Britain: Too liberal/conservative? Watch

Poll: ?
Too socially liberal for my liking! (25)
36.76%
Just about right! (12)
17.65%
Too socially conservative for my liking! (28)
41.18%
Not sure! (3)
4.41%
tucker672
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#21
Report 11 years ago
#21
(Original post by NeverMindThat)
Its pretty simple science, Reactionary ********s aside;

- Is an increase the level of CO2 and NO2, methane and ozone in the atmosphere directly linked to increases in global temperature? YES

- Has humanity caused a notable increase in those levels in the last 200 years? YES

Therefore humanity is accounting for at least SOME of the warming.

I dont really understand how people can continue to dispuite this
Agreed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the subject of conservative vs Liberal? well I dont think it is a matter of either we are just FAR too politically correct.:rolleyes:
0
reply
1721
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#22
Report 11 years ago
#22
(Original post by NeverMindThat)
Its pretty simple science, Reactionary ********s aside;

- Is an increase the level of CO2 and NO2, methane and ozone in the atmosphere directly linked to increases in global temperature? YES

- Has humanity caused a notable increase in those levels in the last 200 years? YES

Therefore humanity is accounting for at least SOME of the warming.

I dont really understand how people can continue to dispuite this
-would the temperature have risen anway? no body knows. thats the cause for uncertainty

-Has humanity caused a notable increase in those levels in the last 200 years? were you around 200 years ago to record the temperature?

-i agree we are some of the blame but not the big part.

to be honest unless your a scientist in the feild you cant really call it one way or the other, even then theres uncertainty.

its stupid, people listen to al gore like hes an expert.
0
reply
1721
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#23
Report 11 years ago
#23
neg rep quote "moron."
hmm really mature, its opinion, so really? not getting your own way, ****ing baby
0
reply
NeverMindThat
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#24
Report 11 years ago
#24
(Original post by 1721)
-would the temperature have risen anway? no body knows. thats the cause for uncertainty

-Has humanity caused a notable increase in those levels in the last 200 years? were you around 200 years ago to record the temperature?

-i agree we are some of the blame but not the big part.

to be honest unless your a scientist in the feild you cant really call it one way or the other, even then theres uncertainty.

its stupid, people listen to al gore like hes an expert.
Science; have you heard of it? We can accurately track the average temperature for many thousands (even millions) of years in the past using a wide variety of methods not limited to 'being there to measure it'. We know with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that the world has gotten warmer and the atmospheric concentrations of NO2 CO2 methane and ozone have increased over the last 200 years

Pretty much 99% of ALL the scientists in the field of climatology AGREE that there is global warming. They all AGREE that Co2 etc levels are contributing to it, and they all agree that humans release huge quantities of Co2 methane and ozone.

I havnt even watched 'an inconvenient truth', I dont care about al gore, I care about accurate science.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Prior to the industrial revolutions, atmospheric CO2 levels had been stable for several thousand years. Since 1790, they have increased by over 35%!
0
reply
NeverMindThat
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#25
Report 11 years ago
#25
(Original post by 1721)
neg rep quote "moron."
hmm really mature, its opinion, so really? not getting your own way, ****ing baby
wasnt me. I think you are an ignorant reactionary, but probably not a moron.
0
reply
Bakunin
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#26
Report 11 years ago
#26
Ignorant is the correct term yes, not aware of the facts as opposed to merely stupid.

And we're too conservative on many issues, but not all of them.
0
reply
Frodz
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#27
Report 11 years ago
#27
(Original post by NeverMindThat)
Its pretty simple science, Reactionary ********s aside;

- Is an increase the level of CO2 and NO2, methane and ozone in the atmosphere directly linked to increases in global temperature? YES

- Has humanity caused a notable increase in those levels in the last 200 years? YES

Therefore humanity is accounting for at least SOME of the warming.

I dont really understand how people can continue to dispuite this
:rolleyes:

That's the most unscientific ********e i've ever heard. Correlation =/= Causation.

