Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Of 928 Papers, 75% say YES global warming + humans, 25% neutral

Of 928 Papers, 75% say YES global warming + humans, 25% neutral
Thread Tools
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 10:41 PM
 
From /.

FredFnord writes "Well, here's an interesting one: the fine folks at Science Magazine have done an analysis of the last ten years' published scientific articles (articles from crank or non-peer-reviewed publications were not counted) on the subject of global climate change. The results themselves are interesting, but the most remarkable part was that, of the 928 papers they found, 75% accepted that global warming was caused by human activities, either explicitly or implicitly. 25% made no mention either way. And not a single paper asserted otherwise." JamesBell submits this article by a geologist which suggests that the Earth is in serious, imminent, unavoidable danger.

You fools are contributing towards the depreciation of my planet and my posterity's future. Don't come here saying doomsday. There is a difference between biblical doomsday (i.e. fiction), and something the vast majority of the scientific community agree on. I'm sick to my stomach by all you arrogent and ignorant consumer whores, and what's worse, I live in a neighborhood where I have to constantly deal with despicable, worthless mothers who drive around in their H2's. I don't know how they can sleep at night. I suppose their secret is "ignorance is bliss", but the truth is that if they were all to just die the earth wouldn't shed a tear, and probably wouldn't even blink at the sudden dissapearance of their worthless lives.

And all of you who voted for that monkey, your ignorant choice will be your undoing as Bush continues to "lead" the US further into more unhealthy decisions for the United States. He needs to forget about oil and create massive nuclear power nation-wide.

Edit: Point in case: Go out and buy a bloody hybrid, so at least even if your life is completely worthless you aren't being a detriment to every living creature on this Earth.
( Last edited by itistoday; Dec 7, 2004 at 11:01 PM. )
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 10:44 PM
 
Huh. Only 30 years ago the same headlines were in newspapers but in the exact opposite context. Global cooling will kill the planet and mankind is the root cause of it.

It's amazing how trends change and scientists adopt the latest dogma.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 10:46 PM
 
Originally posted by Kilbey:
Huh. Only 30 years ago the same headlines were in newspapers but in the exact opposite context. Global cooling will kill the planet and mankind is the root cause of it.

It's amazing how trends change and scientists adopt the latest dogma.
I don't remember this, global warming has been a theory that has been discussed as a serious possibility for some time now. And this is not dogma. This is far from dogma. Dogma is the **** you're fed at church. RTFA.
     
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: -
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 10:48 PM
 
Originally posted by Kilbey:
Huh. Only 30 years ago the same headlines were in newspapers but in the exact opposite context. Global cooling will kill the planet and mankind is the root cause of it.

It's amazing how trends change and scientists adopt the latest dogma.
Get out of your igorance cave.

A good read: Plato's Allegory of The Cave.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 10:50 PM
 
Originally posted by itistoday:
I don't remember this, global warming has been a theory that has been discussed as a serious possibility for some time now. And this is not dogma. This is far from dogma. Dogma is the **** you're fed at church. RTFA.
Read last Sunday's Parade magazine. Michael Crietton(sp?) mocks all the fear mongering going on.

And if you don't remember it, that's your fault. And what exactly does "some time now" refer to? two weeks? 2 years? 2 decades?
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 10:51 PM
 
Originally posted by ambush:
Get out of your igorance cave.
The 12 year old speaks.

You weren't even alive during the 70's. Let alone most of the 80's

Are you telling me you remember the news from then?

Ha Ha...

poser.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 10:52 PM
 
Originally posted by Kilbey:
Huh. Only 30 years ago the same headlines were in newspapers but in the exact opposite context. Global cooling will kill the planet and mankind is the root cause of it.

It's amazing how trends change and scientists adopt the latest dogma.
Here, I figured you would probably need this:
Dogma (n.) - A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.

That's another problem with society. The vast majority of society has no clue how the scientific community works, or what it is. They regard scientists as just random people voicing their own "crazy opinions". Thankfully I've noticed most Mac users to be slightly above average intelligence, and there's a large scientific community that supports Apple products.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 10:53 PM
 
Originally posted by Kilbey:
The 12 year old speaks.

