Polar Bear Endangered. Sort of. - Page 3

Originally Posted by Jubelum

OK... let me back that out a little...

Sex is selfish! It can lead to pregnancy, and pregnancy costs the public health system billions each year... so sex is selfish!

Originally Posted by Flat Stanley

The problem with those damn scientists is that they have no common sense. They always let data and facts and reason get in the way of common sense. Good thing we have talk radio to set things straight.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Let me get this right: The EPA says polar bears are threatened, so therefore they are. Well, I guess that's settled. Shhh....let's not mention the actual number of polar bears out there. You sound like Stephen Colbert getting his audience to triple to number of elephants according to wikipedia. Except you're not joking.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Yes, just like it was true that a few scientists were predicting a new ice age just 35 years ago.

Significant progress was made in the 1960s, and was prompted by a number of discoveries, most notably the Mid-Atlantic ridge. The most notable was the 1962 publication of a paper by American geologist Harry Hess (Robert S. Dietz published the same idea one year earlier in Nature. However, priority belongs to Hess, since he distributed an unpublished manuscript of his 1962 article already in 1960). Hess suggested that instead of continents moving through oceanic crust (as was suggested by continental drift) that an ocean basin and its adjoining continent moved together on the same crustal unit, or plate. In the same year, Robert R. Coats of the U.S. Geological Survey described the main features of island arc subduction in the Aleutian Islands. His paper, though little-noted (and even ridiculed) at the time, has since been called "seminal" and "prescient". In 1967, W. Jason Morgan proposed that the Earth's surface consists of 12 rigid plates that move relative to each other. Two months later, in 1968, Xavier Le Pichon published a complete model based on 6 major plates with their relative motions.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Of course we should do something. But what? Everyone wants a cleaner environment. That is simply not the issue. But many reject the craziness of Teh Global Warming™, and for good reason. But that doesn't matter to you. You see, It's True...it just is. No matter that the Earth is not actually warming. No matter that the Earth was far warmer just a few thousand years ago. No matter that we haven't demonstrated that C02 actually causes warming. Also, let's ignore all other possible explanations of climate change. That large ball of fire in the sky....nah, that can't have anything to do with it. It's C02! What? Hmmm? You say that man is only responsible for 3% of "greenhouse gas" emissions? You say that cattle farting put out more C02 than all the factories on Earth do? You claim that volcanoes spew more into atmosphere than we can even imagine? Bunk! It's your GMC Envoy that's the problem. And anyuone who disagrees is a Teh Global Warming™ Denier. Correction...a stupid Teh Global Warming™ Denier.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

No, they don't.
.

Originally Posted by SDW2001


Yes, just like it was true that scientists were predicting a new ice age just 30 years ago.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

You say that cattle farting put out more C02 than all the factories on Earth do? You claim that volcanoes spew more into atmosphere than we can even imagine? Bunk! It's your GMC Envoy that's the problem. And anyuone who disagrees is a Teh Global Warming™ Denier. Correction...a stupid Teh Global Warming™ Denier.

Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah

That's right. And the sun is cold and grass is green. Weee.



"Whatever was suggested thirty years ago, outside or inside the scientific consensus, means that what we've now proved beyond doubt can't be true." Got you.

Also Piltdown Man was a fake. Which disproves evolution, if I remember right.



It's just the same as arguing with a Creationist.

"Here's some facts."

"AHAH!!!! BUT HERE'S MY FACTS!

"Your facts aren't good facts."

"ARROGANCE!"

"And here's more facts, agreed on by everyone, taken for granted in every institution and government research body on the planet."

"DON'T CALL ME STUPID!"

Originally Posted by Denton

Who the fuck cares whose fault it is: we should be fighting to preserve our way of life for ourselves and for our children.

Originally Posted by Denton

"Phfft! Facts! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!" [H. J. Simpson]

Between a quarter and a third of the world's wildlife has been lost since 1970, according to data compiled by the Zoological Society of London.

Populations of land-based species fell by 25%, marine by 28% and freshwater by 29%, it says.

Humans are wiping out about 1% of all other species every year, and one of the "great extinction episodes" in the Earth's history is under way, it says.

Pollution, farming and urban expansion, over-fishing and hunting are blamed.

Director general James Leape said: "Reduced biodiversity means millions of people face a future where food supplies are more vulnerable to pests and disease and where water is in irregular or short supply.

"No-one can escape the impact of biodiversity loss because reduced global diversity translates quite clearly into fewer new medicines, greater vulnerability to natural disasters and greater effects from global warming."

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Let's rephrase: Your claim is that the idiot is the one who think an "endangered" species should actually have its numbers threatened. You, on the other hand, are far more brilliant, because the number of animals should have nothing to do with it!.

FOR THE RECORD:
Polar bear's status: Headlines in Thursday's Section A about an Interior Department ruling said that it was listing the polar bear as an endangered species. The Interior Department actually gave the bear "threatened" status under the Endangered Species Act. An "endangered" species is defined by the act as facing likely extinction in its natural habitat, while a "threatened" species is seen as one that's likely to fall into the endangered category in the foreseeable future.

Maybe you can get a job at the EPA. It sounds like they're your type. Also, I'll look forward to other animals being endangered according to this most recent standard. Siberian Huskies? Endangered due to Teh Global Warming melting all the snow! House cats? Endangered! No matter that we have so many they're coming out of the woodwork...we should only worry about what MIGHT happen if ten other things happen. Endangered!

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Let's rephrase: Your claim is that the idiot is the one who think an "endangered" species should actually have its numbers threatened. You, on the other hand, are far more brilliant, because the number of animals should have nothing to do with it!.

