calfoxwc Posted September 8, 2015 Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 Liberal scientists... I figure, thought that would look good for "goober warning". "global heat kills the earths trees crisis". wait. "oops, there's eh...a "little" more than we figured"....by ...er...trillions... http://patriotoutdoornews.com/15240/scientists-undercount-trees-by-2-6-trillion-but-assure-us-animals-going-extinct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted September 8, 2015 Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 That article just compared the "alleged" miscalculation of the number of trees with species of animals. Like don't worry, the black rhino wanders around north America and other places...this place is just so big we've never seen them. Unbeleivable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 a whole lot of animals live in woods. btw, if you tie your shoelaces together, you can't walk........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted September 8, 2015 Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 Lol. Good times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted September 8, 2015 Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 a whole lot of animals live in woods. btw, if you tie your shoelaces together, you can't walk........ Seen a few African lions roaming around NE OH have you Cal? I understand the point that certain small species may be hard to definitively say have gone extinct, and usually biologists make some sort of hedge like 'we haven't seen them in decades". At some point, when a species was so prevalent in a certain spot...and then they're gone, and you can see what made them go away...you can call them extinct. I don't think that article gave scientists enough credit for how much we've combed the earth looking for shit. Just because only 3% of our land mass is "urbanized", don't mean we don't know what's on the other 97%. But come here quickly and tell us the cool story next time a black rhino's spotted traipsing down lorain ave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 You still have no legit point. You think wild crocodiles are extinct because they are not found in Alaska? ahahahahaha. Eventually, it comes around to this: The destruction of millions and millions of acres of virgin rain forests on earth, for profit. mmgw wonks won't talk about it, and scientists blame global warming for everything. A lot of insects, animals live primarily in those forests. So.........taking out those forests, kills most all of those species, yes? Therefore, stop the wanton and dramatic destruction of those virgin rainforests. Or, just have nice day, and be very, very quiet, and let us adults talk about the subject, okie dokie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted September 8, 2015 Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 The destruction of millions and millions of acres of virgin rain forests on earth, for profit. mmgw wonks won't talk about it, and scientists blame global warming for everything. Uh, that's been like the founding issue of the mmgw movement. Again what planet are you on? Seriously. The destruction of the rainforests is one of the biggest problems on our planet and has been noted as so pretty much now for at least half a century if not longer. How is life with your head buried in the ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 8, 2015 Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 Just let him be. The "virgin rainforests" comment is his "gotcha!" remark. We can't handle that kind of truth! What is a conservative scientist? One that prays on how to interpret the data? Too bad all of these scientists are liberals and too biased to agree with. What a weird coincidence that they just so happen to disagree with you too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Oh, really? I thought it was all being blamed on us human beings driving our cars, trucks, campfires, and cows farting, and all of us needing to be taxed and taxed and taxed ... and all the time, they secretly know it's the destruction of the rainforests? You don't say. http://www.climatechangechallenge.org/News/Featured-Articles/bellamy_climate_change_not_man_made.htm http://www.climatechangechallenge.org/News/Copenhagen%20News/Causes_of_Climate_Change_slammed_by_140_Scientists.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Deforestation as a contributor to the Causes of Climate change It is important, first to understand what a precious resource rainforests play in our world. They form part of a delicate ecosystem that has taken millions of years to evolve. Rainforests every year help to absorb almost 20% of man made CO2 emissions therefore deforestation can be classed as a major contributor to the causes of climate change. Cutting down rainforests faster than they can be replaced has a devastating effect on the carbon emission cycle producing an extra 17% of greenhouse gases. Remember trees absorb CO2. More deforestation means more CO2 build up in the atmosphere. Deforestation by means of cutting down and burning these tropical rainforests usually pave the way for agriculture and industry which often produce even more CO2. Dr. Md. Mizanur Rahman, a biodiversity specialist, (UNO, Mongla, Bagerhat) says, "that climate change and forests are interlinked. The increased destruction of the rainforest forming a precious cooling band around the Earth's equator, is recognised as one of the main causes of climate change. Forests trap and store carbon dioxide, playing a major role in mitigating climate change. On the flip side of the coin, forests become the sources of the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide when destroyed or over-harvested and burned. Forests , if not harmed ensure that they are enabling to continue to produce the benefits; to mitigate the effects of a changing climate; and to compensate for fossil fuel emissions through carbon storage; and to enhance ecosystem health, sustainability, and resilience. Forests reduce greenhouse gas emissions to combat global warming. 