You weren't even alive during the 70's. Let alone most of the 80's

Are you telling me you remember the news from then?

Ha Ha...

poser.
And that's the sad part. He's more intelligent than you.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Semi-Posting Retirement
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 10:57 PM
 
Originally posted by ambush:
Get out of your igorance cave.

A good read: Plato's Allegory of The Cave.
That has nothing to do with any of this...
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 11:04 PM
 
The earth is fine. We may be a wee bit screwed for the most part, but I'm not worried.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Pit Slab #35
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 11:06 PM
 
go to bed.


ALL of you.
I tried to sig-spam the forums.
ADVANTAGE Motorsports Marketing, Inc. • speedXdesign, Inc.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 11:07 PM
 
Originally posted by Komisar:
That has nothing to do with any of this...
Oh no, he's gonna get all greek on us now...
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 11:08 PM
 
Originally posted by itistoday:
I don't remember this...
Recall this 1975 Newsweek article. The consensus then was that the world was cooling too rapidly, and that all of our food supplies would have dried up "10 years" later. Here's a snippet...
There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production– with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.

The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars' worth of damage in 13 U.S. states.

To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world's weather. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”
Some environmental geniuses swore that the only was to prevent the world from such a doomsday was to cover the ice caps with black soot. Others were upset that governments did not devote all their energies towards stockpiling food reserves for the assured and upcoming famine.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2004, 11:12 PM
 
Oh, but didn't you know? Science is just a religion that makes crap up with no evidence! And they're controlled by a vast, global, oil baron-hating conspiracy that wants you to not buy as much oil anymore!! Because they're evil!!!

We shouldn't try to limit the amount of crap we dump into the atmosphere! Oh, no! That would cost money and get in the way of economics! Because the measures needed to survive once the environment starts to go to **** won't cost anything at all! Of course not! So why put lifeboats on the Titanic? It's just stupid! Anyone with common sense would know the ship is unsinkable!

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2004, 08:14 PM
 
Originally posted by Kilbey:
Read last Sunday's Parade magazine. Michael Crietton(sp?) mocks all the fear mongering going on.

And if you don't remember it, that's your fault. And what exactly does "some time now" refer to? two weeks? 2 years? 2 decades?
Oooooooo. MICHAEL CRICHTON!!! He's such an important scientific figure! If he says something it MUST be true. He's the one who brought back the dinorsaurs, right?
Or wait? That was fiction, wasn't it?
JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE HE WRITES. He's pop fiction dude, real writers don't even give him credit as a literary figurehead.

"Sing it again, rookie beyach."
My website
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2004, 08:29 PM
 
Originally posted by Komisar:
That has nothing to do with any of this...
Of course not. He just wants to be a pseudo-intellectual to leverage and argument against us. Duh.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2004, 10:22 PM
 
Originally posted by Miniryu:
Oooooooo. MICHAEL CRICHTON!!! He's such an important scientific figure! If he says something it MUST be true. He's the one who brought back the dinorsaurs, right?
Or wait? That was fiction, wasn't it?
JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE HE WRITES. He's pop fiction dude, real writers don't even give him credit as a literary figurehead.
Read the article? No. It was not fiction. He wrote a simple article criticizing the fear mongers. Please stop posting you ignorance so obviosly.

And I love the ALL CAPS MAN. Just like my mother-in-law who tries to send me viruses cause she is clueless.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2004, 10:30 PM
 
Originally posted by itistoday:
And that's the sad part. He's more intelligent than you.
No
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2004, 10:36 PM
 
Originally posted by itistoday:
And that's the sad part. He's more intelligent than you.

Please tell me this is a joke. Please. Please. Please. Please.
The man…er…whatever…is predictable. It's a Christmas Miracle that he gets through a thread without mentioning "ur socialist dad"

Like a so.

