Guest viewing is limited

Donald Trump running for president

CJNator said:
Haah that would be great, I personally would prefer the common man that has had some usage and knowledge of psychedelics to get into politics. That's insane! Glad you had good people with you at the time and you came out normally.

I heard a story about some guy that had a bunch of tabs in his backpack while it was raining, so the acid absorbed into his spinal cord and he permanently thinks he's a giant glass of orange juice. Not sure how true the story is but if true that really sucks.
Click to expand...

I couldn't do it! Too much corruption, lies and back stabbing! That actually would make me lose it!
Haha luckily I was with my brother, he said it'll be "character building" and kept me laughing and moving the whole time!
It could be true, I've tripped off just touching tabs in the past and when you're really tripping hard you can feel like you're in a sort of bubble, some of it stays with you but as a feeling not reality if that makes sense? Haha it gets really tricky when you try to explain about tasting colours hahaha
 
Juicedeez utz said:
Well this I completely agree with! Mindset is key, i spilt around 70-80 drops of some acid on me, I thought I was gonna lose my mind when I done it but clung to the right people and rode it out for 3 days, felt a bit weird after for a couple months but not lost haha To be honest I'm a lot more down to earth nowadays, like to listen to/learn from people and hear both sides of a story, I haven't touched anything since the spill! I'd love every politician to have a mandatory DMT or strong mushroom trip before they can be a part of a government so they have a wider perspective haha
Click to expand...

I lived thru the 60's and 70's...don't bet on no politician who was in college during those years not tripping on lsd....I would bet on bill and hill doing some tripping back then-hell, I think Hillary is still tripping, lol. I bet Obama and trump went to see Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds a few times too!!!
 
thebigt said:
I lived thru the 60's and 70's...don't bet on no politician who was in college during those years not tripping on lsd....I would bet on bill and hill doing some tripping back then-hell, I think Hillary is still tripping, lol. I bet Obama and trump went to see Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds a few times too!!!
Click to expand...

LSD is different to shrooms or DMT, LSD is really a body high and very in your own head. The latter make you feel..... connected haha makes you question everything and have a much broader thought on life and other people! Either way, You see the decisions these people make and the lack of care for anything they commit, no I don't think a lot of them have experienced a trip or transient mind expanding experience haha
 
Juicedeez utz said:
I couldn't do it! Too much corruption, lies and back stabbing! That actually would make me lose it!
Haha luckily I was with my brother, he said it'll be "character building" and kept me laughing and moving the whole time!
It could be true, I've tripped off just touching tabs in the past and when you're really tripping hard you can feel like you're in a sort of bubble, some of it stays with you but as a feeling not reality if that makes sense? Haha it gets really tricky when you try to explain about tasting colours hahaha
Click to expand...

Lol I understand, allegedly I actually never had such a strong physical altering of reality. It always was extremely introspective so I came back mentally different each time, I don't understand the mechanics of acid like shrooms. Shrooms allows clear thought so I can easily determine what it's actually doing and acid is a bit zigzagging. This is all alleged info. I just like to put that out there lol.
 
thebigt said:
I lived thru the 60's and 70's...don't bet on no politician who was in college during those years not tripping on lsd....I would bet on bill and hill doing some tripping back then-hell, I think Hillary is still tripping, lol. I bet Obama and trump went to see Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds a few times too!!!
Click to expand...

They probably did lol psychedelics can be used for good or evil, the knowledge they unlock can give people devil like qualities. Knowledge is the seed to total power yet direction is necessary to get somewhere with the knowledge.
 
CJNator said:
Lol I understand, allegedly I actually never had such a strong physical altering of reality. It always was extremely introspective so I came back mentally different each time, I don't understand the mechanics of acid like shrooms. Shrooms allows clear thought so I can easily determine what it's actually doing and acid is a bit zigzagging. This is all alleged info. I just like to put that out there lol.
Click to expand...

