2017-12-07 Powderclimate 1

The Great PG2 Debate. Begin 2017-05-16. End {Still going}.
http://dan-ball.jp/en/bbs/dust2.html
Archived by Amazingdude. Last updated 2017-12-07.
Comments irrelevant to debate have been excluded.
Comments may have been slightly edited to ease readibility, but the message was not altered.

================================================== {Begin great debate!}

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/16 10:35

Climate change is not manmade, is not an issue, and runs in natural cycles. more co2 is good for earth, and fossil fuels are perhaps the most important thing humanity has discovered.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/16 15:40

Natural cycles tend to end with extinctions and/or die=offs if left unchecked, this we have a forestfire safety program despite knowing that forestfires absolutely vital for many species to reproduce effectively.

Natural or not, a change of this scale isn't something civilization will be able to weather without exerting control to significantly slow the rate of change.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/05/17 06:46

TK: We actually do allow natural forest fires (controlled burns) to occur. Forest fires are mainly only largely dangerous when brush accumulates to an unusual degree, or when the weather is unusually hot or dry.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/17 07:18

Yeah that's what I was saying; just because something is within the range of normal, doesn't mean we let it happen uncontrolled. In the case of climate change the only people with any incentive to argue against controlling it are just trying to pinch pennies or otherwise avoid the responsibility of controlling it.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/17 10:41

@TK Educate yourself. Watch these videos. We cant stop it, so why should we worry? The medieval warm period didnt kill everyone

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJWq1FeGpCw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSrjAXK5pGw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49Teja5YNCo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDWEjSDYfxc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkdbSxyXftc

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/17 18:07

You don't have any text sources? I don't want youtube thinking polluting my suggested links more than the Bee Movie already has.

==================================================

Botty McBotface			#fc5Ccs22 2017/05/17 21:36

I, too, bring up controversial scientific beliefs on the forums of Japanese browser game sites.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/18 07:33

@TK
incognito. if u aint willing to see both sides of the issue, you aint informed.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/05/18 09:46

To be fair, if you take the side of the issue with significantly less support from the majority of scientists in the field in question, it's a good chance you're probably not informed either.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/18 12:10

@skyk
the scientists are all paid off to preach the alarmist fear mongering agenda that were gonna cook to death and sink into the ocean. ive researched both sides, believe me.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/05/18 12:15

Amazingdude: I am a scientist. I have spent several years working and spending time with environmental researchers. If you met these people, you would realize how ridiculous it is to claim that they have been paid off. These are the sorts of people that duck tape their socks because they can't afford to buy new ones.

On the other hand, the lobbies that benefit from environmental deregulation, which are the ones promoting anti=climate change, have huge amounts of money at stake.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/05/18 21:33

Are we seriously having the FUCKING global warming argument again???

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/19 04:40

Occam's Razor, ameighzingdude. You're suggesting that it's more likely that 97% of every goddamn climate expert on Earth has been bribed by vast sums of money. Who? Who could possibly have that much money and be willing to throw it around for basically no reason?

==================================================

Molefight				#jZJeWsWO 2017/05/19 05:29

@Torture King
George Soros and the Democrat party, but it's mostly the schools that are brainwashing students.

Also, wouldn't climate change just balance itself out? If it gets too hot it rains, which cools the earth. If co2 levels rise, plants will grow at a faster rate, which will lower the co2 levels.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/05/19 06:22

Unfortunately, neither of those elements would cancel out climate change. In fact, both cause further disruption, through extreme weather and dispersal of invasive plant species.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/05/19 06:58


Human development and activity, especially in developed and developing countries, is unsustainable anyway. Surely we can agree on that.

@Molefight
That's a very simplistic view of things. The earth is far more complex than a single equilibrium. Biological and physical processes are far more diverse than that.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/19 07:46

https://pastebin.com/uT23FX2k

@skyk
What happens is the alarmist industry pays the organization, which tells the scientists to exaggerate their data to make it look like were cooking to death, and the organization pockets the rest

@TK
Its explained in the second video in the list. here it is again https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSrjAXK5pGw. Not every single one is paid off. Only the biggest ones, and they trick people into believing its real using falsified data. The 97% fact only states that climate is changing. It doesnt say anything about the degree of climate change or the effects. Climate is changing, like it always has, and always will, and this brief warm period isnt gonna kill us all. The roman warm period was hotter than today, and the enviornment wasnt all fucked up then, so why would it now? Its climate alarmist exaggering what always happens, and taking advantage of it to gain power.

@molefight
You are absolutely right, and that is one of the primary driving factors in climate fluctuation.

@T&W
Its unsustainable because the enviornmeltaists are not letting us use the full potential of the earth. They are preventing us from using vast amounts of land, just because theres some uninportant thing there. Enviornmentalism is dangerous, and is ultimately going to lead to the extinction of the human species. We cannot advance as a species if we do not use the full potential of the planet we are given. We can support everyone with the earth, if we could use the full earth to our advantage.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/19 09:19

>Calls people alarmist
>"Environmentalism is dangerous and will lead to our extinction"

Sure, we should just fill our waterways with DDT and industrial run=off the way god intended.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/05/19 09:52

What exactly is the "alarmist industry", and how would they have more funding and more to gain than the oil and coal industries?

Also, how can environmentalism lead to extinction? By definition, it will only prevent further expansion.

==================================================

Molefight				#jZJeWsWO 2017/05/19 10:12

Cats have always been aggressive towards me. I never have figured out why.