[Edit]Woops, ambush the boy wonder managed to mention it again in a past thread, like this one.
( Last edited by CreepingDeth; Dec 8, 2004 at 10:52 PM. )
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2004, 10:48 PM
 
Originally posted by Kilbey:
Read the article? No. It was not fiction. He wrote a simple article criticizing the fear mongers. Please stop posting you ignorance so obviosly.

And I love the ALL CAPS MAN. Just like my mother-in-law who tries to send me viruses cause she is clueless.
Is Michael Crichton a scientist? Does he have any credibility at all regarding this? Answer: no. So what makes his opinion worth more than just any Joe on the street?

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2004, 11:26 PM
 
Originally posted by CharlesS:
Is Michael Crichton a scientist? Does he have any credibility at all regarding this? Answer: no. So what makes his opinion worth more than just any Joe on the street?
He's pointing out how scientists have been going back and forth on these issues and contradicting themselves. He never gives his opinion on it either way.

Why do you insist on speaking out so much when you have such ignorance?
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 12:53 AM
 
Originally posted by Kilbey:
Read the article? No. It was not fiction. He wrote a simple article criticizing the fear mongers. Please stop posting you ignorance so obviosly.

And I love the ALL CAPS MAN. Just like my mother-in-law who tries to send me viruses cause she is clueless.
I'm not clueless. Typing in all caps represents shouting, and if you were here in front of me I would have shouted those lines to add emphasis.
Have you ever been to college? Do you know anything about siting sources? About debating? Trying to make an argument? You attempted to site Michael Crichton as an authority on scientific matters. That's like asking Stephen King to teach me to play "Hey Ya" on a guitar. He might know some sh*t about it, but he hasn't done enough work in the field to justify any type of legitimacy.

I bet you feel like a DUMBASS (yes I just shouted at you) for trying to make such a stupid argument. Notice how I didn't attack you directly, I just pointed out how F**KING STUPID your arguments are. You can't just cruise through these forums calling people ignorant and assuming you made a point. I mean you can do it, but I will point out how IDIOTIC your actions are when you do.

"Sing it again, rookie beyach."
My website
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: On this side of there
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 05:43 PM
 
It's odd that when a planet blows up a thousand light years away it's "science" but when the one you're on has empirical indicators of environmental strain it's "fearmongering."
Do you want forgiveness or respect?
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 06:08 PM
 
Originally posted by wolfen:
It's odd that when a planet blows up a thousand light years away it's "science" but when the one you're on has empirical indicators of environmental strain it's "fearmongering."

OMGWTF?! The planet's going to explode!


Looks like we're going to have to Jump!

     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 07:17 PM
 
Originally posted by Miniryu:
I'm not clueless. Typing in all caps represents shouting, and if you were here in front of me I would have shouted those lines to add emphasis.
Have you ever been to college? Do you know anything about siting sources? About debating? Trying to make an argument? You attempted to site Michael Crichton as an authority on scientific matters. That's like asking Stephen King to teach me to play "Hey Ya" on a guitar. He might know some sh*t about it, but he hasn't done enough work in the field to justify any type of legitimacy.

I bet you feel like a DUMBASS (yes I just shouted at you) for trying to make such a stupid argument. Notice how I didn't attack you directly, I just pointed out how F**KING STUPID your arguments are. You can't just cruise through these forums calling people ignorant and assuming you made a point. I mean you can do it, but I will point out how IDIOTIC your actions are when you do.
Look mr. over reacting idiot, You are clueless. you are shouting on teh intraweb. you are only backing up my arguements for me by showing how people jump on the bandwagon and over react.

You still are arguing from ignorance. You have no idea what Critteon wrote in the article yet feel obliged to argue about it. I didn't cite Critteon as an authority about scientific matters. I cite Critteon as a learned person who can see through the fear mongering the media uses by quoting the latest trends in "science" that contradict each other.

Do you even have the most basic reading comprehension?
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 07:19 PM
 
Originally posted by wolfen:
It's odd that when a planet blows up a thousand light years away it's "science" but when the one you're on has empirical indicators of environmental strain it's "fearmongering."
It's not the scientist doing the fear mongering silly. It's the media.