Maybe you can get a job at the EPA. It sounds like they're your type. Also, I'll look forward to other animals being endangered according to this most recent standard. Siberian Huskies? Endangered due to Teh Global Warming melting all the snow! House cats? Endangered! No matter that we have so many they're coming out of the woodwork...we should only worry about what MIGHT happen if ten other things happen. Endangered!

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Let's rephrase: Your claim is that the idiot is the one who think an "endangered" species should actually have its numbers threatened. You, on the other hand, are far more brilliant, because the number of animals should have nothing to do with it!.

On average, volcanoes spew over 130 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year. That sounds like a lot, but compare it to global fossil fuel emissions: in 2005, we emitted more than 27 billion tons of CO2. Emissions from human activity are more than 200 times the emissions from volcanic activity.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Laugh it up, Shawn. I can't wait until global warming is exposed as a pure fraud. By then you libs will be on to the next World Ending Catastrophe.




I did make one mistake there. It was several whole degrees warmer, but not a few thousand years ago. (though, it was at least as warm). No matter...the point is that the Earth was far warmer even before humans existed. What caused it then? Hmm?





According to whom? The sun has a profound impact on Earth's climate. Only a fool would argue otherwise.



And in other places it's cooling. It really just depends on what areas you're looking at it. If you're determined to see a warming pattern, it's easy enough to do. Of course, if you look at averages, you get things like this.



You are positively unreal. There is no question that C02 levels have been going up dramatically. But there is real debate about whether that C02 causes warming itself. As for man's contribution, how can that be? You've acknowledged that 97% of greenhouse gas emissions have nothing to do with people. How could the remaining 3% possibly influence climate? In fact, let's go further. Let's say we somehow reduce our emissions by 50%. Are you then claiming that if we reduce greenhouse gases by 1.5%, it will save the planet from the horrors of Teh Global Warming? Keep in mind that assumes no natural change in the other 97% of non-human emissions.



Really? That doesn't seem to be the argument these folks are making. By the way, that link took all about five seconds to find. There are plenty of Teh Global Warming crazies out there who think that cattle contribute significantly to the problem.



Bullshit. Fucking total bullshit. Volcanoes (correct spelling, Mr. Scientist) release massive amounts of greenhouse gases. They release more than humans could if they tried.



The arguments are simple and valid.

1. The Earth has been far warmer in the past, long before humans existed.

2. Global Warming, not to be confused Teh Global Warming, is apparently on "pause" as far as we can tell at the moment. Why?

3. C02 has not been proven to actually cause warming. There is some debate, in fact, that it may actually be a byproduct.

4. We've experienced nothing abnormal wrt Earth's climate to date. There are a plethora of other explanations for variances we now experience, including weather patterns such as La Nina and El Nino. All of these are ignored by Teh Global Warming Loons.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Enjoy your ban.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Enjoy your ban.

Originally Posted by Denton

"Phfft! Facts! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!" [H. J. Simpson]

Originally Posted by Denton

This is complete bullshit. Scientists are already considering contingency plans in the event that warming gets completely out of hand. The solution is to scatter aerosols in the upper atmosphere, scattering a certain percentage of the incoming light from the sun.

The scary thing about this is that it would be cheap enough to be performed by a small country or a rich individual! Yes, this is the power that we have over our environment! You should have had your consciousness raised to humanity's power to adjust the world environment by our race 20-30 years ago to eliminate CFCs which were destroying ozone in the upper atmosphere. What lessons have you still not learned from history?

The Heartland Institute is a conservative, free-market oriented public policy stink (sic) tank based in Chicago, Illinois.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

There are, in fact, dozens if not hundreds of scientists that simply don't believe we are responsible for the greenhouse effect, if it exists at all.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Unlike you, I am open to new evidence. It is your side of the debate screaming "there is no debate! It's settled science! Anyone who thinks otherwise is a damned fool!"
You then ignore evidence that directly contradicts the theory of Teh Global Warming. It is your side that mocks and derides scientists who are skeptical of TGW. There are, in fact, dozens if not hundreds of scientists that simply don't believe we are responsible for the greenhouse effect, if it exists at all. But you'll dismiss them as part of the We Hate The Earth Republican Club. There are no alternative theories! NONE I say!

But yeah, it's me who is myopic. Righto.

A landmark climate study released Wednesday reports that global warming is changing the life cycles of thousands of animals and plants — as well as hundreds of physical systems — worldwide.

It documents rapid glacier melts in North America, South America and Europe; trees and plants sprouting leaves much earlier in the spring in Europe, Asia and North America; permafrost melting in Asia; and changes in bird migration patterns across Europe, North America and Australia, all in response to rising global temperatures.

Though previous studies have looked at single phenomena or smaller areas, the latest analysis examines data on a continental scale, says lead author Cynthia Rosenzweig, a scientist at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.

By analyzing data from each of the Earth's seven continents and the oceans, the study paints a clear picture of a world that's been undergoing rapid transformation in just the past few decades.

"These are things that are happening now, not projections of future changes," she says.

Originally Posted by SDW2001

Enjoy your ban.

Originally Posted by @_@ Artman

Climate now shifting on a continental scale, huge study says



Thread over.

But Pat Michaels, a senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., says the research "is a retrospective study, with very little to say prospectively, given the unevenness of global warming."

Michaels says that there has been no warming since 1997 and that a recent study, also published in Nature, found that global warming isn't likely to get started again for at least another 10 years. "I think the problem with this study is not in matching the past with the changes but in projecting the future."

There is little doubt left in the minds of professional biologists that Earth is currently faced with a mounting loss of species that threatens to rival the five great mass extinctions of the geological past. As long ago as 1993, Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson estimated that Earth is currently losing something on the order of 30,000 species per year which breaks down to the even more daunting statistic of some three species per hour. Some biologists have begun to feel that this biodiversity crisis this Sixth Extinction is even more severe, and more imminent, than Wilson had supposed.