Page #28
Pages: #1... #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 #25 #26 #27 #28 #29|
Started by #485312 [Ignore] 15,Dec,20 18:50
New Comment Rating: -1 Similar topics: 1.WHY DO PEOPLE COME ON SYD WITHOUT VALID PROFILES???? 2.MERRY CHRISTMAS. 3.What constitutes "World-Famous"? 4.Having Oral Sex Preformed on me by a Priest 5.YouTube can be educational too (let's share videos) Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
There wadv2 or 3 mass extinctions before the big one 75 million years ago, or so, that finished off the dinosaurs.
The world and the universe does what it wants.
The question is, are we to blame,
I dont think so.
only registered users can see external links
Where did you get your data?
Do you have some proof for your conspiracy theories?
- The governments lie to us? The governments were the last to recognize global warming. It is science and all the data is available for everyone to learn about it.
- The Illuminati that run this slave planet? Where are they? How are they doing it? To who are you or am I a slave?
So, who are we and why did we come to be on earth?
And if we know that, how can we take our place among the stars?
only registered users can see external links
CO2 levels are above 400 ppm now. That's a fact: only registered users can see external links
So, I've done my research and have given 2 reliable references.
Where's your data?
You got one thing right, I am an atheist. Still, I don't bash the bible a lot, because I like the character of Jesus. However, if you want to understand current events, science is a better source than a book written 3400 until 1700 years ago. If you want to know about the stars, you're better off looking at telescope pictures (SCIENCE) than looking at the sky with your naked eyes.
The acceptance of science is not a belief, because science is the collective knowledge of our species. It is based on observation, experimentation, data gathering, constant debate and reasoning, testing hypotheses and predictions, until the evidence is very well supported and it is called a theory. If science makes a claim, I can check the data, the sources and peer studies and I can make up my mind if the evidence stacks up enough to accept the truth of the claim. If a claim is revised in any way, because of new data, I have no problem revising my opinion on the subject. Apologists often point this out, as science can change their opinion on anything, when new evidence is found, but that only shows ignorance about science. This only happens on topics when the science is not complete yet. The science of climate change is by now irrefutable.
only registered users can see external links
The Illuminati?
Scientist want to study the stuff to see how it has changed in the low gravity,no oxygen enviroment.The poop and wiz should have had organisms in it that would either change,die or be fossilized.
1 of the original prototypes was found in a back yard in florida in 2018 and scrapped before anyone knew what it was.What a waste.cool moon buggy!
Now the summers have many fucking hot days, sometimes even in may. Almost every year all the grass dies and trees let their leaves fall. We don't have any autumns any more, with nice red leaves. The leaves just shrivel up, die and fall off. We haven't seen a real winter in years. No ice, maybe some wet snow or snow that is melted in a day. Children can only learn to skate in an ice hall.
That's all not normal. That's global warming being obvious.
Something happened i cliced on something wrong,if there is a - point or something comes up,it was a accident
Do you know that only 2.4 million square miles remain of the original 6 million square miles of tropical rainforest that formerly covered the Earth? So humanity has destroyed 60% of it.
Did you know humanity has used about 150 billions barrels of oil so far and there is about 1.5 trillion barrels left. They say we would burn through that in about 50 years at the current consumption.
And you think humanity can do all of that without impacting nature?
only registered users can see external links
Then democracy will favor the many and not the few.
Transparency is not enough. It is already transparent how much money flows to politicians. That doesn't limit them to favor their financiers with beneficial policies.
You are indeed very optimistic when you think political funding is not favoring the benefactors and thereby neglecting the rest of the public.
I'm not telling you all politicians are corrupt, I'm saying that we can help them to act according their conscience, when you make their funding independent from moneyed interests.
Even if politicians could be trusted to make their choices completely independent of their funding, than politics is still dependent of that funding. Moneyed interests can still choose which representatives they help get their message heard. That way they have much more power over politics than normal voters.
Why, why, why? The physical facts support it. No humans involved in the changes. Do you believe humanity has no hand in this? Or do you deny global warming?
We are not getting closer to the sun, but scientists have shown that the distance between the sun and the Earth is changing. ... The rate at which the sun is slowing is also tiny (around 3 milliseconds every 100 years). As the sun loses its momentum and mass, the Earth can slowly slip away from the sun's pull.
The magnetic poles and the NORTH pole are moving
only registered users can see external links
With all these changes, taking place even before civilization began, how is it that humans,being so cocky,think they can actually change the earth?
Things change rather we were here or not.
Eventually this entire blue ball is going to go up in FLAMES. Perhaps that is the Bibical Hell?
The earth will burn for a very long time,seeming like a eternity.
The reason we have had to accept that human activity is influencing the earth's climate is because we are measuring changes that are too sudden and radical to be explained by the factors you mentioned. Those factors are still there. The Earth does change, but over the span of millennia, not in a generation or two.
We can measure, over time, how much carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere. We can measure how much a coal power plant emits. We can calculate with relative ease and great certainty that we have, indeed, made a difference. The uncertainty lies rather in how sensitive the Earth is to our influence.
As it turns out, even though humanity's emissions are only a few percent of the total, that is still enough to upset the equilibrium to a degree that is dangerous to us in the long term.
Now, who's to blame? Most scientists believe humanity is accelerating the process. Maybe, maybe not, but, as managers of this world, we should try to make it better.
If you look where the rockets are launched into space,burning EVERYTHING in it's path all the way up, UM,could it be?
New Comment Go to top