Pesticides, pollution and genetically modified crops are all threats to our environment. I just don't find the idea that co2 is causing the earth to heat very convincing.

So let's just agree to disagree on climate change.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/05/19 10:35

This isn't really a situation where it's appropriate to "agree to disagree". Only one side can be correct, and if climate change actually is occurring, the consequences of not acting now are going to be very significant in the future.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/19 10:43

https://pastebin.com/UfSyQ6Ak

Jesus crist the char limit is too short

@TK
Yeah, maybe I did bash enviornmentalism too hard. I'm talking more about the preservationists who shut down a whole fucking city just so a few animals can roam free, or who drain an entire lake in a state severely in drought just to save 10 fishes. The point is, reducing the amount of land we can use and making corporations tiptoe around a minefield of pointless regulations will only hurt humanity in the long run.

@skyk
The alarmist industry are the enviornmentalists. They are taking advantage of the natural warming period we are in, and are exploiting it for publicity and support. The alarmist industry began in China to make us afraid of warming earth 1 degree every hundred years, and be less competetitive. The enviornmentlists ate it up, and the myth has persisted to this day, however every prediction they have made has turned out false, and their credibility wanes by the day.

Preventing necessary expansion with a growing population is only a bad thing. Eventually, we will outgrow what the enviornmentalists allow us to use, and then we will run out of food, resulting in conflict, famine, disease, and possibly war. All to save a few animals that would have gone extinct anyway without humans.

except global warming is not happening as you alarmists believe. Humans have no impact. We are just in another warm period, like before. Earth didnt fall into chaos then, so why would it now? Climate change is natural, unstoppable, and a constant force of nature. Our current warm period has levelled off in 1998, and will stay that way for decades to come. The consequences will be small, as this warming is just a typical point in history.

@molefight
I disagree, except on pollution. Personally, I only believe pollution only matters in areas that humans use or live in. Dumping shitloads of waste in the ocean or siberian tundra isnt an issue, since its not affecting anybody. Your asolutely right on the co2 thing. More CO2 is good, as it promotes plant growth, which will mean more food, more animals, more oxygen, etc. co2 does not contribute a significant amount to the greenhouse effect, as that is 95% water vapor. It will take 1000ppm of co2 just to warm up half a degree, which nobody except scientists will notice. CO2 is good for the earth, and fossil fuels are the ultimate energy source, as its very cheap and plentiful, as well as being good for the earth. Back in precambrian time, co2 was over 10,000ppm.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/19 11:00

I'm afraid you're not in very rational company, Molefight.

@Ameighzingdude
The oceans aren't important? Seriously? The thing that produces 95% of the world's oxygen supply and the bottom of the food chain isn't important? Sure the tundra is by and large a wasteland with maybe 15 distinct species per continent most of which are lichens or mosquitoes, but the ocean might as well be the most important part of the natural world.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/19 11:13

I must ask, did anyone watch the 5 videos i listed earlier?

@TK
Of course oceans are important. But theres so much ocean that any pollution is so dilute its barely even traceable. Its like a drop of water in a gas can.
If anything, Molefight is the most rational of us here.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/05/19 11:25

I watched the videos. The "science" in them is horrible. A line graph correlating fossil fuel use with sanitation proves that fossil fuels are eco-friendly? I could show you a graph that correlates ice cream consumption with piracy, but it wouldn't prove causation.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/19 11:37

The Great Garbage Patch begs to differ.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/19 12:14

@skyk
There actually is correlation. More fossil fuels mean more energy production, which makes sanitation possible.

@TK
The "great garbage patch" is only a few hundred feet across. It is vastly exaggerated and abused by alarmsits to promote the false narritave that we are making a trash island.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/05/19 12:22

If you can't understand the difference between correlation and causation, I'm just going to stop discussing this.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/19 12:30

@skyk
Causation means A causes B. Correlation means A and B have a relationship, but neither is caused by the other. Using fossil fuels do not cause increased sanitation. There is, however, an inderect relationship between fossil fuel use and sanitation. Indirect.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/19 12:36

It weighs 7,000,000 tons. Of plastic. The material we use specifically because it's sturdy and lightweight. And it's concentrated in a very specific area, disproving your assertion that whatever we put in the ocean is too diluted to matter. And it's poisoning everything around it because fish are stupid and think the smaller pieces are krill.

Look, how about we go with Molefight's idea to stop before this gets really bad and agree that the best compromise would be to move all our heavy industry to Mars. Earth stops getting polluted, oil/coal dependent industries can fcuk up the air and soil all they want without endangering any of Mars' nonexistent wildlife, and if global warming turns out to be a thing and melts the ice caps then we get some much-needed terraforming out of it instead of living underwater in the year 3000.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/19 12:37

@amazingdude
"I know there is correlation. The problem is that correlation does not equal causation. Not only that, but better sanitation doesn't even mean the same thing as a better environment, it just means more transportation of garbage.

"Indirect relationship" means that there's NOT a correlation.
There's an "indirect relationship" between me and a rock that weighs the same as me. There's an "indirect relationship" between an apple and a candle regarding the fact that neither tastes like a dirty sock. There's an "indirect relationship" between the number of films Nicholas Cage starred in this year and the number of suicides in Mexico this year.

Honestly, do you even read your comments before you post them?

At this point, I'm pretty sure you're not having this discussion "in good faith", so I'm just going to stop involving myself."
~skyk

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/19 15:02

@Vidkunssonn
There is no relationship between your weight and the weight of a rock. There is no relationship between cage movies and mexican suicides. Your just being stupid. Both examples compare 2 completely unrelated things. Explain how nic cage movies cause mexicans to kill themselves.

@TK
Its only one area, not the whole ocean. 99% of the ocean is perfectly habitable. Honestly, who gives a shit about a few fish? It not gonna kill us. Moving industry to mars would not work. Itll be to expensive to ship to earth. If you think were gonna be underwater in 3000 due to human activity, you are insane.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/19 23:38

We eat the fish that eat the fish that eat the fish that eat the plastic. There's no such thing as a closed system and you'd do well to abandon such a bronze age idea.

==================================================

Eta Leonid				#zTSrxt1B 2017/05/20 00:10

@amazingdude He was making an example. Like there is an indirect relationship to me liking burning people and how often the Chechen Oblast rebels. Also, you need to think before you post.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/20 04:08

@amazingdude
The relationship between me and the rock is that we both weigh ~170lbs. The relationship between the apple and the candle is that neither taste like the dirty sock. The relationship between Nick Cages' film rates and the suicides in Mexico is that while there are more movies he's in in a year, there is also more suicides in Mexico.

AS I SAID BEFORE, all of these relationships are indirect, implying there is NOT a correlation. There's a relationship because there's a similarity, and that relationship is indirect because the similarities are not caused by the same force. You were trying to put "indirect relationship" and "correlation" together and make it sound like they mean the same thing, and I was plaining to you what the term you used ACTUALLY means.

You're going off the handle with this. Calling me stupid because you couldn't understand my explanation of the thing you used wrong is a sign you shouldn't be participating in this discussion. Do as @skyk says and stop where you're at now before things start to get worse for ALL of us.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/05/20 06:00

@Greywolf
How is Amazingdude ever going to understand earth's natural processes when he can't even understand what you're saying?

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/20 07:37

https://pastebin.com/xEdD8tp8

@TK
The amount of plastic fish eat is slim to none compared to the mass of the fish.

@eta
His examples were not comparable to the relationship between fossil fuel use and sanitation. I do think before I post.

@vidkunssonn
You clearly do not understand. You are beyond repair. Burning fossil fuels produces energy, and you can use that energy to improve sanitation. Doing A produces B, which is used to do C. Therefore, A and C are related. Its called syllogism. By your logic, if X causes Y and Y causes Z, X and Z are completely unrelated, because X does not directly cause Z.

@T&W
Vid does not understand me. Yes, I do understand natural processes. Warm and cold cycles, carbon cycle, water cycle, etc.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/20 09:12

Your arguments would make more sense if you were a nuclear power shill instead of a combustion power shill, just FYI. The yields are incomparable for how little actually goes into it.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/20 10:34

https://meowbin.com/pastes?id=e5d0h3d5c0

"By your logic, if X causes Y and Y causes Z, X and Z are completely unrelated, because X does not directly cause Z."
T-That... that's not what I said at ALL...

Okay.. I'm going to explain "correlation", "causation", "coincidence", and "syllogism".

>Correlation:
-A and B both have property X.
-They have property X because of C.
-This is what you seem to understand as an "indirect relationship". I do not know this to be indirect, because A and B are both directly related because of C and property X.

>Causation:
-A affects B, and B now has property X.
-B, because of its new property X, affects C, and C now has property Y.
-A does affect C in this situation, because without affecting B, C would not be affected at all.

>Coincidence:
-A and B both have property X.
-A has property X because of C.
-B has property X because of D.
-THIS is what I understand to be an "indirect relationship".

>Syllogism:
-All A's are B's.
-All B's have property X.
-Therefor, all A's have property X.

Basically I'm saying that you're saying burning fossil fuels and improved sanitation have a coincidence about them; no, there is a causation.
The burning of fossil fuels, or A, creates more energy, B, and B allows for improved sanitation, C. A (burning FF) gives B (energy) property X (there's now more of it). B, because it has property X, affects C (sanitation), giving C property Y (it's improved).
That IS causation.

Also, Pastebin sucks. You should try http://meowbin.com

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/20 10:37

@TK
Why is being a "fossil fuel shill" worse than being a nuclear shill. Im not a fossil fuel shill, I'm a climate realist.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/20 14:04

Climate Change or not, burning hydrocarbons in excess makes it impossible to live in urban areas without having to wear a gasmask everywhere in the name of moderately productive output. That's the best-case scenario, a coal plant will always put out toxic gas, but a nuclear plant just makes steam and a lump of waste that can be safely buried under a mountain. Coal/oil/gas are outdated and obsolete, they have been for decades.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/21 03:56

@Vidkunssonn
You are right I guess. You just proved fossil fuels are good.