There are regular cycles of global warming that occur naturally due to a variety of effects like Orbital Cycles and Coronal Ejections. Everything suggests we have not yet cleared the period of warming that began with the end of the last ice age for a start.

Unless you want to try and suggest humans had CO2 spewing factories 10,000 years ago......


(Original post by NeverMindThat)
Science; have you heard of it? We can accurately track the average temperature for many thousands (even millions) of years in the past using a wide variety of methods not limited to 'being there to measure it'. We know with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that the world has gotten warmer and the atmospheric concentrations of NO2 CO2 methane and ozone have increased over the last 200 years
Being a physics student i know very well what science is, and i can say you are talking *******s.

If you paid any attention to said average temperatures you'd know that the earth goes through natural cycles unrelated to human activity.

What the green brigade normally say against this is that apparantly the temperature is changing faster than before. This is a blatant lie. The truth is that when using ice-cores for example to measure average temperature over thousands of years, the accuracy of the results will diminish the further back you look. This means what we measure as the temperature change for the older cycles will not be so accurate. I.e there is no evidence to suggest that the temperature change is any faster than before.


(Original post by NeverMindThat)
Pretty much 99% of ALL the scientists in the field of climatology AGREE that there is global warming. They all AGREE that Co2 etc levels are contributing to it, and they all agree that humans release huge quantities of Co2 methane and ozone.
:confused:

Evidence?

Sorry but there is no such consensus about man-made global warming. Perhaps in the halls of power and the scientific advisors to powerful men, but not in the wider scientific community. If you actually knew what science was you'd know the skeptical questioning of dogma is a central element.

You also have a fundamental dilema. Climatologists have a vested interest in man-made climate change existing. Before all this came to light climatology was a fringe science. Today it has millions pumped into it.


(Original post by NeverMindThat)
I havnt even watched 'an inconvenient truth', I dont care about al gore, I care about accurate science.
I sincerly doubt you've seen any accurate science. The papers are published in obscure science journals. What you see is the processed garbage politicians demand from scientific advisors.
0
reply
1721
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#28
Report 11 years ago
#28
(Original post by Frodz)
:rolleyes:

That's the most unscientific ********e i've ever heard. Correlation =/= Causation.

There are regular cycles of global warming that occur naturally due to a variety of effects. Everything suggests we have not yet cleared the period of warming that began with the end of the last ice for a start.

Unless you want to try and suggest humans had factories 10,000 years ago......




Being a physics student i know very well what science is, and i can say you are talking *******s.

If you paid any attention to said average temperatures you'd know that the earth goes through natural cycles unrelaed to human activity.

What the green brigade normally say against this is that apparantly the temperature is changing faster than before. This is a blatant lie. The truth is that when using ice-cores for example to measure average temperature over thousands of years, the accuracy of the results will diminish the further back you look. This means what we measure as the temperature change for the older cycles will not be so accurate. I.e there is no evidence to suggest that the temperature change is any faster than before.




:confused:

Evidence?

Sorry but there is no such consensus about man-made global warming. Perhaps in the halls of power and the scientific advisors to powerful men, but not in the wider scientific community. If you actually knew what science was you'd know the skeptical questioning of dogma is a central element.

You also have a fundamental dilema. Climatologists have a vested interest in man-made climate change existing. Before all this came to light climatology was a fringe science. Today it has millions pumped into it.




I sincerly doubt you've seen any accurate science. The papers are published in obscure science journals. What you see is the processed garbage politicians demand from scientific advisors.
god bless i was all alone. lost my faith in humanity for a min.
0
reply
NeverMindThat
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#29
Report 11 years ago
#29
You are both utterly, utterly deluding yourselves in a bid to be 'cool' by doubting the mainstream consensus.

Fact: All the national acadamies of science of every major industrial nation agree that there has been an increase in global average temperatures since the industrial revolution and that is very likely to be due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere

Sources: http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/..._Print_SPM.pdf, http://royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.asp?id=20742, http://royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.asp?id=13619,

Fact: Solar variation and volcanic effects over the last 60 years have in fact accounted for a COOLING effect, albeit one far smaller than the warming we have experienced.

