It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Can someone post a link to the scientific peer studied research and documents that state man has not had an impact on global warming?
Why? Humans exhale CO2. No one is arguing that. What would be more interesting and enlightening is the Natural CO2 vs Manmade CO2 ratio for some given period of time. That would be interesting. No one can seem to find that.. in all the studies, articles, blogs, etc.
Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by rwfresh
What would you consider more important, wars that affect groups of people around the globe or a disaster that kills most of the people on the globe?
Originally posted by moniesisfun
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Can someone post a link to the scientific peer studied research and documents that state man has not had an impact on global warming?
Why? Humans exhale CO2. No one is arguing that. What would be more interesting and enlightening is the Natural CO2 vs Manmade CO2 ratio for some given period of time. That would be interesting. No one can seem to find that.. in all the studies, articles, blogs, etc.
You're actually serious
LOL!
that just shows how far you've researched!!
hahahahaha!!!
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Can someone post a link to the scientific peer studied research and documents that state man has not had an impact on global warming?
Why? Humans exhale CO2. No one is arguing that. What would be more interesting and enlightening is the Natural CO2 vs Manmade CO2 ratio for some given period of time. That would be interesting. No one can seem to find that.. in all the studies, articles, blogs, etc.
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by rwfresh
What would you consider more important, wars that affect groups of people around the globe or a disaster that kills most of the people on the globe?
Sorry, are we assuming now that science can predict when most of the people on the globe will be killed by global warming?
Originally posted by moniesisfun
reply to post by rwfresh
I'll throw you but one bone.
Look at the carbon pre-industrial revolution...say, 200 years back...under 280ppm for ...a long time...
where are we now?
can you honestly not connect that stupid easy dot?
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Can someone post a link to the scientific peer studied research and documents that state man has not had an impact on global warming?
Why? Humans exhale CO2. No one is arguing that. What would be more interesting and enlightening is the Natural CO2 vs Manmade CO2 ratio for some given period of time. That would be interesting. No one can seem to find that.. in all the studies, articles, blogs, etc.
So what you are saying is you have no proof?
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by rwfresh
What would you consider more important, wars that affect groups of people around the globe or a disaster that kills most of the people on the globe?
Sorry, are we assuming now that science can predict when most of the people on the globe will be killed by global warming?
Actually yes their are documents that state that once global temperatures rise to a certain level human life will not be sustainable.
Originally posted by moniesisfun
reply to post by rwfresh
tsk tsk!
not saying I'm throwing you another.
do tha research, bro!
current
so within 200 years we've gone up ~45%
can you find that ratio?
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Can someone post a link to the scientific peer studied research and documents that state man has not had an impact on global warming?
Why? Humans exhale CO2. No one is arguing that. What would be more interesting and enlightening is the Natural CO2 vs Manmade CO2 ratio for some given period of time. That would be interesting. No one can seem to find that.. in all the studies, articles, blogs, etc.
So what you are saying is you have no proof?
Proof of what? I'm not saying anything about proof of anything because that seems to confuse those that hate thinking. I am asking what the ratio of Natural CO2 to manmade CO2 is. For any time period. Honest question.
Originally posted by moniesisfun
reply to post by rwfresh
tsk tsk!
not saying I'm throwing you another.
do tha research, bro!
current
so within 200 years we've gone up ~45%
can you find that ratio?
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Can someone post a link to the scientific peer studied research and documents that state man has not had an impact on global warming?
Why? Humans exhale CO2. No one is arguing that. What would be more interesting and enlightening is the Natural CO2 vs Manmade CO2 ratio for some given period of time. That would be interesting. No one can seem to find that.. in all the studies, articles, blogs, etc.
So what you are saying is you have no proof?
Proof of what? I'm not saying anything about proof of anything because that seems to confuse those that hate thinking. I am asking what the ratio of Natural CO2 to manmade CO2 is. For any time period. Honest question.
Why are answereing my question with a question that does not pertain to mine? I guess that is why this thread is in the dissinfo and deflection area.
Nice deflection but my original question stands.
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by rwfresh
What would you consider more important, wars that affect groups of people around the globe or a disaster that kills most of the people on the globe?
Sorry, are we assuming now that science can predict when most of the people on the globe will be killed by global warming?
Actually yes their are documents that state that once global temperatures rise to a certain level human life will not be sustainable.
What temperature would that be? How fast is the temperature rising and how much of an impact on the temperature would eliminating all human produced CO2 have? Would be good to know.
In the meantime what are we doing to prevent an earthquake from causing nuclear meltdown of 10 of the 104 nuclear reactors in the USA which would kill off mankind? What have we done to prevent a solar flare from initiating nuclear meltdown on all 104 reactors?
What is being done to stop the use of depleted uranium? How much time do we have until the food chain is completely wiped out by unsustainable farming practices?
Go and try and get me concerned about the temperature possibly rising in the future. try. please. And while you are at it.. what is your solution again?
Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by rwfresh
As I have said before...regardless of how or what is causing Global Warming...it is happening. The U.S. Military is preparing for it. THAT alone tells you something. The U.S. Navy is retiring the Carrier Enterprise in 2015 with the new USS. CVN-78 Gerald R. Ford. This will be the first new class of Carriers since the Nimitz Class.
In 2020 the USS. Nimitz will be replaced by the FORD CLASS USS. CVN-79 J.F.K. Except now because of the speed of Global Warming there is not projected to be any Northern Polar Sea Ice Cap left so the Nimitz may be refitted and used as an Arctic Ocean Carrier Group to protect these new sea lanes.
GLOBAL WARMING IS A REALITY. Split Infinity
Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by rwfresh
As I have said before...regardless of how or what is causing Global Warming...it is happening. The U.S. Military is preparing for it. THAT alone tells you something. The U.S. Navy is retiring the Carrier Enterprise in 2015 with the new USS. CVN-78 Gerald R. Ford. This will be the first new class of Carriers since the Nimitz Class.
In 2020 the USS. Nimitz will be replaced by the FORD CLASS USS. CVN-79 J.F.K. Except now because of the speed of Global Warming there is not projected to be any Northern Polar Sea Ice Cap left so the Nimitz may be refitted and used as an Arctic Ocean Carrier Group to protect these new sea lanes.
GLOBAL WARMING IS A REALITY. Split Infinity
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Originally posted by rwfresh
Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by rwfresh
What would you consider more important, wars that affect groups of people around the globe or a disaster that kills most of the people on the globe?
Sorry, are we assuming now that science can predict when most of the people on the globe will be killed by global warming?
Actually yes their are documents that state that once global temperatures rise to a certain level human life will not be sustainable.
What temperature would that be? How fast is the temperature rising and how much of an impact on the temperature would eliminating all human produced CO2 have? Would be good to know.
In the meantime what are we doing to prevent an earthquake from causing nuclear meltdown of 10 of the 104 nuclear reactors in the USA which would kill off mankind? What have we done to prevent a solar flare from initiating nuclear meltdown on all 104 reactors?
What is being done to stop the use of depleted uranium? How much time do we have until the food chain is completely wiped out by unsustainable farming practices?
Go and try and get me concerned about the temperature possibly rising in the future. try. please. And while you are at it.. what is your solution again?
Who cares?
Depleted uranium? Are you a whack job? Sorry I used to work with it and you can’t change my mind on it.
Nuclear reactors? You are more worried about that than a worldwide extinction. Wow your priorities are way off.
Anyway here is a link I am still waiting for yours.Arctic News
Google is your friendedit on 5-9-2012 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)