@TK
Increase efficiency of cars. More efficient cars is a good thing, as it uses less gas, and pollutes less, which means the gas can be used to power more cars and other stuff. Its a win-win. The problem with nuclear is that its too high risk. Look at fukushima and chernobyl. If we can contain nuclear, and make it safe and reliable, then I'll be all for it, but until then, fossil fuels are our best energy.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/05/21 05:33

The thing is fossil fuels ARE good up to the extent when a developing country has begun rapid industrialisation. Look at Britain, Japan, Brazil, when they were industrialising. It wouldn't have happened without fossil fuels. Of course, you get quickly rampant and unsustainable levels of pollution as a country moves into stage 3 of the Demographic Transition Model. This is why China is now the number one investor of alternative energy. This is why postwar Britain introduced restrictions on coal burning. It won't get better unless you change it. We will have rapidly industrialisation in south Asia, in Africa in the upcoming decades. We need more efficient, cleaner and more renewable fuels to stop this. Of course, improving the efficiency of machines is also a measure to take but there will always be a limit.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/21 06:28

Fukushima was struck by both a 9.0 earthquake and a tsunami and despite that no deaths or radiation sicknesses have been reported since it started.
Chernobyl was intentionally built with numerous cut-corners because the USSR generally valued low costs over human lives. The most surprising thing about it's failure was that the news got past the Iron Curtain, and the US govt. hyped it to hell and back for morale reasons.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/21 17:09

@T&W
So basically we shouldnt use fossil fuels because were already industrialized, even though we sitll need energy, and renewables and nuclear have proven themselves unreliable?

@TK
While 99% of nuclear plants may be fine, the 1 event every century will make the nearest 100 miles uninhabitable for millenia. Not a risk I'd be willing to take at the moment, when we have tons of safe, plentiful, efficient energy right under our feet.

==================================================

Hoopig					#JA6SzCa4 2017/05/21 22:05

@amazingdude
Fossil Fuels aren't a clean source of energy, that's why there is this conversation.

==================================================

Toucans					#DEBIj4XU 2017/05/22 03:44

Well, I have done research in school, and there are plenty of other more natural ways to create energy such as wind turbines or geothermal energy.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/22 06:57

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/five-years-after-meltdown-it-safe-live-near-fukushima
It's like none of your opinions are grounded in reality.

They've declared 70% of the affected area to be safe.

==================================================

Sigma					#iWOBESYY 2017/05/22 13:26

@amazingdude
When did he say that renewable/nuclear energy is unreliable? He just said how desperately we need them right now as developed nations.
Also, it looks like Mr. One-percent-of-the-ocean-being-trash-is-perfectly-fine suddenly became Mr. One-percent-of-nuclear-plants-will-eradicate-all-life-on-Earth.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/22 14:40

is that u Esigma?
https://pastebin.com/NjZQDRit

@Hooping
Yes they are. They release CO2 which acts like a natural fertillizer for plants. More CO2 is good for the earth. complex life first emerged back when CO2 was over 10,000ppm. Before CO2 emissions began, it was at 280ppm. Now it's at 400ppm. We are saving the earth. At 150ppm, plants start to die. The notion that CO2 causes global warming is false, as 95% of the greenhouse effect is water. In global warming charts, you will see that the temperature rises first, 800 years before co2 levels. Many scientists predict that we are approaching a coo period. No warming has occured in the last 20 years, yet co2 levels continue to rise. All the climate change in the history of the earth has been 100% natural, not manmade.

Over the past 150 million years, CO2 has been on a steady decline, and without us, co2 would reach dangerously low levels 2 million years from more. So basically, it's a win-win: Cheap, reliable, green energy.

"We are the salvation of life, because we reintroduced CO2 to the atmosphere that was taken out by oceanic life that sucked it up. Without CO2, plants die. And without plants, we die." --Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace

@Toucans
Wind is unreliable, as its inconsistant and you cant store it. Geothermal only works in certain areas.

@TK
Chernobyl is still unsafe.

@Sigma
He never said they are unrelible, I did. He proposed an unreliable idea, and I told  him it was unreliale. Besides, 1% of the ocean being fucked up is no big deal, but 1% of plants making the nearest 100 miles a wasteland is.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/23 04:34

Chernobyl was poorly made even by the standards of a bankrupt developing power, and then when something happened a response was delayed until it was too late to do anything. Properly made plants and response times appropriate for disaster make the the Fukushima outcome.
And really, the first use of the technology was a super-weapon based on not controlling the reaction, one would think the USSR would have the Realpolitik to not risk losing control of an asset like that.

==================================================

ZororarkMan				#W0evNddu 2017/05/23 05:04

Why are we having a debate about energy? It's pointless. (Also, the plants are placed in places that people consider 'in the middle of nowhere'.)

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/23 07:59

@TK
shit happens either way. Had people not sacrificed their lives for chernobyl, half of Europe would be uninhabitable for half a million years. Even today, the plant still needs to be contained. Even Fukushima was bad. How many nuclear plants are working correctly? Id like to see statistics.

@Zororarkman
Because fossil fuels are not the devil, like people want you to think.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/23 11:21

https://www.nei.org/Knowledge-Center/Nuclear-Statistics/World-Statistics

Of course they're not the devil; they're just inefficient at everything that doesn't involve choking everything around them with smog and soot, and somewhat okay at generating energy using materials that we're rapidly running out of.

==================================================

Eta Leonid				#zTSrxt1B 2017/05/24 03:05

I want to see amazingdude tossed into the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/24 06:22

@eta
I'd also like to see you climate alarmists tossed into a barrel of burning oil

@TK
Fossil fuels are efficient, clean, and good for earth. We are releasing the trapped CO2 back into the air to be used by plants. More plants is good for earth. A world without CO2 is a world without life. CO2 is next to sunlight at the bottom of the food chain. All of this and we get shitloads of energy from it. Pollution can be managed by increasing efficiency of cars and power plants. How is using fossil fuels bad? Also, I'm not anti-nuclear, I'm just skeptical. Nuclear is our second best option.

