Expert?!?!?!? Michael Moore?!?!?!?!?!?!?

[Rogue Leader]

Originally Posted by swifttal

Holy crap! You actually read that post?

I created the thread and I didnt even bother to read it

[headpunter]

during the seventies they told us the particulates from the burned fuel would block out the Sun and cause global cooling.....personally its been cold already this winter in Washington so i am letting my truck idle hours on end to try and help global warming along.....hopefully it kicks in before too long....

[The_Blur]

Michael Moore won't be satisfied until we have cars that produce kittens instead of emissions.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by headpunter

during the seventies they told us the particulates from the burned fuel would block out the Sun and cause global cooling.....personally its been cold already this winter in Washington so i am letting my truck idle hours on end to try and help global watming along.....hopefully it kicks in before too long....

They made a mistake 30 years ago. They are absolutely, positively, beyond a shadow of a doubt, undeniably correct this time. Any proof to the contrary is supported by big oil. Those capitalist bastards just want to keep making money and destroy the earth. Screw them! Go out and buy a solar panel and a hybrid car. Pay no attention to the environmental impact that these green technologies actually have.

[GTAHVIT]

Buy that man a drink. And I got the sarcasm this time

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by headpunter

during the seventies they told us the particulates from the burned fuel would block out the Sun and cause global cooling.....personally its been cold already this winter in Washington so i am letting my truck idle hours on end to try and help global warming along.....hopefully it kicks in before too long....

I'm right there with ya. Here is a good link below.

Study: Half of warming due to Sun! –Sea Levels Fail to Rise? - Warming Fears in 'Dustbin of History'

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.c...0-274616db87e6

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by swifttal

Wheh! That's a good one... though you do have a point, even the best idiots can't be wrong 100% of the time

define best idiot.... kind of oxymoronic....

Originally Posted by Supermans

You obviously believe in most of the mumbo jumbo theoretical science that is laid out as fact in classroom science textbooks without the other opinions of half the scientists around the world who oppose such theories.

Before we all had automobiles in the not too distant past and before the population was as large as it is now, we had massive climate change occur within recorded history and scientists have uncovered lots of evidence that the Earth has gone through quite a few cooling and heating periods.

With the sun getting more erratic as time goes on (since it is an uncontrolled massive gaseous fireball) which we have no control over and the possibility of asteroids and meteors the size of Texas falling to Earth. It is foolish to think we as a collective people are causing any type of massive amounts of climate change unlike anything that has happened before. Taxing Michael Moore's and other cow's methane filled gaseous farts is not going to solve any theoretical global warming/global cooling/climate change or whatever scientists come up next.

Why is it so hard for die hard global warming fanatical believers to believe that the Earth's climate is cyclical and naturally occurring with or without human influence? When the world does go into this "cooling period" that is being predicted, how will scientists want to counteract it then??? Increase the cow population tenfold and feed them re-fried beans along with their grass???

wow.... you did read my post right? I didnt say that humans are soley responsible for climate change. I said that we are adding to it and increasing its rate. I said that the earth goes thru heating and cooling phases and right now we are getting to the peak of one of the heating phases before we will begin another cooling phase.

dont tell me what I obviously believe. just like the auto vs manual threads, when everyone and their mother was spouting for the manual being better than the auto, I put up plenty of info going the other way. and as such I was labeled as an auto-maniac. regardless of the fact that I have put up the same amount of info for the manual.

before we had automobiles and before our population was even half of what it is now, we had a massive flood that covered the earth.... or did we? who knows.

you obviously have a closed mind and arent willing to investigate both sides of an argument before you remark on the subject.


and gtahvit, perhaps fragile isnt the correct term. the climate is very durable for the most part. but it has an achilles heel which is the north atlantic current.

meteorites, nuclear bombs/testing, Ice ages, volcanoes, polution, deforestation,

as for meteorites.... when was the last time a meteorite struck earth of enough size to do anything to the climate?
nuclear bombs/testing....why do you think testing was moved to below surface testing instead of above ground testing? how many nuclear weapons have been used since their creation?
Ice ages have happened, and will happen again.
volcanoes.... when was the last sizeable volcano eruption? not just oozing magma in florida, but something like pompeii? that actually put enough into the atmosphere to have an effect on things?
pollution.... we are adding to it. just because we havent seen any immediate effects, does not mean that we are not on the edge of the table before things take a turn for the worst.
deforestation... what about it? the fact that we are reducing the amount of trees/plants in the world which then cause a decrease in the amount of co2 that is taken from the atmosphere?