And where are these "empitrical" indicators that humans are heating up the planet. Are they the same "empirical" indicators that were used to prove how the humans were causing rapid cooling of the Earth too?
     
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Madison, AL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 07:38 PM
 
Originally posted by Miniryu:
I'm not clueless. Typing in all caps represents shouting, and if you were here in front of me I would have shouted those lines to add emphasis.
Have you ever been to college? Do you know anything about siting sources?
I would like to know more about siting sources.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: NYC*Crooklyn
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 07:52 PM
 
Am I the only one here who feels "f*ck it, the Earth will be perfectly destroyed and used just as I die. what a great time to live!"

humans = more important than nature

end of human kind = everything dies. it's the cycle of which we are a minor part.

my kids (if any) = enjoy what you have. you're witnessing the last stages of humankind.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 07:54 PM
 
Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
Am I the only one here who feels "f*ck it, the Earth will be perfectly destroyed and used just as I die. what a great time to live!"

humans = more important than nature

end of human kind = everything dies. it's the cycle of which we are a minor part.

my kids (if any) = enjoy what you have. you're witnessing the last stages of humankind.


…or not.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: NYC*Crooklyn
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 07:59 PM
 
i'm pretty selfish, but i dont go out of my way to drain resources

No car, I recycle, but i'm not going to protest to save himalyan goats
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 08:24 PM
 
Originally posted by Kilbey:
It's not the scientist doing the fear mongering silly. It's the media.

And where are these "empitrical" indicators that humans are heating up the planet. Are they the same "empirical" indicators that were used to prove how the humans were causing rapid cooling of the Earth too?
Uh... why don't you read the actual scientific reports? The data is right there in them, scientists don't just say "oh, we think this is happening". And this isn't the media. In fact, the media is really pissing me off becaues they're hardly mentioning this, and most morons get their news from Television and so don't understand what's actually going on. And if TV ever does mention global warming (I have yet to see anything about this on TV, then again, I don't watch much TV...) it's usually quite lack luster. This needs to be spewed on all news channels several times a week to make more lazy ****s concerned.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 08:35 PM
 
So…what do these reports say? "Read the reports" is not an argument. You generally need one of those to debate.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 09:00 PM
 
I think the people on both sides of this argument are retarded. On one side you have the fear mongers using their "we're all gona fry" scare tactics to get folks to believe their "science can't be wrong" agenda. On the other side you have the folks who believe that "driving a car that gets 15mpg highway causes no negative environmental impact" and "suvs are safer anyway".

Here's what I believe:

Has the global temperature been rising for 500 years? Probably

Has the rise in global temp been caused by humans? Probably not

Does that mean there are no other reasons to be environmentally responsible? Hell no


I still think it's irresponsible to drive your sorry ass to work alone in a car that seats 7 people.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 09:02 PM
 
Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
Am I the only one here who feels "f*ck it, the Earth will be perfectly destroyed and used just as I die. what a great time to live!"

humans = more important than nature

end of human kind = everything dies. it's the cycle of which we are a minor part.

my kids (if any) = enjoy what you have. you're witnessing the last stages of humankind.
Except your wrong.

end of human kind != everything dies
end of human kind = every human dies
(most other life forms on this planet will keep truckin' right along just fine without us)

Either way, all the humans are gone and I am pretty indifferent to that.
We won't be on this planet forever.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 09:04 PM
 
Originally posted by iMOTOR:
I think the people on both sides of this argument are retarded. On one side you have the fear mongers using their "we're all gona fry" scare tactics to get folks to believe their "science can't be wrong" agenda. On the other side you have the folks who believe that "driving a car that gets 15mpg highway causes no negative environmental impact" and "suvs are safer anyway".

Here's what I believe:

Has the global temperature been rising for 500 years? Probably

Has the rise in global temp been caused by humans? Probably not

Does that mean there are no other reasons to be environmentally responsible? Hell no


I still think it's irresponsible to drive your sorry ass to work alone in a car that seats 7 people.
People can buy whatever they want. You don't know if they have a 7 person family or not. Humans have a negligible impact on the environment, and the effects of economically insane policies will do little or anything. The temperature of the Earth has gone up 1º since 1850 on average.
Wow.

