I'm with Steve on this one and any how sounds good to me. :up:

Why yes, it is. The problem here with man-made "warming" advocates, and evolutionists is that they both only understand (or try to understand) the process. They never seek to look at the origin of the processes. Evolution cannot tell you how the process came into existence, yet it seeks to disprove the existence of God. And it fails miserably in that. Man made warming advocates seek to show a narrow trend in weather patterns as a tragedy, yet refuse to look at historical trends, current trends, solar cycles, actual output from natural CO2 sources, and actual output totals from man. They refuse to acknowledge that natural sources of CO2 are not a constant. Therefore, man's small 3% of 3% CO2 totals from all sources, and it's comparison to all greenhouse sources in total is totally negligible in the long run. In fact if humanity doubled our rate of CO2 emissions, it would add a measly .024% to the CO2 overall totals in the atmosphere. Not even making it 3.1% of the total of all greenhouse emissions. I don't know how these "scientists" get away with these blaringly flawed theories with so little questioning from so many. Solar cycles, diminishing solar activity, concurrent cooling cycles with diminishing solar activity, and warming on other planets in the solar system while we saw a warming trend here are other things to look at. When trying to understand 1+3=4, don't forget the "=4" part of the equation. And don't forget to add the "3" to the "1".

I don't doubt any of it Xabba. The thing is, the climate has always showed changing conditions historically. Where I live right now, it was both a desert at one time, and had evidence of regular snow cover at another time. Way before the industrial revolution. I wouldn't be surprised if your grandkids are saying the exact opposite of you. They'll probably be saying 80 years from now, "geez, back when I was young, we didn't have all this snow. It used to be much warmer!! Now it's looking like an ice age."

No it does'nt, it never has and it never will. The Theory of Evolution does not say anything about the existance or nonexsistance of any god or gods, but what it does do is disprove various creation myths. There are people out there who claim to have lost faith in god when they learned about evolution, Richard Dawkins being a well known example here, but the theory itself is silent on the subject.

More then 40% Americans think the earth is only 6000 years old. :lol:

No, just that evolutionists discount God's role, or divine creation as a result of watching species adapt over time. They act as though natural processes of adaptation disproves God. Don't pretend it doesn't happen. It does. When they do that it is very short sighted. Just like Man-made "global warming". If it helps you, hardcore Christian fundies do the same in reverse. To them, there couldn't be natural processes helping life on Earth because the bible does not talk about DNA, or genentic mutations directly. They are short-sighted in reverse. DNA and natural adaptation is truly miraculous and divinely created IMHO.

And Fish, I'd love to see your study that proves 40% of all Americans think the Earth is only 6000 years old. I realize there are people who do believe that. But that belief is not restricted to only Americans. And 40% of Americans seems a tad high. I don't buy it. BTW, when I lived in Europe, it was just the same level of stupidity and mass ignorance I saw in the USA, just culturally offset. You may be unaware/ignorant of it, but Europeans are just as dumb as Americans, and in many ways dumber.

Thats what I said, thats to do with individuals and not with the theory. Agree with you on the fundies bit, regardless of what religion they follow a muslim creationist is no less misguided than a christian creationist. As for the divine creation of DNA, I disagree because I have yet to see any evidence for the divine, but everyone is welcome to their own opinions.Allso doubt that the precentage of youn earth creationists is quite that high, mut meh. And yes, there are idiots everywhere in roughly the same concentrations, at least thats what I have seen so far.

All I say about this is that the 2 last winters have been VERY mild here in Finland where I live. It was in 1980 when there was no snow at Christmas the last time, now, last year, we barely got snow on Christmas and the weather was all around very mild. This year, no snow at all on Christmas and the temperatures havent gone under 15-C. Last year it went way past 20-C and the year before that we had plenty of snow and temperatures of over 30-C. :roll: Let's see what the next winter brings.

Overview
Search
Documentation
Special Collections
Repeat Photography of Glaciers
NPS Glacier Survey Reports
DAHLI IGY Photos



http://nsidc.org/data/glacier_photo/...ir_glacier.jpg http://nsidc.org/data/glacier_photo/...is_glacier.jpg http://nsidc.org/data/glacier_photo/...all_glacer.jpg
Overview

What global warming? :roll: :roll: :roll:

I understand. You are free to see how truly miraculous life is, how wondrous nature is in the world around you, and how truly remarkable the processes of genetic variation and adaptation is in an ever changing world of chaotic systems. You are free to consider it all a cosmic accident if you wish, or you are free to see that divinity(God) must play a role in it. Such order within such chaos confirms to me that there is much more there (God) than what the average evolutionist sees. Evolutionists are definitely short sighted in their views of the world and universe around them.