Yeah I've always said acid is a really personal experience, whereas stuff out of the ground is much clearer, more visual and feels much better haha I was always on edge on cid, strangely enjoying the feeling of paranoia haha
 
Juicedeez utz said:
Yeah I've always said acid is a really personal experience, whereas stuff out of the ground is much clearer, more visual and feels much better haha I was always on edge on cid, strangely enjoying the feeling of paranoia haha
Click to expand...

youtube...dmt-jerry sargeant
 
Juicedeez utz said:
Yeah I've always said acid is a really personal experience, whereas stuff out of the ground is much clearer, more visual and feels much better haha I was always on edge on cid, strangely enjoying the feeling of paranoia haha
Click to expand...

The paranoia is fun lol it's almost like being in a movie or book of some sort(for myself at least).
 
CJNator said:
The paranoia is fun lol it's almost like being in a movie or book of some sort(for myself at least).
Click to expand...

It was a bit unsettling for me. But controllable and not impossible to deal with. Also not enough to keep me from using several times. Lol
 
On climate change - I feel ax may enjoy this, lol.

When Trump announced our withdrawal from the Paris Accords, I felt that he had done the right thing.

Global warming is real, about 1.5°C in the last 250 years, and it is caused by human emission of greenhouse gases. That is a scientific judgement that I will stand behind, based on my own work and on that of my colleagues in the non-profit BerkeleyEarth.org.

But the Paris accords did almost nothing to stop the increase. Alas, most of that increase will come from China, India, and the developing world, not from the US or Western Europe. To be effective, anything we rich nations do must set an example that the developing world can follow. That means it must not be expensive; if it isn’t profitable, it isn’t sustainable.

There are three things we need to do to slow and stop global warming:

More extensive energy conservation.
Encourage nuclear power. (For the last decade we are effectively telling the world that nuclear power is unsafe and has no reasonable way to dispose of waste.)
Shale gas as an alternative to coal. A gas plant emits ½ to ⅓ the CO₂ of coal.
Everything else is just frosting. We tend to do fashionable things without caring if it makes sense for the developing world. For example, electric cars, if used in China, would increase their CO₂ pollution (since 70% of their electricity derives from coal). And they can’t afford lithium ion autos; the $7500 subsidy for electric cars is for show only; it does not address global warming.

The problem with the Paris treaty is that it was a political show with no teeth. Countries set their own limits; there is no outside verification. The developing world was enthusiastic in large part because the US had pledged to put $3 billion dollars per year in the sustainable development fund. (China had already indicated that it wanted some of this money to build coal power plants. Their argument was that with the funds they would build more efficient coal plants than they would otherwise build.)

My fundamental argument against the Paris treaty is that it gave the illusion of progress, and such an illusion can be detrimental to real progress. Others say it was a small step in the right direction, but it was generally not portrayed that way. And the step was (in my opinion) exceedingly small, too small.

The US needs to have truly workable programs to help the developing world take advantage of concepts in energy efficiency, and to make progress on shale gas and nuclear. On shale gas, at least we are setting a good example, but we need to help China develop its own resources (which are greater than those in the US). We need to set the right example in nuclear by showing that we consider it to be a clean and safe technology. Among other things, we need to make it possible to license 4th generation nuclear plants in the US; they cannot be currently licensed! And we need to make it known to the outside world that disposal of nuclear waste is not a challenge, but is a solved problem.

This is my stance as well.
 
Jiigzz said:
On climate change - I feel ax may enjoy this, lol.

When Trump announced our withdrawal from the Paris Accords, I felt that he had done the right thing.

Global warming is real, about 1.5°C in the last 250 years, and it is caused by human emission of greenhouse gases. That is a scientific judgement that I will stand behind, based on my own work and on that of my colleagues in the non-profit BerkeleyEarth.org.

But the Paris accords did almost nothing to stop the increase. Alas, most of that increase will come from China, India, and the developing world, not from the US or Western Europe. To be effective, anything we rich nations do must set an example that the developing world can follow. That means it must not be expensive; if it isn’t profitable, it isn’t sustainable.

There are three things we need to do to slow and stop global warming:

More extensive energy conservation.
Encourage nuclear power. (For the last decade we are effectively telling the world that nuclear power is unsafe and has no reasonable way to dispose of waste.)
Shale gas as an alternative to coal. A gas plant emits ½ to ⅓ the CO₂ of coal.
Everything else is just frosting. We tend to do fashionable things without caring if it makes sense for the developing world. For example, electric cars, if used in China, would increase their CO₂ pollution (since 70% of their electricity derives from coal). And they can’t afford lithium ion autos; the $7500 subsidy for electric cars is for show only; it does not address global warming.

