Home | Community | Message Board


Original Seeds Store
Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Growery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Left Coast Kratom Kratom Powder For Sale   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleHarry_Ba11sachM
cannoisseur
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal Flag
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: THEBats]
    #358420 - 02/06/10 12:15 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Of course, by the very nature of global climate change then the extremes on both ends of the spectrum will increase. the warm will be warmer and the cold will be colder. :shrug:


It's actually extremely accurate to extrapolate past temperature patterns through ice cores because the heavier molecular weight of water composed with delta18-O oxygen affects the rate of evaporation. by measuring the concentration of water made with d18-O atoms versus standard atomic oxygen we can very accurately calculate what the temperature was at that point. further, when the majority of the 16-O has been evaporated and stored on land in snow pack then the concentration of d18-O in the ocean is significantly higher. Foraminifera and diatoms within the ocean use oxygen, silicon and carbon (all three of which have temperature sensitive isotopes) to form their shells, so combining the ratios of isotopic oxygen within their shells on the ocean floor combined with isotopic concentration in ice cores is an extremely accurate and entirely errorless way of calculating past temperatures. the 1700's is just the start of it, we've accurately mapped temperatures for the last couple hundred thousand years, and at this point we're only limited by our extraction technology. the only reason we haven't mapped farther is because we haven't drilled deep enough.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineTHEBats
The Bridge Master
Male


Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 8,488
Last seen: 10 years, 8 months
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: Harry_Ba11sach]
    #358454 - 02/06/10 12:39 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Harry_Ba11sach said:
Of course, by the very nature of global climate change then the extremes on both ends of the spectrum will increase. the warm will be warmer and the cold will be colder. :shrug:





I'm not sure if I really understand this.  If we are exponentially increasing the amount of co2 in the atmosphere shouldn't the temperature follow the trend if it's the cause?


Quote:

Harry_Ba11sach said:

It's actually extremely accurate to extrapolate past temperature patterns through ice cores because the heavier molecular weight of water composed with delta18-O oxygen affects the rate of evaporation. by measuring the concentration of water made with d18-O atoms versus standard atomic oxygen we can very accurately calculate what the temperature was at that point. further, when the majority of the 16-O has been evaporated and stored on land in snow pack then the concentration of d18-O in the ocean is significantly higher. Foraminifera and diatoms within the ocean use oxygen, silicon and carbon (all three of which have temperature sensitive isotopes) to form their shells, so combining the ratios of isotopic oxygen within their shells on the ocean floor combined with isotopic concentration in ice cores is an extremely accurate and entirely errorless way of calculating past temperatures. the 1700's is just the start of it, we've accurately mapped temperatures for the last couple hundred thousand years, and at this point we're only limited by our extraction technology. the only reason we haven't mapped farther is because we haven't drilled deep enough.




As far as this I would need to read into it more.  I'm still not quite understanding how that could translate into a mean global temperature.  Aren't most ice core samples taken from the poles?  I would also need to see examples of present day temperature being successfully predicted using this method; ie taking samples over a period of time and those predictions matching actual recorded data.


--------------------
kickin-two-hundo said:
you know what i did in english class? I came to class stoned out of my mind every day, i chugged vodka in the back of class, i put dead fish in the ceiling tiles. i put a gallon of old milk and orange juice in the file cabinet before winter vacation. i brought snakes in a tied up sweater and let them loose during class. i didnt go to school to learn, i went because i had to. i didnt care, and i didn't fucking listen to that stupid bitch. and i still don't fucking care. i tore the pages out of her books and burned them, and threw away all the books in the class, two books per day.  :twobooks:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHarry_Ba11sachM
cannoisseur
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal Flag
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: THEBats]
    #358461 - 02/06/10 12:52 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Ice from the poles comes from water evaporated from every ocean on the globe. by using ice in greenland, nova scotia and Antarctica as well as chile, tibet etc... we can get some pretty accurate numbers. plus like I said, the shells of foraminifera are all over the planet on the sea floor so that can give us a spot-location reading as well.

if you do some searching you can find MILLIONS of examples of this being used to extrapolate data. it's hardly breaking technology, they've been doing it for years and the math is very sound and accurate. google it out if you're curious :shrug:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleniteowl
GrandPaw
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 4,765
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: THEBats]
    #358464 - 02/06/10 12:58 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

THEBats said:
I'd also like to pose the question on how we are getting reliable global temperature data as far back as 1700.




