I never get tired of our arguements of this topic

[SobaViolence]

:cool:

bring it on, Qdrop (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9B59396E-AD51-4BF7-A02D-136D0D403CF7.htm)

Climate scientists, with the aid of diving robots probing the world's warming seas, have found the heat exchange between Earth and space is seriously out of balance - validating forecasts of global warming.

[Qdrop]

rising temperatures are becoming less and less the in question.
global temps have risen an fallen many many times throughout global history....far before human industry.

again...what we don't know is:
how much the earth will warm.
how that will effect the earth's natural climate.
how much human industry is effecting the warming.
if any reduction in human industry will effect any measurable global warming.

also, look at how and what methods are used to measure global warming....look up the differances, the weakness, the disputes behind those methods, the wild variances, the huge differances in predictions from one study to the next....
look up and explain those.


but.....you won't. ;)

and again, i'm not categorically denying global warming...

when study after study from a variety of sources (even conservative ones) start coming up with relatively EQUAL data, EQUAL predictions, and the studies are shown to be REPEATABLE...
in effect, the variances decrease....

then i will have alot more faith in the data and in the effects of HUMAN industry on global warming.

[Ali]

and again, i'm not categorically denying global warming...

when study after study from a variety of sources (even conservative ones) start coming up with relatively EQUAL data, EQUAL predictions, and the studies are shown to be REPEATABLE...
in effect, the variances decrease.....so you're not saying there is global and you're not saying there isn't

so, actually, you are saying sweet fuck all

as usual
(n)

[Qdrop]

so you're not saying there is global and you're not saying there isn't

so, actually, you are saying sweet fuck all

as usual
(n)

i'm saying we need more research....

you know that's what i'm saying....you've read my previous posts.

stop putting on a show for the on-lookers....

[Ali]

i'm saying we need more research........
There's plenty of research

which you ignore

The point of Kyoto is not just reducing the effect of industry on global warming, negligible or not (proven or unproven); it's aimed at addressing the unchecked consumption of natural resources and pollution of the environment, in the the name of profit.

The whole world has realised that we can't continue like this and has ratified the treaty. It's just the US who continue to pay scientists to look for ways to prove that the earth is heating up anyway and use these findings as an excuse not to reduce their carbon emissions.

For every corporate-sponsored study proving that Global Warming is natural, there are ten proving that insustrial CO2 output is contributing to it and another 100 showing that industrial activity is detrimental to the environment.

You know that damn well. You are simply passing time by taking a contrary viewpoint for your own amusement and making as if you are trying to get people to defend their POV.

[Qdrop]

There's plenty of research

which you ignore
no, i don't.
i'm probably more well versed on the science behind all of this then you by far.


The point of Kyoto is not just reducing the effect of industry on global warming, negligible or not (proven or unproven); it's aimed at addressing the unchecked consumption of natural resources and pollution of the environment, in the the name of profit.
and i agree with most of that...how could one not?
the problem is they should remove the global warming items from the treaty at this time and focus on reforms for proven and apparent issues, LIKE unchecked consumption of natural resources and pollution of the environment, ect. don't give Russia or the US a red herring to focus on and back out....


for every corporate-sponsored study proving that Global Warming is natural, there are ten proving that insustrial CO2 output is contributing to it
where did you get that number from? "Ali's book of facts"? i'd love to see your reseach on that stat.

and another 100 showing that industrial activity is detrimental to the environment. i don't think anyone doubts the that industrial activity can and does harm the environment.
i'm certainly not arguing against that.


You know that damn well. You are simply passing time by taking a contrary viewpoint for your own amusement and making as if you are trying to get people to defend their POV.
no, i believe in what i type.

try it sometime....