Help Build Greenopolis

Help make Greenopolis.com your community! Tell us what you like, don't like, or what you want to see on your site!

global warming. the crime? fraud.
Greenopolis Founder

bigconserv...

hello all. though i do not like the idea of pollution and all that, i do not believe the absurd ideas about global warming. believe it or not, its mostly lies on the news and whatnot. 

a lot of what you here about global warming is LIES, people, LIES.
so here's the deal
1. global warming is a natural occurrence of sunspots on the sun. they creat more sunlight/heat and allow less clouds to form. less clouds means not as much heat reflected
2. it is not man-made
3. the polar ice caps are actually now EXPANDING at a fast rate
4. what caused it to get so hot during the early age of the dinosaurs? the earth was a large desert, and 60% hotter than today.

http://geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html take the global warming TEST

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2007/100307Swindle.htm see the real answers of global warming, in the GREAT GLOBAL WARMING SWINDLE

2.69231
Average: 2.7 (13 votes)

Got Research?

chickenglobal.jpg

Todays landfills are tommorrows archaeological digs! 
surfacestations.org

Agree and Disagree...

sfma2.jpg

1. - You are absolutely correct that solar radiation controls the Earth's climate. However, to correct your first point, more heat from the sun causes increased evaporation over the oceans (they cover most of the planet, after all,) which leads to MORE clouds. Clouds are both heat storing (as water vapor absorbs infrared radiation) and reflective (they're white), but they're more the latter than the former... (You've stood under a cloud on a hot day... it's cooler!) So, it has been argued that increased heat from the sun will trigger a feedback mechanism and generally cause more cooling due to increased evaporation.

2. - Again, you're right. Man didn't create global warming. There was, indeed, a warm globe long before there was man. However, we've tripled the amount of a heat-storing molecule in the planet's atmosphere in a single century. Simple physics follows that this must have some kind of effect. (It has every time a volcano has done so in the past...) -The only question is: what kind of effect will it be?

3. -The caps aren't expanding... if anything (there is controversy), polar sea ice has recently expanded, which is different.

4. - Good question. However, during the "age of the dinosaurs" the Earth was not a desert.

Take a look for yourself if you're really interested. Don't trust what any media outlet tells you, conservative or liberal. Go to the source. A good place to start would be: http://www.agu.org/pubs/#journals

Cheers.

So, where are you from?

Default Avatar

So, where are you from? Alabama? Kentucky? It seems obvious that you are desperate for attention. Not only did you come onto an environmental site just to post some republican rhetoric in order to get people worked up, but you openly come on here and declare yourself a conservative. Labelling yourself with these broad generalizations does nothing but label yourself as closed minded. You really ought to spend less time posting misinformation and more time finding out what YOU think.

Are you serious?

Me

My suggestion is to watch the movie, "An Inconvenient Truth" by Al Gore. This movie will clearly show you that not only is global warming directly influenced by human actions, but that the ice caps are indeed shrinking and the oceans are already rising. Sure, in the past, the world has faced global warming, as well as global cooling, but the time-spans for those changes to occur happened over millions to billions of years. Today, the changes are being seen right in front of our eyes and are happening a millions times faster than in the past.

hmm

Default Avatar

icecaps are in water right? then the oceans water is already supporting the density of the ice, and therefore even if they melt the oceans supporting the ice would not rise. not saying that all ice caps are floating in water. however, you can prove my theory by putting an ice cube in a glass, fill the glass to the brim, and put it in the microwave. as long as you do not shake the glass and spill the water, you will see that the water will in fact not overflow.

in your experiment, the ice

Default Avatar

in your experiment, the ice doesn't melt because you're boiling off some of the water. try leaving the glass on the counter and then see what happens.

Please, when you cite a

Default Avatar

Please, when you cite a soure, use an ACADEMIC source, not a news cite, an Al Gore video, wikipedia, or anything of that nature,in order to verify your information.

reply to hmm

Default Avatar

The ice at the poles is formed on top of a continent. However, that has no bearing on what you propose. Your theory would work if the volume of the water on the earth was equal to the volume of the water in the glass, and the volume of the ice cube was equal to the volume of the glaciation on earth. However, there is a vast difference. About 90% of the water on earth is frozen, in glaciers. So imagine the cube of ice to be about 9 times the size of the glass, and see if your experiement still works. Even in your first experiment, you forget that global warming fanatics are not cocerned with the earth overflowing, they are concerned with the temperature, and continents being covered with water. Even if the proportions were the same as your ice cube and glass of water, there would still be an overall rise sea level around the earth, just probably not a frightful amount. Proportionally, in earth history, there have been few times when there has been a large amount of ice on earth, so if plate tectonics move the plate underneath the icecaps (it would most likely be gradual), then the ice will melt, and there is nothing that human beings can do about it.

Joseph Goebbels would be proud

Wildman in the tall grass

of the half truths, mangled science and unfounded assumptions on the websites that you reference. Scientists, both conservative and liberal in their political persuasion, have never been more united around the basic conclusions, based on historical and natural records going back 650,000 years, that CO2 and other greenhouse gases including water vapor) are increasing in the atmosphere, trapping more of the sun's heat (sunspots or no) and warming the globe to a degree we've not seen for a really long while. And that it is largely caused this time by human activity. Yes, it was hotter and wetter when the dinosaurs roamed- and if those conditions were present again today, most of our coastal cities and much human population would be under water.