Cause they make up numbers
to fit their theories ...
not the other way around

Here is a list from NASA on yearly temps

year    Annual_Mean  5-year_Mean
---------------------------------
1880      -.36        *
1881      .18        *
1882      .10      -.27
1883      -.75      -.32
1884      -.50      -.45
1885      -.60      -.52
1886      -.50      -.48
1887      -.27      -.35
1888      -.54      -.22
1889      .16      -.19
1890      .05      -.25
1891      -.33      -.27
1892      -.59      -.27
1893      -.64      -.41
1894      .18      -.30
1895      -.66      -.19
1896      .22      -.09
1897      -.06      -.20
1898      -.12      .06
1899      -.36      .04
1900      .61      .05
1901      .12      -.04
1902      -.01      -.04
1903      -.55      -.24
1904      -.34      -.26
1905      -.40      -.28
1906      .02      -.14
1907      -.14      -.11
1908      .17      .05
1909      -.19      .08
1910      .37      -.06
1911      .16      -.12
1912      -.84      -.07
1913      -.10      -.18
1914      .05      -.31
1915      -.15      -.33
1916      -.50      -.31
1917      -.97      -.34
1918      .05      -.39
1919      -.12      -.07
1920      -.41      .16
1921      1.12      .13
1922      .15      .02
1923      -.08      .18
1924      -.68      -.04
1925      .38      -.03
1926      .05      .00
1927      .18      .03
1928      .06      -.03
1929      -.54      .16
1930      .11      .12
1931      1.00      .24
1932      -.03      .59
1933      .65      .58
1934      1.22      .41
1935      .03      .39
1936      .16      .41
1937      -.14      .32
1938      .77      .32
1939      .80      .39
1940      .02      .43
1941      .51      .30
1942      .03      .15
1943      .13      .13
1944      .04      .16
1945      -.05      .16
1946      .64      .12
1947      .06      .15
1948      -.09      .11
1949      .17      -.10
1950      -.23      -.05
1951      -.39      .14
1952      .28      .27
1953      .87      .30
1954      .82      .43
1955      -.06      .40
1956      .26      .24
1957      .13      .11
1958      .05      .07
1959      .15      .02
1960      -.23      -.01
1961      -.01      .02
1962      -.01      -.03
1963      .18      -.01
1964      -.11      -.06
1965      -.13      -.07
1966      -.23      -.17
1967      -.09      -.19
1968      -.30      -.19
1969      -.20      -.17
1970      -.14      -.21
1971      -.11      -.10
1972      -.31      -.03
1973      .24      -.04
1974      .19      -.07
1975      -.20      .07
1976      -.25      -.07
1977      .37      -.22
1978      -.48      -.13
1979      -.56      .05
1980      .25      -.09
1981      .67      .01
1982      -.32      .13
1983      .00      .00
1984      .04      .02
1985      -.37      .24
1986      .75      .32
1987      .80      .29
1988      .38      .55
1989      -.09      .54
1990      .91      .45
1991      .70      .30
1992      .36      .43
1993      -.36      .33
1994      .55      .18
1995      .43      .14
1996      -.06      .47
1997      .14      .58
1998      1.31      .63
1999      1.07      .83
2000      .69      .93
2001      .92      .81
2002      .68      .72
2003      .69      .76
2004      .61      .84
2005      .92      .88
2006      1.31      .77
2007      .88      .70
2008      .12        *
2009      .25        *

link

Looks like things are cooling off to me :shrug:


--------------------
The Ego is a pathological condition
like a calcareous tumor or cyst
that begins growing in the personality
in the absence of hallucinogenic substances
-Terence McKenna-

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineTomCollins


Registered: 10/06/09
Posts: 2,943
Last seen: 3 months, 5 days
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: niteowl]
    #358469 - 02/06/10 01:24 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

niteowl said:
Quote:

THEBats said:
I'd also like to pose the question on how we are getting reliable global temperature data as far back as 1700.