The problem with the Paris treaty is that it was a political show with no teeth. Countries set their own limits; there is no outside verification. The developing world was enthusiastic in large part because the US had pledged to put $3 billion dollars per year in the sustainable development fund. (China had already indicated that it wanted some of this money to build coal power plants. Their argument was that with the funds they would build more efficient coal plants than they would otherwise build.)

My fundamental argument against the Paris treaty is that it gave the illusion of progress, and such an illusion can be detrimental to real progress. Others say it was a small step in the right direction, but it was generally not portrayed that way. And the step was (in my opinion) exceedingly small, too small.

The US needs to have truly workable programs to help the developing world take advantage of concepts in energy efficiency, and to make progress on shale gas and nuclear. On shale gas, at least we are setting a good example, but we need to help China develop its own resources (which are greater than those in the US). We need to set the right example in nuclear by showing that we consider it to be a clean and safe technology. Among other things, we need to make it possible to license 4th generation nuclear plants in the US; they cannot be currently licensed! And we need to make it known to the outside world that disposal of nuclear waste is not a challenge, but is a solved problem.

This is my stance as well.
Click to expand...

Who wrote this?
 
thebigt said:
just wait....I bet you .50 cents he gets canned before the year is up!!!
Click to expand...

You have the wrong person.

You're thinking Robert Mueller, not Richard Muller. Two completely different people.

You can Paypal me the 50 cents ;)
 
A worldwide list of scientific orgs that think climate change is caused by humans:

Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile
Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal
Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana
Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela
Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala
Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico
Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia
Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru
Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Académie des Sciences, France
Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada
Academy of Athens
Academy of Science of Mozambique
Academy of Science of South Africa
Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS)
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy of Sciences of Moldova
Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic
Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt
Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy
Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science
African Academy of Sciences
Albanian Academy of Sciences
Amazon Environmental Research Institute
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Anthropological Association
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Fisheries Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
American Public Health Association
American Quaternary Association
American Society for Microbiology
American Society of Agronomy
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Statistical Association
Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
Australian Academy of Science
Australian Bureau of Meteorology
Australian Coral Reef Society
Australian Institute of Marine Science
Australian Institute of Physics
Australian Marine Sciences Association
Australian Medical Association
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Bangladesh Academy of Sciences
Botanical Society of America
Brazilian Academy of Sciences
British Antarctic Survey
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
California Academy of Sciences
Cameroon Academy of Sciences
Canadian Association of Physicists
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Geophysical Union
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Society of Soil Science
Canadian Society of Zoologists
Caribbean Academy of Sciences views
Center for International Forestry Research
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia)
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences
Crop Science Society of America
Cuban Academy of Sciences
Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters
Ecological Society of America
Ecological Society of Australia
Environmental Protection Agency
European Academy of Sciences and Arts
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
European Science Foundation
Federation of American Scientists
French Academy of Sciences
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of Australia
Geological Society of London
Georgian Academy of Sciences
German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina
Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
Indian National Science Academy
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management
Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology
Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK
InterAcademy Council
International Alliance of Research Universities
International Arctic Science Committee
International Association for Great Lakes Research
International Council for Science
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
International Research Institute for Climate and Society
International Union for Quaternary Research
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
International Union of Pure and Applied Physics
Islamic World Academy of Sciences
Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities
Kenya National Academy of Sciences
Korean Academy of Science and Technology
Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts
l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Latin American Academy of Sciences
Latvian Academy of Sciences
Lithuanian Academy of Sciences
Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences
Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology
Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts
National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina
National Academy of Sciences of Armenia
National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic
National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka
National Academy of Sciences, United States of America
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
National Association of State Foresters
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Council of Engineers Australia
National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Research Council
National Science Foundation
Natural England
Natural Environment Research Council, UK
Natural Science Collections Alliance
Network of African Science Academies
New York Academy of Sciences
Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences
Nigerian Academy of Sciences
Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters
Oklahoma Climatological Survey
Organization of Biological Field Stations
Pakistan Academy of Sciences
Palestine Academy for Science and Technology
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Polish Academy of Sciences
Romanian Academy
Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium
Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain
Royal Astronomical Society, UK
Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
Royal Irish Academy
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
Royal Scientific Society of Jordan
Royal Society of Canada
Royal Society of Chemistry, UK
Royal Society of the United Kingdom
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Russian Academy of Sciences
Science and Technology, Australia
Science Council of Japan
Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research
Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Slovak Academy of Sciences
Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Society for Ecological Restoration International
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Society of American Foresters
Society of Biology (UK)
Society of Systematic Biologists
Soil Science Society of America
Sudan Academy of Sciences
Sudanese National Academy of Science
Tanzania Academy of Sciences
The Wildlife Society (international)
Turkish Academy of Sciences
Uganda National Academy of Sciences
Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Woods Hole Research Center
World Association of Zoos and Aquariums
World Federation of Public Health Associations
World Forestry Congress
World Health Organization
World Meteorological Organization
Zambia Academy of Sciences
Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences

People who are opposed:

Ax1


;)

97% of all papers on the matter agree Humans are contributing; all 3% opposed have vital flaws:

Invalid Link Removed

Studies conclusioN: Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

Invalid Link Removed
 
Jiggz, you forgot about the NASA scientists who wrote the letter that Ax1 has posted 6+ times! He is not alone!
 
I agree the paris climate accord won't accomplish much...what are scientists doing to 'REPAIR' the problem?
 
thebigt said:
what would your opinion be if conversations between manafort and trump[while manafort was trump's campaign manager]were passed to the Obama AND Clinton team, and used to aid the Clinton election effort?

damn, I really, really want this to be true, lol.
Click to expand...

I've already said repeatedly that both Clintons should be in jail as war criminals. If Obama was involved illegally, then he should be punished as well. From what I can tell though they did the wire taps legally. I don't agree with the use of secret courts, but it's currently legal.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
I've already said repeatedly that both Clintons should be in jail as war criminals. If Obama was involved illegally, then he should be punished as well. From what I can tell though they did the wire taps legally. I don't agree with the use of secret courts, but it's currently legal.
Click to expand...


FAIR ENOUGH...I don't agree with using the IRS against groups that have opposing views, but apparently that's legal also.
 
thebigt said:
I agree the paris climate accord won't accomplish much...what are scientists doing to 'REPAIR' the problem?
Click to expand...
Again, you misunderstand the role of a scientist. They are working on solutions, after which a government must set forward action to achieve the solution.

Their role is repairing, is finding a solution.

That's like asking what role an architect plays in actually building a building seeing as they don't bring the manual labor.
 
Jiigzz said:
Again, you misunderstand the role of a scientist. They are working on solutions, after which a government must set forward action to achieve the solution.

Their role is repairing, is finding a solution.

That's like asking what role an architect plays in actually building a building seeing as they don't bring the manual labor.
Click to expand...

who takes credit for putting a man on the moon? the scientists or the guys who physically built the actual rocket?

I am not asking scientists to fly a plane to sprinkle magic pixie dust into the atmosphere, just to develop that special magic pixie dust!!!
 
thebigt said:
who takes credit for putting a man on the moon? the scientists or the guys who physically built the actual rocket?

I am not asking scientists to fly a plane to sprinkle magic pixie dust into the atmosphere, just to develop that special magic pixie dust!!!
Click to expand...

Whoever is President tends to take the credit. As for special magic pixie dust, scientists have put forth solutions already. There isn't a magic solution and it's going to take time and it's going to take the entire planet changing up their act, thus things like the Paris Accord.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Whoever is President tends to take the credit. As for special magic pixie dust, scientists have put forth solutions already. There isn't a magic solution and it's going to take time and it's going to take the entire planet changing up their act, thus things like the Paris Accord.
Click to expand...

humans will be humans, it is our nature to be self destructive...sad but true, it is what it is!!!

if things are as dire as some say, I think a scientific 'magic cure' is the only hope!!!
 
