The Laurentide ice sheet covered half of North America under hundreds of feet of ice 20,000 years ago. Then it started to receed.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

10,500 years ago, the Sahara Desert was much like it is today. Arid and unpopulated. Then over a period of around 500 years, it turned into a lush savannah-type environment due to climate change.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

5,000 years later, it started to revert back to what it is today.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

Posted by tecwrg on 6/2/2017 12:58:00 PM (view original):
The Laurentide ice sheet covered half of North America under hundreds of feet of ice 20,000 years ago. Then it started to receed.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

10,500 years ago, the Sahara Desert was much like it is today. Arid and unpopulated. Then over a period of around 500 years, it turned into a lush savannah-type environment due to climate change.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

5,000 years later, it started to revert back to what it is today.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

In your mind, is it impossible for the planet to undergo natural, slow changes and also undergo rapid, man-made changes?

Posted by bad_luck on 6/2/2017 1:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/2/2017 12:58:00 PM (view original):
The Laurentide ice sheet covered half of North America under hundreds of feet of ice 20,000 years ago. Then it started to receed.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

10,500 years ago, the Sahara Desert was much like it is today. Arid and unpopulated. Then over a period of around 500 years, it turned into a lush savannah-type environment due to climate change.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

5,000 years later, it started to revert back to what it is today.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

In your mind, is it impossible for the planet to undergo natural, slow changes and also undergo rapid, man-made changes?

I believe that our planet is far more dynamic, adaptable and resilient that you give it credit for. It has survived and even thrived after multiple global extinction events throughout its history. I don't believe it can be drastically affected by "rapid man-made changes", short of a global thermonuclear war.

You've never thought that "man" ourselves are a global extinction event?

We are a parasite on the planet.

Posted by The Taint on 6/2/2017 1:12:00 PM (view original):
You've never thought that "man" ourselves are a global extinction event?

We are a parasite on the planet.

If all humans suddenly died out, the planet would continue to survive and thrive.

Mankind's biggest problem is and will be overpopulation. Population growth soon will (or already has) start to exceed the resources needed to sustain itself.

Posted by tecwrg on 6/2/2017 11:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/2/2017 11:19:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/2/2017 6:16:00 AM (view original):
Forget about climate change, global warming, all that bullshit which is backed by questionable "science" at best for the moment.

Why would we want to continue to harvest and consume fossil fuels, of which there's only so much left in the ground, and which humans are consuming at an unsustainable rate, and which is known to pollute both the water and the air when harvested and burned?

Why wouldn't we want to make a directed effort towards turning to renewable energy, such as solar and wind, which has significantly less impact on the environment when both harvested and consumed?

No, no. We should not forget about climate change, you flat-earther. It's real and backed by real science.

I misspoke.

Climate change is not bullshit. It's real.

The bullshit part is the claims that it's mostly influenced by human behavior. The "science" behind that is questionable, and ignores a ****-ton of facts that show that it's natural and cyclical, and would be occurring anyways whether or not humans existed.

Climates change. Period. This planet has been here 4.5 billion years. That's science.

Claiming that hand-wringing over cars and factories and aerosol cans are going to have a lasting effect on this rock is bullshit. It's a political football for funneling money towards pet programs and preferred industries.

If you're giving money to "climatologists", THEY'RE GOING TO SAY WHATEVER IT TAKES TO KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING. If Obama wants to give money to solar companies run by cronies or major donors, THEY'RE GOING TO SAY WHATEVER IT TAKES TO KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING. Ten years ago, it was global warming. Thirty years ago, it was the pending ice age. Follow the money.

I heard the planet is only 60,000 years old.

60 years ago we were filling people's lungs up with hot oil to fight TB.


Just over 100 years ago we used leeches for hemorrhoids.


Science gets more advanced and we learn more.

Posted by toddcommish on 6/2/2017 1:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/2/2017 11:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/2/2017 11:19:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/2/2017 6:16:00 AM (view original):
Forget about climate change, global warming, all that bullshit which is backed by questionable "science" at best for the moment.

