Think of our activity as just another volcanoe. You know only 35% of scientiests think global warming is a problem.

You know 98% of statistics are made up on the spot.

Just like that one? I have a scourse though. Unlike you. Mwahahah!

a "sourse" eh? Nice of you to tell us what it is..

------------------
╔═════════════╦══════════════════╗
║ TheJkWhoSaysNi║ -----@% (Snail racing. ) .║
╠═════════════╩══════════════════╣
║Warning: This post may contain traces of nut║
╚════════════════════════════════╝

Well, then show it.

------------------
Snail racing: (500 posts per line)

---------@%

The Massassi JO/JA Single Player contest info (I don't know why I have this still in my sig)

not a source, a scourse!

------------------
WAITER: Here’s your green salad, sir.
ANAKIN: What? You fool, I told you NO CROUTONS! Aaaaaaargh!

What would you consider a scientist?

98% of scientists aren't qualified to be included in a statistic regarding opinions on the threat of global warming.

Statistics can be used to prove anything. 4/5 people know that.

------------------
╔═════════════╦══════════════════╗
║ TheJkWhoSaysNi║ -----@% (Snail racing. ) .║
╠═════════════╩══════════════════╣
║Warning: This post may contain traces of nut║
╚════════════════════════════════╝

If 8/10 people suffer from diarrhea, does that mean two enjoy it?

Now this thread topic shifted toward statistics?

------------------
Snail racing: (500 posts per line)

---------@%

The Massassi JO/JA Single Player contest info (I don't know why I have this still in my sig)

It was from a 1993 gallup poll.

All your base are belong to us. You will not survive to make your time.

No, because the amount of CFCs is not an issue.

The environment has developed over billions of years to maintain a stable balance of chemicals, and Volcanic activity has all been part of that cycle. The environment is a very fragile balance of chemicals and has a natural limit.
Human activity is bumping the chemical imbalance over that limit. Now, if that activity had been happening over millions of years, then yes the environment probably would adapt to compensate. But it's only been happening over the last 200 years, and accelerating all the time.


I didn't really want to resort to using analogies, but.. imagine a glass of water. it's a big glass, and you can pour in a lot of water. once the glass is full, the glass is full. you might have been able to pour in two litres of water into that glass before, but if you pour in one drop now, the glass will overflow. The more water you pour in now, the more it overflows.

Don't follow this analogy too far, in that the obvious flaw is that you're pouring in water, and the 'overflow' result is also water, and with global warming that isn't the case. Now, 'global warming' does not mean that it's going to get warmer, though one of the effects is the melting of glaciers and ice caps. 'global cooling' is simply another name for the same effect.

Human activity is altering the Earth's climate.


I'm not even going to start on your 'statistic'.

Provide publication information and/or a link that shows it.

------------------
Roach - Gyring and gimbling in the wabe...
0 of 14.

Public opinion is never an indication of the soundness of any scientific theory.

It was among scientests.

uhm?

"it was among scientists". I don't understand.

The greatests scientific breakthroughs are the ones that go against what most scientists believe.
Up until Einstein's theory of relativity, scientists believed everything followed Newtonian laws of motion. Should Einstein have said "oh well, most people believe in Newton, i'd better pack this in"? Up until the 60s, most scientists believed that Einstein's laws applied to fundemental particles, when the field of quantum physics arose. Up until a few weeks ago, most scientists believed that nothing could escape from a black hole, then Hawking conceeded that some radiation does leak out. Science is all about challening and redefining our view of the world.

Many scientists believe global warming isn't an issue? They could be wrong.
I'm not one to throw around allegations of corruption or anything, but an awful lot of 'scientists' work in businesses related to industry that would be severely damaged by any plans to become more environmentally friendly.

Also, the 1993 gallup poll seems to have nothing to do with global warming. It seems to have something to do with cloning, and organ doners, and some other things. And it seems to be only limited to scientists within America, which swings things quite a bit.

And anyway...
17,000 scientists have signed a statement saying that global warming is not happening

19,000 scientists have signed a petition saying that global warming is a problem.


But all of this is really quite irrelevant. What "most scientists" think is no indication of the truth. Don't rely on 'scientists' as some unquestionable source of truth, look at the evidence yourself and read up on chemistry.


Also, I found a section that states what I've been saying with some nice numbers.


[This message has been edited by Mort-Hog (edited August 19, 2004).]

Just to clear something up, CFCs have nothing to do with global warming. They're compounds that are involved in the breaking down of the ozone layer, which is another problem, but one which has no impact on global warming.

Global warming is caused by an increase of greenhouse gasses (like CO2), which cause the atmosphere to retain more heat energy.

[This message has been edited by Vornskr (edited August 19, 2004).]

Ah.