Pope Al is vewy, vewy mad

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

Proof that you are a complete fucking moron.
Yes, the Earth warms, the Earth cools. Ever hear of the ice age fuck monkey? The "debate" here isn't whether or not the Earth is actually warming, and there is no conclusive proof that it is, the "debate" is whether or not WE are causing it. WE are NOT causing the Earth to warm or cool. There is absolutely no proof of that and you cannot offer any proof...and I can say that just based on your comment that you think nuclear power plants emit greenhouse gasses.

Also, FYI, there is no such thing as a global warming/global climate change scientist. There are so many different areas of study that there is no way anyone is ever going to agree on whether we are in a warming trend or not. Shit, we haven't even been tracking global temperatures on a regular basis for more than 100 years. So what do we base temperatures on 1,000 years ago? 10,000 years ago? 100,000 years ago? 1,000,000 years ago? We base it on what is known in the scientific community as artifacts - things like tree rings, ice cores, etc. These are not very accurate and only provide glimpses of temperatures in very specific areas of the globe and don't even take into account all of the factors that go into determining whether or not the Earth is in a warming/cooling trend.

The so-called global warming area of study is made up of scientists who study hurricanes, ice cores, plants, soil, ocean currents, glaciers, atmospheric conditions, etc. To say that all these areas of study agree that not only is the Earth warming but that WE are causing it is complete bull shit.

Gore is just cashing in on his new religion. Plain and simple. And he wants to make US (Americans) feel guilty that we are "raping" the natural world and causing global catastrophe. I say again...bull shit.

I don't think you read my post correctly at all, and you went on to attack me and call me stupid several times in your post. Congratulations.

I didn't say "global warming" exists. I said climate change exists. Al Gore isn't a good guy, and I never intended to defend him. Jesus fuck, I'm literally astounded by how you twisted five sentences, which stated nothing but that the Earth goes through changes, is constantly changing, and therefore is changing right now, and that people argue about "global warming" in extremely stupid ways, to "GLOBAL WARMING EXISTS. WE ARE ALL KILLING THE PLANET. HAIL AL GORE!" Please, man. Learn some common fucking sense.

I never said I thought nuclear plants emit greenhouse gases, or that they're a cause for any global warming. I was telling you that I'VE HEARD IT. From MORONS. I never said I believed it, or were trying to plead their case for them. Like I explained in an earlier post, I've heard a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that I believe them. I've heard the moon is made of cheese. Are you going to attack me for hearing something else that isn't true?

The parts in your post I bolded were the only things I said in my original post. Oddly enough, you agreed with me. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif

Holic, I don't know why you had to tell me that microwaves do not cause cancer. I wasn't saying that I thought they did. If you want to give someone a dose of truth, find someone it's going to affect, because I didn't say they did anything. Also, to imply I'm ignorant based on my assessment of nuclear plants is absurd. I don't like nuclear energy as a whole, specifically because simple mistakes like design flaws potentially kill hundreds of thousands of people, kill off vegetation for an amount of time, and cause animal life to cease for decades. Unbelievably radioactive materials are not good things to be producing as quickly as we are when we can't even create designs that can't withstand earthquakes, floods(the floods in the Midwest over the past several months posed a huge threat to several nuclear plants within a few hundred miles of my home, and the majority were on the Missouri River and would leak several different radioactive isotopes with a half-life of more than ten years into the largest source of food and transportation around here), tsunamis, and whatever common natural phenomenon will cause the next huge nuclear disaster.

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

You are a fucking retard. There, simple enuf for ya? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/uhoh.gif.c07307dd22ee7e63e22fc8e9c614d1fd.gif

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif You attacked me because you misinterpreted my post, and you still just don't get it. Whatever, man. I don't feel like arguing with people who can't have rational conversation.

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif You attacked me because you misinterpreted my post, and you still just don't get it. Whatever, man. I don't feel like arguing with people who can't have rational conversation.

Says the guy with more groans than thanks...I rest my case. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

Says the guy with more groans than thanks...I rest my case. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

People don't like opinions that aren't their own so I'm a retard? You aren't even a competent troll.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

People don't like opinions that aren't their own so I'm a retard? You aren't even a competent troll.

Ain't no trollin' here fucktard...just the cold, hard truth. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

 

---------- Post added at 07:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:00 PM ----------

 

lulz

 

[thevic24 5,000+ posts]

People don't like opinions that aren't their own so I'm a retard? You aren't even a competent troll.

That dose go both ways.....