Very interesting Neon. But you do know that glacial ice is moving, and never constant, right? :hmm: :D Geez, when did people begin believing that weather patterns from year to year are unchanging and constant? When Al Gore said so?? How come nobody from that side ever questions why the warming trends coincided largely from recent solar activity, and now we are cooling, and ....surprise.....solar activity is decreasing as well. How come they discount global warming on other planets in the solar system? How come they discount the hottest days in the 20th century were in the 1930's, before modern industries began churning out like now? How come they cannot see that with increased CO2, and our current cooling, there may be some questions into their flawed theories concerning CO2 vs. atmospheric warming? How come they never seem to understand that humans put out less than 1% of the totals of CO2 in the atmosphere and how negligible that really is? In regards to that, how come they don't realize that natural emissions aren't always a static figure either, and if their theories were correct, the Earth would have died out long ago do to years where higher levels of natural pollutants soaked the atmosphere? How come the man who tells everyone to change their lifestyle and conserve energy, sells carbon credits and pollutes like a pig himself somehow goes unnoticed by those who promotes these flawed theories? Mr. Gore anyone? Also, have you also seen stories like this for the last few months:

http://www.ottumwacourier.com/local/...093225554.html

There were tons of them. Coldest Winter they've seen in Beijing this year, record snowfalls in the US Midwest, cold and normal from where I sit. Record level snowfalls in the Northern states, the arctic ice has seen more build-ups. These were just a few headlines I saw this winter. The fact that warming advocate's predictions are never right, and there is a history of "global weather tragedy" that has been sold for more than a century, and it has never come true, you truly have an uphill battle. BTW, do you ever actually go out and enjoy nature yourself? Do you actually go to lakes, mountains for hikes, and forests to see how remarkable nature is? Are you aware that it's normally cold in the winter, hot in the summer and milder in between the two. And we've seen no changes whatsoever in that? Other than variation in how much we see. Which is normal I might add. Always has been that way, and always will be. Even if human beings start taking the advice of the craziest in the environmental movement and begin living like it's 1700, variations in weather patterns (hot, milder, cold) will still occur. ;)

In the 1700's people burned wood for heat and cooking. Take the carbon production of that and times it by todays world population and i wonder if we'd be better or worse off...

Ah. Very good point. :know: Nothing would make em' happy. Maybe if humanity planned it's own extinction, we could save the planet!! :-j I know many in the environmental movement might seriously think that sounds like a good idea. :doh: :lol:

Humans and the subsequent population explosion combined with industrialization and destruction of habitats across the globe have caused increase in co2 levels.

Figure 1: Atmospheric Concentrations of Carbon Dioxide in Geologic Time and in Recent Years

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/sci...onc_co2-lg.gif



EPA data.

It is just a cycle my a#$!:p

Right Neon. We all know that human beings are putting more CO2 in the atmosphere. But CO2 is still only 3% of all greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. And human contributions to that are still 3% of that 3%. In other words, we contribute less than 1% to the total of all greenhouse gases combined. Your graphs show we are putting more CO2 in the atmosphere. That's true.....but it's still negligible when you look at things mathematically and think a little bit about it. The fact that we are still increasing CO2 and yet, we are cooling right now goes against all theories proposed by warming advocates. Your post above doesn't address that inconsistincy in any way at all. If those theories were correct, we'd be running off the charts. We aren't. Since the 1880's we've seen surface temperatures increase an "alarming" 1 degree F. Woo hoo! What a tragedy. :roll:

Pollution and destruction of animal habitats are a shame, agreed. But those problems will not be solved pushing yet another fraudulent weather scare. Been there, done that. They were wrong then, and it's obvious they're wrong now. And it also doesn't help that one of the prime leaders of the movement is a gross polluter himself, and is a partner in the firm that sells so-called "carbon credits". See something odd in that?

From what I understand,one of the Global Warming indicators is supposed to be sea temperature. According to what I've been hearing that hasn't changed in over a decade.

I wonder how many of the members of the "Church of the Global Warming" were also ones that claimed in the late 60s early 70s that we were heading for a new ice age.

Finally,the former head of the National Hurricane Center basically called Global Warming a fraud perpetrated by climotologists looking for Government hand-outs. The guy was a meteorologist for over 40 years and as far as he is concerned the only thing happening is just the normal rise and fall of earth's temperature, and as he put it in the interview (With the LA Times) the only thing that would worry him is if the temperatures stayed the same and didn't change...THEN he thinks something would be seriously wrong.

And he isn't the only Meteorologist who considers Climotologists to be way off base.