Global Warming is a Good Thing: Polar Bear Population Stable, Whales

Socrtease said:
Dano your logic is flawed. The ONLY thing that this shows about global warming is that the effects of global warming have already begun to have an inpact on 2 distinct population groups. You have taken a set of facts that coincidentally occur with another set of facts and concluded causation rather than just what it is, coincendence. Which is basically what the other side does as well but you are both wrong in drawing causations from these facts.

As for less ice means less trapped whales that is true but it also means more fresh water into a system that relies on salinity for the health of the ecosystem. Will it be too much? no one knows yet.
Click to expand...

That's the same thing they were saying in 1938. Shall I listen to you lower castes once more?
 
I'm still kinda shaking my head at how DeMano could call the complete undoing of both arguments he made with this thread a "grammatical gotcha"...
 
uscitizen said:
And why do dems love to spin about global warming ?

How does this benefit them or make thier energy cost less ?
Click to expand...
Why would you think they are interested in things costing less? They are after all fond of taxes and enjoy paying them more.

To Liberals, climate change allows them a chance to regulate and control far more things, and they have never been fond of Americans living well, they often rail against this hidden with hatred with such terms as "living beyond our means", "excessive consumerism" and so on...

Their ideology has no known stopping point, they just try and subjugate more and more under government or really their control to how they think the rest of us should live.
 
Socrtease said:
Dano your logic is flawed. The ONLY thing that this shows about global warming is that the effects of global warming have already begun to have an inpact on 2 distinct population groups. You have taken a set of facts that coincidentally occur with another set of facts and concluded causation rather than just what it is, coincendence. Which is basically what the other side does as well but you are both wrong in drawing causations from these facts.

As for less ice means less trapped whales that is true but it also means more fresh water into a system that relies on salinity for the health of the ecosystem. Will it be too much? no one knows yet.
Click to expand...

It's a good point, but it should be mentioned that however the environment changes, animals are rarely doomed, they do adapt and evolve.
I remember reading that the polar bear evolved from the grizzly bear and it is a probability that as climate changes it may well evolve back to being more like the grizzly is to change to adapt to a more temperate climate.
 
TheDanold said:
It's a good point, but it should be mentioned that however the environment changes, animals are rarely doomed, they do adapt and evolve.

I remember reading that the polar bear evolved from the grizzly bear and it is a probability that as climate changes it may well evolve back to being more like the grizzly is to change to adapt to a more temperate climate.
Click to expand...


And maybe humans in Florida will evolve gills to breath underwater, when sea level rises!

:cof1:

It takes thousands of years for evolutionary changes. If we are in a period of very rapid, human-induced climate change, that could melt much of the polar ice in the next 100 years, I doubt that will be enough time for polar bears to evolve
 
Cypress said:
And maybe humans in Florida will evolve gills to breath underwater, when sea level rises!

:cof1:

It takes thousands of years for evolutionary changes. If we are in a period of very rapid, human-induced climate change, that could melt much of the polar ice in the next 100 years, I doubt that will be enough time for polar bears to evolve
Click to expand...
But we are NOT in a period of RAPID change, it is very slow as a matter of fact, certainly the rapidity of change in Greenland's climate was much more so in the time of the Vikings when it was warm enough for them to farm in Greenland.

Gore lied in his estimates of sea level rising, I'm glad you brought that up so that fearmongering can be corrected:

"You've also asserted that global warming is going to cause sea levels to rise by over 20 feet. The recent IPCC report indicates a rise of at most 23 inches," Barton told Gore.

The most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report projects various levels of sea level rise -- by the end of the century -- but the maximum is not 20 feet (as Gore lied); it is 10 to 23 inches."
http://cbs5.com/topstories/local_story_080210110.html

And that's the MAXIMUM, and that's coming from one of the top leftwing sources for suppressing sceptics evidence from their report and they still strongly strike down Gore's huge LIE despite their bias to his position.
 
TheDanold said:
It's a good point, but it should be mentioned that however the environment changes, animals are rarely doomed, they do adapt and evolve.
I remember reading that the polar bear evolved from the grizzly bear and it is a probability that as climate changes it may well evolve back to being more like the grizzly is to change to adapt to a more temperate climate.
Click to expand...

Honestly Dano you and I are not far apart on this issue. I think there is very little evidence that humans as a species have been the cause any demonstrable, serious advancement of global warming. I believe that the earth goes through cycles and this is one of them. When Mount Pinatubo blew it let HUGE amounts of green house gases into the atmosphere, more than modern man has, and it did not spell any serious long term increases or decreases in temp. There was a dip in temps world wide for a while but nothing long lasting. I think your post actually does a better job of proving that what the eviro-left has done is the same thing. They point to warming, ice melts, two populations of polar bears having a drop off and want to conlcude that it is the evil human that has be the SOLE cause of this. The last time there was a serious, global shift in temps and ice we barely made a mark on the planet so whose fault was that? IMO no ones just like this is not our fault. This is the natural cycle of things and people want to place the blame somewhere because it could never be our kind and loving mother earth.
 
Socrtease said:
Honestly Dano you and I are not far apart on this issue. I think there is very little evidence that humans as a species have been the cause any demonstrable, serious advancement of global warming. I believe that the earth goes through cycles and this is one of them. When Mount Pinatubo blew it let HUGE amounts of green house gases into the atmosphere, more than modern man has, and it did not spell any serious long term increases or decreases in temp. There was a dip in temps world wide for a while but nothing long lasting. I think your post actually does a better job of proving that what the eviro-left has done is the same thing. They point to warming, ice melts, two populations of polar bears having a drop off and want to conlcude that it is the evil human that has be the SOLE cause of this. The last time there was a serious, global shift in temps and ice we barely made a mark on the planet so whose fault was that? IMO no ones just like this is not our fault. This is the natural cycle of things and people want to place the blame somewhere because it could never be our kind and loving mother earth.
Click to expand...
I find it difficult to believe that humans are the sole cause. However I do not believe that saying "contribute to" is the same as saying "the cause of".

We have only to look at the other planets' warming trends to realize that there is some sort of cycle of sun warming going on presently. Now have we exacerbated that effect with an accumulated pollution? I honestly don't know.

Do I think that we should make changes in our consumerism to better effect the environment? Yes. But there are other, and I believe better, reasons other than a "consensus".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top