On Global Warming, which = Climate Change
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Saturday, January 1, 2011 00:26
VIEWED: 5597
PAGE 2 of 5
Quote:
Originally posted by ALYSSRICHES:
TBH, and not to stirr up a whole hate-fest, I always wonder why people who believe in "climate change", "global warming" whatever, massively ignore all of the evidence opposing the fact- and simply tend to trust the media and government overhauls and regulations.
And in short, no- I'm not buying into it :)
Because their liberal minds don't function right. See, liberalism is mental disorder..we have had a thread that proved this. This disorder usually only effects hippies, gays, and the unbathed amongst us. So you do not need mask, it is not SARS......
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
As to the other: I don't bother answering stupid questions which I know are aimed at me for assinine reasons and don't pertain to the topic.
Me, being the " other" , of course. And it's neither a stupid question nor is it for an assinine reason.
Since you obviously DON'T know, I pose the question with that in mind, for exactly that reason.
Where WOULD you go to find the answer to such a question ?
I think you know where this is headed....
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You know... this is WHY true environmetalism fails.
You've got a bunch of stinky hippies screaming about shit they know nothing about.
So now, whenever someone says somthing about the environment, these fuckers have already infected peoples minds about it and noone pays attention.
"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay, I'll bite. It's a long-running argument whether he was a predetor or a scavanger; so again, it's up to making up one's own mind once one has researched various sources. And no, I don't know where it was headed...where did you think it was?
That good enough for you? If you were using it as an analogy of issues which have a lot of pro and con, then it IS valid; if it was a snark, well, at least you got an answer.
And no, Wulf, I don't think Peter Noone IS paying attention, you're right.
ETA: If you're asking for my OPINION, by the way, I think he was a predator who was happy to scavenge or eat injured prey. Our Bald Eagle does the same; he can fish, but he's just as happy to scavenge...ditto the Turkey Vulture. But that's just my opinion (and I'm less on the fence about that than about global warming; still there's no definitive answer).
MOST 'predators' will scavenge anyway, so it's kind of a moot point.
ETA also: I'll give you back a question. Was Tarbosaurus a T. Rex or a separate genus?
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The 'prey' group, headed by the likes of paleontologists Robert Bakker and Phil Currie, see the evidence pointing toward T.Rex as being the top link in the food chain.
The 'scavenger' group, headed by the likes of Jack Horner, sees T.Rex as being too slow to actively hunt - anything, and simply used his massive size to muscle out other predators for their hard earned kill.
Both camps have exactly the same evidence. Both have very credible scientist,giants in their respected field, arguing their side. Both have valid sounding arguments.... but are both right ?
While many might say the answer isn't fully one or the other, the argument remains. Was T.Rex more apt to hunt for his dinner, or simply hang around and wait for something to drop dead ?
It's not always as straight forward as it seems.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
The 'prey' group, headed by the likes of paleontologist Robert Bakker and Phil Currie, see the evidence pointing toward T.Rex as being the top link in the food chain.
The 'scavenger' group, headed by the likes of Jack Horner, sees T.Rex as being too slow to actively hunt - anything, and simply used his massive size to muscle out other predators for their hard earned kill.
Both camps have exactly the same evidence. Both have very credible scientist,giants in their respected field, arguing their side. Both have valid sounding arguments.... but are both right ?
While many might say the answer isn't fully one or the other, the argument remains. Was T.Rex more apt to hunt for his dinner, or simply hang around and wait for something to drop dead ?
It's not always as straight forward as it seems.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
AURapt, I get your point. However, the "experts" that point to man-made global warming have two hundred years of soft data, yet swear (for the green economy agenda and their paychecks) it is man-made. T-rex? Really? I could say T-rex was an alien from nieumguba. Could you argue I was wrong? Instead of making the T-rex argument....show her Al Gore's lies, how the oceans suck up C02 like her girlfriend eats her ass, and the effects of the Sun...then explain that we are just a blip on the planet and know no more than we know about T-rex......
Dude you are the kingpin....I am just the "fuck you... you are a tard" gal....
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Niki2 -
Hi!
Nope you haven't met me! :) I've been a browncoat for ages, but have only recently decided to become active on the forums and internet community. (as in, last night I decided I should start posting!)
As for the post related...
I do prefer to read all of the evidence, and then decide for myself! I can generally respect the opinions on either side (as long as no one gets too debate-y, or insulting!), as long as they've at least learned some about whichever side they are taking a stance for!
....does this make sense? I'm ill and tired hah!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Welcome, Alyss.
Can't Take (my gorram) Sky
------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nik
I meant more along the lines of hi-lib-progs screaming global warming (or are you guys using Climate Change now) at every oppurtunity.
There is snow? Climate Change
There is NOT snow? Climate Change
Rain? Climate Change
Sun? Climate Change
There MAY be something to what you are saying. Beyong gradual polar shift, and general new ice-age weather.
But... like calling raciss... you guys shoot yourselves in the foot. So people stop paying attention.
P.S.
ALY..
"I do prefer to read all of the evidence, and then decide for myself!"
Fresh meat...
There is a reason I chose to call myself Wulf... I hope you can learn to stake your claim here. It gets rough.
"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Haha ;)
Thanks for the welcomes! :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME