UN Embarrassed by Forecast on Climate Refugees for 2010

[GreecePwns]

Who's debunked the most recent NASA and IPCC studies then?

[Phatscotty]

The studies in favor of global warming keep on being debunked.

No, they do not.

Oil companies, however, like to tell you that they are.

So is it the truth that an oil company made this story out of thin air that the UN made the prediction that there would be 50 million climate refugees in 2010? Or did the oil companies make sure that 50 million people did not flee? whats the connection besides anyone who agrees with me has me in their pocket?

[Neoteny]

Good god, you are stupid.

[GreecePwns]

The studies in favor of global warming keep on being debunked.

No, they do not.

Oil companies, however, like to tell you that they are.

So is it the truth that an oil company made this story out of thin air that the UN made the prediction that there would be 50 million climate refugees in 2010? Or did the oil companies make sure that 50 million people did not flee? whats the connection besides anyone who agrees with me has me in their pocket?

Unfortunately for you, the UN doesn't speak for every one of the thousands of studies that affirm climate change exists.

I honestly can't wait for Glenn Beck's show to shut down. What will the Scottys of the world do?

[Army of GOD]

Christ, you guys are gangbanging Scotty. Mr_Adams, NightStrike, other conservatives! Get in here and help Scotty defend the liberals!



While us apathists continue to not care about world issues.

[Night Strike]

Who's debunked the most recent NASA and IPCC studies then?

The IPCC debunked their own studies when the private emails saying they had manipulated data were released.

[Army of GOD]

[Phatscotty]

The studies in favor of global warming keep on being debunked.

No, they do not.

Oil companies, however, like to tell you that they are.

So is it the truth that an oil company made this story out of thin air that the UN made the prediction that there would be 50 million climate refugees in 2010? Or did the oil companies make sure that 50 million people did not flee? whats the connection besides anyone who agrees with me has me in their pocket?

Unfortunately for you, the UN doesn't speak for every one of the thousands of studies that affirm climate change exists.

I honestly can't wait for Glenn Beck's show to shut down. What will the Scottys of the world do?

I canceled fox news a long time ago. Thanks for playing tho. What will the pwns of the world blame now?

[Mr_Adams]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

this is going to come back. watch

[Phatscotty]

Good god, you are stupid.

Yes but the debunked predictions are smart. Stick with them they are a winner.

[rdsrds2120]

Global "Warming" and "Cooling" are starting to become outdated terms. It's being replaced with "Climate Change". Anywho, on another note, Phatscotty, saying that the UN being wrong about a prediction discredits a whole concept is inaccurate. For example, if I predicted that raining made everyone in my neighborhood go inside, but some or all stayed out, that wouldn't mean I had lied about the fact that it's raining.

-rd

[spurgistan]

Who's debunked the most recent NASA and IPCC studies then?

The IPCC debunked their own studies when the private emails saying they had manipulated data were released.

That's not how science works, dude.

The fact that somebody hacked an email between two climate scientists thaty seems to indicate that they suppressed evidence that didn't support their central thesis does not mean the entire system is suddenly bankrupt. How many links to we need to show between polluters and climate change deniers to show that many deniers are similarly suppressing data in order to prove their thesis? Aren't you an engineer, or something? If I "found" some information saying that some car manufacturer maybe knowingly used poor modeling to estimate gas mileage (I got no idea) would that mean that the entire engineering field is totally compromised?

[Mr_Adams]

Global "Warming" and "Cooling" are starting to become outdated terms. It's being replaced with "Climate Change".

-rd

"We don't know what we're talking about, so we'll cover all bases, so that we can point at anything and claim it as evidence!"

The average temperature could go unchanged, and they would claim that man's activities have created an unhealthy artificial regulation of climate.


As for what I think is happening, have you heard of "daisy world"?

[Phatscotty]

Global "Warming" and "Cooling" are starting to become outdated terms. It's being replaced with "Climate Change". Anywho, on another note, Phatscotty, saying that the UN being wrong about a prediction discredits a whole concept is inaccurate. For example, if I predicted that raining made everyone in my neighborhood go inside, but some or all stayed out, that wouldn't mean I had lied about the fact that it's raining.

-rd

right you are, except I did provide a specific example that has been shown to be false. It's only when we start looking at other false predictions of doom and gloom and the end of the world, that we begin to scrape the surface of "the whole concept". To me, there is no definite, the issue either sways one way or the other. With this false prediction, the scale is tipped just a tad bit more to "we still don't know".

All I am saying is they should stop pretending like they do know, and stop trying to change the economy based on that.

[Metsfanmax]

Global "Warming" and "Cooling" are starting to become outdated terms. It's being replaced with "Climate Change".

Another example of choosing neutral, politically correct terminology ruining effective discourse on the subject. The climate is always changing. Global warming is an example of climate change which is dangerous to the species.

[Army of GOD]

[rdsrds2120]

Global "Warming" and "Cooling" are starting to become outdated terms. It's being replaced with "Climate Change".

Another example of choosing neutral, politically correct terminology ruining effective discourse on the subject. The climate is always changing. Global warming is an example of climate change which is dangerous to the species.

True, I didn't mean it like that, though. I accept the theory that people are changing the way the Earth cools, I was trying to be a little more correct on what I was saying

Arguing semantics is pointless though, call it what you will, the idea of our species and planet being affected by an unnatural disturbance increase in average yearly surface temperatures *BREATHHHHH* is a problem.

