Bin Laden and Al Gore are now two peas in a pod

I have never denied the reality of "climate change." If you will read closely what I said, I always said "man-caused climate change." Yes, I believe that pumping C02 into the atmosphere, 95% which comes from non man-made sources, has no affect. If you believe C02 is the real bad boy, then let's all stop breathing and also stop letting things decay! I'm sure the world will be a better place without any humans here to polute it. Then maybe evolution can start all over again and get it right, assuming evolution is the answer to why we are here.

Yes, I believe that pumping C02 into the atmosphere, 95% which comes from non man-made sources, has no affect.

Please show us your research into this as to how you formed the conclusion that man induced CO₂ has no effect on climate change.Edited by bluescat48, : missing phrase

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

Ok. I'll sit in your garage with a cow while you sit in my garage with my car running. Who's going to die here?If you had to guess, would you say that there are more or less stock animals than cars? (don't forget to calculate India and China). That's not even factoring in all of the coal plants, the natural gas wells that spew toxic shit into the air as well as pollute the groundwater, and all of the other types of petroleum processing facilities that burn off shit into the air.You see, earth is ok with animals because life has evolved to live here. Animals and people exhaling gases is natural because we have *GASP* plants and trees that use those gases to convert into O2. What is NOT natural is all of the other pollutants that are burned off as a result of the aforementioned processes.So again I say: would you prefer to be stuck in a garage with a cow (or even multiple cattle) or a running car?

---

By the same token, please show us how the 5% of man-caused C02 causes climate change!

Please answer my question.As for your question we now have more than the original 100%, The added CO₂
plus the clearing of much of the natural CO₂
filters (rain forests) increased the level even higher.Edited by bluescat48, : missing <>Edited by bluescat48, : No reason given.Edited by bluescat48, : "/" screw up

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

It is not just 5 percent.. it is 5 percent year after year after year.If you look at the ice core samples, and see how much carbon dioxyde was in the atmosphere 200 years ago, we have 30% more in the atmosphere today. While a lot of the excess CO2 is being absorbed by the ocean, it is also causing the oceans to be more acidic..

And to dispel the "hive mind" BS about science and scientists: SourceSo yea, it's pretty much only morons who think man has NOT caused climate change.

---

You know that hockey stick graph: I've been wondering where we at with that nowadays...It seems to me that last year, 2009, wasn't that bad WRT Global Warming.Has anyone seen any of the temperature data from that year and where it would be on the hockey stick graph?

As far as I can tell from the data from the NCDC it would be pretty much in line with the values on the far right of the graph, a bit above 0.5.TTFN,WK

What were you looking at that told you that? Aren't all those graphs that are linked to with the X's from data published in 2008? Are you sure they include the 2009 data?or am I doing it wrong?

I don't think so, the 2008 paper was detailing improvements in temperature anomaly analysis. Given there are 9 columns to the right of 2000, and the fact that the graph is different from the one from 2008, I don't see why there is any reason to doubt that this includes the data for 2009.For a verbal breakdown see here.TTFN,WK

Oh, I see. The 2008 ones referece a paper from 2005. I thought the paper in the 2009 one was where they were pulling the data from, and saw the 2008 and thought it didn't have the 2009 data yet, or something like that.But yeah, it does seem to have the 2009 data. Hey, Thanks for the help! Yeah, that one is much better. Thanks again.2009 didn't seem that hot where I live so I was curious what the rest of the world was seeing. From the link:

quote:

---

Global Temperatures

​

The years 2001 through 2008 each rank among the ten warmest years of the 130-year (1880-2009) record and 2009 was no exception.

---

CO2 levels in the atmosphere in ages past have been much higher than they are now, when human population was non-existant! So blaming current climate-change fluxuations on the 5% man-caused CO2 seems to be quite a stretch.If you and others truly believe man is the cause of current climate change fluxuations, I would start a crusade to plant more trees, rather than enact cap & trade laws to curb man-caused CO2 emissions, or maybe you could join those who have designed artificial tree machines to take CO2 out of the atmosphere?The basic problem is that many at this forum don't believe God will take care of His first creation until He creates a new heaven and a new earth!Genesis 8:22, "While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease."Rev 21:1, "Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth ; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea."Blessings

CO2 was very much higher at times way in the geological past than it is now. Earth was a much warmer place than now at many of those high-CO2 times, too. And I still don't know what this "5%" you keep mentioning is supposed to be. The atmosphere currently has 36% more CO2 than it did in 1832, and over 20% more than it did in 1960.Go see the well-footnoted article at Wikipedia if you want some leads: Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere - Wikipedia Isn't that alleged to be going to happen within the lifetimes of people who heard Jesus's words? Or at least really soon now?

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

The basic problem is that many at this forum don't believe God will take care of His first creation until He creates a new heaven and a new earth!

What the heck does religious mythology have to do with whether global warming is man induced or nature induced?
My beliefs, your beliefs and the beliefs of others on this forum have no effect on the cause of global warming.

If you and others truly believe man is the cause of current climate change fluxuations, I would start a crusade to plant more trees, rather than enact cap & trade laws to curb man-caused CO2 emissions, or maybe you could join those who have designed artificial tree machines to take CO2 out of the atmosphere?

The problem is that the area where the trees would help are the areas that have been cleared of trees, ie: rain forestsEdited by bluescat48, : typo no [/qs]Edited by bluescat48, : misplacementEdited by bluescat48, : lost paragraph

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008