==================================================

hi						#BVKVYk0d 2017/05/24 06:51

killa-byte

==================================================

Sigma					#iWOBESYY 2017/05/24 09:19

But there is such a thing as *too* much CO2. And while the Earth experienced a time when it's CO2 levels were at 10,000 ppm before our time, we have evolved to live in much lower levels and I don't think prolonged exposure of increased levels would be good for our health (I don't know for sure, but suffocation isn't the only danger with this).

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/24 10:26

@Sigma
LOL, we're gonna suffocate to death!! At 1% CO2. If anything, we'd go through a green revolution as the earth is transformed and ecosystems become stronger and we'll experience something like a second cambrian explosion. More CO2 = more plants. More plants = more life. More life = better earth.
Or take out all the CO2 and kill the plants, watch as ecosystems collapse, etc.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/24 11:15

Excess CO2 doesn't make plants grow faster/better. If there was 1000% more CO2 on earth than all the plants on earth required, they'd all grow and reproduce at exactly the same rate as if there were 10% more CO2 than required.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/24 13:43

CO2 is also released as plants die and rot, so don't act as if fossil fuels are the only thing keeping the balance.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/24 15:14

Plants also consume O2 to turn sugar into H2O and CO2 the same way humans do. Even while they're alive, they release CO2 into the atmosphere.

Even with the excess of those other factors, plants can only convert 6CO2 + 6H20 <--> 6O2 + C6H12O6 back and forth so much at once.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/05/25 01:38

There are limiting factors to plant growth. Even if there was a massive increase in CO2, limiting factors such as water, light, temperature and nutrients restrain the rate of photosynthesis to a normal level.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/25 04:50

@Vidkunssonn
Greenhouses amplify CO2 concentration to get plants to grow. The earth has already gotten noticably greener because of increased co2 levels. This is good for the earth, more plants ia always better for the ecosystem. The overall impact of humans on the earth has been overwhelmingly positive. We have used fossil fuels to transform our world and keep us safer from the climate, and fossil fuels are the reason you are alive and typing on a computer.

@TK
Fossil fuels are not the only reason, but they are the largest. Dead plants and other factors DO release CO2, but not as much as fossil fuels. In a way, we are helping the enviornment, as CO2 levels are dropping around the world before humans came along, and would have dipped below 150ppm, which would suffocate plants. We are the saviors of the planet, by releasing co2 that has been trapped in the crust.

@T&W
With this natural warm period, higher temperatures means more evaporation off the ocean, which means more clouds. More clouds means more rain, which means more water for plants. Another limiting facter has gone up. While nutrients might be rare in one area, they might not be in another. More CO2 will allow for more plants to grow in some areas. More is more.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/25 05:20

... So you acknowledge that plants give off CO2 as they die and that with low levels of CO2 plants die, but you don't acknowledge that this is an obvious cycle we don't need to help along?

Also your entire argument thus far has been that humans cannot have more than a negligible impact on the climate, why are you now saying that our actions are the only thing keeping the climate from killing us?

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/05/25 05:40

@amazingdude
...you know that no matter how high the temperatures rise or how much it rains, the limiting factor of sunlight will stay not change. The rate of the flow of the transpiration stream is controlled by limiting factors as well. They will not increase. Furthermore, the amount of rain that falls will vary significantly due to global weather patterns. The most rain will fall on places where water is already a plentiful resource.

Anyways, you keep talking about carbon dioxide as a gas. What do you have to say about methane, nitrous oxides and sulphur dioxide as gases?

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/25 06:18

@amazingdude
No... A greenhouse's purpose is to keep the plants inside nice and warm. It has no other effects on the plants other than it keeps them dry on rainy days. All a greenhouse is is a transparent structure that absorbs heat. That's why the Greenhouse Effect has it's name: it's just keeping heat given off by sunlight on the earth. It does not affect the concentration of any gas in the air.

Fossil fuels are not the reason I am alive today. The only overall impact that they have on me is that they power the devices that make me less bored.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/26 06:50

https://pastebin.com/TKDGXf5g

@Vidkunssonn

So if a greenhouse only keeps plants warm, why do they put more co2 into the greenhouses then? Oh right, so the plants grow better. If not for fossil fuels, you probably would have died in the hospital or some disease. Fossil fuels allow us to be safe from the enviornment.

@TK
Why shouldnt we help the cycle when helping would be good for the earth? Yes, we do impact the earth, not the climate.

@T&W
That doesnt mean that more co2 wont be good for earth. Besides the other gasses have such a small impact on the climate its near undetectable.

==================================================

Powdermaster			#fAh8IkLs 2017/05/26 07:49

{Amazingdude} makes a good point about climate change. It is all natural. You all are just stuck up with what the scientific community says.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/26 08:01

http://i.imgur.com/dliQRoP.png

[!] [!] [!] [!] [!] TRANSCRIBE [!] [!] [!] [!] [!]

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/26 08:07

@amazingdude
No.
No.
They don't do that.

My grandmother has a greenhouse, and the plants in it are some of the greenest house plants I've ever seen, and all she does to them is water them. There's no gaseous concentration difference between inside the greenhouse and outside the greenhouse. They're green because they're kept in a warm environment with plenty of light and given plenty of water, not because of excess CO2.

