POLL - USA election candidates

sir_haha said:
The sad part is because of the mame. "Global warming" in stead of climate change. People and political powers do not believe in it. However there was a time when people believe the world was flat. That did not make the world flat just there believes in the global structure
Click to expand...

Most people and political powers do "believe" (AKA understand) it.

Oil companies and extremist conservatives seem to be the only people who don't think it exists. When 97% of the scientific community thinks it exists, you should start taking it seriously.
 
I'm pretty sure the 97% figure yall are throwing around about "believing" in global warming is in fact true ..... The problem is that it's not nearly 97% that can agree on the actual causes ... Some think it's a natural cycle that gets progressively faster as it reaches its apex and some believe that it's accelerated by the Industrial Age and others still believe it was solely caused by humans

Any way it's not if there's global warming .... Geological studies shows it's happened a few times in earths history (ice ages among other things are caused by this cycle).... It's wether or not humans had an effect on it or wether or not we even have the ability to slow or stop it from happening sooner rather then later
 
Nathan_WINNING said:
Don,

The fact of the matter is that we are adding NEW gases to the atmosphere by taking carbon and other fossil fuels in solid or liquid form, and turning them into a gas.

Obviously when you add more greenhouse gases, the greenhouse gas effect will be more prominent.

Planting more trees isn't really the solution to taking gases out of the air.... Because it mainly just converts a greenhouse gas "carbon dioxide" to another greenhouse gas "oxygen". Trees still are a solution because they can be turned back into fossil fuels over the course of a long time... Thus, reducing the amount of greenhouse gases in the air.

What needs to happen is we have to take the gases and take them out of the system, that is, turn them back into liquid/solid so that there's fewer greenhouse gases.

It will probably take tens out thousands of years to reset the greenhouse gas levels back to where they were before. When the dinosaurs lived, the surface temperature of the earth was much higher (I think about 60 C average), because the greenhouse gases that are now locked away in fossil fuels were in the atmosphere then. If we were to pump all the fossil fuels out and burn them, we'd reach a similar temperature on earth that it was in the dinosaur age.

I'm not a scientist and don't have any major degrees yet, but not many people here have climatology degrees either. A biology degree doesn't qualify you to discuss climatology. They're two very different things. My argument is simply based on logic.

Yet, even though I may not be an expert on this subject, I can tell you that 97% of experts from various parts of the world DO agree that it is occurring, I will be more inclined to agree with the majority of scientists.
Click to expand...

Look at the affects of CFCs chlorine makes ch2o2 which is a green house gas it takes 30 years for the chlorine to break down

Co2 takes 20-200 years to break down there is always going to be a rise in co2 before there is a fall it's a natural process the earth goes through take temperature they rise and fall that is a natural occurring process

The ocean is our biggest filter so to speak

A weaker jet stream just means that storms and other things will stay around longer this also could be a natural process but it has only been studied for 15 years look it's 2015 so since 2000 they have been studying jet streams

What does a weaker jet stream mean prolong temperatures like longer winters or longer summers but is that a sign of global warming could be but it hasn't been studied long enough to make any type of scientific observation on it

I think you are grasping at straws to try and prove that humans cause more global changes than other naturally occurring process but to me I can see yes we need to do things to help protect this planet but to make a sudden jump on bad data is just stupid

Also remember in the 90s al gore said polar bears are dying because of global warming guess what they said not to long ago( couple of days ago) if we keep it up they will be put in the endangered species list but if you look it up polar bears are on threatened list
 
I think most scientists agree it's caused by humans as well. Clearly other things may cause climate change such as an overpopulation of either plants or animals (or underpopulation), but in this case I think it's humans.

Think of how much emission we produce in one day.

Billions of cars.
Many Trucks
Semi-trucks
Buses
Airplanes
Boats
Factories
Trains
Various machinery
Etc.

We see all these things almost everywhere we go in civilization. And all use fossil fuels.
 
Who cares what Al Gore says.
Political rhetoric n lobbyists n big oil etc run America. If ppl wanna listen to a puppet go watch Pinocchio.

Was he the idiot who cannot spell?

POTATOE
 
Yes polar bears are listed on the endangered species act and have been since 2008.

The only thing that's changed recently is there was a plan to address the destruction of the Arctic wild places the bears need to live.
Over 30 experts worked with the USFWS to help draw a multi agency plan to help protect the bears habitats. The plan is to work with the other nations to help each protect their polar bears.
 
Ok Don.

First off your polar bear statement makes no sense.

You heard that polar bears will be endangered soon. You found out that polar bears are one step away from being endangered. Good for you.., there was no point to that statement. They're currently ranked "vulnerable". If it gets worse for them they will be ranked "endangered". I still don't see the point.

And bad data?

The data has been compiled and reviewed in many different countries by various different organizations, who all use the scientific method. The research was conducted by professionals and has been consistent ever since the research began. I don't see how you can continue to say that it is "bad data" when it is many real scientists who are compiling the information.
 
