Jump to content

Climate Change & Global Warming


Atomic
 Share

How important is Global Warming to you in the Grand Scheme of Things?  

246 members have voted

  1. 1. How important is Global Warming to you in the Grand Scheme of Things?

    • Give me a break, I've enough on my plate
      17
    • I suppose there's something in it, but it's for the Politicians/Corporations/Those in power to sort out
      4
    • Yes I think it is important and I try to do my bit.
      79
    • If we don't stop it, the Planet dies in a few years, it's as simple as that.
      34
    • I think it is all hype and not half as bad as they make out
      108
    • I don't know what to think
      17

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

But I thought the earth as it cooled was shrinking ?

 

Opinion is divided:

 

http://www.maniacworld.com/Conspiracy-of-Science.html

 

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t54163.html

 

I go for the first one, I never did like the pangaea theory much.

 

Who's to say the earths core will cool anyway?, it may yet turn out our little dynamo is powering up.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/earth-magnetic-00a.html

While we're here; where the hell did all the water come from?. Since the comet theory has been all but thrown out as a way to explain it, can we be sure there is not more to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst we are at the subject of the Earth, is gravity now more than it used to be, as I'm sure I once read someplace the idea that at the time of the dinosaurs that gravity was less, and more massive animals could be more easily supported, this was due apparently do the Earth slowing down its spinning.

 

So I've always wondered, how much does the Earth spinning effect our gravity ?

 

 

Also, I'm curious how the tides work, something to do with the moon pulling the water away from the Earth.. I can go with that, but isn't their pulling on the oppersite side of the Earth where there isn't a moon to do the job ?

 

 

I also wonder, that some of the energy from nothing devices we hear about might be leaching energy from the Earths big dynamo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I'm curious how the tides work, something to do with the moon pulling the water away from the Earth.. I can go with that, but isn't their pulling on the oppersite side of the Earth where there isn't a moon to do the job ?

 

Although I don't believe science for a second as to the source of gravity, the result effects at this scale, are much the same.

 

http://home.hiwaay.net/~krcool/Astro/moon/moontides/

 

Another way of thinking about this is that the gravitational force of the Moon causes the Earth to accelerate slightly towards the Moon causing the water to get pulled towards the Moon faster than the solid rock on the side nearest the Moon. On the far side, the solid Earth 'leaves behind' some of the water which is not as strongly accelerated towards the Moon as the Earth is. This produces the bulge on the 'back side' of the Earth."

 

I'm sure I once read someplace the idea that at the time of the dinosaurs that gravity was less, and more massive animals could be more easily supported, this was due apparently do the Earth slowing down its spinning.

 

Come to think of it, this would work into a previously smaller earth theory fine as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But doesn't spin reduce the effect of gravity by centrifugal force ?

 

I see I'm now not alone in this thought:

 

http://www.oneoffpublishing.com/prnov04.html

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dinosaurs-Expanding-Earth-Explanation-Pre-historic/dp/0952260301

 

And an interesting, but long (I just skimmed it myself, not read it yet.) thread about the subject here it appears:

 

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?s=a4e0de5c1104a20ebff0daddb99ac6a4&showtopic=53775

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But doesn't spin reduce the effect of gravity by centrifugal force ?

 

I see I'm now not alone in this thought:

 

http://www.oneoffpublishing.com/prnov04.html

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dinosaurs-Expanding-Earth-Explanation-Pre-historic/dp/0952260301

 

And an interesting, but long (I just skimmed it myself, not read it yet.) thread about the subject here it appears:

 

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?s=a4e0de5c1104a20ebff0daddb99ac6a4&showtopic=53775

I'm sorry, but those links are hilarious. How could anyone take that crap seriously? I've heard this expanding or contracting earth stuff before, I think Koy used to post some stuff about it. It's up there with the creationists, UFO nuts and the flat earthers, and just a little bit more plausible than the 9/11 truthers. There is less evidence to support this than there is for the resurrection of Jesus, and that was magic!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're too used to falling in line with anything any scientist happens to get down on paper AT, you need to start thinking for your self for once.

Shouting "crap" at everyone is not much of a debating tool.

 

Just say their big theorys were not there and I came here telling of weird black holes that break down the laws of physics beyond their event horizon or Universe creating explosions that go against your own dear held laws of Physics. (something from nothing and all that) An idea first put by a jesuit priest by the way before you start comparing any one of being creationists.

 

Here's how we roll:

The Universe has always been here, in fact it's always been everywhere; to quote the great Anita Dells, "There's no limit".

It's an electric Universe "PLASMA RULES OK" We live on electric residue, spat out by the sun or one of the large gas giants like io was by Jupiter or caught up in a tight orbit like the once comet Venus was.

 

Every star has companion stars, more and more binary systems are found all the time, it's starting to look like the rule. We are as well but ol Kronos went and discharged itself. (thunderbolts of the gods and all that)

http://www.varchive.org/itb/goldage.htm

 

Birkeland currents run between the sun, the planets, the moons and the galaxys themselves with a big plasma Z-pinch in the middle of each galaxy.

 

It makes perfect sense that the Earth started out much smaller, the continents fit back to a ball shape near perfect and a far better explanation than your pangaea "CRAP" theory at the very least.

 

The big Dinosaur on a small planet thing is a new idea to me but also fits in perfect with the idea that if the Earth was smaller; the incoming gravity which our Earth makes a shadow of to keep us on terra firma would be much less, allowing Giganotosaurus to get off its backside once in a while.

 

I dont think you can disprove any of this without retreating to the mocking soap box you share with those who are well overpayed to stay put on and demand we jump to whatever tune they play.

 

Anyway to grasp back towards topic and before its used as a cunning attack ploy; No I don't think global warming is caused by us about to turn into a Sun (not yet anyhow) but more to do with the dark rift we're in, upcoming galactic alignment, possible pole shift, blah, blah, blah, etc, etc, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:roll: Yeah, right. :roll:

 

The evidence points to an expanding universe, but you believe in a steady state universe.

 

The evidence points to a steady state Earth, yet you believe in an expanding Earth.

 

Venus is a comet! That's a new one. Link please?

 

Io is a jovian bogey! Pulllleeease, stop it you're making me dizzy.

 

Sol has a companion star, but it fused. So why can't we detect it's gravitational effects (No, hang on, I know this one... That's right, gravity doesn't exist, does it?).

 

My Pangaea theory? It wasn't me guv, anyway what's so weird about continents moving? Especially considering we can measure the speed of the movement. How do you explain hotspots like Hawaii? There is a clear trail of volcanic islands and undersea mountains showing exactly how the crust has moved over the past few hundred million years.

I dont think you can disprove any of this without retreating to the mocking soap box you share with those who are well overpayed to stay put on and demand we jump to whatever tune they play.

My point exactly. It's not up to me to disprove this rubbish, it's up to you to prove it, or at least provide some evidence, and I don't mean some random crackpots website, I'm talking about peer-reviewed scientific papers.

 

Oh, but hang on, all the scientists are part of the conspiracy to keep this stuff secret. So how come those websites are out there? Because they aren't written by scientists. So why should we take them seriously? Eh, well, some of the scientists are honest, but not any of the ones who publish research. But if you don't publish research, can you call yourself a scientist? Of course, all you need is a website. But don't you need a science degree? That's easy, you can buy them off the internet.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

global warming. and if your going to laugh at other peoples theories you would have been the flat earther after all the earth going around the sun was once a wacky idea by a few odd types. they all are weird ideas but if we dont have weird ideas we dont have science. keep up the odd ideas but i dont see what any of it has to do with global warming

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have to do with Global Warming and climate change because they are all theorys just the same as the theory of Man Made Global Warming. "Links" can be found to support anything, even that we still live on a flat earth, as you mention, which shows how silly the idea of proposing links to support any argument really is.

 

And lets not forget that Galileo was not exactly a popular person in his day, but those who religiously (theres that word again) believed what they had been told rather than accepting facts have been proven wrong in time.

 

I just wonder how many more have to die needlessly before "believers" realise they have been nothing but pawns in the big money game of trading polution allowances.

 

However, to go back to the ever popular link method - lets see what happens if we apply the "fixes" for man made global warming theory to other problems facing us today.

 

:wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, but hang on, all the scientists are part of the conspiracy to keep this stuff secret. So how come those websites are out there? Because they aren't written by scientists. So why should we take them seriously? Eh, well, some of the scientists are honest, but not any of the ones who publish research. But if you don't publish research, can you call yourself a scientist? Of course, all you need is a website. But don't you need a science degree? That's easy, you can buy them off the internet.......

 

arf!

 

Opinion is divided:

 

 

Between you and the educated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have to do with Global Warming and climate change because they are all theorys just the same as the theory of Man Made Global Warming.

That's the creationist argument. Which just goes to show that, just like them, you don't know the difference between a "theory" as defined in the dictionary and a "scientific theory".

 

Theory ~ (from Wiki) In common usage, the word theory is often used to signify a conjecture, an opinion, a speculation, or a hypothesis. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements that would be true independently of what people think about them.

 

Scientific theory ~ (from Wiki) In science a theory is a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise verified through empirical observation. For the scientist, "theory" is not in any way an antonym of "fact". For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behavior are Newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and the general theory of relativity.

 

As you can see, there is a big difference, something many people seem to have difficulty with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements that would be true independently of what people think about them

 

Well yes the truth is out there but the lies are inside your head.

 

If space is infinite, there is nothing on the other side. If space is finite because it has been bent around upon itself because of gravity, then again there is nothing on the other side of it because there is no seam. It looks like the surface of a smooth ball which represents a piece of flat paper bent upon itself.

 

http://einstein.stanford.edu/content/relativity/qanda.html

 

Models of nothing which represent nothing but the nonsense of relativity.

 

At least Nikola Tesla had not something but plenty to show for his work, not just a whole lot of folded up nothing that you sit spellbound by because teacher told you to.

 

Bring on the sanity Tesla:

 

I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view.

Magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king..., its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but you believe in a steady state universe.

 

I never stated on a steady state owt so don't tell me what I believe before you even understand the edges of it.

 

The Universe is a work in process and always has been as galaxys are born from other galaxys and new suns come out to play.

You may think the Universe is ruled by peer reviewed papers but don't be surprised that it aint.

 

Many proper scientists have time and time again shown proof beyond your feeble Einstein but at their own risk as the usual response by the establishment is to deny them any funding, throw them off campus or deny them telescope time.

 

The truth may out one day but for now the morons are running the madhouse so don't mind me. Just sit back and enjoy your unending confusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...