The future of the Earth.

bertramhall

Member
Aug 14, 2015
87
32
21
I would like to ask you about your views on ecology and ecologicals measures taken by the US and international community in order to save our planet from contamination and destruction. I think that all the countries should cut emissions not only because of global warming but also because of pollution of the atmosphere. Do you support Obama`s climate initiative? Do you support the UN activity in this sphere? Do you think that taken measures are efficient?
 
I support the climate initiative and the actions of other countries in combating climate change.
 
I support the climate initiative and the actions of other countries in combating climate change.
11947668_10153296336214024_4580195904660820783_n.jpg
 
Humans are a disease, the sooner gone the better...
Yes there is a serious need for culling..... Maybe a good war will take care of it... Fear not, Earth will do whatever is necessary too get rid of parasitic overgrowth... When symbiotic relationship becomes parasitic then it is bound to happen...
 
Humans are a disease, the sooner gone the better...
Yes there is a serious need for culling..... Maybe a good war will take care of it... Fear not, Earth will do whatever is necessary too get rid of parasitic overgrowth... When symbiotic relationship becomes parasitic then it is bound to happen...
We are already parasites...
 
I would like to ask you about your views on ecology and ecologicals measures taken by the US and international community in order to save our planet from contamination and destruction. I think that all the countries should cut emissions not only because of global warming but also because of pollution of the atmosphere. Do you support Obama`s climate initiative? Do you support the UN activity in this sphere? Do you think that taken measures are efficient?

I think it's all complete nonsense. It has nothing to do with ecological conditions, but with the expansion of government control.

If those people believe the CO2 is killing the planet, why do they not stop exhaling, and do us all a favor?
 
I would like to ask you about your views on ecology and ecologicals measures taken by the US and international community in order to save our planet from contamination and destruction. I think that all the countries should cut emissions not only because of global warming but also because of pollution of the atmosphere. Do you support Obama`s climate initiative? Do you support the UN activity in this sphere? Do you think that taken measures are efficient?

I think it's all complete nonsense. It has nothing to do with ecological conditions, but with the expansion of government control.

If those people believe the CO2 is killing the planet, why do they not stop exhaling, and do us all a favor?
Why don't you get a brain, Billy?
 
I would like to ask you about your views on ecology and ecologicals measures taken by the US and international community in order to save our planet from contamination and destruction. I think that all the countries should cut emissions not only because of global warming but also because of pollution of the atmosphere. Do you support Obama`s climate initiative? Do you support the UN activity in this sphere? Do you think that taken measures are efficient?

I think it's all complete nonsense. It has nothing to do with ecological conditions, but with the expansion of government control.

If those people believe the CO2 is killing the planet, why do they not stop exhaling, and do us all a favor?
Why don't you get a brain, Billy?

Why don't you get a cogent argument for your Master's agenda?
 
If you'd like to see a cogent argument, visit www.ipcc.ch and read AR5. If you'd like to make your own cogent arguments, you might stay away from puerile death wishes like "stop exhaling and do us all a favor".
 
God charged us (humans) to care for the animals and the Earth.
It is our duty to take care of the home He provided for us.
 
The Bible is not the best source to support that sort of view. Several passages tell us that god created the Earth and all non-human life to serve us. The Bible has been used on many occasions to justify the rape of the planet and the contention that, due to some divine protected status, it is not possible for us to harm it.

PS, wouldn't Tinkerbell be non-canonical supernaturalism and therefore a false god?

PPS, Isn't she copyrighted? Has it expired or do you consider this "fair use"?

PPPS, Am I the only one that has always had a problem with her morphology? Is there any method by which someone could construct a pelvis between her wasp waist and the hem of her dress that didn't make her into some sort of monster?
 
Last edited:
If you'd like to see a cogent argument, visit www.ipcc.ch and read AR5.

One must first consider the historical veracity of any UN organization. It's quite thin.

If you'd like to make your own cogent arguments, you might stay away from puerile death wishes like "stop exhaling and do us all a favor".

I have no reason to argue. There are capable scientists who do that for me, and the history of the "ice age/global warming/climate change/now ice age again" argument is full of holes 'like zee swiss cheese'. They do Velikovsky proud.

There is no doubt that climate changes. That is a fact, and few argue the point. The rest of Al Gore's Traveling Snake Oil Show is complete nonsense. He is the modern P.T. Barnum. Suckers born every minute.

And as to the "death wish" you reference, I merely suggested the proponents of these mad theories put their money on the board. If they believe what they say, it is their duty to save the Earth.
 
Last edited:
If you'd like to see a cogent argument, visit www.ipcc.ch and read AR5.

One must first consider the historical veracity of any UN organization. It's quite thin.

And you think that sufficient to throw aside AR5 and all its predecessors? I see you're unaware of how the IPCC works. They conduct no research of their own. The reports are assessments of the conclusions being found in the world's published climate research. Do you believe the veracity of the world's scientists for the past 27 years to be "quite thin"?

If you'd like to make your own cogent arguments, you might stay away from puerile death wishes like "stop exhaling and do us all a favor".

I have no reason to argue.

Then you agree it was a puerile comment.

There are capable scientists that do that for me

For every one you can name, I can name a hundred that disagree. This argument fails.

, and the history of the "ice age/global warming/climate change/now ice age again" argument is full of holes 'like zee swiss cheese'. They do Velikovsky proud.

What holes would that be? Holes that have failed to dissuade the world's climate scientists at any point since the IPCC was created? The numbers of active research scientists who accept anthropogenic global warming as an accurate description of the behavior of our climate has done nothing but grow and now approaches universality. AGW is widely accepted science. Rejecting it has become completely akin to flat-Earth, moon-mission-hoax, government-blew-up-WTCs level idiocy.

There is no doubt that climate changes. That is a fact, and few argue the point. The rest of Al Gore's Traveling Snake Oil Show is complete nonsense. He is the modern P.T. Barnum. Suckers born every minute.

Bringing up (and criticizing) Al Gore in a climate change argument is identical to being the first person in a political argument to call your opponent a Nazi. I have the utmost respect for Al Gore, but he is not a scientist and he has not been a significant source of AGW information for many years. If it is on that which you base your views, you have some serious catching up to do . Swallow your pride and read Working Group I's section of AR5: The Physical Science Basis.

And as to the "death wish" you reference, I merely suggested the proponents of these mad theories put their money on the board. If they believe what they say, it is their duty to save the Earth.

Replacing your gas guzzler with a small four cylinder would reduce CO2 emissions orders of magnitude more than would convincing you to stop breathing. And the cleverness of the "stop breathing" comment faded somewhere between the third and fourth grade. Don't be a child. You're trying to make physical threats in a media where they serve only to make you look a fool.
 
Replacing your gas guzzler with a small four cylinder would reduce CO2 emissions orders of magnitude more than would convincing you to stop breathing.

The 1970 Olds Cutlass 4-4-2 with the mighty and majestic 455 Rocket V8 is not up for negotiation. 17 MPG on the open road!

That you are willing to rearrange my comments in ways to attempt to ridicule, change context or otherwise reinforce your own nonsensical delusions indicates a dishonest streak, and I will not respond to you again until I see improvement in your attitude.

BTW, the IPCC is no more than a clearing house for those willing to support the UN's moves toward greater governmental control on an ultimately global scale. Scientists are as political as anyone else, and like all politicians, are happy to bend reality to forward their goals.
 

Forum List

Back
Top