The REAL explanation of global warming

[Square Ninja]

Originally Posted by Raticus

i m bein funneh on teh interbutt plz liek me

I'm not saying we should completely ignore things like CO2 emissions, but there is nothing holding the Global Warming hypothesis together other than a vague correlation.

[Endless Devoid]

Originally Posted by Square Ninja

I'm not saying we should completely ignore things like CO2 emissions, but there is nothing holding the Global Warming hypothesis together other than a vague correlation.

That is shameful, Square. Disregarding the evidence is almost as obnoxious as not bothering to look at it. Do you deny that CO2 build-up in the atmosphere can decay the ozone and produces more chemical heat that oxygen? Even the EXISTENCE of CO2 in the atmosphere is evidence that there is combustion occuring in greater amount than being used by plant-life. Combustion = heat, so naturally the product of it is conducive to heat.

It's chemistry, you can't say you deny this, and if not, how can you deny the obvious effects and says it's merely a "correlation"?

[KeyBladeWarrior1]

actually endless devoid i am a republican. AND what i said was just a thought. And when you say " or your a republican" well id like you to tell me why you think badly of us republicans. were the only level headed minds here...

[Pelafina]

Originally Posted by KeyBladeWarrior1

actually endless devoid i am a republican. AND what i said was just a thought. And when you say " or your a republican" well id like you to tell me why you think badly of us republicans. were the only level headed minds here...

This should have an interesting retort.

[violent_anger]

actually endless devoid i am a republican. AND what i said was just a thought. And when you say " or your a republican" well id like you to tell me why you think badly of us republicans. were the only level headed minds here...

AND WE'VE GOT BETTER HAIRCUTS

[Geocillin]

Hm...this discussion isn't intelligent anymore, since it's just a bunch of ad hominem. Anyways, this 'vague' correlation isn't really vague as I believe it's been researched and the probability of it being the cause of global warming is high. Many things aren't proven, just proven to be probable. We can't perceive cause, only infer it. We always infer something causes another, we use probability to determine if it's certain or not.

[Square Ninja]

Originally Posted by Endless Devoid

That is shameful, Square. Disregarding the evidence is almost as obnoxious as not bothering to look at it.

Oooooooookay...not sure how the disregarding bit came up.

Originally Posted by Endless Devoid

Do you deny that CO2 build-up in the atmosphere can decay the ozone and produces more chemical heat that oxygen?

I don't deny that, but what's in question here is whether or not man-made emission are causing the whole world to heat up, not the chemical processes the hypothesis is based upon.

Originally Posted by Endless Devoid

Even the EXISTENCE of CO2 in the atmosphere is evidence that there is combustion occuring in greater amount than being used by plant-life. Combustion = heat, so naturally the product of it is conducive to heat.

CO2 didn't exist in the atmosphere before global industrialization?

Originally Posted by Endless Devoid

It's chemistry, you can't say you deny this, and if not, how can you deny the obvious effects and says it's merely a "correlation"?

It's bad science, you can't deny this, and if not, how can you deny the average temperature decrease in the southern hemisphere over the past few decades?

EDIT:
...and to the following posts:
TIMESCALE FOR ACCURATE CLIMATE PROFILES = LONG TIME

[Ultima Sacrifice]

Here's the thing. Global Warming happens on it's own. Then we go through global cooling. How else would we have had the Ice Ages? But because of the things we have and what we release into the air, we are kind of helping it along. So much gasoline being used know = more carbon emissions = more heat. Soon enough it'll start to cool down, but we can at least try to not push global warming higher because of our pollution. Some people could say to that, "So my grandkids will never see a polar bear. I never saw the dinosuars and I'm not complainin'." the real question is, WOULD YOU HAVE WANTED TO SEE A DINOSUAR? You'd be like a mid-morning snack. Not even. So maybe you never got to see a dinosuar. Maybe we should let our grandkids and the kids to come have the option of seeing a polar bear. Think about it. If we mess up this planet, our entire race is done for.

[Square Ninja]

Originally Posted by Ultima Sacrifice

Here's the thing. Global Warming happens on it's own. Then we go through global cooling. How else would we have had the Ice Ages?

Exactly.

Originally Posted by Ultima Sacrifice

Some people could say to that, "So my grandkids will never see a polar bear. I never saw the dinosuars and I'm not complainin'." the real question is, WOULD YOU HAVE WANTED TO SEE A DINOSUAR? You'd be like a mid-morning snack. Not even.

Okay, that part has to be joke.

[Narnoldshmarnold]

And as I said before, even if climate change isn't as doomy-doom as we think it is, what harm is there to conserve our resources and be environmentally conscious?

exactly. maybe global warming is caused by us and the world is going to end or something, maybe not. but instead of the whole world arguing over it, we should at least try and have a solution ready, just in case. the amount of effort people are going to to prove global warming is right or wrong could be used on more important things, like inventing a new way of powering houses. fossil fuels are gunna run out soon anyway.

[violent_anger]

fossil fuels are gunna run out soon anyway.

o rly? how soon ?

[Square Ninja]

Originally Posted by violent_anger

o rly? how soon ?

Either way they will run out eventually. Alternative fuel sources are still a major concern (but mostly for political reasons).

[violent_anger]

eventually ain't soon. We might as well have genocide justified by saying we'll run out of land to fit people on soon.

[Square Ninja]

Originally Posted by violent_anger

eventually ain't soon. We might as well have genocide justified by saying we'll run out of land to fit people on soon.

^had clearly missed it when I said "political reasons."

[Dr. Freeman]

Honestly, there has to be an increase of temperature on the planet, due to the massive amounts of CO2 going in the air, no one can deny that. Is it as drastic as people make it out to be? I don't know. But to be honest, I'm curious as to what natural substance is creating the rise of temperature, that is not a greenhouse gas. I'm actually really curious to know.

Also, isn't more cost effective to get alternative sources of power anyway? I mean, if not to "save the world", how about so that everything seems cleaner, and we don't have to worry as much about people complaining, and we save money?