Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

The Great Global Warming Swindle

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-27 18:48

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-31944410825346433&q=The+Great+Global+Warming+Swindle+duration%3Along&total=16&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=7
GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE! GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE!

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-02 16:46

why does global warming/climate change need to meet a platinum standard of truth when almost nothing else does?  oil companies have only the faintest outlines of data when they make the decision to invest billions in infrastructure to reach an unseen oil field.  financial stock market brokers weave together disparate points of data across multiple markets when deciding when to invest.  someone who buys a house with a mortgage is making the assumption they'll still be able to pay in 20 years - something most people can't possibly know as fact.

in each of these cases, it's entirely appropriate to act on limited data.  but why not with global warming?  because conservitards would rather stick their heads in the sand on a business as usual corse than acknowledge what's happening.

global warming is happening.  it's being measured and evidence strongly points to human causes.  do we have 100% proof?  of course not?  are there small groups of countervailing evidence?  sure there's a few blips where its getting colder.  that's why the term climate change is preferable to global warming.  the Earth has a surface area of 510,065,600 km^2, so it's entirely reasonable to expect some localization of results.  

more icebergs in a small part of the Antartic?  sure, but the overall pattern, the line of best fit, common sense if you will, all point to an overall level of warming.  so take your tiny group of iceberg "proof" and STFU

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List