Nathan_WINNING said:
I think most scientists agree it's caused by humans as well. Clearly other things may cause climate change such as an overpopulation of either plants or animals (or underpopulation), but in this case I think it's humans.

Think of how much emission we produce in one day.

Billions of cars.
Many Trucks
Semi-trucks
Buses
Airplanes
Boats
Factories
Trains
Various machinery
Etc.

We see all these things almost everywhere we go in civilization. And all use fossil fuels.
Click to expand...

Pertaining to this post ... U really want something to worry about? This link is just raw data ... But I think it proves we major issue coming possibly sooner then any possible natural occurring ice age or global event ...

http://m.worldometers.info/world-population/

How much deforestation , fossil fuels, trash dumps, or any other number of issue will become much more pronounced and will they all have a snowball effect on the global stability of the earth trying to maintain our world population at the growth rate it's seen in just the last 100 years ... And while it's true the growth rate may be slowing somewhat by percentages it's actually growing faster overall numbers (bigger the number gets less the percentage of growth looks) then it ever has in our history (we have almost tripled the world population from just 1930 to 2000 from 2 billion to 6 billion and since 2000 to 2015 added another 1.4 billion in just 15 years )
 
Nighthawk_FPBO_1 said:
Who cares what Al Gore says.
Political rhetoric n lobbyists n big oil etc run America. If ppl wanna listen to a puppet go watch Pinocchio.

Was he the idiot who cannot spell?

POTATOE
Click to expand...

Al gore was the one who coined the term global warming and started an agency to regulate certain groups of the industrialized world in the United States like the coal plant

You do realize more regulations on coal will cause coal plants to shut down thousands of people out of work then electricity will sky rocket not only will they be out of a job but people who do sheet rock will be out of a job and also houses will not have said sheet rock because there won't be enough being made at the cost that it is now
 
Bad data I've already proved bad data with in the epa site you quoted from

Thermometers placed in bad spots recording hear from roadways, beside buildings next to air conditions all promote bad data


Or how about the person they higher to do the statics where they include outliers to prove what the government wants to be proven
 
Was Dan Quayle actually i believe misspelling
POTATO.

As for electricity BC Ontario n Quebec export to the USA.
As for gas n natural gas Alberta n BC export to the USA as well.
Maybe start being more responsible n less wasteful.
 
xX__Tha-Don__Xx said:
Nighthawk_FPBO_1 said:
Who cares what Al Gore says.
Political rhetoric n lobbyists n big oil etc run America. If ppl wanna listen to a puppet go watch Pinocchio.

Was he the idiot who cannot spell?

POTATOE
Click to expand...

Al gore was the one who coined the term global warming and started an agency to regulate certain groups of the industrialized world in the United States like the coal plant

You do realize more regulations on coal will cause coal plants to shut down thousands of people out of work then electricity will sky rocket not only will they be out of a job but people who do sheet rock will be out of a job and also houses will not have said sheet rock because there won't be enough being made at the cost that it is now
Click to expand...

Ok so again not actually correct
To a scientist, global warming describes the average global surface temperature increase from human emissions of greenhouse gases. Its first use was in a 1975 Science article by geochemist Wallace Broecker of Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory: "Climatic Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?"
But global warming became the dominant popular term in June 1988, when NASA scientist James E. Hansen had testified to Congress about climate, specifically referring to global warming. He said: "global warming has reached a level such that we can ascribe with a high degree of confidence a cause and effect relationship between the greenhouse effect and the observed warming." Hansen's testimony was very widely reported in popular and business media, and after that popular use of the term global warming exploded. Global change never gained traction in either the scientific literature or the popular media.
To address your coal concerns yes shutting down coal fired power stations will hurt, however if alternative sources of power creation and distribution can be brought online with alacrity then the knock on effect to the power generation capacity will be limited. Also maybe just stop wasting power conserve the energy resources which are finite and look to use other resources.
 
One guy wrote a book in 2008 about climate change

The other guy is widely known in BUSINESS magazine


Sounds legit

Tell me more

Which ones have had scientific peer reviews done on their "work" as climate change experts?

How many peer review articles have they written

One studied how the warm water of the gulf mixed with the cool water of the Norwegian Sea which is naturally occurring sea currents which also help drive the jet stream the other person keeps screaming about

It's all a theory being proved by computer projections

From 1800 to 2005 I believe the temperature has stayed between .60 c to .70c with the highest being .63c

But like I said you can sway data any way you want to make a statement
 
If you haven't noticed I have never said global warming is not a problem just not warming as fast as these computer projected models are saying
 
I was watching al gore on CNN.
He was talking and talking and talking, and then
Out of boredom my pet polar bear, shot himself.
Isn't that ironic?
 
As a non american person, I am curious... Do americans here actually like Donald Trump as a candidate? For me it looks like he didn't have anything to do for the summer and came with the idea of running for pres.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top