Cause they make up numbers
to fit their theories ...
not the other way around

Here is a list from NASA on yearly temps

year    Annual_Mean  5-year_Mean
---------------------------------
1880      -.36        *
1881      .18        *
1882      .10      -.27
1883      -.75      -.32
1884      -.50      -.45
1885      -.60      -.52
1886      -.50      -.48
1887      -.27      -.35
1888      -.54      -.22
1889      .16      -.19
1890      .05      -.25
1891      -.33      -.27
1892      -.59      -.27
1893      -.64      -.41
1894      .18      -.30
1895      -.66      -.19
1896      .22      -.09
1897      -.06      -.20
1898      -.12      .06
1899      -.36      .04
1900      .61      .05
1901      .12      -.04
1902      -.01      -.04
1903      -.55      -.24
1904      -.34      -.26
1905      -.40      -.28
1906      .02      -.14
1907      -.14      -.11
1908      .17      .05
1909      -.19      .08
1910      .37      -.06
1911      .16      -.12
1912      -.84      -.07
1913      -.10      -.18
1914      .05      -.31
1915      -.15      -.33
1916      -.50      -.31
1917      -.97      -.34
1918      .05      -.39
1919      -.12      -.07
1920      -.41      .16
1921      1.12      .13
1922      .15      .02
1923      -.08      .18
1924      -.68      -.04
1925      .38      -.03
1926      .05      .00
1927      .18      .03
1928      .06      -.03
1929      -.54      .16
1930      .11      .12
1931      1.00      .24
1932      -.03      .59
1933      .65      .58
1934      1.22      .41
1935      .03      .39
1936      .16      .41
1937      -.14      .32
1938      .77      .32
1939      .80      .39
1940      .02      .43
1941      .51      .30
1942      .03      .15
1943      .13      .13
1944      .04      .16
1945      -.05      .16
1946      .64      .12
1947      .06      .15
1948      -.09      .11
1949      .17      -.10
1950      -.23      -.05
1951      -.39      .14
1952      .28      .27
1953      .87      .30
1954      .82      .43
1955      -.06      .40
1956      .26      .24
1957      .13      .11
1958      .05      .07
1959      .15      .02
1960      -.23      -.01
1961      -.01      .02
1962      -.01      -.03
1963      .18      -.01
1964      -.11      -.06
1965      -.13      -.07
1966      -.23      -.17
1967      -.09      -.19
1968      -.30      -.19
1969      -.20      -.17
1970      -.14      -.21
1971      -.11      -.10
1972      -.31      -.03
1973      .24      -.04
1974      .19      -.07
1975      -.20      .07
1976      -.25      -.07
1977      .37      -.22
1978      -.48      -.13
1979      -.56      .05
1980      .25      -.09
1981      .67      .01
1982      -.32      .13
1983      .00      .00
1984      .04      .02
1985      -.37      .24
1986      .75      .32
1987      .80      .29
1988      .38      .55
1989      -.09      .54
1990      .91      .45
1991      .70      .30
1992      .36      .43
1993      -.36      .33
1994      .55      .18
1995      .43      .14
1996      -.06      .47
1997      .14      .58
1998      1.31      .63
1999      1.07      .83
2000      .69      .93
2001      .92      .81
2002      .68      .72
2003      .69      .76
2004      .61      .84
2005      .92      .88
2006      1.31      .77
2007      .88      .70
2008      .12        *
2009      .25        *

link

Looks like things are cooling off to me :shrug:




It looks like an up and down pattern to me. Steadily increasing.