Jiigzz said:
A worldwide list of scientific orgs that think climate change is caused by humans:

Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile
Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal
Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana
Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela
Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala
Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico
Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia
Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru
Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Académie des Sciences, France
Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada
Academy of Athens
Academy of Science of Mozambique
Academy of Science of South Africa
Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS)
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy of Sciences of Moldova
Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic
Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt
Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy
Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science
African Academy of Sciences
Albanian Academy of Sciences
Amazon Environmental Research Institute
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Anthropological Association
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Fisheries Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
American Public Health Association
American Quaternary Association
American Society for Microbiology
American Society of Agronomy
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Statistical Association
Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
Australian Academy of Science
Australian Bureau of Meteorology
Australian Coral Reef Society
Australian Institute of Marine Science
Australian Institute of Physics
Australian Marine Sciences Association
Australian Medical Association
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Bangladesh Academy of Sciences
Botanical Society of America
Brazilian Academy of Sciences
British Antarctic Survey
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
California Academy of Sciences
Cameroon Academy of Sciences
Canadian Association of Physicists
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Geophysical Union
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Society of Soil Science
Canadian Society of Zoologists
Caribbean Academy of Sciences views
Center for International Forestry Research
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia)
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences
Crop Science Society of America
Cuban Academy of Sciences
Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters
Ecological Society of America
Ecological Society of Australia
Environmental Protection Agency
European Academy of Sciences and Arts
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
European Science Foundation
Federation of American Scientists
French Academy of Sciences
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of Australia
Geological Society of London
Georgian Academy of Sciences
German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina
Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
Indian National Science Academy
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management
Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology
Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK
InterAcademy Council
International Alliance of Research Universities
International Arctic Science Committee
International Association for Great Lakes Research
International Council for Science
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
International Research Institute for Climate and Society
International Union for Quaternary Research
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
International Union of Pure and Applied Physics
Islamic World Academy of Sciences
Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities
Kenya National Academy of Sciences
Korean Academy of Science and Technology
Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts
l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Latin American Academy of Sciences
Latvian Academy of Sciences
Lithuanian Academy of Sciences
Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences
Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology
Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts
National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina
National Academy of Sciences of Armenia
National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic
National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka
National Academy of Sciences, United States of America
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
National Association of State Foresters
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Council of Engineers Australia
National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Research Council
National Science Foundation
Natural England
Natural Environment Research Council, UK
Natural Science Collections Alliance
Network of African Science Academies
New York Academy of Sciences
Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences
Nigerian Academy of Sciences
Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters
Oklahoma Climatological Survey
Organization of Biological Field Stations
Pakistan Academy of Sciences
Palestine Academy for Science and Technology
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Polish Academy of Sciences
Romanian Academy
Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium
Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain
Royal Astronomical Society, UK
Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
Royal Irish Academy
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
Royal Scientific Society of Jordan
Royal Society of Canada
Royal Society of Chemistry, UK
Royal Society of the United Kingdom
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Russian Academy of Sciences
Science and Technology, Australia
Science Council of Japan
Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research
Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Slovak Academy of Sciences
Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Society for Ecological Restoration International
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Society of American Foresters
Society of Biology (UK)
Society of Systematic Biologists
Soil Science Society of America
Sudan Academy of Sciences
Sudanese National Academy of Science
Tanzania Academy of Sciences
The Wildlife Society (international)
Turkish Academy of Sciences
Uganda National Academy of Sciences
Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Woods Hole Research Center
World Association of Zoos and Aquariums
World Federation of Public Health Associations
World Forestry Congress
World Health Organization
World Meteorological Organization
Zambia Academy of Sciences
Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences

People who are opposed:

Ax1


;)

97% of all papers on the matter agree Humans are contributing; all 3% opposed have vital flaws:

Invalid Link Removed

Studies conclusioN: Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

What role did humans play in the previous global warming periods that melted the ice ages, according to all the consensus believing scientists? They had more drastic warming periods than those discussed in all these studies.
 
thebigt said:
who takes credit for putting a man on the moon? the scientists or the guys who physically built the actual rocket?

I am not asking scientists to fly a plane to sprinkle magic pixie dust into the atmosphere, just to develop that special magic pixie dust!!!
Click to expand...
Ermm, the scientists do LOL. I think you meant to say scientists or engineers, as I bet noone has any idea which companies were contracted to build a space ship. all work together.

I think you miss the point completely.