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Holic, I don't know why you had to tell me that microwaves do not cause cancer. I wasn't saying that I thought they did. If you want to give someone a dose of truth, find someone it's going to affect, because I didn't say they did anything. Also, to imply I'm ignorant based on my assessment of nuclear plants is absurd. I don't like nuclear energy as a whole, specifically because simple mistakes like design flaws potentially kill hundreds of thousands of people, kill off vegetation for an amount of time, and cause animal life to cease for decades. Unbelievably radioactive materials are not good things to be producing as quickly as we are when we can't even create designs that can't withstand earthquakes, floods(the floods in the Midwest over the past several months posed a huge threat to several nuclear plants within a few hundred miles of my home, and the majority were on the Missouri River and would leak several different radioactive isotopes with a half-life of more than ten years into the largest source of food and transportation around here), tsunamis, and whatever common natural phenomenon will cause the next huge nuclear disaster.

I think you read way too much into my post.

As for nuclear plants, if we humans are truly causing global warming, we dont have the technology to stop relying on fossil fuels any other way than with nuclear energy. We do however have the technology to not put the fuel tanks for our backup power generators outside and exposed to the weather.

What would happen if an earthquake hit Hoover Dam? I guess we better not use hydro power either.

Fossil fuels are finite, pollute the environment, and often times ruin large portions of land to extract. Wind power is laughably inefficient. And solar power is expensive and has a long ways to come technologically before it can be considered a viable widespread power source. So what do you consider the best choice, if not nuclear?

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

I think you read way too much into my post.
As for nuclear plants, if we humans are truly causing global warming, we dont have the technology to stop relying on fossil fuels any other way than with nuclear energy. We do however have the technology to not put the fuel tanks for our backup power generators outside and exposed to the weather.

What would happen if an earthquake hit Hoover Dam? I guess we better not use hydro power either.

Fossil fuels are finite, pollute the environment, and often times ruin large portions of land to extract. Wind power is laughably inefficient. And solar power is expensive and has a long ways to come technologically before it can be considered a viable widespread power source. So what do you consider the best choice, if not nuclear?

I don't like any of the now-proposed energy ideas. I choose E, none of the above. I'm not an engineer and have no way of creating a new viable energy source, and I can't put enough thought into making a be-all and end-all energy source. But that doesn't mean I have to agree with what they've come up with so far, and I don't think promoting a dangerous solution just because it's efficient is the right thing to do. I know efficiency and productivity is important, and I don't have a solution. I wish I did, though. And I wish the world wasn't so torn between these half-good, half-horrible solutions. There's got to be some new way to harness some kind of power the scientific community hasn't acknowledged yet. Well, one can hope.

SM, if you want to get a ton of groans easily, defend a gay person while twenty people in one topic are saying to hang them all. You'll get plenty of groans per post guaranteed.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

This is exactly what Al Gore built the internet for //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

 

[Linkz 10+ year member]

I don't like any of the now-proposed energy ideas. I choose E, none of the above. I'm not an engineer and have no way of creating a new viable energy source, and I can't put enough thought into making a be-all and end-all energy source. But that doesn't mean I have to agree with what they've come up with so far, and I don't think promoting a dangerous solution just because it's efficient is the right thing to do. I know efficiency and productivity is important, and I don't have a solution. I wish I did, though. And I wish the world wasn't so torn between these half-good, half-horrible solutions. There's got to be some new way to harness some kind of power the scientific community hasn't acknowledged yet. Well, one can hope.

Cold fusion is a new alternative to nuclear energy (eg nuclear fission). It is still being developed. But when they can scale it up, it will be safer and cheaper than all other alternative energy sources.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

I don't like any of the now-proposed energy ideas. I choose E, none of the above. I'm not an engineer and have no way of creating a new viable energy source, and I can't put enough thought into making a be-all and end-all energy source. But that doesn't mean I have to agree with what they've come up with so far, and I don't think promoting a dangerous solution just because it's efficient is the right thing to do. I know efficiency and productivity is important, and I don't have a solution. I wish I did, though. And I wish the world wasn't so torn between these half-good, half-horrible solutions. There's got to be some new way to harness some kind of power the scientific community hasn't acknowledged yet. Well, one can hope.


SM, if you want to get a ton of groans easily, defend a gay person while twenty people in one topic are saying to hang them all. You'll get plenty of groans per post guaranteed.

I wish we had a perfect energy source too, but we dont.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Cold fusion is a new alternative to nuclear energy (eg nuclear fission). It is still being developed. But when they can scale it up, it will be safer and cheaper than all other alternative energy sources.

Cold fusion is a lot further from fruition than to scale it up. As it stands now, the original claims of it even existing as a real possibility are generally considered a pipe dream. And, even if it were to be invented (since Fleischmann and Pons cant prove they actually proved it is real), it would have a radioactive byproduct, which of course would mean potential radioactive pollution. If we are worried about radioactive pollution on a level we have now, with a relatively small number of nuclear plants, can you imagine what the potential problems would be with a much more localized nuclear power source?