--------------------
andyistic said:
Ok so let me bring you idiots up to speed.
The admins are tired of this shitfest being made the joke of the weed community on the Internet.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHarry_Ba11sachM
cannoisseur
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal Flag
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: niteowl]
    #358473 - 02/06/10 01:35 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

niteowl said:
Quote:

THEBats said:
I'd also like to pose the question on how we are getting reliable global temperature data as far back as 1700.




Cause they make up numbers
to fit their theories ...
not the other way around

Here is a list from NASA on yearly temps

year    Annual_Mean  5-year_Mean
---------------------------------
1880      -.36        *
1881      .18        *
1882      .10      -.27
1883      -.75      -.32
1884      -.50      -.45
1885      -.60      -.52
1886      -.50      -.48
1887      -.27      -.35
1888      -.54      -.22
1889      .16      -.19
1890      .05      -.25
1891      -.33      -.27
1892      -.59      -.27
1893      -.64      -.41
1894      .18      -.30
1895      -.66      -.19
1896      .22      -.09
1897      -.06      -.20
1898      -.12      .06
1899      -.36      .04
1900      .61      .05
1901      .12      -.04
1902      -.01      -.04
1903      -.55      -.24
1904      -.34      -.26
1905      -.40      -.28
1906      .02      -.14
1907      -.14      -.11
1908      .17      .05
1909      -.19      .08
1910      .37      -.06
1911      .16      -.12
1912      -.84      -.07
1913      -.10      -.18
1914      .05      -.31
1915      -.15      -.33
1916      -.50      -.31
1917      -.97      -.34
1918      .05      -.39
1919      -.12      -.07
1920      -.41      .16
1921      1.12      .13
1922      .15      .02
1923      -.08      .18
1924      -.68      -.04
1925      .38      -.03
1926      .05      .00
1927      .18      .03
1928      .06      -.03
1929      -.54      .16
1930      .11      .12
1931      1.00      .24
1932      -.03      .59
1933      .65      .58
1934      1.22      .41
1935      .03      .39
1936      .16      .41
1937      -.14      .32
1938      .77      .32
1939      .80      .39
1940      .02      .43
1941      .51      .30
1942      .03      .15
1943      .13      .13
1944      .04      .16
1945      -.05      .16
1946      .64      .12
1947      .06      .15
1948      -.09      .11
1949      .17      -.10
1950      -.23      -.05
1951      -.39      .14
1952      .28      .27
1953      .87      .30
1954      .82      .43
1955      -.06      .40
1956      .26      .24
1957      .13      .11
1958      .05      .07
1959      .15      .02
1960      -.23      -.01
1961      -.01      .02
1962      -.01      -.03
1963      .18      -.01
1964      -.11      -.06
1965      -.13      -.07
1966      -.23      -.17
1967      -.09      -.19
1968      -.30      -.19
1969      -.20      -.17
1970      -.14      -.21
1971      -.11      -.10
1972      -.31      -.03
1973      .24      -.04
1974      .19      -.07
1975      -.20      .07
1976      -.25      -.07
1977      .37      -.22
1978      -.48      -.13
1979      -.56      .05
1980      .25      -.09
1981      .67      .01
1982      -.32      .13
1983      .00      .00
1984      .04      .02
1985      -.37      .24
1986      .75      .32
1987      .80      .29
1988      .38      .55
1989      -.09      .54
1990      .91      .45
1991      .70      .30
1992      .36      .43
1993      -.36      .33
1994      .55      .18
1995      .43      .14
1996      -.06      .47
1997      .14      .58
1998      1.31      .63
1999      1.07      .83
2000      .69      .93
2001      .92      .81
2002      .68      .72
2003      .69      .76
2004      .61      .84
2005      .92      .88
2006      1.31      .77
2007      .88      .70
2008      .12        *
2009      .25        *

link

Looks like things are cooling off to me :shrug:





First off read my posts to see how the numbers are NOT made up.

secondly, if you had actually looked at the numbers you posted you would see that it actually displays an increase as well. import those numbers into excel and graph it and tell me what you find


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDudeTron
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 407
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: Harry_Ba11sach]
    #358489 - 02/06/10 02:24 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

I think it's a waste of time to address this issue from a standpoint of 'fact-checking' and name dropping and 'credibility' of sources etc. 
There's too much money involved in being he who decides the current paradigm.  If your science beats his science then you get the grants, and your science becomes even more concrete.  The way that we operate our intense scientific endeavors has become extremely politicized, monetary, and cultural... Science is our latest religion, and don't forget that some people know and exploit that.

As far as global warming/climate change I think it's wrong to assume we know what's going on.  More so when we really on figures and organizations whose drive to discover and enlighten is outweighed by their need to promote agendas and make money.
It's silly to assume we don't affect the Earth, though to what degree is debatable.  We're trying to predict the future, and we've never been very good at that... It's still a matter of opinion and faith when we try to state what's going to happen to Earth because of us.  My personal opinion is that our system is just not that fragile.. Life is robust and extremely persistent.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineb0b gnarley
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/21/08
Posts: 5,663
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: niteowl]
    #358501 - 02/06/10 02:54 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Gaia hypothesis, motherfucker, learn it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDudeTron
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 407
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: b0b gnarley]
    #358511 - 02/06/10 03:11 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

He [James Lovelock] claims that Gaia's self-regulation will likely prevent any extraordinary runaway effects that wipe out life itself, but that humans will survive and be "culled and, I hope, refined."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis#The_Revenge_of_Gaia

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineb0b gnarley
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/21/08
Posts: 5,663
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: DudeTron]
    #358527 - 02/06/10 03:18 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Lovelock is a faggot

earth as an organism FTW

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleFurrowedBrowM
Free yourself from yourself
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 12,041
Loc: Carpal Tunnel
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: DudeTron]
    #358535 - 02/06/10 03:22 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Do we really need to use global warming to catalyze moral behavior?  Isn't it obvious that spewing all sorts of chemicals into a formerly pristine atmosphere will cause damage to some degree?  Are we going to debate to what degree of damage is necessary before we change things? 

Niteowl, should we change our current coal burning ways in favor of a more sustainable alternative? 


:facepalm:


If you say yes to that question, does the global warming debate become irrelevant?  This isn't the fucking debate that should be going on.  We should be debating the economics and feasibility of alternative methods of energy production and reduction.


--------------------





Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies - Become a member!
The Growery's Herb Museum (post #24)
I prefer dangerous freedom to peaceful slavery.
~ Thomas Jefferson ~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineb0b gnarley
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/21/08
Posts: 5,663
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: FurrowedBrow]
    #358539 - 02/06/10 03:27 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

WE WIL;L BECOME BELL CURVE

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDJ_avocado
myco-botanist
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/21/09
Posts: 147
Last seen: 11 years, 11 months
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: FurrowedBrow]
    #358581 - 02/06/10 04:49 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

I'm not going to miss polar bears or vampire squid.  I'm not FOR their extiction either.  The variety of life on earth is SO vast, it seems almost natural for one species to dominate all of life on earth.  It is still sad...but I believe it is natural.  Especially (and unfortunately) when human nature is taken into account.