A scientist built Google. A scientist built Facebook.
 
thebigt said:
humans will be humans, it is our nature to be self destructive...sad but true, it is what it is!!!

if things are as dire as some say, I think a scientific 'magic cure' is the only hope!!!
Click to expand...
The solution is actually not as difficult as people make it out to be. Countries need to rely less on fuel sources like coal and move nuclear.

That alone will make a dramatic impact
 
youngandfree said:
What role did humans play in the previous global warming periods that melted the ice ages, according to all the consensus believing scientists? They had more drastic warming periods than those discussed in all these studies.
Click to expand...
The thing to note is, the tempterature is changing at an alarming rate.

Do you know the time it took for earth to cycle through an ice age, or are you just assuming that because something happened once, that means something isn't happening now?

That's flawed logic. We know the earth goes through cycles, but it is the rate of that change that people (who coincidentally don't spend nearly much time researching as the thousands of scientists across the globe) are failing to grasp.

What scares me, is that in places in the US they literally voted against solar farms because they were afraid it would kill all the surrounding vegetation by draining the sun. Not only did they vote; they won.
 
Jiigzz said:
Ermm, the scientists do LOL. I think you meant to say scientists or engineers, as I bet noone has any idea which companies were contracted to build a space ship. all work together.

I think you miss the point completely.

A scientist built Google. A scientist built Facebook.
Click to expand...

then 'build' a fix for the atmosphere...why are they wasting time proving a point that has already been proven...less talk, more 'building'!!!
 
Jiigzz said:
The solution is actually not as difficult as people make it out to be. Countries need to rely less on fuel sources like coal and move nuclear.

That alone will make a dramatic impact
Click to expand...

yup...and if theories worked as well in practicality as they do on paper......human nature is always going to screw things up-they call them the seven deadly sins for a reason, lol.
 
thebigt said:
then 'build' a fix for the atmosphere...why are they wasting time proving a point that has already been proven...less talk, more 'building'!!!
Click to expand...

You really do not get it, lol.
 
youngandfree said:
What role did humans play in the previous global warming periods that melted the ice ages, according to all the consensus believing scientists? They had more drastic warming periods than those discussed in all these studies.
Click to expand...

Greenhouse gasses, principally CO2, have controlled most ancient climate changes. This time around humans are the cause, mainly by our CO2 emissions.

Climate Myth...
Climate's changed before
Climate is always changing. We have had ice ages and warmer periods when alligators were found in Spitzbergen. Ice ages have occurred in a hundred thousand year cycle for the last 700 thousand years, and there have been previous periods that appear to have been warmer than the present despite CO2 levels being lower than they are now. More recently, we have had the medieval warm period and the little ice age. (Richard Lindzen)
Greenhouse gasses – mainly CO2, but also methane – were involved in most of the climate changes in Earth’s past. When they were reduced, the global climate became colder. When they were increased, the global climate became warmer. When CO2 levels jumped rapidly, the global warming that resulted was highly disruptive and sometimes caused mass extinctions. Humans today are emitting prodigious quantities of CO2, at a rate faster than even the most destructive climate changes in earth's past.

Abrupt vs slow change.
Life flourished in the Eocene, the Cretaceous and other times of high CO2 in the atmosphere because the greenhouse gasses were in balance with the carbon in the oceans and the weathering of rocks. Life, ocean chemistry, and atmospheric gasses had millions of years to adjust to those levels.



What does past climate change tell us about global warming?

Link to this page
What the science says...
Select a level... Basic Intermediate
Greenhouse gasses, principally CO2, have controlled most ancient climate changes. This time around humans are the cause, mainly by our CO2 emissions.

Climate Myth...
Climate's changed before
Climate is always changing. We have had ice ages and warmer periods when alligators were found in Spitzbergen. Ice ages have occurred in a hundred thousand year cycle for the last 700 thousand years, and there have been previous periods that appear to have been warmer than the present despite CO2 levels being lower than they are now. More recently, we have had the medieval warm period and the little ice age. (Richard Lindzen)
Greenhouse gasses – mainly CO2, but also methane – were involved in most of the climate changes in Earth’s past. When they were reduced, the global climate became colder. When they were increased, the global climate became warmer. When CO2 levels jumped rapidly, the global warming that resulted was highly disruptive and sometimes caused mass extinctions. Humans today are emitting prodigious quantities of CO2, at a rate faster than even the most destructive climate changes in earth's past.

