• 🛑Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
    Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community! 💪
  • 💪Muscle Gelz® 30% Off Easter Sale👉www.musclegelz.com Coupon code: EASTER30🐰

John Kerry Says That Climate Change Is Just As Dangerous As Iran's Nukes.

Lmao. Another ridiculous politician getting paid for sensationalizing nothingness, the reality these guys live in is so far from anywhere people call home, it is truly tiring to listen to them speak...
 
He just wants to be relevant again that's all. I doubt he even believes that.
 
Just is becoming more and more unstable by the day. These dems are really losin' it.

Kerry: 'Climate Change' As Much Of A Threat As Iran's Nukes

The Pentagon has been studying climate change and stating this for at least 15 years. One report ending up being released to the public about 12 years ago or so.

The Earth is getting warmer. That's a fact.

The debate is: are humans/human behavior causing it?

I suspect only the top scientist can attempt to answer and even then they may have their own biases (if they are American).

In the US, it's a political issue more than a scientific issue. For the rest of the world it's a scientific issue and only a scientific issue.

The CIA is moving/has moved its domestic operation headquarters from DC to Denver, 5,000 miles above sea level.

The new focus by the US embassy and other US agencies is Phnom Penh because Saigon is at sea level and if you often dig a few feet deep with a shovel you often will hit water.

Contingency plan are already being made.

Another theory about they Earth is entering what we think is a warming cycle is that the Milky Way Galaxy does move and bring the Earth along with it. This warming may be because of the Earth and Galaxy pattern cycle. (Obviously, I'm not an astronomer, but some have written about this.)

In the end we may not know the exact reasons or agree, but we do know the Earth is getting warmer at the moment.

Our lives are insignificant; our lives are but a mere glimpse in geological terms.
 
Global warming is s huge threat. Lack of fresh water changes the playing field.
 
Global warming is s huge threat. Lack of fresh water changes the playing field.

Yup.

Salinization of the fresh water resources.

As we've discussed in the past in Open Chat, future wars may likely be over water.
 
lol:roflmao:
 
Yup.

Salinization of the fresh water resources.

As we've discussed in the past in Open Chat, future wars may likely be over water.

it's crazy when you think about the earths surface is roughly 70% water but only 1% of that is fresh. the heavily industrialized country's have done much damage to their "fresh" water supplies. I worked on some desalinization systems in the Navy, they are very slow and break down frequently.
 
Jesus Christ you are idiots. You guys are truly retards if you don't think climate change is as threatening as Iran's Nukes. I'm not saying whether or not we are accelerating it (We are, and again, you are a retard if you don't understand this), but the power mother nature can unleash is far more devastating than anything Iran could ever come up with. The asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs unleashed 10x more power than the total number of nukes worldwide during the peak of the cold war, released in 1 spot. I understand this was not climate change related, but it shows you how truly small we are in comparison to everything else. When climate change reaches the tipping pint, whether we are pushing it to the brink or not, it's going to accelerate exponentially at a very rapid rate. If it happens in our lifetime you'll probably get to see some pretty gnarly mass destruction. I understand we are probably not going to stop doing what we do and neither are other countries, but we should be researching not only how to mitigate our damage, but also how we can slow down the natural process as well.
 
IML Gear Cream!
The only thing john kerry know's is how to write himself war fake war citations and marry money
 
Jesus Christ you are idiots. You guys are truly retards if you don't think climate change is as threatening as Iran's Nukes. I'm not saying whether or not we are accelerating it (We are, and again, you are a retard if you don't understand this), but the power mother nature can unleash is far more devastating than anything Iran could ever come up with. The asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs unleashed 10x more power than the total number of nukes worldwide during the peak of the cold war, released in 1 spot. I understand this was not climate change related, but it shows you how truly small we are in comparison to everything else. When climate change reaches the tipping pint, whether we are pushing it to the brink or not, it's going to accelerate exponentially at a very rapid rate. If it happens in our lifetime you'll probably get to see some pretty gnarly mass destruction. I understand we are probably not going to stop doing what we do and neither are other countries, but we should be researching not only how to mitigate our damage, but also how we can slow down the natural process as well.

the flying spaghetti monster will save us...
 
I agree. I think both pose a small threat.
 
Jesus Christ you are idiots. You guys are truly retards if you don't think climate change is as threatening as Iran's Nukes.

I do not recall anyone on this forum saying that, Dale.

This is just another politician who's dumb and looking for press.

The topic has gone into 'climate change.'

Iran's nukes?

