Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Drew Dowdell

This is why Dogbert is my hero.

36 posts in this topic

Dilbert is good stuff.

But... "Dying planet." :rolleyes:

Anyone hear about Al Gore's erroneous claims of

climate-change related natrual disasters the other

day and how he was found AGAIN to be pulling

"facts" from a dark place in his rear?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sixty8, how dare you use his own invention against him.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I know is that this has been a record setting winter in NC (just like around the world -- First snow in London in 20 years!)

But hey, they've EMBELLISHED the scheme to include "climate change and natural disasters" now. So I guess that saves their ass regardless. Apparently "global warming" includes the planet getting warmer, the planet getting colder, a snow storm, a tornado, a tsunami, a hurricane, a thunderstorm, sunshine and the fact that I'll have gas tomorrow... Hell, around here we have a special world for global warming; it's called "WEATHER"

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of global warming, it's been in the mid 80s all week here..that is unheard of for Phoenix in February. I hope this doesn't mean it will be 120 in July.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about global climatology is that the margin of error in the science is so astronomical that any conclusion can be completely refuted, disputed, or confirmed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing about global climatology is that the margin of error in the science is so astronomical that any conclusion can be completely refuted, disputed, or confirmed.

Yes, it's truly one of the more inexact sciences. There are phenomenons that are definitely pointing to some sort of climate change like the melting of polar ice caps, rising seas, flooding of coastal areas, stronger hurricanes, etc.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i thought this thread was about dogbert. lol

anyone hear that the satellite that was going to study GW "closer" failed to reach orbit? lol

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i thought this thread was about dogbert. lol

anyone hear that the satellite that was going to study GW "closer" failed to reach orbit? lol

Hadn't heard about that..I'm sure there are conspiracy theories as to why it 'failed'..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i thought this thread was about dogbert. lol

anyone hear that the satellite that was going to study GW "closer" failed to reach orbit? lol

hehe yeah i saw that a 280 million $ fireworks show the penguins got to watch. i hear global warming pimp slapped it back down but eh thats just a rumor.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i thought this thread was about dogbert. lol

anyone hear that the satellite that was going to study GW "closer" failed to reach orbit? lol

More proof that "environmentalists" can't get anything up.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All I know is that this has been a record setting winter in NC (just like around the world -- First snow in London in 20 years!)

But hey, they've EMBELLISHED the scheme to include "climate change and natural disasters" now. So I guess that saves their ass regardless. Apparently "global warming" includes the planet getting warmer, the planet getting colder, a snow storm, a tornado, a tsunami, a hurricane, a thunderstorm, sunshine and the fact that I'll have gas tomorrow... Hell, around here we have a special world for global warming; it's called "WEATHER"

F.O.G, I like you and we agree on a lot of things, but you're still wrong on this one.

They changed the terminology because of statements like yours. It may sound strange, but yes global warming could cause snow in London.

Here's the explanation:

London is kept warm by the gulf stream. As warming melts arctic ice, that cold water and ice burgs flow south and interact with the gulf stream as it heads toward the English coast. This has a cooling effect on the gulf stream and lowers the air temperature reaching England. Keep in mind that nearly all of England is at a higher latitude than any of the lower 48 states.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F.O.G, I like you and we agree on a lot of things, but you're still wrong on this one.

They changed the terminology because of statements like yours. It may sound strange, but yes global warming could cause snow in London.

Here's the explanation:

London is kept warm by the gulf stream. As warming melts arctic ice, that cold water and ice burgs flow south and interact with the gulf stream as it heads toward the English coast. This has a cooling effect on the gulf stream and lowers the air temperature reaching England. Keep in mind that nearly all of England is at a higher latitude than any of the lower 48 states.

"Climate change" and "global warming" have been synonymous from the very beginning. There is nothing new to this terminology.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
More proof that "environmentalists" can't get anything up.

It's a NASA rocket manufactured by the Orbital Sciences Corporation.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Climate change" and "global warming" have been synonymous from the very beginning. There is nothing new to this terminology.

its newer in the msm

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FoG:

I agree 100%, I know what Oldsmoboi is saying but even

those theories have a margin of error of 95-250%...

This is the analogy I use: These retards running around

yelling "The Sky is Falling!" are doing the scientific

equivalent of observing a major highway from 5:00am

to 9:00am and based on that 4 hour chunk of time

predicting:

1. By noon the traffic will be 3 times the total capacity of

the highway, in keeping, of course, with the trend they

saw from 5:00-9:00am.

2. Next Sunday there will be the same amount of traffic, if not more!

Sixty8, how dare you use his own invention against him.

LoL :cheers:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know what Oldsmoboi is saying but even

those theories have a margin of error of 95-250%...

Care to back that up?

How can "A glacier use to be here and now it's not" have a 250% margin of error?

You are turning into the SMK of the environmental discussions.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F.O.G, I like you and we agree on a lot of things, but you're still wrong on this one.

They changed the terminology because of statements like yours. It may sound strange, but yes global warming could cause snow in London.

Here's the explanation:

London is kept warm by the gulf stream. As warming melts arctic ice, that cold water and ice burgs flow south and interact with the gulf stream as it heads toward the English coast. This has a cooling effect on the gulf stream and lowers the air temperature reaching England. Keep in mind that nearly all of England is at a higher latitude than any of the lower 48 states.

Different strokes for different folks...

I am certainly an advocate of the environment and I think we should do as much as we can to lessen our impact on this planet. However, creating PANIC and giving up freedom and creating a WHOLE lot of other sociocultural issues that will cause people distress is just not acceptable IMO.

Even the head of the Sierra Club called Al Gore an alarmist. And we ALL know that he is certainly a hypocrite. (Which is where my conflict theory ideology comes into play)

Climate = long-term

Weather = short-term

And the last time I checked, the short term summed the long term, not vice versa.

"Climate change" and "global warming" have been synonymous from the very beginning. There is nothing new to this terminology.

The initial shock and panic was built around global warming. Then a bunch of people and sources (I'll not beat a dead horse) offered contradictory evidence. So now, we're using climate change as the motivator. Again, it's not about the end result, it's about the means at which we're achieving that result. (i.e. the senseless panic and sacrifice)

I think I've hijacked the thread, so I'll stop. This will be my last global warming post.

Edited by FUTURE_OF_GM
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

During the last ice age, but not seeing your point. My point is that he can't call :bs: on something that can be empirically proven.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • Who's Chatting

    There are no users currently in the chat room