Abrupt vs slow change.
Life flourished in the Eocene, the Cretaceous and other times of high CO2 in the atmosphere because the greenhouse gasses were in balance with the carbon in the oceans and the weathering of rocks. Life, ocean chemistry, and atmospheric gasses had millions of years to adjust to those levels.

Lush Eocene Arctic 50 million years ago

Lush life in the Arctic during the Eocene, 50 million years ago (original art - Stephen C. Quinn, The American Museum of Natural History, N.Y.C)

But there have been several times in Earth’s past when Earth's temperature jumped abruptly, in much the same way as they are doing today. Those times were caused by large and rapid greenhouse gas emissions, just like humans are causing today.

Those abrupt global warming events were almost always highly destructive for life, causing mass extinctions such as at the end of the Permian, Triassic, or even mid-Cambrian periods. The symptoms from those events (a big, rapid jump in global temperatures, rising sea levels, and ocean acidification) are all happening today with human-caused climate change.

So yes, the climate has changed before humans, and in most cases scientists know why. In all cases we see the same association between CO2 levels and global temperatures. And past examples of rapid carbon emissions (just like today) were generally highly destructive to life on Earth.
 
Jiigzz said:
You really do not get it, lol.
Click to expand...

talk is cheap-get er done!!!

personally I am tired of talking about it. if things were really a dire as they make it out to be there would be more being done about it!!!
 
thebigt said:
talk is cheap-get er done!!!

personally I am tired of talking about it. if things were really a dire as they make it out to be there would be more being done about it!!!
Click to expand...
You make it seem easy. Thus is a global problem that cannot be fixed easily, or cheaply. It requires a huge effort.

You can't just make a new environment or whatever. You're trying to make something complex into something simple
 
thebigt said:
lol..i don't think you get 'it'....people get more worked up over some statues than what some call the end of the world as we know it-why is that?
Click to expand...
Because America.

That sums it up
 
Jiigzz said:
Because America.

That sums it up
Click to expand...

that is such a cop out, if America is responsible for the pending end to mankind, why do countries continue to do business as usual?

should not the rest of the world boycott everything American to save the planet, I mean the end of mankind is more important than the latest I-phone, right?
 
thebigt said:
that is such a cop out, if America is responsible for the pending end to mankind, why do countries continue to do business as usual?

should not the rest of the world boycott everything American to save the planet, I mean the end of mankind is more important than the latest I-phone, right?
Click to expand...
What? Now you're making up arguments. Who said it being Americas fault? Read my post again. Global problem.

All i was saying is that im not surprised the US puts statues above anything else. That is the American thing to do.

Its like calling something a World Series, yet only have your country play
 
Jiigzz said:
What? Now you're making up arguments. Who said it being Americas fault? Read my post again. Global problem.

All i was saying is that im not surprised the US puts statues above anything else. That is the American thing to do.

Google " because 'Merica" and look at all the things about stuff you could only expect from America, lol
Click to expand...


it isn't just America, the rest of the world seems to be going about things pretty much as usual....I don't see any dramatic lifestyle changes being made.

for something as dramatic as the end of mankind I just don't see any sense of urgency....a whole lot of talk, but very little action.
 
thebigt said:
humans will be humans, it is our nature to be self destructive...sad but true, it is what it is!!!

if things are as dire as some say, I think a scientific 'magic cure' is the only hope!!!
Click to expand...

If human nature is to be self destructive, how did we not die out long ago? How are we not all still living in caves? Just because you choose to have a negative view, doesn't make it true. The evidence all around you speaks for itself.
 
Jiigzz said:
What? Now you're making up arguments. Who said it being Americas fault? Read my post again. Global problem.

All i was saying is that im not surprised the US puts statues above anything else. That is the American thing to do.

Its like calling something a World Series, yet only have your country play
Click to expand...

Don't believe the news coverage of that. It's a small minority of hypocritical ****heads, most of which didn't give a crap about those statues until it gave them a way to be bigot white supremacists hiding behind the facade of "preserving history." Most of us would rather focus on actual issues and not the ones the politicians tell us to get worked up over.
 
thebigt said:
it isn't just America, the rest of the world seems to be going about things pretty much as usual....I don't see any dramatic lifestyle changes being made.

for something as dramatic as the end of mankind I just don't see any sense of urgency....a whole lot of talk, but very little action.
Click to expand...
Have you not heard of any of the huge changes some nations like China are making?