[MerF]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

nuclear bombs/testing....why do you think testing was moved to below surface testing instead of above ground testing? how many nuclear weapons have been used since their creation?

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Since the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, nuclear weapons have been detonated on over two thousand occasions for testing purposes and demonstration purposes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bomb
Not saying Wikipedia is the end-all source, but I think that's a pretty significant number. Just thought I'd point that out.

[swifttal]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

define best idiot.... kind of oxymoronic....

Best being an adjective. The purpose of an adjective is to describe a noun. The noun in this case being idiot.

Definition of idiot: noun - an utterly foolish or senseless person
Definition of best: adjective - of the highest quality, excellence, or standing

So as you can see from above, this is classified as a descriptive statement. He is of the highest quality of being an utterly foolish and senseless person. That is to say, he excels at it.
An oxymoron produces a self-contradictory effect. A good example would be "He is a brilliant idiot". Which is clearly not the case.

Let me know if you need anything else clarified

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by Rallysport

Mr. Moore most certainly is an expert. He is well versed in the act of OVEREATING. He is also well regarded as an expert in general sloppiness of appearance. Let's not forget his specialty....being an ignorant blowhard. See? Expert all the way!

You just made me realize what a HYPOCRITE Mr. Moore is...

He doesn't like "Gas Guzzling, Unsafe Cars", right? Well, that's mighty silly coming from a "FOOD GUZZLING, UNSAFE BODY" like him.

Seriously, if he wants the government to mandate what kinds of cars we can drive and own and how much gas they use, how much they pollute, and how to make them safer, and all that...

How about we Tax HIM because he's a slob who's polluting and creating more waste by eating too much and his body is a hazard to other people and his size makes him a burden on the health care system unfairly to people who eat healthy.

Maybe if someone put it to him like that, he would think twice about what he's saying!

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by Supermans

You obviously believe in most of the mumbo jumbo theoretical science that is laid out as fact in classroom science textbooks without the other opinions of half the scientists around the world who oppose such theories.

Before we all had automobiles in the not too distant past and before the population was as large as it is now, we had massive climate change occur within recorded history and scientists have uncovered lots of evidence that the Earth has gone through quite a few cooling and heating periods.

With the sun getting more erratic as time goes on (since it is an uncontrolled massive gaseous fireball) which we have no control over and the possibility of asteroids and meteors the size of Texas falling to Earth. It is foolish to think we as a collective people are causing any type of massive amounts of climate change unlike anything that has happened before. Taxing Michael Moore's and other cow's methane filled gaseous farts is not going to solve any theoretical global warming/global cooling/climate change or whatever scientists come up next.

Why is it so hard for die hard global warming fanatical believers to believe that the Earth's climate is cyclical and naturally occurring with or without human influence? When the world does go into this "cooling period" that is being predicted, how will scientists want to counteract it then??? Increase the cow population tenfold and feed them re-fried beans along with their grass???

You left out the effects of volcanoes and supervolcanoes.

The climate change doomsayers are so fixated on their one little concern that they haven't the slightes clue that the Earth is flying "Blind" in a sea of rocks and it's only a matter of time before a huge one smacks the planet and opens it up like a melon, releasing more carbon into the air in one millisecond than humand could produce in a million years.

Spending on asteroid research and detection and deflection technologies is so underfunded it's non-existant.

But we're worried about a few cars hurting us!

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by MerF

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bomb
Not saying Wikipedia is the end-all source, but I think that's a pretty significant number. Just thought I'd point that out.

its a large number, but the amount of material that was actually put into the atmosphere was not significant enough to cause a change... now if they were all detonated simultaneously, yes, then we'd be in hot water....literally but they were spaced out enough to not affect things to a high degree

Originally Posted by swifttal

Best being an adjective. The purpose of an adjective is to describe a noun. The noun in this case being idiot.

Definition of idiot: noun - an utterly foolish or senseless person
Definition of best: adjective - of the highest quality, excellence, or standing

So as you can see from above, this is classified as a descriptive statement. He is of the highest quality of being an utterly foolish and senseless person. That is to say, he excels at it.
An oxymoron produces a self-contradictory effect. A good example would be "He is a brilliant idiot". Which is clearly not the case.

Let me know if you need anything else clarified

lol.... sarcasm doesnt read well does it?

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

You left out the effects of volcanoes and supervolcanoes.

The climate change doomsayers are so fixated on their one little concern that they haven't the slightes clue that the Earth is flying "Blind" in a sea of rocks and it's only a matter of time before a huge one smacks the planet and opens it up like a melon, releasing more carbon into the air in one millisecond than humand could produce in a million years.

Spending on asteroid research and detection and deflection technologies is so underfunded it's non-existant.

But we're worried about a few cars hurting us!

because its the majority of the public who thinks that kind of thing could only happen in the movies. when in fact, just a few years ago, an asteroid passed within 230,000,000 miles of earth... yeah, thats a large distance, but we didnt see the damn thing until a couple weeks before it passed our orbit.

I agree that we need to spend donkey assloads of money on detection and deflection technologies, but unfortunately, thats not what the majority of the world cares or thinks about.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

its a large number, but the amount of material that was actually put into the atmosphere was not significant enough to cause a change... now if they were all detonated simultaneously, yes, then we'd be in hot water....literally but they were spaced out enough to not affect things to a high degree


lol.... sarcasm doesnt read well does it?



because its the majority of the public who thinks that kind of thing could only happen in the movies. when in fact, just a few years ago, an asteroid passed within 230,000,000 miles of earth... yeah, thats a large distance, but we didnt see the damn thing until a couple weeks before it passed our orbit.

I agree that we need to spend donkey assloads of money on detection and deflection technologies, but unfortunately, thats not what the majority of the world cares or thinks about.

Believe me there is not much we can do to stop an asteroid from hitting us. If you watched Armageddon, you would know that sending all of our nuclear warheads into its path wouldn't slow it down or break it apart at the speed they travel in.. Landing on one and drilling a hole in it deep enough to blow it up from the inside is simply science fiction at best.. So I disagree in spending "donkey assloads of money on detection/defelction technology when the planet has millions of starving people that are alive today that could use that money in whatever form it comes in.. (ie. help, charity,) In other words there are bigger fish to fry for the next couple thousand years..

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by Supermans

Believe me there is not much we can do to stop an asteroid from hitting us. If you watched Armageddon, you would know that sending all of our nuclear warheads into its path wouldn't slow it down or break it apart at the speed they travel in.. Landing on one and drilling a hole in it deep enough to blow it up from the inside is simply science fiction at best.. So I disagree in spending "donkey assloads of money on detection/defelction technology when the planet has millions of starving people that are alive today that could use that money in whatever form it comes in.. (ie. help, charity,) In other words there are bigger fish to fry for the next couple thousand years..

well, its kinda either way. on one hand, you spend billions to feed starving children.... then an asteroid lands on them. or you spend billions on asteroid protection and the children starve.

it depends on the size of the asteroid and how soon its detected whether we could do anything about it. you dont have to blow it up to get rid of it. just nudge it out of the way. there are options, but if its too big or isnt detected soon enough... we're screwed. and you say the next thousand years. i dont see it taking that long for a decent sized one to hit. look at the tunguska impact. imagine if it would have occurred 12 hours later when the US was in the crosshairs. however, im not saying to freak out over all this stuff, just consider the inevitable.