|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling?
#7071048 - 06/20/07 06:14 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Um...yeah. Which global calamity are we on this year?
Quote:
Read the sunspots The mud at the bottom of B.C. fjords reveals that solar output drives climate change - and that we should prepare now for dangerous global cooling
R. TIMOTHY PATTERSON, Financial Post Published: Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Politicians and environmentalists these days convey the impression that climate-change research is an exceptionally dull field with little left to discover. We are assured by everyone from David Suzuki to Al Gore to Prime Minister Stephen Harper that "the science is settled." At the recent G8 summit, German Chancellor Angela Merkel even attempted to convince world leaders to play God by restricting carbon-dioxide emissions to a level that would magically limit the rise in world temperatures to 2C.
...
Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting into its weakest Schwabe solar cycle of the past two centuries, likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth. Beginning to plan for adaptation to such a cool period, one which may continue well beyond one 11-year cycle, as did the Little Ice Age, should be a priority for governments. It is global cooling, not warming, that is the major climate threat to the world, especially Canada. As a country at the northern limit to agriculture in the world, it would take very little cooling to destroy much of our food crops, while a warming would only require that we adopt farming techniques practiced to the south of us.
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/comment/story.html?id=597d0677-2a05-47b4-b34f-b84068db11f4
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: trendal]
#7071143 - 06/20/07 06:39 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I will agree that the current "greening" trend that is widely publicized is a little overblown..... but what I dont get from the republicans is where is the conspiracy coming from? how is this enormous liberal group gaining anything from this "delusion"?
I can see where Al Gore makes political gains from it, and I can see where certain car companies make money from it... but it kind of stops there. Where are the gains to be made from the plethora of scientists that are claiming that global warming is spiraling out of control? what do the hippies have to gain from spending time, money and energy to raise awareness?
I think to say that it is an imminent problem plaguing the world is overdoing it, but so is claiming that there is some liberal conspiracy without citing any motive whatsoever. Find some middle ground.... and would it hurt for us to atleast try and be globally aware that we do have somewhat of an impact on the climate of the world?
|
Astral Piper
Voivod
Registered: 05/02/07
Posts: 262
Loc: Hell
Last seen: 6 years, 2 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: SneezingPenis]
#7071362 - 06/20/07 07:24 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
There is no credible scientific evidence that human activity has had any effect on climactic change whatsoever. Yet various pundits, politicians, media and celebrity personalities have pronounced this as "established science" and beyond debate.
THAT is the problem.
I realize that people see churning smoke erupting from trucks and buses, or pictures of stagnant air enveloping entire cities in China, and they extrapolate that to mean the demise of all life as we know it.
Yet there is no evidence to support this at all.
But, as in the aforementioned article from the Financial Times, various governmental agencies and NGOs are demanding the reallocation of resources to address a "problem." People are being told that their lifestyles are complicit in killing the environment, and that to ignore calls for radically modifying the entire economies of the nations which comprise the modern industrialized is bordering on criminal collusion. Absolute nonsense.
The standard of living we have in the modern world today is directly tied to the modern market economies of the powerhouses of our globe - namely The United States and several large nations in Europe. That standard of living has extended human lifespan while at the same time increasing the quality of our lives UNIVERSALLY - both in the modern industrialized world and in those nations still in the developmental stages of their respective economies.
One radical environmentalist in the 1960s declared that anecdotal evidence showed that DDT was responsible for numerous birth defects and genetic damage. This message was celebrated by a sympathetic media and gained momentum, leading to eventual legislation that banned the production and use of one of the most effective weapons in the fight against mosquitoes (and the malarial disease they transmit) - subsequently, MILLIONS of lives in Africa have been lost to that nefarious disease when they could possibly have been saved.
This is the result of people's inability to see beyond their own political predilections, and their desire to pronounce scientific proofs without the benefit of actual hard empirical evidence.
So while you are trying to find "middle ground" in an area that is being propounded ceaselessly by a complicit media, some of us refuse to acknowledge the pseudo-science and mindless nonsense spouting from the peanut gallery.
The real root of this problem is ignorance. So many people today who believe they are educated really display the same proclivity for repeating slogans and neologisms that are based in their own fantasies simply because these "fit" with their preconceptions.
Many people seem to have reached a point where their "book learning" has far exceeded their ability to think critically.
-------------------- Syd Barrett at his final appearance with Pink Floyd on December 22, 1967:
|
EllisDSox
King Hella!
Registered: 01/22/07
Posts: 25,730
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: trendal]
#7071391 - 06/20/07 07:30 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
At the recent G8 summit, German Chancellor Angela Merkel even attempted to convince world leaders to play God by restricting carbon-dioxide emissions to a level that would magically limit the rise in world temperatures to 2C.
Hahahahahaha. I love the use of the term "play God" here. Clearly, only imbeciles and abominations would do something so dastardly as try and prevent drastic changes in climate destroying humanity. I consider global warming a test. If we're intelligent enough, as a species, to alter our way of life sufficiently that global warming doesn't destroy us, we pass the test. If we don't, we all die. Hooray!
-------------------- Disclaimer: If you have any kind of heart condition, my posts are not for you. You could literally die from reading the first couple of words in any one of them. Scroll down the page, live your life and prosper, but don't read my posts because your heart will probably explode. I am not joking.
|
Astral Piper
Voivod
Registered: 05/02/07
Posts: 262
Loc: Hell
Last seen: 6 years, 2 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: Astral Piper]
#7071396 - 06/20/07 07:31 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
This link leads to the complete text of the article:
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/comment/story.html?id=597d0677-2a05-47b4-b34f-b84068db11f4&p=4
Perhaps someone out there who actually cares about this issue enough to investigate further will be motivated to open their eyes to real scientific efforts to answer questions about global climactic change, instead of reminding everybody that village in Texas is missing it's idiot.
-------------------- Syd Barrett at his final appearance with Pink Floyd on December 22, 1967:
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: Astral Piper]
#7071467 - 06/20/07 07:46 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I beg to differ that there is credible scientific data that shows humans have an impact upon the earths climate. I do not currently have the time to go find articles, though I will when I get home, because they are aplenty....
As far as DDT goes, i witnessed the decline of the brown pelican population firsthand, as well as their comeback over the years since DDT was taken from use. now, Im not saying that lack of brown pelicans = DDT's fault.... directly..... but it is considered a moderately toic chemical which isnt soluble in water, and was so widely used that it had to have some adverse effect upon the ecology, even the slightest disruption in the amount of mosquitos which affects the spiders and frog population, which in turn affects another species and up and up until biological magnification of toxins starts to affect bigger species in greater quantities. As far as malaria goes... well, I think human evolution, like sickle cell anemia took up a lot of slack. Was our goal to wipe out all mosquitos? if so that is ridiculously short-sighted as a solution to a problem. Killing of a majority of mosquitos in africa isnt going to stop malaria... all it takes is just one mosquito to transmit it.... and it isnt like malaria is some great catasrophic epidemic that has caused the tribal nations of africa to remain an underdeveloped continent.
Im not up to current medical trends, but since the banning of DDT, hasnt the rate of thalidomide stricken infants decreased to almost nothing? and during that time, the rate of those babies rose so quickly that it could not be contributed to a freak genetic occurence?
once again, I ask you where is the motive? where is the financial gain? where is this huge campaign of misinformation stemming from? who is to gain from all this conspiracy to go "green"? because I can easily find the motive of large corporations and chemical manufacturers to disuade the public and make such harsh, unbacked statements such as yours regarding psuedo-science and whatnot. This is my point: I can see the motives behind the republicans and anti-green people... but I cannot see the motives behind the entire "pro-green" group.
|
leftandright
space stunt man
Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 373
Loc: (35.7°N/88.4°W)
Last seen: 13 years, 7 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: SneezingPenis]
#7071519 - 06/20/07 07:56 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
people freak the fuck out over our weather. Its as good pretty much as it can get.look at the history of weather that earther has had for the last couple of billion years. we are lucky but hot yes.
|
InsolentPrude
dark-helmetedknight
Registered: 06/07/07
Posts: 1,228
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: leftandright]
#7071541 - 06/20/07 07:59 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
The basic idea of the year is based on who produced the best documentary of our doom that year and running with it. Awhile back it was El Nino and La Nina, Then it was guns and fast food, then it was terrorists, then global warming, then a new ice age, then a meteor... what's next?
I was watching a documentary last night, they basically stated that they have pinpointed where planet Earth is on it's ultimate time-line, and that in 5-billion years, Earth's orbit will have completely degraded and it will go catapulting into the Sun?!?!
-------------------- "You know what they say: if God had been a Liberal, we wouldn't have had the ten commandments. We'd have had the ten suggestions."
Edited by xxetniesxx (06/20/07 08:01 PM)
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: InsolentPrude]
#7071557 - 06/20/07 08:03 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
a good point to make about every single one of the things you cited is that they all did have some affect upon us at one time. Now, how sensationalized it was is up for debate, but to say it as if these things were invented out of the blue is laughable. yes, there is terrorism, and yes it has/is/will affect us, but is it the huge worldwide scare the media propses? probably not... this is what I mean by finding middle ground. To say that global warming is a figment of peoples minds is ludicrous, but to say that by the year 2020 we will be burning to death in a world covered by 98% water is ludicrous as well.
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: InsolentPrude]
#7071562 - 06/20/07 08:03 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
In 5 billion year our Sun will go nova.....and what's happening to the Earth's orbit won't matter much at all
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: trendal]
#7071614 - 06/20/07 08:13 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
well, looking at anything in such a macroscopic way makes anything not matter at all. in 5 million years, it wont matter who got murdered today... so lets just legalize murder.
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: SneezingPenis]
#7071751 - 06/20/07 08:33 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
That's the most insane thing I've heard all day
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
Astral Piper
Voivod
Registered: 05/02/07
Posts: 262
Loc: Hell
Last seen: 6 years, 2 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: SneezingPenis]
#7071782 - 06/20/07 08:39 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psilocyberin said: I beg to differ that there is credible scientific data that shows humans have an impact upon the earths climate. I do not currently have the time to go find articles, though I will when I get home, because they are aplenty....
Produce them please. Credible scientific data may mean different things to different people, but if your sources contain references to actual published studies that have been peer-reviewed and critically analyzed, then you definitely do have evidence. I am anxious to see this.
Quote:
psilocyberin said: As far as DDT goes, i witnessed the decline of the brown pelican population firsthand, as well as their comeback over the years since DDT was taken from use. now, Im not saying that lack of brown pelicans = DDT's fault.... directly..... but it is considered a moderately toic chemical which isnt soluble in water, and was so widely used that it had to have some adverse effect upon the ecology, even the slightest disruption in the amount of mosquitos which affects the spiders and frog population, which in turn affects another species and up and up until biological magnification of toxins starts to affect bigger species in greater quantities. As far as malaria goes... well, I think human evolution, like sickle cell anemia took up a lot of slack. Was our goal to wipe out all mosquitos? if so that is ridiculously short-sighted as a solution to a problem. Killing of a majority of mosquitos in africa isnt going to stop malaria... all it takes is just one mosquito to transmit it.... and it isnt like malaria is some great catasrophic epidemic that has caused the tribal nations of africa to remain an underdeveloped continent.
Of course the inappropriate use of massive quantities of DDT, or other hard pesticides (like endrin) will have deleterious effects on the ecosystem. So will pulp produced at paper mills, degreasing agents used in the manufacture of engine components for Toyota Priuses, and the gas coming out of your ass after you eat at Taco Bell.
The pelican population dwindled because the shells of their eggs grew thin in those areas that saw significant run-off of DDT pesticides in California (and endrin in Louisiana.) However, the application of this beneficial substance was never debated (remember, the Swiss chemist who discovered DDT won a Nobel Prize for his efforts) but rather it was banned entirely.
If you are seriously doubting the effects of the mosquito problem in Africa, then you need to do some research. I have lived in Africa (both northern and sub-Saharan) so rather than belabor the point to you, please learn more about this issue on your own. I know firsthand about the problems this insect has caused, and if you are keen to live by an infested body of standing water, then be my guest.
Quote:
psilocyberin said: Im not up to current medical trends, but since the banning of DDT, hasnt the rate of thalidomide stricken infants decreased to almost nothing? and during that time, the rate of those babies rose so quickly that it could not be contributed to a freak genetic occurence?
No. Thalidomide babies were born with birth defects because their mothers were prescribed a standard sedative called... thalidomide. This has no bearing on any discussion of DDT or climactic change.
Quote:
psilocyberin said: once again, I ask you where is the motive? where is the financial gain? where is this huge campaign of misinformation stemming from? who is to gain from all this conspiracy to go "green"? because I can easily find the motive of large corporations and chemical manufacturers to disuade the public and make such harsh, unbacked statements such as yours regarding psuedo-science and whatnot. This is my point: I can see the motives behind the republicans and anti-green people... but I cannot see the motives behind the entire "pro-green" group.
My statements are not "unbacked" unlike the ad hominem nonsense you are perpetuating.
Political posturing is nothing new, and attempting to swing the discussion by referencing unconnected issues under the broad canopy of questioning whether there is a "conspiracy" tells me that you are intellectually bankrupt (at least in this issue, and in the context of this discussion.)
My point was not to attempt to defend or rationalize a perception of collusion by groups bent on proselytizing a series of unproven assumptions about mankind's impact on global climactic change, but rather point out that the real problem is evidenced by a lack of logical arguments endemic to people such as yourself.
If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it.
-------------------- Syd Barrett at his final appearance with Pink Floyd on December 22, 1967:
|
DieCommie
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: Astral Piper]
#7071809 - 06/20/07 08:44 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Im thinking Godwin's Law at any moment
|
InsolentPrude
dark-helmetedknight
Registered: 06/07/07
Posts: 1,228
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: Astral Piper]
#7071823 - 06/20/07 08:47 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Astral Piper said: My statements are not "unbacked" unlike the ad hominem nonsense you are perpetuating.
Political posturing is nothing new, and attempting to swing the discussion by referencing unconnected issues under the broad canopy of questioning whether there is a "conspiracy" tells me that you are intellectually bankrupt
Although i'm more ataraxic about the whole deal... nice call out
-------------------- "You know what they say: if God had been a Liberal, we wouldn't have had the ten commandments. We'd have had the ten suggestions."
|
Astral Piper
Voivod
Registered: 05/02/07
Posts: 262
Loc: Hell
Last seen: 6 years, 2 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: DieCommie]
#7071867 - 06/20/07 08:56 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said: Im thinking Godwin's Law at any moment
Nice reference!! I'm sure I'll be accused of being a Brownshirt in short order!
-------------------- Syd Barrett at his final appearance with Pink Floyd on December 22, 1967:
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: Astral Piper]
#7071930 - 06/20/07 09:10 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
dont have much time to respond, I will probably leter tonight... but yeah, big fuck up on my part with the thalidomide... dont know why those got tied together in my head.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: SneezingPenis]
#7072072 - 06/20/07 09:40 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Political posturing is nothing new, and attempting to swing the discussion by referencing unconnected issues
am i the one that brought up DDT and the medical advances of recently industrialized nations? I was discussing global warming before you brought up these side issues.
Thalidomide was just a huge debating blunder on my part, and was not really meant to be some sidetrack topic. So I apologize for that, but lets not try to act like I brought up this "conspiracy" idea to out maneuver you in debating.... I brought it up before you were even in this conversation.
|
d33p
Welcome to Violence
Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 10 years, 10 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: InsolentPrude]
#7072458 - 06/20/07 10:51 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
xxetniesxx said: The basic idea of the year is based on who produced the best documentary of our doom that year and running with it. Awhile back it was El Nino and La Nina, Then it was guns and fast food, then it was terrorists, then global warming, then a new ice age, then a meteor... what's next?
Our solar system is traveling in a direction different from that of the milky way. Some claim that the heliosphere is currently or will soon be running into a rough patch of magnetized strips and striations containing hydrogen, helium, hydroxyl, and other elements. There is also differing solar wind and galatic radiation that our solar system will encouncer. This could cause the sun to exhibit eratic behavior and distress the earth'd magnetic field.
Shit, maybe it'll be so bad that the world will actually end or some other crazyness in 2012. The Mayans could have been right...