It seems that your ideology is driving your science- and that's dangerous. Just ask the Jews of Europe from 1933-1945. Oh that's right, you can't; they're not here any more, due to a monstrous hybrid of political policy, pseudoscience and ideology. Many more millions than that, however, will suffer and perish in the next century if we do nothing to avert our collision course with GHG increases and climatic change.

You think it's a fraud? To what purpose? Who profits? A vast global conspiracy of over 100 countries, thousands of scientists and most of the world's media? There's no logic and little data behind your statements. Even bona fide conservatives like John McCain, John Warner and Rupert Murdoch admit that climate change is real and the scientific consensus behind it is sound. BTW, the earth is not flat either, despite what your eyes tell you when you look at the horizon. Have you considered that you might just be dead wrong? It's happened to me on occasion.

Why did you bother joining htis site?

goatse7.jpg

What I don’t comprehend is the reasoning your followed that made it seem like a logical idea to come to brand new website, focused entirely on proactive environmental ideas, and spout off your conservative opinions on global warming. There are communities where opinions like yours are revered, but this isn’t one of them. I am not only concerned about your lack of respect for the environment, but also your total lack of respect for your fellow man – all because they don’t share your ideology.

are you serious?

Default Avatar

While there is a natural component of global warming, which no one really disputes, the evidence is overwhelming that human practices have drastically accelerated this phenomenon. It concerns me that people like you are still out there, posting on environmental sites, claiming that global warming is a hoax because you somehow feel that you can justify burning obviously dirty fuels (they emit black smoke that's been proven to cause health issues, or do you dispute that too?) because you are too cheap or too lazy to find an alternative and too short sighted to care about the planet of your children.

you haven't researched your information

Default Avatar

As an enviromental geologist, the Al Gore video twists facts to fit a political agenda. Global Warming exists, but there are also issues that are just as important, if not more, in comparision to Global Warming, such as nuclear waste. The earth will eventually get hotter due to plate tectonics because ice forms when land is at the poles. When the land moves off the poles, the earth will get hotter. However, we should still do our part to conserve, and Global Warming does exist, but people do not have complete control over the earth. The earth is not going to get too hot for people to live on it in the next twenty years. And if it was going too, people cannot stop it, but there is still no reason to emit more than is necessary for survival. BigConservative, while you are correct in not listening to everything that comes from Al Gore, your facts are incorrect. It is landmasses on the poles, and not sunspots.

A combination of factors

sfma2.jpg

Sevenyears,

I agree that alarmism is in all likelihood politically motivated, and civilization may not be in imminent peril. However, it may be worth considering that while landmass position does severely influence atmospheric temperature regulation, (airstreams, etc,) solar cycles also do have a substantial effect on the planet's climate, as do subtle changes in axial tilt and orientation over time, (there have even been hints that the magnetic pole migration over the last 40 years may be related,) and at this point we do not have a firm enough comprehension of planetary feedback mechanisms to determine which effects are truly dominant, lasting, or threatening. From a planetary perspective (i.e. my opinion), all we really know is that 1) tipping points in any planet system do exist, 2) it is possible to permanently upset/alter a planet's climate system, and 3) we should be working furiously to reign in our effects until we do have a better understanding - it's hard enough to live on the world with the climate zones as they are. Imagine a world where suddenly all agriculture is restricted to the Canadian and Siberian tundra....

reply to hey!

Default Avatar

yes, he is, and his information is incorrect. His representation of scientists is an embarassment. Ever wondered why the graphs in his movie don't have numbers? Or why he didn't put his findings in a scienfic journal? However, ad hominem is a fallacious argument.

Featured Thought Leader

SustainableDave

One of the first things to happen when you start storing trash in your basement is that you think a lot about “stuff”. The stuff we buy, the stuff that stuff all com...

Green Tips

  • Don't spring a leak!
    Green Living Handbook
    A leaking faucet or pipe in your home can waste 10 gallons of water a day. Check around your sinks, tubs, showers and toilets for possible leaks, and have them repaired quickly.

Speaking of Green

Latest Post

Two Girls Go Green
Okay, okay so it’s a bit later than expected. But I really wanted to tell you guys about the Green Christmas I had this year.

Iwanted to write and tell you about it earlier, but I couldn’t because Ididn’t want my loved ones finding...

Latest Forum Topic

godsdog

I have an older car that gets about 25 miles to the gallon. I'm thinking about getting a hybrid, but the old car still has a lot of miles left on it. I'm thinking that if I change my driving habits and reduce my miles driven by 30%, that's equivalen...

Latest Poll

Liv Greene
1 at a time- I like to drive as much as possible
0% (0 votes)
2-4- I try to double up
25% (1 vote)
5-7- I'm a real multi-tasker
75% (3 votes)
8-12- I scour my to-do list and plan trips to get it all done
0% (0 votes)
I don't leave the house unless there's a fire!
0% (0 votes)
Total votes: 4