January to June 2012 warmest first half of any year on record

[Samwell Seed Well]

One of the newest forms of rightist argument is the "that was debunked" tack - it seems that everything that a rightist believes that can be or is contradicted by facts wind up having been debunked but when asked for references to that "debunking" we are left high and dry or with links to opinion pieces, rightist blogs or claptrap science. Check out all of the "debunking" going on regarding the age of the earth and evolution.

Volcanic activity is "noise" or artifact in calculations it is not an ongoing, non-"natural" set of events that continualy pour carbon which was sequestered over millions of years back into an atmosphere in a matter of hundreds. Remember that.


ginja's post is confusing, the short of it is this, volcanic activity produces about 200 million tons of carbon per year, man produceds carbon at a rate of 26.8 billion tones.

your claim that we produce only a small percentage of volcanic activity has been "debunked"

http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/archive/2007/07_02_15.html

check please

 

[NoDrama]

Victims of global warming.....

Most likely cause by man in search of fire. All that burning wood did those mammoths in.

This guy told us so.

Meet Ogg, the newest most intelligent climate scientist to ever be thawed out in Encino. Much smarter than Brendan Frasier.

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

the CO2 you have to worry about is not from a Volcano, its from the permafrost ground in cannada's frozen bogs where decaying moss that has frozen has trapped a shit ton of co2, think about it

 

[canndo]

You answered your own question
Follow the money upstream and you can see who is financing the deniars
Doesnt matter anyway
The Deniers are a very small minority in the scientific community
And all the bouncing around the internet echo chamber by the energy giants isnt going to change scientific concensus
That Global warming is happening and we had a part in making it happen

You underestimate the power of the trillions invested in the status quo. Why is this debate even happening? What we are seeing is what we always see when the established machines are questioned, lots of funds spent on tearing apart research but little evident in original research that contradicts the established research. This is no different than big tobacco attempting to poke holes and establish doubt about the credibility of honest researchers finding that smoking is bad. this is no different than Intelligent design, no original research, simply nit picking the original researchers and attempting to create doubt. Global warming was made into a political issue by those with the most to lose if we change as a culture in order to curtail this warming. The original work was not done with a political agenda - that was injected into this "debate" later.

 

[canndo]

http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/archive/2007/07_02_15.html
More to the point, the numbers were essentially reversed. In 2003, volcanoes released an estimated 200 Mt of CO2. Human activity, specifically CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuel, added 26.8 Gt that year, or more than 130 times as much as volcanoes. Granted, volcanic action tends to be sporadic, but the Pinatubo eruption (a large stratovolcanic event) was estimated to release 234 Mt of total CO2, or one per cent of fosil fuel CO2 at the time. cn

And yet, the two who have claimed that man released co2 is insignificant compared to volcanism will not alter their arguments on other websites or in other discussions, they will take what they now KNOW to have been debunked and use it again. they are not liars, they are simply incapable of adjusting their basis in understanding in order to see the world as it truely is rather than how they need it to be in order for their ideology to stand. This happens whenever science conflicts with politics and especially when ever the right crosses that critical line where fact resides.

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

suedo science

people need to be objective, but they choose to be egocentric

 

[ChesusRice]

suedo science

people need to be objective, but they choose to be egocentric

It usually isnt about ego
It is about being paid.
If I had the credentials
I could sell them to the highest bidder by taking thier side on a issue

Oregon Institute of Science and medicine




These are the Buttwads who falsely claim they have the backing of 30000 scientists
Then some ignoranus (i didnt spell it wrong) Just copys it as if it was true

THESE GUYS
are getting paid
If they had an Ego they wouldnt come up with the crap science they peddle as fact

 

[cannabineer]

And yet, the two who have claimed that man released co2 is insignificant compared to volcanism will not alter their arguments on other websites or in other discussions, they will take what they now KNOW to have been debunked and use it again. they are not liars, they are simply incapable of adjusting their basis in understanding in order to see the world as it truly is rather than how they need it to be in order for their ideology to stand. This happens whenever science conflicts with politics and especially when ever the right crosses that critical line where fact resides.

In all fairness, the lefties have their own ignore-the-facts hot buttons. Neither side plays quite fair ime. cn

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

money is status, security, well being,material items, if true science which benefits all is super ceded by money then i dont see how it isnt egocentric, but i get what you are saying

 

[ChesusRice]

In all fairness, the lefties have their own ignore-the-facts hot buttons. Neither side plays quite fair ime. cn

Bust out the ignore all facts hot buttons
please

 

[canndo]

In all fairness, the lefties have their own ignore-the-facts hot buttons. Neither side plays quite fair ime. cn

I think you will find a whole lot less of it and a much better intigration of facts with the left. Certainly they get carried away with some of the more bleeding heart issues and some of the eco-issues as well - loco mentions the spotted owl (although that was a ruse from the start). My favorite was the leftist story that more women were beaten on super bowl sunday than the entire rest of the year.

