Yeah, I know but Bolivia is in shit with itself and Venezuela is well...yeah. It's going to be interesting.
the idea that "oh well the earth has been around for billions of years, no way we could have any impact" is absurd because the earth had been around for billions of years... without an anthropogenic presence, much less industrial revolution resulting in tons of CO2 entering the atmosphere in a short period of time. Yes, there is dissenting scientific opinion about how severe the anthropogenic impact is/will be, but no scientist will deny the basic processes that dictate global temperature and the fact is we've something like doubled the CO2 in the atmosphere over the last 120 years.
of course beyond that, it's simple ignorance to deny the additional benefits of efforts to fight global warming. If you wish to disagree with global warming because of the dissenting reports then go for it, but denying the benefits entailed by greener policy is fucking retarded- better public health, increased sustainability, less pollution, energy independence, new industry, etc. It's just being fucking stubborn and idiotic otherwise.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate...al_industry.22
Hey remember when smoking didn't cause cancer?
Hey, remember when popular opinion was shown up by what science ended up proving as incorrect?
I know you'll say some science still proves global warming is real. Lets agree to disagree on climate change vs global warming, but i think we can both agree our sarcasm still stands.
The fuck? How did this post twice.
so trying to negatively politicize climate change when the resulting program is still beneficial for numerous reasons is just being a bitter hack looking for any silly-ass reason to spout some libruhl-hate. stop it.
Global Warming is a popular opinion? Maybe in Eastern Europe.
Some science? lol...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change
Statements by dissenting organizations
With the July 2007 release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate.[46]
The totality of the evidence on climate change overwhelmingly indicates:
*Climate change is real
*Climate change is human-caused
*Climate change is going to fuck our shit up.
Holding a contradictory viewpoint is, at this point, hopelessly ignorant of the facts.
Just a note for the people who seem to think that OMG 50K SCIENTISTS is somehow impressive. First, the linked sites say "scientists", but further down they clarify that they mean "people who have science degrees".
There's roughly 25k "science" doctorates awarded every year. 7.5k of them are psych or social science doctorates, which I think we can all agree are irrelevant to this discussion. That leaves around 17.5k doctorates awarded every year in the approriate fields. Source, from 2005, but the numbers don't substantially change over the years: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/11/28/phds
If you go down to bachelor's degrees, there's roughly 450k degrees awarded a year in fields that can be called "scientific". A little over half of those are psychology and social sciences, two fields that, while they may be "science", are a very different kind of science than the kind we're talking about. Once you take them out, there's around 220k in the more traditional scientific disciplines. Source, also from 2005, because it came up first in Google and I'm reasonably sure that the numbers would be on the same order of magnitude today: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/pdf_v2.htm#ch2
The reason I'm pointing this out is because the vast majority of people (including Kirin, apparently) seem to think that science degrees are rare. 50k people out of a pool of several million is not even close to a threat to the consensus. In fact, if you figure that most degree holders live to hold their degree for at least 20 years, that works out to a pool of almost 4.5 million "scientists" (not even including PhDs), of which 50k is... around 1.1%. Now, that's obviously an approximation, but given that the average life expectancy in the US is substantially higher than the mid-40s, if anything, the 1.1% number is being very favorable towards your position. Someone doing a study could easily fudge social science and psych degrees in as well to get more respondants, since nearly every resource I checked classified them as "science and engineering" degrees. That only makes the real numbers even more damning.
In short, LOL UR WRONG.
How is saying "Climate Change is real, Global Warming is not" contradictory to anything any of you have posted. I am apparently missing something. Please show me the apparent light of discovery I am missing.
not sure if this has been posted already, but LOL:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...r_finding.html
Obama has the perfect campaign ad waiting to be made here. Highlight the points of this factcheck article, then just say "The Republicans have been doing quite a bit of misleading and fact-twisting over the last 8 years... and it looks like John McCain is ready to bring 4 more."
another article in the same vein:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j...Dl1-gD934QN4G0
put those two together.*Climate change is real
*Climate change is human-caused
bump: CNN interviewing both candidates. only half an hour left though; Obama is on now. wish I would came across this earlier.
aww it's over already, the last half hour is for commentary but they're doing Ike breaking news.
and it sounds like Ike is gonna be a serious motherfucker. wow.
fuck the candidates GIVE ME MORE PALIN SPEECHES