. the placement of the bermuda triangle, and all the :q:q:q:q affiliated with it
 
Why not? Compact florescents have their place....

No they don't. They are a joke and like ALL Liberal feel good attempts at saving the planet, they do more harm than good.

All Things Considered, February 15, 2007 · The Environmental Protection Agency and some large business, including Wal-Mart, are aggressively promoting the sale of compact fluorescent light bulbs as a way to save energy and fight global warming. They want Americans to buy many millions of them over the coming years.

But the bulbs contain small amounts of mercury, a neurotoxin, and the companies and federal government haven't come up with effective ways to get Americans to recycle them.

"The problem with the bulbs is that they'll break before they get to the landfill. They'll break in containers, or they'll break in a dumpster or they'll break in the trucks. Workers may be exposed to very high levels of mercury when that happens," says John Skinner, executive director of the Solid Waste Association of North America, the trade group for the people who handle trash and recycling.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you realize if you break one of these bulbs in your house, your home is considered a contaminated site?
 
My mistake :slam I was entirely unaware that the earth/environment cares about your politics or mine.
psungee, surely you read the rest of Bryan's post, did you not? Are you deliberately trying to miss his point?

Never mind the fact that the light given off by these bulbs flat out SUCKS, these bulbs are actually more dangerous to humans AND to the environment than Edison's Very Special Creations.
 
Well... yeah! I'm just not with you guys on absolutism. Look - horse chestnuts are dangerous too. We don't ban them. They are used in medicine and are sustenance for some wildlife.

Caffeine will kill your dog but almost nobody will have a second thought of leaving a soda or a piece of chocolate (not to speak of coffee) lying around their home.

There is a tendency to want to ban everything we see that poses a danger. Heck! We know the emissions from cars are toxic (I assume we can agree on this). Some of us are prepared to ban a light bulb but people die because of exhaust emissions. Cripe! People die from their allergy to peanuts. Let's wipe peanuts off the face of the earth (and get bees at the same time). Well, yeah! Of course this is silly. Suggesting that incandescents are the only viable non-natural light is equally ridiculous. Many homes have florescent bulbs in kitchens, work shops, garages, etc. Factories, offices and commercial establishments are pretty much exclusively florescent.

So? You want to ban a light bulb but you haven't an issue with firearms? Sorry guy - I just don't see it.

(BTW... it was Edison's very special improvement - was it not? Something I'm very grateful for, personally. That doesn't mean we shouldn't seek better. Bell did wonderful things with the phone but we're not really using his hard wired device as much as we used to and there are WAY more phones out there now than there were 50 years ago.)

With this said, I don't understand how florescent lighting is about liberalism. Surely you don't think Wal-mart is a "liberal" money machine, do you? I don't know. I always thought they were just business - not political.

Besides, I just don't buy what "seems" to be your "everything wrong with the world is a liberal conspiracy." any more than I would buy "everything wrong with the world is a conservative conspiracy." That's just inane prattle!
 
Besides, I just don't buy what "seems" to be your "everything wrong with the world is a liberal conspiracy." any more than I would buy "everything wrong with the world is a conservative conspiracy." That's just inane prattle!

I don't think you can find any of us using those words. However, anytime the government tries to either ban something or force us to behave in a certain way, that is liberalism. It's not a conspiracy, it's just liberalism.

Liberalism believes that people are not competent enough to direct their own lives and need elites to tell them how to live. These elites exist in the United States in the form of government programs, bureaucrats, and congressmen. Any solution that can be found in the hands of individuals or the free market is frowned upon and discouraged.
 
I don't think you can find any of us using those words. However, anytime the government tries to either ban something or force us to behave in a certain way, that is liberalism. It's not a conspiracy, it's just liberalism.

Liberalism believes that people are not competent enough to direct their own lives and need elites to tell them how to live. These elites exist in the United States in the form of government programs, bureaucrats, and congressmen. Any solution that can be found in the hands of individuals or the free market is frowned upon and discouraged.

Fair enough. I have not seen those specific words being used but I suspect that I'm not the only one who has this sense from the threads I've read.

from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberalism
"a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties."

Essentially, all definitions are about the same.

You seem a reasonably bright guy - I assume we're not going to attempt to rewrite the dictionary here. I also assume that when you stand back and think about it, you realize that when a politician ascends to power (s)he (regardless of his/her political stripe) wields that power with the specific intent of controlling any descenting opinion - regardless of its validity.

... But isn't defining socio-political attitudes and behaviours an entirely different thread? (It would be an interesting discussion if it could be had as a discussion as opposed to a battle.)
 
With this said, I don't understand how florescent lighting is about liberalism. Surely you don't think Wal-mart is a "liberal" money machine, do you? I don't know. I always thought they were just business - not political.

Just like Ethanol is a joke perpetrated by the tree huggers and liberals alike.

Let's make the free market use ethanol. Let's force people to use it. Let's tell them it will clean up the air. Let's tell them it will burn 5% cleaner. Let's not tell them that they will use 10% more gasoline to get that benefit.

Let's tell them ethanol will free the U.S. from dependency on foreign oil.

Let's not tell them that it takes more energy to produce ethanol (from corn) than the energy created. Let's not tell them the effects on corn prices and every product related to corn.

Let's cry wolf about global warming and deny any proof that it is not man-made.

The list goes on and on and on.

Let's give condoms to 12 year olds.
Let's give tax credit to those that don't pay taxes.

Liberalism is a losing proposition on almost every single topic. It just doesn't work.

If you don't think that Walmart is under tremendous pressure on all fronts to act 'socially more responsible", you don't know Walmart. I do. I sell to them. I can tell you every little initiative they have undertaken and the genesis for it. They have to appear to care about the earth or they will get ravaged by liberals and the media.

There is a huge push to eliminate plastic at Walmart. Watch your favorite clothes detergent bottle change soon.
 

Members online

Back
Top