Sources: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/104/10/3713.pdf, http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/...Print_Ch09.pdf

Fact: The most extensive review of the evidence for and against man made climate change ever conducted, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, found overwhelmingly that climate change exists, and humanity has a large part in causing it.

Source: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/003.htm

Fact: There are no significant credible scientists claiming humanity has had no (or an insignificant) part in global temperature increases

Source: Prove me wrong. Make sure its recent (last 3 years)



Basically, since the IPCC report, there is pretty much no scientist of serious stature claiming man isnt at least substantially responsible for climate change.

Before that, sure, the ones whose tenure is funded by ExxonMobbil and Shell pushed alternatives, but we are talking 3+ years ago; its not a scientific debate any longer.



Seriously, you guys remind me of creationists desperately sifting around for discredited scientists and decades old journals to back up their deeply unscientific views.
0
reply
1721
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#30
Report 11 years ago
#30
(Original post by NeverMindThat)
You are both utterly, utterly deluding yourselves in a bid to be 'cool' by doubting the mainstream consensus.

Fact: All the national acadamies of science of every major industrial nation agree that there has been an increase in global average temperatures since the industrial revolution and that is very likely to be due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere

Sources: http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/..._Print_SPM.pdf, http://royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.asp?id=20742, http://royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.asp?id=13619,

Fact: Solar variation and volcanic effects over the last 60 years have in fact accounted for a COOLING effect, albeit one far smaller than the warming we have experienced.

Sources: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/104/10/3713.pdf, http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/...Print_Ch09.pdf

Fact: The most extensive review of the evidence for and against man made climate change ever conducted, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, found overwhelmingly that climate change exists, and humanity has a large part in causing it.

Source: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/003.htm

Fact: There are no significant credible scientists claiming humanity has had no (or an insignificant) part in global temperature increases

Source: Prove me wrong. Make sure its recent (last 3 years)



Basically, since the IPCC report, there is pretty much no scientist of serious stature claiming man isnt at least substantially responsible for climate change.

Before that, sure, the ones whose tenure is funded by ExxonMobbil and Shell pushed alternatives, but we are talking 3+ years ago; its not a scientific debate any longer.



Seriously, you guys remind me of creationists desperately sifting around for discredited scientists and decades old journals to back up their deeply unscientific views.
fact your not going to change my mind, im clearly not going to change yours so lets just leave it at that.
end of descussion.
0
reply
NeverMindThat
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#31
Report 11 years ago
#31
(Original post by 1721)
fact your not going to change my mind, im clearly not going to change yours so lets just leave it at that.
end of descussion.

"Rant about how unscientific opponent is"
*I post evidence*
"NOTHING WILL CHANGE MY MIND!!!!!"

facepalm...


I mean, HONESTLY, do you disagree with the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change? ON WHAT BASIS??
0
reply
HeatherChandler
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#32
Report 11 years ago
#32
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too conservative.

I want cocaine sold in Tesco and abortions up to 9 months.
0
reply
kiddranc
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#33
Report 11 years ago
#33
(Original post by Kestrel_Lover_Sophie)
Erm, doesn't that rather depend on your political views?
I think it's too liberal in many ways, especially concerning the role of the family - but I'm a conservative anyway.
What's politics got to do with it?

I think the UK is too conservative personally. Uptight and prudish people suck.
0
reply
Kestrel_Lover_Sophie
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#34
Report 11 years ago
#34
(Original post by kiddranc)
What's politics got to do with it?

I think the UK is too conservative personally. Uptight and prudish people suck.
Well, if a person is conservative by nature they will consider things unsuitable that more liberally minded people consider normal.
Likewise, liberals might consider normal what a conservative considers shocking.

Perhaps saying 'politics' was a little misleading, I didn't strictly mean party politics, more a person's general life view.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (2)
3.77%
They might tell the bully (5)
9.43%
I don't think they'd understand (10)
18.87%
It might lead to more bullying (19)
35.85%
There's nothing they could do (17)
32.08%

Watched Threads

View All