-------------------- I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends. bang bang
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: Watch out for Global Warm....oh....cooling? [Re: d33p]
#7073124 - 06/21/07 01:11 AM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Produce them please. Credible scientific data may mean different things to different people, but if your sources contain references to actual published studies that have been peer-reviewed and critically analyzed, then you definitely do have evidence. I am anxious to see this.
ok..... here is an article that summarizes the general consensus of the scientific community based on peer-reviewed articles.
Quote:
Policy-makers and the media, particularly in the United States, frequently assert that climate science is highly uncertain. Some have used this as an argument against adopting strong measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, while discussing a major U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report on the risks of climate change, then-EPA administrator Christine Whitman argued, "As [the report] went through review, there was less consensus on the science and conclusions on climate change" (1). Some corporations whose revenues might be adversely affected by controls on carbon dioxide emissions have also alleged major uncertainties in the science (2). Such statements suggest that there might be substantive disagreement in the scientific community about the reality of anthropogenic climate change. This is not the case.
The scientific consensus is clearly expressed in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environmental Programme, IPCC's purpose is to evaluate the state of climate science as a basis for informed policy action, primarily on the basis of peer-reviewed and published scientific literature (3). In its most recent assessment, IPCC states unequivocally that the consensus of scientific opinion is that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities: "Human activities ... are modifying the concentration of atmospheric constituents ... that absorb or scatter radiant energy. ... [M]ost of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations" [p. 21 in (4)].
IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements. For example, the National Academy of Sciences report, Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions, begins: "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise" [p. 1 in (5)]. The report explicitly asks whether the IPCC assessment is a fair summary of professional scientific thinking, and answers yes: "The IPCC's conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue" [p. 3 in (5)].
Others agree. The American Meteorological Society (6), the American Geophysical Union (7), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling (8).
but what do all these pseudo-scientists and their lengthy credentials know... right? Us logical and smart people know better, and refuse to accept any of this data.... right?
but here is some "middle-ground" reporting, which is the second half of this report.
Quote:
The drafting of such reports and statements involves many opportunities for comment, criticism, and revision, and it is not likely that they would diverge greatly from the opinions of the societies' members. Nevertheless, they might downplay legitimate dissenting opinions. That hypothesis was tested by analyzing 928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and listed in the ISI database with the keywords "climate change" (9).
The 928 papers were divided into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position.
Admittedly, authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point.
This analysis shows that scientists publishing in the peer-reviewed literature agree with IPCC, the National Academy of Sciences, and the public statements of their professional societies. Politicians, economists, journalists, and others may have the impression of confusion, disagreement, or discord among climate scientists, but that impression is incorrect.
The scientific consensus might, of course, be wrong. If the history of science teaches anything, it is humility, and no one can be faulted for failing to act on what is not known. But our grandchildren will surely blame us if they find that we understood the reality of anthropogenic climate change and failed to do anything about it.
Many details about climate interactions are not well understood, and there are ample grounds for continued research to provide a better basis for understanding climate dynamics. The question of what to do about climate change is also still open. But there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. Climate scientists have repeatedly tried to make this clear. It is time for the rest of us to listen.
Now, i agree that the scientific community is fallible, but to discredit an overwhelming concensus with the statement "humans do have an impact on the earths climate via greenhouse gases" cannot be just dismissed as "pseudo-science".
Quote:
If you are seriously doubting the effects of the mosquito problem in Africa, then you need to do some research. I have lived in Africa (both northern and sub-Saharan) so rather than belabor the point to you, please learn more about this issue on your own. I know firsthand about the problems this insect has caused, and if you are keen to live by an infested body of standing water, then be my guest.
now who is side-tracking? granted, your firsthand experience of Africa outstrides my knowledge of it, even though my uncle contracted Malaria from nigeria.... but how about distributing quanine? how about instead of putting more money into buying dubious chemicals, why not spend that money on different ways of combating the mosquito problem? Also, what does DDt have to do with global warming at all? are we going to bring the Aswan dam into this as well?
also, where is my debating posturing? where is my ad hominem? if anyone is slinging ad hominems, it is you. get a dictionary and check your posts...bub.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686
|
|