Global Warming is Man made, True or False?

[wjr]

screw global warming, we just got around 2-3 feet of snow in mass.

What kind of logic is that? If the average global temperature goes up 5 degrees (a big change), then you will still have cold winters, and snow.

I personally think that global warming is entirely true. It's pretty unanimously believed among the scientific community.

And, even if it wasn't, we should still take every precaution to stop emitting green house gases, because if the green house gasses we're putting in the atmosphere now aren't doing anything, they will eventually.

[Niox]

Scary thought aint it that we could enter another ice age, chances are I wont be around to see it but you have to think about the future generations and such.

Ok now I have turned into a hippy, next thing you know I will be sticking the word man on the end of everything I type and getting a big pncho and sandles man...

That's it, give me a lump of coal, some plastics and some hydrocarbons with a big box of matches!

Capitalism and Oil FTW!

[NotKai]

I wont be around to see it but you have to think about the future generations and such.

That's where I disagree.

[Aggravated Assault]

1st Point - Ofcourse it is an unprovable opinion, the theory that space is infinite is an unprovable opinion as we can't find an edge of space, but just to say we can't find the edge doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Dosen't mean it does either. Hence the relevance to this thread.

2nd Point - Why would you be crippling your economy? I don't know what state the US economy is in right now but I can't see how you would cripple by cutting out oil?

Even if you could find the "cure all" clean alternate to "fossil fuels" and phase it in over a long period of time - I would surmise the cost of a change like that, to a country the size of the US, would be staggering.

3rd Point - I know what ethenol is and I was not talkiing about Ethenol, hence why I used the word "biofuel stuff" I agree that it is a bit of a broad term to use and it is very inaccurate but I was actually refering to the crushed plant stuff (biomass) that the Nordic countries have been using to replace fossil fuels. Because of the glucose or something contained in the plant stuff it makes cars much more higher performance

Brazil, I believe, uses cane sugar in the same way. I am not as familiar with that, but no matter what example you use, it comes down to energy needed to produce vs. the energy you reap. I used ethanol as an example because that is the flavor of the month 'round these parts.

Although you have picked fault with my post you have not posted anything with any proof to disprove my opinions or prove your owns. Also simply posting unproven opinion seems a little umm lacking if you will as that is what this thread and most all the others on the forum are about, opinions. Opinions are best when they are accompanied with proof and facts, but I'm lazy so there we go.

I know, googleing something is so hard. Biofuels are not a cure all or even close. Maybe a small sliver of the equation, but not a signifigant one.

Really, both sides can shoot holes in the others argument becase we really have no 100% answer to why global warming is happening. All theory. We have almost no idea of how much or little impact we are having on it. The only real fact is that Global warming is almost certainly happening.

[warbeak2099]

We have almost no idea of how much or little impact we are having on it.

We actually have pretty conclusive data than we are only causing about 5% of it. The other 95% is natural warming.

The only real fact is that Global warming is almost certainly happening.

That's not even a fact. The idea of a linear, ongoing warming as opposed to a cycle of warm and cold is merely opinion. The fact that about 95% of the warming is natural certainly lends itself to the argument that this is a natural cycle and not a manmade catastrophe.

I wonder when the media will ever publish that and we will have to stop looking in scientific journals to find the real truth.

[geekwarrior]

wrong again

[ntn4502]

Im sorry I'll counter with facts in the morning(when I'm a great deal sober), but do you honestly use logic that your grandfather bestows upon you in terms of global warming, I mean much of your reasoning is archaic.

I'll break it down to simple folk reasoning if need be

[Aggravated Assault]

We actually have pretty conclusive data than we are only causing about 5% of it. The other 95% is natural warming.

I've seen a lot of conflicting stuff in the area of "man's" contribution to global warming. Thats why I say we just don't know for sure.

That's not even a fact. The idea of a linear, ongoing warming as opposed to a cycle of warm and cold is merely opinion. The fact that about 95% of the warming is natural certainly lends itself to the argument that this is a natural cycle and not a manmade catastrophe.

A natural cycle or manmade, it's still Global warming. And by almost all accounts, we are in a period of rising global tempature.

I wonder when the media will ever publish that and we will have to stop looking in scientific journals to find the real truth.

What!! The media be objective about a cause near and dear to their liberal hearts!

Um, never.

[ntn4502]

wrong again

Kinda cool to see you quote David Bromwich, hes a very good Prof