@Torture King
I'm sorry, I placed a couple of arrays in the wrong places. It should work properly, now.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/26 13:47

lets go
https://pastebin.com/T9bdpqNR

@Vidkunssonn
You dont HAVE to pump co2 into a greenhouse, but it definitely helps. You dont need fertillizer to grow grass, but it definitely helps.

If somebody removed the comments manually, they would remove ones with filter bypasses like shit.

@TK
CO2 is not a toxic gas. It is the base of all life on earth. Actually, Earth was already breaking, and we came in and fixed it. I'm not an "oil ostrich", I am not funded by anybody. I dont suck big oil's dick. I legitimately believe climate change is natural and good. Your false data would never fool me.

You have to understand that individual scientists arent bribed. They are told that climate change is manmade, and will cherry pick data that fits their hypothesis, and since they believe in the hoax, they will believe their data. Its not that people are paid off, its that they genuinely believe the crap the media throws them. These people, except the real top heads like CEOs, legitimately believe humans cause climate change, only the top dogs are in on the hoax. They create the idea that were all gonna die if we dont follow their wishes. They (climate change alarmists) use fear mongering and false doomsday predictions to scare the public into believing it. Look at all the predictions about ice and temperature that came out false.

Real data shows there has been no warming since 1998. They go back and change the weather records to create a false sense of warming, and changed how they measure temperatures to produce warmer readings. If you take temperature in cities, its gonna be hotter than in nature because cities absorb all the heat. Its not rocket science. The top dogs use these techniques and ship it to everyone and say the earth is warming exponentially, but in reality, warming has leveled off in the last 20 years. Because of a grand solar minimum, we are expected to enter an ice age by 2050. Solar activity deflects cosmic rays, and cosmic rays have been known to affect cloud cover. More cosmic rays = more clouds. You really think that great ball of fire in the sky has less impact on global climate than burning a few gallons of dead plant material?

Warming started at the end of the little ice age, hundreds of years before fossil fuel emissions started, and if you look back in time over billions of years, you will see that co2 levels and temperature have no real correlation, and co2 has been on the decline for 150 million years and wouldve reached dangerous levels without human intervention. We got within 30ppm of the minimum co2 for plant survival during the last glacial maximum. The medieval warm period was as warm as today. Roman warm period was hotter than today. Look back at co2 levels and temperature over the past 100000 years or so, and you will find that co2 levels rise 800 years after tempetature. How can the "cause" happen after the effect? Sea levels rose hundreds of feet in the last 15,000 years, and much faster than today, and we didnt all die. Species werent all dying, earth wasnt frying up, so why should it now, under lesser warming conditions? It makes no sense. Runaway greenhouse is nonsense, as it should have happened back in the cambrian period with co2 over 10,000ppm.

"Global warming" is really just part of a natural climate cycle. In the 70s, it was global cooling, but then the earth started warming, so it became global warming. After warming stopped in 1998, its now climate change. Now the climate isnt changing, its now extreme weather. These people are full of shit. Do not trust them. Trust god emperor trump to set us free from the chains of enviornmentalists and let us use the full potential of out planet to our advantge and begin a second industrial revolution. God bless trump. The enviornmentalists took advantage of this natural warm period and spread fear to gain funding. They run off of this hoax. To believe this natural warming is caused by human activity and is killing the earth is delusionalism and insanity. Spread the truth.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/26 15:10

Nitrogen does not have the same effect on plants as CO2 does. Plants need CO2 to grow. Nitrogen only helps plants grow, but like CO2, there's only so much a plant can use at once, so any excess goes unused.

==================================================

Avo						#LSR5NOs7 2017/05/26 17:41

Amazing dude Wow thank u for explaining it! i was believing the hoax for a while until you introduced me to the real view

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/27 02:34

https://pastebin.com/kn4SX5Au

Fallacy after fallacy, do you even listen to yourself?

1) If breathing it harms you, it is in fact toxic.

2) Just because you're partially made of something, doesn't make it good by itself in all situations.
Chemistry isn't nearly as forgiving as that.

3) I never said you were funded, ostriches are associated with a fictional behavior of reacting to danger by burying their heads in sand. You are at least partially aware of how chemistry and physics work, but you're still clinging to ludicrous closed-system ideas like "it's only a little ocean, that won't affect anything" because you don't want to consider being wrong about something.

4) Just because something is natural, doesn't make it good for you. Arsenic is natural, DO NOT EAT ARSENIC.

5) Your faith in humanity is astounding, falsifying data is a serious charge you know. Do you have any proof? I ask because rational people don't cave to blatant witchhunts.

6) Which CEOs exactly would benefit from an increase in production costs? I'm all for anticorporatism, but surely you can see that they'd not want everyone to demand that they lose money?

7) You keep saying things like "real data" and "hoax" but then you don't give us any good sources, how are we to know which data is good? Do you expect us to cherrypick the 3% of climate studies agreeing with what you're saying with no sense of irony?

8) Some of the most damning GCC evidence is from soil samples taken in the arctic- far away from any major city that would absorb heat.

9) Cosmic rays are also harmlessly reflected by the magnetosphere, if at any point that stopped being the case, all electronics the world over would be fried in the best case scenario, in the worst case, the sky would flash magenta before everything dies. They're somewhat rare and not responsible for the weather.

10) We don't know how many species went extinct during those periods because prescientific-method societies were rather bad at science.  Pliny the Elder published a book saying that there was no more than 273 types of fish in the ocean and nobody called him out on it.

