How many Prius owners believe in Global Warming theory?

Accelerating frames of reference are just a THEORY.
:behindsofa:

 

Computer models have zero certainty when predicting temps rising greater than 2.1 degrees F.
Zero certainty about "how bad it will get".
Meaning runaway AGW theory is pure
science fiction.

 

It's funny how much you're like a pit bull: be very selective in your "facts" and then just keep hammering them. So now, that you've been proved that most scientists involved with climate research believe in AGW, they're just lobbied by "the man". You completely rename true scientific studies and glance over their main assertions. You also latch on to random secondary sources in magazine articles as proof that AGW is just some big conspiracy. It's pretty sad, really, that many "news" sources in this day and age are like that too (refuse to look at primary sources and just latch on to random elements they find on the net).

 

The title is "Climate Change's Uncertainty Principle

Scientists say they can never be sure exactly how extreme global warming might become, but that's no excuse for delaying action"

I agree with the facts presented.I do not agree with the suggested course of action.
Its not like Im being selective amongst the facts presented.


I tried to change the name of a scientific study?

Who could be so gullible as to believe that the name of the Akasofu paper was
" Western whore scientists use ancient astrology to divine AGW".
Except for you.

 

'Which one' is a serious question, as there are many competing theories of gravity, not one of which can currently claim Law status.

Newton's theory was found to wrong, a simple approximation that fell apart in important situations. Anyone claiming it is law has zero credibility.

As a replacement, Einstein's [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity"]GR[/ame] is the best known model, but by no means the only competitor. Combined with QED, something is clearly wrong. Here is one list of alternatives.

 

First of all, you were the one that was espousing that "roughly translated" Akasofu's paper was titled "Western whore scientists use ancient astrology to divine AGW". I pointed out how absurd that was, as it was obviously a translation of a translation of a translation. See, you have to use some logic to filter out what you read on the internet.

First of all, the name of an article was "Climate Change's Uncertainty Principle". It's an article and not a scientific study. The scientific study that you renamed was Akasofu's. The only fact that you seem to agree with from the article is that current CO2 output will account for 2.1 degree increase. You don't seem to agree with anything else about the article (which in no way denies AGW).

 

Youre not capable of understanding the assertion of the article.
Or understanding sarcasm.
You dont have to respond.

 

*cringe*

Can I point out one more time that theories do not become laws? No matter how great we think a theory might be!

 

You're not capable of understanding the assertion of the article.
Or understanding sarcasm, and complete sentences.
You dont have to respond.

 

Well...

Bobby Henderson's theory that the world was created by a flying spaghetti monster has become a religion (Pastafarianism) and as soon as we can get enough of us elected to public office to repeal the pesky First Amendment we can make it a law that everyone must believe that what we've been erroneously calling "gravity" is really just the FSM pressing down on us with his noodly appendages.

And a theory will have become a law.

 

ya know... when I become supreme ruler, lots of things will change.

 

I've been involved with Environmental issues since college in the 60s and 70s. Now I have a grandson. The science indicates human intervention as the primary cause. But, if it isn't I'm not willing to risk the whole darned place and my or anyone elses grandchildrens lungs and quality of life in order to find out. Second reason, I don't want to continue to fund terrorist states, I don't want to continue to see the money of the U.S. exported along with our financial future. Third, I'm just plain cheap!

 

The thing is... even if we totally prove today that climate change is NOT due to any human activity - we still need to change all those things that are making us (and our world) sick.

Saving lungs and quality of life. Exporting a billion US dollars per day? We need to fix these things even if we never even consider global climate change. It is likely the most important point that gets lost in these silly discussions.

Let's pretend that we prove to everybody's satisfaction that humans have no control over climate change. Does that then mean we should keep polluting our air and water? Keep depending on other nations for our energy - for our quality of life? Keep exporting our money?

Hell no. We need to make all the changes that help stop climate change even if we didn't need to stop climate change!

 

Get in line!

 

Good news, Daniel! There is still room in my court for one more jester. Dood... you get to board directly adjacent to the primary harem!

 

Will he have to wear spandex?

Tom

 

Just ask yourself this: Would the quality of jest be better served with or without Spandex? I'm pretty sure that "with" is the answer here.

 

And here I was going to offer you the post of Energy Czar when I became Emperor of the World. The least you could do would be to offer me an ambassadorship somewhere I could make a few hundred million dollars through graft and corruption.

 

Jeez. That almost makes me feel bad.

Hey! Did I mention the harem thing?

 

I do believe in global warming. However I will admit that this belief is based on what I've read and seen in books, on TV, and the internet. It's a great debate but not the heart of the issue in my mind. You see, the earth is very resilient. It has survived asteroid strikes, nuclear war, ice ages and a myriad other natural disasters and it will survive global warming because CO2 is absorbed by most everything that grows. What is a fact and beyond debate is that someday, we will run out of fossil fuel if we keep using it to the extent we are using it now. The earth is not infinite, nor does it have infinite resources. We have to use what's left to develop technologies that can replace the finite fossil fuel on this planet. So here's my point. When the last ounce of oil is burned and when the last ounce of coal is mined we must have in place a method to continue energy consumption from the sun as it arrives as what is stored on earth as fossil fuel will be gone. The more time we have by rationing the remainder of our fossil fuel to allow us to make this transition from the sun's energy that is stored to the suns energy that arrives in real time, the better prepared we will be. So buy a Prius.