Tis gettn hot in here?!
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 09:17 PM
 
Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
People can buy whatever they want. You don't know if they have a 7 person family or not.

I said I think it's irresponsible to drive yourself alone to work in giant suv. If you have 7 people in your family, then by all means, go buy fscking suburban. A more efficient minivan would work too.

And I know countless single men that drive escalades to work, and will never have 7 passengers in their car.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 09:21 PM
 
Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
So…what do these reports say? "Read the reports" is not an argument. You generally need one of those to debate.
Like I said, I assure you, they're not asking you to take their word for it. In fact, the fact that you seem to think they are shows your nievity towards any scientific understanding.

But if you insist:

http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/meeting/CSW...CSW_Report.pdf
http://www.ourplanet.com/aaas/pages/atmos02.html
And uh... here's some more stuff if you have the time:
http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/support.htm
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: NYC*Crooklyn
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 10:24 PM
 
Originally posted by dcmacdaddy:

(most other life forms on this planet will keep truckin' right along just fine without us)

so what's wrong?

we as humans have lived a great existence. the things we did, the history we made, the love and hate, the good and bad... we had a great run.

I'm going to die in 50-70 years. I don't care what happens to the earth after that. I dealt with all the problems former generations have left me. Now future generations have to deal with the accumulating crap I leave with them.

I certainly am not breathing in the same clean air and drinking the same clean water Jeebus did.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 10:38 PM
 
Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
so what's wrong?

we as humans have lived a great existence. the things we did, the history we made, the love and hate, the good and bad... we had a great run.

I'm going to die in 50-70 years. I don't care what happens to the earth after that. I dealt with all the problems former generations have left me. Now future generations have to deal with the accumulating crap I leave with them.

I certainly am not breathing in the same clean air and drinking the same clean water Jeebus did.
Its not particularly wise or visionary to limit yourself to your own life span. You may have a limited time but humanity goes on as one of the most adaptive and capable species around.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 11:46 PM
 
Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
I'm going to die in 50-70 years. I don't care what happens to the earth after that.
So when you die, everyone else should just piss off?


Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
I dealt with all the problems former generations have left me. Now future generations have to deal with the accumulating crap I leave with them.
That is the same logic as saying " I beat the crap out of my kids because my parents beat the crap out of me when I was a kid"
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2004, 11:51 PM
 
Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
so what's wrong?

we as humans have lived a great existence. the things we did, the history we made, the love and hate, the good and bad... we had a great run.

I'm going to die in 50-70 years. I don't care what happens to the earth after that. I dealt with all the problems former generations have left me. Now future generations have to deal with the accumulating crap I leave with them.

I certainly am not breathing in the same clean air and drinking the same clean water Jeebus did.
Wow, that just epitomizes extreme selfishness.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 10, 2004, 01:15 AM
 
Originally posted by Kilbey:
Look mr. over reacting idiot, You are clueless. you are shouting on teh intraweb. you are only backing up my arguements for me by showing how people jump on the bandwagon and over react.

You still are arguing from ignorance. You have no idea what Critteon wrote in the article yet feel obliged to argue about it. I didn't cite Critteon as an authority about scientific matters. I cite Critteon as a learned person who can see through the fear mongering the media uses by quoting the latest trends in "science" that contradict each other.

Do you even have the most basic reading comprehension?
You lost man. You attacked me instead of my ideas. You don't have any real argument so you attacked me. Good job.

You keep saying I argue from ignorance- is that the only word you know? I tire of this discussion, so I am about to demonstate how ignorant you are. You actually could have cited Crichton as a scientific authority since he does have a degree in anthropolgy and an MD to boot (both from Harvard), but you are so unknowledgeable that you don't even know when you have a valid point to make. Way to do your research champ. This is why people don't buy anything you say.

While I'm concluding, I didn't overreact. I "shouted" because it is funnier to do so when mocking people. I still have no clue what you meant about how I "jump on the bandwagon and over react [sic]" so I admit my ignorance there. It must be trendy to over react.