Synthetic meats to reduce carbon emissions produced by livestock (makes up the majority of all emissions)?

Electric cars?

Moves toward greener energy sources?

Legislation to ban non recyclable material?

The list is endless

Heck Elon is even trying to create a back up planet in case we F this one up
 
Aleksandar37 said:
If human nature is to be self destructive, how did we not die out long ago? How are we not all still living in caves? Just because you choose to have a negative view, doesn't make it true. The evidence all around you speaks for itself.
Click to expand...

look at history...the Egyptians, the greeks, the romans, the Persians,the Vikings, the French, the germans, the japanese---in the past they didn't have the capability to destroy mankind....just think the nuclear world is only around 70 years old, that is a mere blink of the eye.
 
Jiigzz said:
Have you not heard of any of the huge changes some nations like China are making?

Synthetic meats to reduce carbon emissions produced by livestock (makes up the majority of all emissions)?

Electric cars?

Moves toward greener energy sources?

Legislation to ban non recyclable material?

The list is endless

Heck Elon is even trying to create a back up planet in case we F this one up
Click to expand...

with all of those wonderful changes Elon is still betting on us screwing up, right?
 
Jiigzz said:
The solution is actually not as difficult as people make it out to be. Countries need to rely less on fuel sources like coal and move nuclear.

That alone will make a dramatic impact
Click to expand...
I actually agree I am a big supporter of nuclear. It's cheaper, safer, and renewable. I've said this for years. Scientists have said this for even longer. Nuclear is the best by far without a doubt!!!!!!!!!!

However, I wonder even if we get rid of every bit of human caused co2 emissions(not caused by respiration I get this is a low %) would it fix anything? Seriously? I dont have any idea. I'm not educated enough to know. But I know we are at record high co2 and how would the co2 decrease? The amount of co2 being converted to o2 by plants, algae and certain fungi is not that much more than the natural respiration of oxygen breathing organism.(yes it is higher but not that much)
 
Oh also I'm not truly convinced that global warming is man made btw.


Also read a theory today that made me laugh, and probably make you all laugh. It was saying the we should actually increase emissions to a point were are atmosphere is so dense that it actually reflects the sunlight and heat the comes with it. I call total b.s. on this, but it was by the ancient allien, botard, loser wanna be, fake ass, liar(sorry I hate that guy)
 
Jiigzz said:
What? Now you're making up arguments. Who said it being Americas fault? Read my post again. Global problem.

All i was saying is that im not surprised the US puts statues above anything else. That is the American thing to do.

Its like calling something a World Series, yet only have your country play
Click to expand...

Woah woah woah, dont start harping on the World Series. Maybe because it's globally recognized that the MLB is the best professional baseball league in the world and baseball players from literally every country in the world (where the game is played) strive to make it to ONE place at the end of the day - the MLB.

Edit: Dont even try associating people getting upset about statues that they didnt give a shît about and the best baseball league in the world with the best players in the world (save maybe a handful who are working on coming to the MLB from Cuba, Japan, Puerto Rico, Dominican, etc) calling their championship the World Series. Bit of a stretch.
 
jswain34 said:
Woah woah woah, dont start harping on the World Series. Maybe because it's widely recognized globally that the MLB is the best professional baseball league in the world and baseball players from literally every country in the world (where the game is played) strive to make it to ONE place at the end of the day - the MLB.
Click to expand...
Yep we had soft ball in the Olympics and the USA one all but once I get that, that isn't BASEBALL, but the results would be the same. The USA would win. Just like basketball, football(I know not in Olympics), etc pretty much everything not soccer or hockey that has major money. As the USA puts entertainment above all and is one of the riches nations(if not the most idk the current numbers) so the money's here for major money sports making them move here leading to future generations (ie current generations) to compete and win at the highest level here in the USA. As you can see in the Olympics who has the most medal and by how much??? It's all about the money. Oh and also the breading we did but that is a different but sadder/horrible story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top