11) Trump is a gameshow host that whines on Twitter when Broadway makes fun of him, not a god.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/27 04:25

https://pastebin.com/S4hMtbJS

@Vidkunssonn
CO2 has the same effect as nitrogen on plants

@Avo
Its great that I convinced you otherwise of the liberal hoax. Thank you for taking me seriously.

@TK
So much wrong with your response. Nothing was a fallacy.

1. Breating too much of anything is toxic. If you breathe too much oxygen, you die. Is oxygen toxic then? Same with water.

2. I never said everything we are made of is good for us.

3. So your saying that i am scared of manmade climate change, so i pretend its false? wtf is this shit? I'm dead serious about my responses, I really believe them.

4. Natural doesnt mean its good for you, you are right on that, but co2 is a net good for all life.

5. Look at climategate, theres emails discussing faking data. Even the government is in on it.

6. Enviornmental groups. They fool everyone into thinking humans are the devil and the world is doomed, and we all get scared and act in their favor. Why are you anticorporate? Corporations are good. You a communist then? Communists killed 10x more than nazis did.

7. That 97% thing is misleading. 97% believe the climate is changing, but they disagree on whether its humans, its natural, or if its bad. 97% of people believe vaccine side effects are real, but it doesnt mean that all vaccines cause autism.

8. Ice core samples are reliable, except they show nothing aout the cause. Yes, they show warming and co2 levels. No, the co2 does not cause more temperature. Look at the graph. co2 comes after temperature changes.

9. Some cosmic rays pass though. Weaker sun = more cosmic rays reach earth. more rays reach earth = more get thru.

10. That exactly proves my point. We cannot prove more species are going extinct now if we dont know past extinction rates during past warm periods.

11. Trump is a good leader, no doubt. Making america great again.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/27 06:45

https://pastebin.com/cy6nt2Fk

No it doesn't. Plants do not use nitrogen to turn water into sugar and oxygen.

@amazingdude
1) He never specified that a certain amount of the thing hurts you it's toxic, he said that if you breathe it AT ALL and it hurts you, it's toxic.

2) You DID say that CO2 is the basis of all life on earth, which is the CRINGIEST thing I've ever heard about CO2. It is not the basis for OUR lives, because we don't use it. We exhale it to get rid of it. We cannot live off of CO2, which is the exact opposite of what "the basis of life" means.

3) That is EXACTLY how you appear, though. Not to one thing he has said have you made a rebuttal or have you debunked/explained it to help your side of the argument; you just plant another unsupported "fact" on your side of the field.

4) OVERALL, yes, maybe, it is good for us, but it still harms people all the time. I.E. China.

5)"Even the government is in on it" What are you, a hippy degenerate 70's kid? EVIDENCE, PLEASE, FRONT AND CENTER! Also, things labeled with the suffix "-gate" is labeled that because it is FAKE NEWS. I.E. Pizzagate.

6) EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE!

7) Refer to #6, And NO vaccine causes autism. Autism is entirely genetic. The only cause of autism is stupid parents who do stupid things while they're pregnant with the children and they come out autists.

8) Heat diffuses a lot faster than CO2 diffuses. Large CO2 emissions are dangerous because there's large masses of CO2 that isn't diffusing fast enough lying where people have to breathe. It's toxic because the CO2 levels in the breathed air are rising, lowering the O2 levels (because CO2 weighs more than O2, the CO2 moves below the O2, like water and oil) and we're stuck at the bottom with it. The arctic doesn't have that same problem because there's no large CO2 emissions in the arctic. The majority of the CO2 in the arctic soil comes from far away places, LONG after the heat gets there because, again, it diffuses MUCH slower than heat.

9) I don't even WANT to know what you're talking about here.

10) What point? How does this relate to anything you're saying?

11) Trump isn't that great of a leader. He's just better at leading than Hillary, which is really the only reason I'm happy he's in the White House.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/05/27 08:07

In addition to what Vidkunssonn said, I'm anti-corporatist because I'm pro-freemarket. Corporations are okay in my book as long as they still play by the same rules as any small business and don't kill competition or get special treatment from the government when they fail to adapt to the public's changing demands. Adam Smith (1723-1790) had a lot of negative things to say about corporatism, so I recommend any of his works if you're interested in more on that.

==================================================

Toucans					#DEBIj4XU 2017/05/27 08:14

REASONS WHY I DON'T AGREE WITH amazingdude
Greenhouse gasses can negatively effect the earth to. Carbon Dioxide isn't only good, it kills the ozone layer and lets in UV rays, causing the world to warm up to unnatural temperatures. Polar ice is melting and the sea level is also rising, this is known as GLOBAL WARMING. Global warming harms plants and animals like in the colder areas, the polar bears must get to land sooner because of melting glaciers. FOSSIL FUELS ARE NOT A CLEAN SOURCE OF ENERGY. Smog caused by burning fossil fuels are also harming the environment, and people in certain areas must wear masks because of this. FOSSILS FUELS ARE NOT GOOD.

I also forgot that carbon dioxide is part of acid rain, which is not good at all which is quite obvious. I'm going to make an upload about all of this! And it will explain what I believe, which is science. Who knows? Maybe global warming does not exist, but I believe it does. BTW, "Carbon dioxide is a colorless gas with a density about 60% higher than that of air that is odorless at normally encountered concentrations. Carbon dioxide consists of a carbon atom covalently double bonded to two oxygen atoms."

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/27 08:55

CO2 does not damage the ozone layer, those'd be CFCs that do that.