Why would we want to continue to harvest and consume fossil fuels, of which there's only so much left in the ground, and which humans are consuming at an unsustainable rate, and which is known to pollute both the water and the air when harvested and burned?

Why wouldn't we want to make a directed effort towards turning to renewable energy, such as solar and wind, which has significantly less impact on the environment when both harvested and consumed?

No, no. We should not forget about climate change, you flat-earther. It's real and backed by real science.

I misspoke.

Climate change is not bullshit. It's real.

The bullshit part is the claims that it's mostly influenced by human behavior. The "science" behind that is questionable, and ignores a ****-ton of facts that show that it's natural and cyclical, and would be occurring anyways whether or not humans existed.

Climates change. Period. This planet has been here 4.5 billion years. That's science.

Claiming that hand-wringing over cars and factories and aerosol cans are going to have a lasting effect on this rock is bullshit. It's a political football for funneling money towards pet programs and preferred industries.

If you're giving money to "climatologists", THEY'RE GOING TO SAY WHATEVER IT TAKES TO KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING. If Obama wants to give money to solar companies run by cronies or major donors, THEY'RE GOING TO SAY WHATEVER IT TAKES TO KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING. Ten years ago, it was global warming. Thirty years ago, it was the pending ice age. Follow the money.

It's funny that BL, who hates money, chooses to ignore the enormous financial motivations behind the "man-made climate change" movement.

Posted by tecwrg on 6/2/2017 1:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/2/2017 1:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/2/2017 12:58:00 PM (view original):
The Laurentide ice sheet covered half of North America under hundreds of feet of ice 20,000 years ago. Then it started to receed.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

10,500 years ago, the Sahara Desert was much like it is today. Arid and unpopulated. Then over a period of around 500 years, it turned into a lush savannah-type environment due to climate change.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

5,000 years later, it started to revert back to what it is today.

Was that the result of man-made climate change?

In your mind, is it impossible for the planet to undergo natural, slow changes and also undergo rapid, man-made changes?

I believe that our planet is far more dynamic, adaptable and resilient that you give it credit for. It has survived and even thrived after multiple global extinction events throughout its history. I don't believe it can be drastically affected by "rapid man-made changes", short of a global thermonuclear war.

Or billions of people burning fossil fuels for 200 years.

Nope. Not even close.

From ExxonMobile (emphasis mine):

Our position on climate change

We have the same concerns as people everywhere – and that is how to provide the world with the energy it needs while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The risk of climate change is clear and the risk warrants action. Increasing carbon emissions in the atmosphere are having a warming effect. There is a broad scientific and policy consensus that action must be taken to further quantify and assess the risks.

ExxonMobil is taking action by reducing greenhouse gas emissions in its operations, helping consumers reduce their emissions, supporting research that leads to technology breakthroughs and participating in constructive dialogue on policy options.

Addressing climate change, providing economic opportunity and lifting billions out of poverty are complex and interrelated issues requiring complex solutions. There is a consensus that comprehensive strategies are needed to respond to these risks.

At a meeting in Exxon Corporation's headquarters, a senior company scientist named James F. Black addressed an audience of powerful oilmen. Speaking without a text as he flipped through detailed slides, Black delivered a sobering message: carbon dioxide from the world's use of fossil fuels would warm the planet and could eventually endanger humanity.

"In the first place, there is general scientific agreement that the most likely manner in which mankind is influencing the global climate is through carbon dioxide release from the burning of fossil fuels," Black told Exxon's Management Committee, according to a written version he recorded later.

It was July 1977 when Exxon's leaders received this blunt assessment, well before most of the world had heard of the looming climate crisis.

From ConocoPhillips:

We recognize that human activity, including the burning of fossil fuels, is contributing to increased concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere that can lead to adverse changes in global climate.

I can't believe those corrupt researchers at Exxon and Conoco, taking the federal grant money and lying about climate change being mad-made. Bunch of *******. Won't pull the wool over tec's eyes, though. No, no. He's WAY too smart for their games. He sees right through them. Follow the money.