1. Welcome to NoFap! We have disabled new forum accounts from being registered for the time being. In the meantime, you can join our weekly accountability groups.
    Dismiss Notice

How many of you believe in Climate change?

Discussion in 'Off-topic Discussion' started by Environmental Specialist, Jul 30, 2019.

  1. MuzzyTheArab

    MuzzyTheArab Fapstronaut

    116
    660
    93
    Well, scientific, historic, and even superstitious literature suggests that at one point there was a flood that covered much of the earth if not all of it. Some think it was a world wide flood that happened all at once, and others say it happened in specific areas over a longer period of time. This would have been around 3000 B.C. After the earth flooded the suns rays were reflected off of the water, and back to where they came from. As a consequence, when Winter came, the earths Poles in the North and South underwent a great freeze. Also known as the Ice Age, the most recent one anyway. Scientists believe we've had three that they know of. Having a large portion of the earth covered in ice isn't exactly normal within the relative scope of its existence, and the earth is returning to Pre-Flood and Pre-Ice age conditions, especially as less and less of the suns rays are reflected back into space and allowed to enter into our atmosphere. As a consequence it is getting much hotter, and ice at our poles is melting. If you'd like I can mail you some of my sources. :)
     
  2. The flood myth is ... a myth. Never happened. If you have a proof to the contrary, please do send it to me. I shall collect my Nobel prize afterwards.
    I'm not sure where would you get the water to cover the whole Earth and if you did why would it turn to an iceball?
    Afaik the temperature changes linearly, not exponentially, taking thousands of years to move the average one degree up or down. If the previous glacials and interglacials offer any hints, the interglacial should now be ending. The icecaps ought to start growing and within less than 100000 years we should have mammoths and sabertooth tigers back. But it seems that we're moving in exactly the opposite direction.
     
  3. badbanana

    badbanana Fapstronaut

    20
    78
    13
    I'm the guy you're thinking of when you talk about the non believers. I'm a Republican trump supporter and I work in the oilfield in ND. I don't deny climate change, what I disagree with is the policy being proposed to deal with it. We've all been painted as climate change deniers because we don't think our governments can solve the problem. The truth of the situation is that developing countries like China are creating the lions share of pollution and if they refuse to clean up their act there is no point in the fully developed countries investing billions to bring our own emissions down even further. We would destroy our economy because we can't compete in a global market with countries that are more or less lawless in terms of pollution regulation. These counties never played by the rules and it doesn't matter what kind of initiative they sign onto.
     
    SuperFan and hardowner like this.
  4. hardowner

    hardowner Fapstronaut

    555
    789
    93
    There's a village near the place that I live, where the farmers found shells in the earth while plowing. That village is on the mountains.
     
    Coffee Candy and MuzzyTheArab like this.
  5. MuzzyTheArab

    MuzzyTheArab Fapstronaut

    116
    660
    93
    I'm not even necessarily talking about Noah's flood, if you are thinking that this is what I am talking about. When the Earth turned into a Giant ice ball literally nothing lived aside from tiny little bacteria's. But I'll send you a few things bro, I'm enjoying our conversation so far.
     
  6. MuzzyTheArab

    MuzzyTheArab Fapstronaut

    116
    660
    93
    Omg, it won't let me message or put links in the forum because it says my like/post ratio must be at least 0% and its at 130%. What does that even mean?
     
  7. Paul69

    Paul69 Fapstronaut

    118
    202
    43
    So untrue. China per head of the population is consuming way less fossile fuels than the US, and today they are doing more to further curb it. The US has unleashed a shale oil revolution, China is the world's largest producer of solar panels. The fact that the US is doing so little is also an argument for others not to do as much as they could, so it is doubly harmfull.
     
  8. badbanana

    badbanana Fapstronaut

    20
    78
    13
    Weird how they produce so many solar panels but still have cities where people walk the streets wearing face masks. Once the average income increases enough for people to own cars it will be much worse. It's pretty easy to have lower pollution per capita when most of your population are farmers without cars. We have a serious social revolution taking place in the us and it'll do us a heck of a lot more than good than giving our government more power.
     
    Kiz Whalifa likes this.
  9. SuperFan

    SuperFan Fapstronaut

    So you actually DENY that plant biomass increases with greater CO2 concentrations? You don't think that's actually a part of the carbon cycle? Dude, you're digging yourself into a deep hole because you're trying to save face. You're about to get owned.

    This is from NASA. Checkmate.

    https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth

    "Green leaves use energy from sunlight through photosynthesis to chemically combine carbon dioxide drawn in from the air with water and nutrients tapped from the ground to produce sugars, which are the main source of food, fiber and fuel for life on Earth. Studies have shown that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide increase photosynthesis, spurring plant growth.

    Results showed that carbon dioxide fertilization explains 70 percent of the greening effect, said co-author Ranga Myneni, a professor in the Department of Earth and Environment at Boston University."

    Yeah, that's usually what people do when they've had the truth undeniably laid out before them.
     
    hardowner likes this.
  10. SuperFan

    SuperFan Fapstronaut

  11. I can't tell whether you're thirteen or fifty.
    Not this again.
    You said increase of biomass is the carbon cycle. It's not. The carbon cycle is the transfer of C molecules from biosphere to atmosphere and back. Apparently there's an effect where the biosphere expands its capacity when the amount of carbon in the atmosphere increases but that's not the fucking carbon cycle and it's clearly not nearly enough to mitiga- oh wait, I said I was going to stop this nonsense exchange. Go get somebody else to play with, kid.
     
  12. MuzzyTheArab

    MuzzyTheArab Fapstronaut

    116
    660
    93
    Come on guys, each of you knows something that the other person doesn't, no need to patronize or become pious. Were all brothers united on this forum because of our desire to combat our sexual urges. There is a difference between friendly debate, and talking purely to show moral or intellectual superiority.
     
    Ghost in the Shell likes this.
  13. I've no idea what the CPC plans to do in the future but it's a fact that China is currently the largest producer of co2 emissions. But you're right, how could one expect the Chinese to adopt clean tech if the west doesn't? If we were to sum the total emissions over time we'll get Western Europe and US far out in front of everyone else.
     
  14. SuperFan

    SuperFan Fapstronaut

    Right. And the *amount* of plant biomass is an crucial variable in that process, and it grows and contracts to help keep CO2 at a relative equilibrium.
     
    hardowner likes this.
  15. SuperFan

    SuperFan Fapstronaut

    Yeah, apparently there's an effect. You know that now because I showed it to you.

    I love how with the sugar cane example, you mocked it by saying,

    And then when you were shown data from NASA that shows huge swaths of the entire earth's land mass greening because of higher CO2, you shift your stance and say, "oh, well that's still not enough to mitigate anything" ... as if you could possibly have data to back up that claim.
     
    hardowner likes this.
  16. badbanana

    badbanana Fapstronaut

    20
    78
    13
    I suppose what I'm getting at is if we are to curb emissions we need to find a way to get industrializing countries to adopt polution standards while growth is still happening. There is a serious incentive to cut corners to remain hyper competitive in world trade and we should find another way. I'm no isolationist but more of us should stop buying our goods from countries that take advantage of their own citizens and the environment at large. And fracking is awesome.
     
    hardowner likes this.
  17. EXPONENTIALLY

    EXPONENTIALLY Fapstronaut

    How about that ?
     
  18. badbanana

    badbanana Fapstronaut

    20
    78
    13
    I think we're best friends now. I know everything about all those things.
     
    EXPONENTIALLY likes this.
  19. EXPONENTIALLY

    EXPONENTIALLY Fapstronaut

    Well "Climate Change" is just the koolaid for the weather modification weapon of Agenda 21 I guess.
     
  20. MuzzyTheArab

    MuzzyTheArab Fapstronaut

    116
    660
    93
    Lol what?
     
    Ghost in the Shell likes this.

Share This Page