Quote:

FurrowedBrow said:
:facepalm:  I dont even know where to begin with this thread.  So i will put it shortly.  There can really be no debate about human's contributions to our environment effecting it in a negative way.  Look at the way we completely exploit a resource and then move on to the next one.  That's been going on since well before the industrial revolution.  The scientific community doesn't view this as something that's debatable.  The media outlets love to make it something that can be questioned.  Money will make people say anything.  Yes, extinction is necessary, so long as it's caused naturally.  Now, if the squid existed for 350 million years and now it'd dying (lets say hypothetically from increased water temperature in their habitat) surely we can attribute that rise in temperature to something, and i would suspect it would be from our actions over the last 200 years.  So, when we can partially attribute a life forms extinction to OUR behaviour then extinction is not a good thing as bats said, it'll fuck up our ecosystems and could eventually get back to us.  denying global warming is like being a prohibitionist.  throw out reason and science for political gain.  pffft!




ABSOLUTELY. It will definitely bite us in the ass.  But I have faith in nature to adapt beyond our destructive nature.  What did vampire squid do for me?  What did polar bears do for me?  Nothing, that's what.  Selfish Mo'fuckin bears.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleFurrowedBrowM
Free yourself from yourself
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 12,041
Loc: Carpal Tunnel
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: DJ_avocado]
    #358595 - 02/06/10 06:17 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

the food chain is very complex.  You may benefit in many many ways, indirectly and covertly from their current and continued existence.


--------------------





Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies - Become a member!
The Growery's Herb Museum (post #24)
I prefer dangerous freedom to peaceful slavery.
~ Thomas Jefferson ~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDJ_avocado
myco-botanist
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/21/09
Posts: 147
Last seen: 11 years, 11 months
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: FurrowedBrow]
    #358647 - 02/06/10 09:09 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

I don't have a knife to a polar bears throat man! I'm just saying what ever happens happens. :shrug: I'm just trying to jokingly imitate someone "oblivious to wildlife".  I was watching Dave Attenborough in "The Private Life of Plants", "Branching Out", and the relationships that some plant species have with their enviroment is insanely fragile. Check'em out.



I find this shit AMAZING.  :whoa: Sooo stoned right na.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineb0b gnarley
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/21/08
Posts: 5,663
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: DJ_avocado]
    #358652 - 02/06/10 09:22 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

check out life in the undergrowth

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleniteowl
GrandPaw
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 4,765
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: FurrowedBrow]
    #358677 - 02/06/10 10:01 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

DudeTron said:
As far as global warming/climate change I think it's wrong to assume we know what's going on.  More so when we really on figures and organizations whose drive to discover and enlighten is outweighed by their need to promote agendas and make money.
It's silly to assume we don't affect the Earth, though to what degree is debatable.  We're trying to predict the future, and we've never been very good at that... It's still a matter of opinion and faith when we try to state what's going to happen to Earth because of us.  My personal opinion is that our system is just not that fragile.. Life is robust and extremely persistent.




That's pretty much how I feel about the issue.
There isn't enough evidence to say how the climate works

Assuming that humans are drastically affecting global climates
in my opinion is an overly arrogant stance to take

we simply do not have enough data to say one way or another
how the planets weather is supposed to play out

Quote:

FurrowedBrow said:
Do we really need to use global warming to catalyze moral behavior?  Isn't it obvious that spewing all sorts of chemicals into a formerly pristine atmosphere will cause damage to some degree?  Are we going to debate to what degree of damage is necessary before we change things? 

Niteowl, should we change our current coal burning ways in favor of a more sustainable alternative?




Of course, when have I said otherwise?

Why is it when I disagree with the human based global warming theory
that people instantly believe that I am some how pro oil

:facepalm: x10

Fossil fuels are a finite source of energy, they will run out one day
and we need to find a cleaner better source of energy that is abundant
it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that simple fact

Quote:

If you say yes to that question, does the global warming debate become irrelevant?  This isn't the fucking debate that should be going on.  We should be debating the economics and feasibility of alternative methods of energy production and reduction.