-rd

[Night Strike]

Global "Warming" and "Cooling" are starting to become outdated terms. It's being replaced with "Climate Change".

Another example of choosing neutral, politically correct terminology ruining effective discourse on the subject. The climate is always changing. Global warming is an example of climate change which is dangerous to the species.

How do you know warming is dangerous? During past warmer periods (you know, those periods were it was warmer than now even though CO2 levels were much lower), much more of Europe was able to be cultivated for food production, which aids many people. People can survive in warmer climates much easier than they can in bitter cold climates. The climate is WAY too big for people to artificially manipulate with our current technological abilities. The temperature of the earth has always gone up and down (especially you believe evolutionary theories), even more widely than it has during recent history. Furthermore, many scientists have calculated that eliminating ALL CO2 sources (besides human population) would not even change the average temperature of the globe by a full degree Celsius, which means all of these attempts at legislating away CO2 is just wealth redistribution and not scientifically based.

[GreecePwns]

Global "Warming" and "Cooling" are starting to become outdated terms. It's being replaced with "Climate Change". Anywho, on another note, Phatscotty, saying that the UN being wrong about a prediction discredits a whole concept is inaccurate. For example, if I predicted that raining made everyone in my neighborhood go inside, but some or all stayed out, that wouldn't mean I had lied about the fact that it's raining.

-rd

right you are, except I did provide a specific example that has been shown to be false. It's only when we start looking at other false predictions of doom and gloom and the end of the world, that we begin to scrape the surface of "the whole concept". To me, there is no definite, the issue either sways one way or the other. With this false prediction, the scale is tipped just a tad bit more to "we still don't know".

All I am saying is they should stop pretending like they do know, and stop trying to change the economy based on that.

The ones who weren't paid off by oil companies know. NASA, for example.


It must be natural.

[rdsrds2120]

Global "Warming" and "Cooling" are starting to become outdated terms. It's being replaced with "Climate Change".

Another example of choosing neutral, politically correct terminology ruining effective discourse on the subject. The climate is always changing. Global warming is an example of climate change which is dangerous to the species.

How do you know warming is dangerous?

Well, it would upset many ecosystems biodiversity, the line for glaciers would recede and raise sea levels, this would make more areas wet and warm (aka tropical). In these tropical areas, tropical diseases would be able to develop and spread to people whose bodies aren't as accustomed to them, and some other stuff that I can't remember though. That's what too much warming could do.

The climate is WAY too big for people to artificially manipulate with our current technological abilities

You can't assume that. That would be like saying there's too much water in the Ocean to pollute it all, we could never make THAT much pollution, right!

Well, no. It's all about time and accumulation.

The temperature of the earth has always gone up and down (especially you believe evolutionary theories), even more widely than it has during recent history.

...No it hasn't. Though, if you have something to back this statement up, I'll withdraw my statement.

Furthermore, many scientists have calculated that eliminating ALL CO2 sources (besides human population) would not even change the average temperature of the globe by a full degree Celsius, which means all of these attempts at legislating away CO2 is just wealth redistribution and not scientifically based.

I'd like to see that, too. I'm not trying to inherently discredit you or anything like that, but for claims that completely oppose everything I've read and heard about something need more than just word of mouth, lol.

-rd

[Metsfanmax]

Global "Warming" and "Cooling" are starting to become outdated terms. It's being replaced with "Climate Change".

Another example of choosing neutral, politically correct terminology ruining effective discourse on the subject. The climate is always changing. Global warming is an example of climate change which is dangerous to the species.

How do you know warming is dangerous? During past warmer periods (you know, those periods were it was warmer than now even though CO2 levels were much lower), much more of Europe was able to be cultivated for food production, which aids many people. People can survive in warmer climates much easier than they can in bitter cold climates. The climate is WAY too big for people to artificially manipulate with our current technological abilities. The temperature of the earth has always gone up and down (especially you believe evolutionary theories), even more widely than it has during recent history. Furthermore, many scientists have calculated that eliminating ALL CO2 sources (besides human population) would not even change the average temperature of the globe by a full degree Celsius, which means all of these attempts at legislating away CO2 is just wealth redistribution and not scientifically based.

I said nothing about the cause of the warming. I said it is happening, and it is dangerous to us, so we had better be ready for it when it happens, if it is indeed unavoidable.

[GreecePwns]

Wealth redistribution? What is the poor getting from a cap on greenhouse gas emissions?

[Night Strike]

Wealth redistribution? What is the poor getting from a cap on greenhouse gas emissions?

Rich nations who have polluted more than their fair share of pollution have to send money to third world countries since we have irreparably harmed them. That's wealth redistribution.

[Mr_Adams]

Just in case you think I am taking this topic seriously, this is all a big political tool, IMHO. Don't know if it's true, but I have heard that any significant volcanic eruption has release more CO2 than all of man kind in history.

Natural sources of carbon dioxide are more than 20 times greater than sources due to human activity,

source cited: http://www.grida.no/publications/vg/climate/

[GreecePwns]

Wealth redistribution? What is the poor getting from a cap on greenhouse gas emissions?

Rich nations who have polluted more than their fair share of pollution have to send money to third world countries since we have irreparably harmed them. That's wealth redistribution.

So what's the problem with cap and trade measures within a nation again?