Who cares?
 
small problems when left unattended turn into very large problems. 80% of US states have drinking water that is contaminated with various chemicals, drugs, carcinogens, etc.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/science/earth/03water.html?pagewanted=all

https://www.google.com/search?q=US+...cp.r_qf.&fp=9ca5e7b839d7ba51&biw=1024&bih=574

Nothing to do with global warming but as always, thanks for the knowledge vomit.

Drinking water has a lower pH (~5.5) because carbon dioxide from the atmosphere dissolves in the water to form carbonic acid.
 
Nothing to do with global warming but as always, thanks for the knowledge vomit.

Drinking water has a lower pH (~5.5) because carbon dioxide from the atmosphere dissolves in the water to form carbonic acid.

it sure does...global warming causes the glaciers to melt along with groundwater extraction to water crops, etc. which ends as water vapor and then rainfall which further contributes to sea levels rising. eventually leeching into the coastal fresh water aquifers then further inland.

nope...no problem there
 
Didn't one of the skeptical scientists who wrote Physics for Future Presidents just change his mind on global warming? I heard part of an interview with him and he had some very compelling revelations. He also warned that if China continues on it's course they are going to expedite even worse problems. So yeah we probably should be just ad concerned about global warming, or at least getting off of fossil fuels as fast as we can if not for climate change, then at least so we don't end up battling developing nations with billions of human resources to throw at us for the precious few fossil fuels in the future...
 
IML Gear Cream!
Rivers flow to the sea so explain this one.

and what about them. most of the major US rivers been altered via dams for hydroelectric power, there are over 80,000 dams in the US and about 7,500 major ones. and a good number of them were built 50+ years ago.

Renewable Energy Sources in the United States

* This USGS report details how ground and surface waters are used in each state and in what quantities

Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 2005
http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1344/pdf/c1344.pdf

Association of State Dam Safety Officials
Association of State Dam Safety Officials

* there is not much left in this country that we haven't fucked up
 
This is not a "dem issue", this is an issue that is going to impact everyone regardless of their political alliances.
The earth is heating up, the resulting weather impacts to food production and fresh water supplies is potentially catastrophic and labeling it as a "dem issue" is not going to make it go away.


New study links current events to climate change


By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer

WASHINGTON. The relentless, weather-gone-crazy type of heat that has blistered the United States and other parts of the world in recent years is so rare that it can't be anything but man-made global warming, says a new statistical analysis from a top government scientist.
The research by a man often called the "godfather of global warming" says that the likelihood of such temperatures occurring from the 1950s through the 1980s was rarer than 1 in 300. Now, the odds are closer to 1 in 10, according to the study by NASA scientist James Hansen. He says that statistically what's happening is not random or normal, but pure and simple climate change.
"This is not some scientific theory. We are now experiencing scientific fact," Hansen told The Associated Press in an interview.

Hansen is a scientist at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and a professor at Columbia University. But he is also a strident activist who has called for government action to curb greenhouse gases for years. While his study was published online Saturday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, it is unlikely to sway opinion among the remaining climate change skeptics.

However, several climate scientists praised the new work.
In a blunt departure from most climate research, Hansen's study based on statistics, not the more typical climate modeling , blames these three heat waves purely on global warming:


  • Last year's devastating Texas-Oklahoma drought.
  • The 2010 heat waves in Russia and the Middle East, which led to thousands of deaths.
  • The 2003 European heat wave blamed for tens of thousands of deaths, especially among the elderly in France.

The analysis was written before the current drought and record-breaking temperatures that have seared much of the United States this year. But Hansen believes this too is another prime example of global warming at its worst.
The new research makes the case for the severity of global warming in a different way than most scientific studies and uses simple math instead of relying on complex climate models or an understanding of atmospheric physics. It also doesn't bother with the usual caveats about individual weather events having numerous causes.
The increase in the chance of extreme heat, drought and heavy downpours in certain regions is so huge that scientists should stop hemming and hawing, Hansen said. "This is happening often enough, over a big enough area that people can see it happening," he said.

Scientists have generally responded that it's impossible to say whether single events are caused by global warming, because of the influence of natural weather variability.
However, that position has been shifting in recent months, as other studies too have concluded climate change is happening right before our eyes.
Hansen hopes his new study will shift people's thinking about climate change and goad governments into action. He wrote an op-ed piece that appeared online Friday in the Washington Post.
"There is still time to act and avoid a worsening climate, but we are wasting precious time," he wrote.

The science in Hansen's study is excellent "and reframes the question," said Andrew Weaver, a climate scientist at the University of Victoria in British Columbia who was a member of the Nobel Prize-winning international panel of climate scientists that issued a series of reports on global warming.
"Rather than say, 'Is this because of climate change?' That's the wrong question. What you can say is, 'How likely is this to have occurred with the absence of global warming?' It's so extraordinarily unlikely that it has to be due to global warming," Weaver said.

For years scientists have run complex computer models using combinations of various factors to see how likely a weather event would happen without global warming and with it. About 25 different aspects of climate change have been formally attributed to man-made greenhouse gases in dozens of formal studies. But these are generally broad and non-specific, such as more heat waves in some regions and heavy rainfall in others.
Another upcoming study by Kevin Trenberth, climate analysis chief at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, links the 2010 Russian heat wave to global warming by looking at the underlying weather that caused the heat wave. He called Hansen's paper an important one that helps communicate the problem.
But there is bound to be continued disagreement. Previous studies had been unable to link the two, and one by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration concluded that the Russian drought, which also led to devastating wildfires, was not related to global warming.

White House science adviser John Holdren praised the paper's findings in a statement. But he also said it is true that scientists can't blame single events on global warming: "This work, which finds that extremely hot summers are over 10 times more common than they used to be, reinforces many other lines of evidence showing that climate change is occurring and that it is harmful."
Skeptical scientist John Christy of the University of Alabama at Huntsville said Hansen shouldn't have compared recent years to the 1950s-1980s time period because he said that was a quiet time for extremes.
But Derek Arndt, director of climate monitoring for the federal government's National Climatic Data Center, said that range is a fair one and often used because it is the "golden era" for good statistics.

Granger Morgan, head of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University, called Hansen's study "an important next step in what I expect will be a growing set of statistically-based arguments."
In a landmark 1988 study, Hansen predicted that if greenhouse gas emissions continue, which they have, Washington, D.C., would have about nine days each year of 95 degrees or warmer in the decade of the 2010s. So far this year, with about four more weeks of summer, the city has had 23 days with 95 degrees or hotter temperatures.
Hansen says now he underestimated how bad things would get.
And while he hopes this will spur action including a tax on the burning of fossil fuels, which emit carbon dioxide, a key greenhouse gas, others doubt it.

Science policy expert Roger Pielke Jr. of the University of Colorado said Hansen clearly doesn't understand social science, thinking a study like his could spur action. Just because people understand a fact that doesn't mean people will act on it, he said.
In an email, he wrote: "Hansen is pursuing a deeply flawed model of policy change, one that will prove ineffectual and with its most lasting consequence a further politicization of climate science (if that is possible!)."
 
Last edited:
world%20temp%20graph.jpg

NASA GISS: Research News: 2006 Was Earth's Fifth Warmest Year

2006_temp_anom.gif
 
Romney/Rubio 2012
 
Damn, came across this too late, a lot has already been said about how I view the statement.

I agree with a lot of people who said underestimating climate change is dumb, people are dying all the time from massive storms and occurances that haven't happened in the past or as frequently as they seem to be happening now. I also agree that its not a matter of whether we are creating the climate change, that is just a political ploy really, the earth is known for entering both hot and cold extremes in its history. Nuke deaths vs. mother nature, mother nature will win every time.

Being Canadian scares the shit out of me when it comes to fresh water supplies. I really hope that it wont get too messy when it becomes an issue, but greed is uncontrollable in this world.
 
130 years of data is not enough to claim global warming, the earth has been aroun a long time, people are paranoid for oneeason, IMO.
 
doesn't really change the facts that the increase in the global population from 1B in the 1800's to 7B now is destroying much of the environment and that the current growth is most certainly unsustainable, similar to recent events in the US economy.

more of everything isn't always better
 
Didn't one of the skeptical scientists who wrote Physics for Future Presidents just change his mind on global warming? I heard part of an interview with him and he had some very compelling revelations. He also warned that if China continues on it's course they are going to expedite even worse problems. So yeah we probably should be just ad concerned about global warming, or at least getting off of fossil fuels as fast as we can if not for climate change, then at least so we don't end up battling developing nations with billions of human resources to throw at us for the precious few fossil fuels in the future...

The only people debating it are politicians and morons. I believe the number of scientists (All scientists, not just climate scientists) who believe climate change is real and we are one of the leading causes of it is over 85%. If 85% of financial guys told you to pull your money out of a stock because it was a shitty investment, not a single person would ignore that advice, yet when it has to do with climate change for some reason people seem to turn a blind eye. We should be trying to stop or reverse it, not speed it up. Oh, and John Kerry and Al Gore are fucking dickbags by the way. Their carbon footprint is probably larger than about 50 average people.
 
Last edited:
political ideology causes people to believe or refute scientific theory or even empirical evidence simply because of party affiliation of the presenter.
 
Back
Top