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions result from deforestation and degradation of forest, more than all the world's cars, trucks, ships and planes combined. Fossil fuels release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere contributing to global warming and climate change. Forest alleviates this change by converting carbon dioxide to carbon during photosynthesis. The world's forests contain about 125 percent of the carbon found in the atmosphere. This carbon is stored in the form of wood and vegetation through "carbon sequestration". Trees possess about 20 percent carbon by weight and biomass of forest acts as a "carbon sink." The soil organic matter produced by the decomposition of dead plant material also acts as a carbon store. Consequently forests store enormous amount of carbon: in total, the world's forests and forest soils currently store more than one trillion tons of carbon, twice the amount found floating free in the atmosphere, according to FAO studies. The atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration in the pre-industrial era was 280 ppm. Right now the level has risen to 375 ppm, a 30% increase. It is predicted that the level will be 450 ppm in 2050 resulting in 1.8-3ºC increase in temperature eventually. Therefore, global warming will produce a sharp upswing followed by a deep plunge into a glacial period several thousands years from now. A myriad of potential impacts such as increased cyclone intensity; melting of polar iceberg and glaciers; increased salinity and changes in oceanic currents sea level rise and inundation of low lying cities like Venice, Cairo, New Orleans, Lagos, Amsterdam, etc.; coral bleaching and mortality of coral reef; colonization of invasive species and species migration; changes in ecosystem; mass extinction; ozone layer depletion; water shortage; and spreading of diseases -- is predicted. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 and the mmgw movement, moron, is not on this board. Not one of the prommgw wonks around here will talk about it. Just political postering via sound bites and liberal key phrases. Listen to the 140 scientists who want the UN to prove their contentions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Just let him be. The "virgin rainforests" comment is his "gotcha!" remark. We can't handle that kind of truth! What is a conservative scientist? One that prays on how to interpret the data? Too bad all of these scientists are liberals and too biased to agree with. What a weird coincidence that they just so happen to disagree with you too... You are all about science until some nut job MAN says the "feel" like a woman. Then you ignore the science that clearly indicates that the person has an X and Y chromosome (therefore they are a man) and you ignore the clear observation that they are a man just because the mentally ill person says they feel like a woman. It's interesting how stupid you really can be sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 You are all about science until some nut job MAN says the "feel" like a woman. Then you ignore the science that clearly indicates that the person has an X and Y chromosome (therefore they are a man) and you ignore the clear observation that they are a man just because the mentally ill person says they feel like a woman. It's interesting how stupid you really can be sometimes. Actually the science there explains why they feel the way they do. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_transsexualism#Brain_structure Zhou et al. (1995) found that in a region of the brain called the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BSTc), a region known for sex and anxiety responses, MTF transsexuals have a female-normal size while FTM transsexuals have a male-normal size. While the transsexuals studied had taken hormones, this was accounted for by including non-transsexual male and female controls who, for a variety of medical reasons, had experienced hormone reversal. The controls still retained sizes typical for their gender. No relationship to sexual orientation was found. In a follow-up study, Kruijver et al. (2000) looked at the number of neurons in BSTc instead of volumes. They found the same results as Zhou et al. (1995), but with even more dramatic differences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Sorry, I forgot to insult you and everyone else while disagreeing with you can I still play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Just let him be. The "virgin rainforests" comment is his "gotcha!" remark. We can't handle that kind of truth! What is a conservative scientist? One that prays on how to interpret the data? Too bad all of these scientists are liberals and too biased to agree with. What a weird coincidence that they just so happen to disagree with you too... You think all decent scientists are liberal? You think that to be conservative is defined by an unwillingness to accept scientific fact? Guess again. Just a fringe minority of conservative scientists (actual scientists, not ken ham pseudo-scientists) are YECs or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 You think all decent scientists are liberal? You think that to be conservative is defined by an unwillingness to accept scientific fact? Guess again. Just a fringe minority of conservative scientists (actual scientists, not ken ham pseudo-scientists) are YECs or whatever. Follow the money. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 You think all decent scientists are liberal? You think that to be conservative is defined by an unwillingness to accept scientific fact? Guess again. Just a fringe minority of conservative scientists (actual scientists, not ken ham pseudo-scientists) are YECs or whatever. No no no no I'm making fun of Cal calling all scientists presenting data he disagrees with "liberal scientists". I then made a stereotype for "conservative scientists". Hell, there are even some YEC scientists that have made contributions. We've had them listed here before... I don't think all scientists are liberal. If we extrapolate my experience in engineering out to scientists, I'd imagine most aren't that political at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 You are all about science until some nut job MAN says the "feel" like a woman. Then you ignore the science that clearly indicates that the person has an X and Y chromosome (therefore they are a man) and you ignore the clear observation that they are a man just because the mentally ill person says they feel like a woman. It's interesting how stupid you really can be sometimes. What the fuck are you talking about? I'm pretty sure Chris' follow up addressed this post appropriately Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 What the fuck are you talking about? I'm pretty sure Chris' follow up addressed this post appropriately Just let him be. The "virgin rainforests" comment is his "gotcha!" remark. We can't handle that kind of truth! What is a conservative scientist? One that prays on how to interpret the data? Too bad all of these scientists are liberals and too biased to agree with. What a weird coincidence that they just so happen to disagree with you too... backpedal much? the "stereotype" you called a conservative scientist is complete with the (mocking) of "one who prays" is more "gotcha" because it is unsubstantiated. a favorite of yours to use here and marginalize people of faith. how do you stereotype a conservative scientist exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 I'm not sure how I backpedaled... I probably could have used some better wording in my first post though. If praying is good for you, then great. I'm pretty sure there have been studies on it and how it affects the brain. It does make people feel better. Other than that though, it really doesn't accomplish anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 I'm not sure how I backpedaled... I probably could have used some better wording in my first post though. If praying is good for you, then great. I'm pretty sure there have been studies on it and how it affects the brain. It does make people feel better. Other than that though, it really doesn't accomplish anything. It's a pretty strong placebo for a lot of people. At least in terms of praying for themselves. In terms of "let's pray for timmy's cancer to go away" not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 its the "gotcha " twins! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 I would venture to say that even Pascals wager applies in reverse too? if you dont pray for healing over the effects and devastation over diseases like cancer, dont expect a miracle then? my faith says to expect and look for such miracles when you pray it in Jesus' name.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 So you think prayer has a tangible effect on the world around you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Woody backpedals because he never learned to pedal his bike forwards. Neck cramps from looking backwards to where he's going? That would explain a decrease in blood flow to his brain, resulting in his weird posts, scientificly speakin... https://s.yimg.com/fz/api/res/1.2/lpJ7FPzPJwtBcNNoAuZCaw--/YXBwaWQ9c3JjaGRkO2g9ODc2O3E9OTU7dz01OTA-/http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/b1/40/2b/b1402b2247128c3e857533ec93e82a48.jpg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 So you think prayer has a tangible effect on the world around you? I cant know the results of what prayer by believers will have accomplished in holding back catastrophe, or helped with a miracle healing for someone, in the world at large. But believing when that prayer is in accordance with God's will it can and does change things.... and its called faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 you guys know who Pascal was right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 I prayed that the browns season last year would go off without an attack from an elephant. It didn't! I mean, I can't know what effect prayer had on that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 you guys know who Pascal was right? The guy we named the unit of pressure after? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Sorry, I'll stop mocking now. It's not big and it's not clever. You have every right to worship who you like of course, and if prayer helps you feel better about yourself then have at it. Just don't expect everyone else to follow suit, and don't expect people not to be a little pissed that while they're actually doing things, you're just praying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.