And I am done with this thread.

"Sing it again, rookie beyach."
My website
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 10, 2004, 01:33 AM
 
Originally posted by Miniryu:
I lost man. You attacked my ignorance instead of my bad ideas. I don't have any real argument so sound like an overractioning fool. Good job.

You keep saying I argue from ignorance- is that the only word you know? I tire of this discussion, so I am about to demonstate how ignorant you are. You actually could have cited Crichton as a scientific authority since he does have a degree in anthropolgy and an MD to boot (both from Harvard), but you are so unknowledgeable that you don't even know when you have a valid point to make. Way to do your research champ. This is why people don't buy anything you say.

While I'm concluding, I didn't overreact. I "shouted" because it is funnier to do so when mocking people. I still have no clue what you meant about how I "jump on the bandwagon and over react [sic]" so I admit my ignorance there. It must be trendy to over react.

And I am done with this thread.
I am comment about your ignorance of the article that he wrote. I am very familiar with his background. It was also in the article. You know, that you never read but feel qualified to discuss.

Shouting is always overreacting. You lost control of your actions. You overreacted to me like most people are overreacting to this "news" about global warming.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: NYC*Crooklyn
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 10, 2004, 11:06 AM
 
Originally posted by iMOTOR:
So when you die, everyone else should just piss off?

That is the same logic as saying " I beat the crap out of my kids because my parents beat the crap out of me when I was a kid"
i dont do anything extra to destroy nature, i've had to deal with all the pollution from the begginning of man kind to now, so my kids and future human kind should just bite down and do the same thing I did. Adapt to the changes.

and the beating stuff... that's an extreme example that's not socially accepted but yes. you can change that to, "i make my kids mow the lawn because my parents made me do it."
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Western MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 10, 2004, 11:28 AM
 
Don't volcanoes cause more harm than humans?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 10, 2004, 02:45 PM
 
Originally posted by pman68:
Don't volcanoes cause more harm than humans?
Shhhh... don't pay any attention to the man behind the curtain.


*ahem*
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 10, 2004, 04:53 PM
 
Originally posted by MacNStein:
Shhhh... don't pay any attention to the man behind the curtain.


*ahem*


Oh, noooo! Volcanoes don't do anything
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 10, 2004, 05:27 PM
 
Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
i dont do anything extra to destroy nature, i've had to deal with all the pollution from the begginning of man kind to now, so my kids and future human kind should just bite down and do the same thing I did. Adapt to the changes.

and the beating stuff... that's an extreme example that's not socially accepted but yes. you can change that to, "i make my kids mow the lawn because my parents made me do it."
What a stupid reason for not caring/mowing the lawn/beating your children. "I'm doing it because they did it!"
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 10, 2004, 05:36 PM
 
Since the other thread got burried:

Chlorofluorocarbons are an artificially produced gas. It is a strong gas that is also lighter than oxygen. It rises to the top, the chlorine combines with the O3, causing a reaction that destroys ozone (O3). This is a fact, non-disputable.

Since humans are the only thing on the planet that creates chlorofluorocarbons, we are responsible for at least contributing to the depletion of the ozone layer (and if it's a natural occurrence, responsible for accelerating it unnaturally.)
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 10, 2004, 05:41 PM
 
Originally posted by olePigeon:
Since the other thread got burried:

Chlorofluorocarbons are an artificially produced gas. It is a strong gas that is also lighter than oxygen. It rises to the top, the chlorine combines with the O3, causing a reaction that destroys ozone (O3). This is a fact, non-disputable.

Since humans are the only thing on the planet that creates chlorofluorocarbons, we are responsible for at least contributing to the depletion of the ozone layer (and if it's a natural occurrence, responsible for accelerating it unnaturally.)
Sadly this post is wasted on people that need to understand it most. Ironic huh? They simply don't understand or care for what "an ozone layer" is. Gah, what a crappy government, spending so much money on useless **** and wars instead of education.
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:38 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2