 

[cannabineer]

I think you will find a whole lot less of it and a much better integration of facts with the left. Certainly they get carried away with some of the more bleeding heart issues and some of the eco-issues as well - loco mentions the spotted owl (although that was a ruse from the start). My favorite was the leftist story that more women were beaten on super bowl sunday than the entire rest of the year.

My biggest issue with the left is economics. Left-wing economics tend to match right-wing science for sheer woo-woo. The poor fools (in composite, of course, which isn't fair of me either) are still dazzled by the beauty of Marx' vision, even though (imo!) it's decoupled from realistic human psychology. The right at least "get" that given the chance, people tend to be pricks. My opinion.

 

[canndo]

My biggest issue with the left is economics. Left-wing economics tend to match right-wing science for sheer woo-woo. The poor fools (in composite, of course, which isn't fair of me either) are still dazzled by the beauty of Marx' vision, even though (imo!) it's decoupled from realistic human psychology. The right at least "get" that given the chance, people tend to be pricks. My opinion.

THe left gets it that trickle down doesn't work, the left seems to believe however that stuff is free so I guess i got your point but it is pretty easy to show them the light and have then go toward it. Watch as the two who were debunked here never ever acknowlege that they were incorrect and were parroting someting they heard without ever checking on it.

As to the rest,yes the left doesn't get that individuals can be pricks, but the right doesn't get that corporations are rarely the benevolent organizations they imagine them to be.

 

[cannabineer]

THe left gets it that trickle down doesn't work, the left seems to believe however that stuff is free so I guess i got your point but it is pretty easy to show them the light and have then go toward it. Watch as the two who were debunked here never ever acknowlege that they were incorrect and were parroting someting they heard without ever checking on it.

As to the rest,yes the left doesn't get that individuals can be pricks, but the right doesn't get that corporations are rarely the benevolent organizations they imagine them to be.

I imagine we're seeing pretty much eye to eye.. For six thousand years of recorded history, humans have tried to find an effective form of social and financial governance. That process, for all our wish to set ourselves apart as Moderns, does not seem to have become any more straightforward even in the face of our impressive technical advances. I generally distrust the easy answers ... but not axiomatically, lest I trap myself in contradiction! cn

 

[Red1966]

there is no way you have ever stuck your dick into anything besides possibly your dog. and yes, i had to teach you how to spell britches, mr. 46 year old virgin. you were going with "briches"

Typical Buck. Poor baby! Wipe the spittle off your chin. That is spittle, isn't it?

 

[UncleBuck]

Typical Buck. Poor baby! Wipe the spittle off your chin. That is spittle, isn't it?

it might be chinese food, i just had a shitload.

i think your 46 year virginity streak might be some kind of record.

 

[canndo]

Not a single word from the "volcano crowd", imagine that.

 

[Red1966]

ummm, no, you can't, you won't even get 1/75th of the way there before you realize that a million is way bigger than 13,289.

Damn! Why did you tell him? Could have kept him busy for several days checking every post you ever made.

 

[Red1966]

Here it is, evidence that those who ascribe to rightist "ideology" are incapable of correcting their own assessments of the world around them. They see by way of their already set facts and are unwilling or unable to accept anything different. To this end they will use all sorts of logicaly sketchy "reasoning". Up to and including impugning the source rather than dealing with the information itself. Nor are they at all concerned that they are apt to weigh science through the lens of their own personal politics. This is not about Gore, it is not about consensus of scientific opinion it is about a rather large body of fact that points to global warming and man made global warming at that but we will never ever convince our friends on the right of such things because they are incapable of examining facts on their own merit but rather on how those facts comport witht their predetermined opinions. "if the report agrees with what I have already decided,then it must be correct, if it does not then it must be, by virtue of that lack of comportment - a lie" In short - The earth isn't warming, but if it is, we didn't do it, but if we did, there is nothing we can do about it anyway, but if there is, it is too costly. Follow the money. Always follow the money, the reasons those scientist have to lie is because each and every one is doing so in order to preserve their grant money - a grand total of several billions globaly. Of course the only reason the nay sayers have to lie is in order to preserve the status quo - which is worth dozens of trillions. Now who is likely lying?

One could substitute leftest for rightest and the statement would be equally true.

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

One could substitute leftest for rightest and the statement would be equally true.

vice president Obvious over here handing out life lessons, and nobel prizes