Actually this debate was about animals going extinct

Some people got their panties all wadded up
when I said it was a good thing and
spun off on a rant about human based global warming
being the reason for these recent extinctions

:shrug:

I have never supported the theory of human based global warming
I do believe that the planet has been moving out of an ice age, so a warming is expected
I have simply not seen any real evidence of humans having a dramatic affect on this system

the only people pushing this issue are ones with an underlying agenda of getting reelected

hence my suspicions


--------------------
The Ego is a pathological condition
like a calcareous tumor or cyst
that begins growing in the personality
in the absence of hallucinogenic substances
-Terence McKenna-

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineTomCollins


Registered: 10/06/09
Posts: 2,943
Last seen: 3 months, 5 days
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: niteowl]
    #359808 - 02/08/10 02:42 AM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

niteowl said:
Actually this debate was about animals going extinct

Some people got their panties all wadded up
when I said it was a good thing and
spun off on a rant about human based global warming
being the reason for these recent extinctions

:shrug:





Lol but you posted a vid of an animal, who's existence was threatened by pollution and asked isn't extinction a good thing. :facepalm:

No one got their panties wadded up and the conversation did not spin off. You evidently started it poorly. All I did was give an example of an animal that is threatened due to "possible" global warming, and you said global warming is a government conspiracy. :rofl2:


--------------------
andyistic said:
Ok so let me bring you idiots up to speed.
The admins are tired of this shitfest being made the joke of the weed community on the Internet.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineYrat
Happy Planting
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 886
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: Harry_Ba11sach]
    #359829 - 02/08/10 06:02 AM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Harry_Ba11sach said:


If you had done even the slightest bit of research on the topic you would know that the current warming trend is 100% NOT natural. sure in the past there have been wide range temperature fluctuations, but the speed of the current trend is thousands of times faster than anything experienced in the past. additionally, we can say with 100% certainty that CO2, methane and water vapor are extremely potent greenhouse gases so it's a rather logical conclusion that dumping thousands of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is going to have a discernible impact.





actually...









--------------------
"Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." - Abraham Lincoln


"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root"
~ Henry D. Thoreau
Strike The Root
                                                                                      :gethigh:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleniteowl
GrandPaw
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 4,765
Re: Isn't extinction a good thing? [Re: Yrat]
    #359928 - 02/08/10 11:47 AM (14 years, 1 month ago)

:handth:

great vid Yrat

Proved most of my points

:cheers:

The only people pushing for the human based global warming theory are
politicians who think they can cash in on the fear created by the theory


--------------------
The Ego is a pathological condition
like a calcareous tumor or cyst
that begins growing in the personality
in the absence of hallucinogenic substances
-Terence McKenna-

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Left Coast Kratom Kratom Powder For Sale   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Religion may become extinct in nine nations, study says Shaggy420 2,506 10 03/24/11 01:26 AM
by Coaster
* Hitler Reacts To The Last "Grateful Dead" Shows in Chicago Deadkndys420 3,189 18 03/23/15 04:13 PM
by Deadkndys420
* can you react bho with acetic acid pizzeria 361 0 03/01/16 02:46 PM
by pizzeria
* This place isn't very shroomy
( 1 2 all )
Sunny 5,370 20 05/06/08 10:08 AM
by GROWEED
* at 10 you learn santa isn't real, and at 35 you learn the world is totally corrupt Irishdrunk 1,310 8 02/18/13 02:25 AM
by Hawksresurrection
* Who here ISN'T from the Shroomery
( 1 2 all )
razmablues 11,916 31 04/20/08 07:35 PM
by andyistic
* Isn't it bad to digest tissues?
( 1 2 all )
ConcreteJungle 6,521 21 05/13/08 05:19 AM
by neepling
* So, BP isn't in charge of the claims anymore! blissedout 2,094 14 08/23/10 10:16 PM
by Thebooedocksaint

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: FurrowedBrow, Harry_Ba11sach, Magash, Data, Stoneth, Dr. Siekadellyk
23,421 topic views. 10 members, 454 guests and 314 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
Royal Queen Seeds Cannabis Seeds
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.036 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 15 queries.