==================================================

Sigma					#iWOBESYY 2017/05/27 09:10

The pastebin wars.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/27 11:03

Volume 2

@Toucans
Acid rain is caused by sulfur and nitrogen oxides, not CO2.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/27 13:11

https://pastebin.com/CwQ31aJY

@Vidkunssonn
1. We breathe in 400ppm of co2 every breath. That doesnt hurt us, so by this definition, co2 is non-toxic.

2. Sunlight is also the basis of life on earth. CO2 and sunlight are the basis of plant life, which is the basis for animal life. If we take all the co2 out of the air, we fucking die, because all the plants would die, and we would starve. Pretty essential for life.

3. All of my replies have been rebuttals. I watch hour long interviews with climate realists every day. I'm not scared of manmade climate change. How can i be scared after all ive said against it?

4. That gray shit is not CO2. Thats other toxins.

5. Climatic Research Unit email controversy. Most gates are actually real. Honestly, I wouldnt be surpirzed if pizzagate was real.

6. Eco-terrorism. Greenpeace, PETA, ELF, etc. All this pro enviornmentalist crap. Its anti-humanism at this point.

7. Vaccines do not cause autism, i only used that as an example of a consensus being misleading. Yes, there is a small chance of vaccines causing rashes and fatigue or mild sickness, but that doesnt mean they cause autism, just like the small chance that humans MIGHT contribute to 0.5 percent of warming in a century, but that doesnt mean humans cause all climate change. Consensus does not equal fact. 97% of scientists once thought the earth was flat. 97% of scientists once thought the sun orbits the earth. 97% of scientists once thought gravity wasnt real.

8. CO2 is non toxic, see #1.

9. Just dismissing it as fake science?

10. He said that we cannot track extinctions in the past. We cannot prove more species are going extinct now if we dont know past extinction rates during past warm periods.

11. He's a great leader, he's done a good job so far. He's trying, but cucked congress is blocking him.

@TK

Ahh, makes sense now. I thought you meant anticorporate as in the government should control everything. I agree with your stance about free market.

@Toucans

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJWq1FeGpCw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49Teja5YNCo

I posted those before, but they explain very well how fossil fuels are clean energy and beneficial for humans. Smog is because their cars are inefficient. doesnt make all fossil fuels bad. You are one of those people who dont want humans to advance as a species, and want us to resort back to tribal societies to save the earth. You are anti-human. Limiting the advancement of a civilization to preserve their planet is like a computer limiting its power to preserve its components. Melting ice is due to natural warming, and it has happened before, and will continue to happen. Climate is always changing. Stop bitching about it and learn to adapt. You cant change the climate, but you can adapt to the climate. You are like a parasite of the human civilization.

@Sigma
I like that idea :)

==================================================

Toucans					#DEBIj4XU 2017/05/28 07:35

People are listening? I thought nobody cared. SOMEONE NOTICED YAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAY. WWWWOOOOOOWWWWWEEEEEEE

I still dont like Co2

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/28 10:54

@Toucans
Well I guess you hate life then

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/28 16:13

https://pastebin.com/iv5Hu06R

1) He's talking about the OTHER gases that burning coal releases, you moron.

2) CO2 is not the most important gas on the face of the planet. Plants need CO2 just as much as they need O2, H2O, and other things. Stop worshiping CO2.

3) Your "rebuttals", as you call them, are you practically saying "No it's not" to everything we say. You use no evidence to support yourself, you don't explain or describe anything.. Do you KNOW how discussions work?

4) Yes, there are other toxins, but CO2 is still entirely unhelpful in that situation.

5) You're a fucking nut. I bet you're a fan of Alex Jones.

6) That's good. Now, do the OTHER step YOU are supposed to take and GIVE THE EVIDENCE. This is an internet discussion. You're not doing a good job by giving me a list of things to Google.

7) Yes, now it's the other way around. 97% of people believe the earth is a sphere, these days, and that's dropping because people don't know how vast our human scientific discovery has become. They take a look at a single statistic or geometry equation and change their entire view-point on the earth, and it's pretty saddening and pathetic. (POINT OF INFERENCE: I whole-heartedly believe the earth is a sphere.)

8) Never said it was. Not once in that entire paragraph.

9) No, I'm dismissing it as unrelated. Stop assuming shit and actually READ what I'm saying.

10) It's unhelpful to your "point" to say "nobody knows".

11) You're a sheep.

"You are one of those people who dont want humans to advance as a species, and want us to resort back to tribal societies to save the earth."
What the fuck is wrong with you? You don't know anything about Toucans and here you are calling him a wannabe-Neanderthal. I get trying to stress your belief, but you've gone too far. This needs to stop.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/28 21:17

@Pastebin Wars
https://pastebin.com/CEyqtA3m

1. Such as? What other gasses are there and what do they do?

2. It may not be THE most important, but its pretty damn close to it. We should rightfully celebrate co2 for the life it gives, as without it, the earth would be a dead planet.

3. Have you read my 5 paragraph essay i posted a while back? That whole thing explains my stance and refuts all your arguments.

4. Unhelpful does not equal bad.

5. I dont watch alex jones. I like to keep my sanity.

6. Your not doing a good job either by not googling them.

7. It's an oblate spheroid.

8. "It's toxic because the CO2 levels in the breathed air are rising, lowering the O2 levels"

9. So cosmic rays affecting cloud cover is completely unrelated to the climate?

10. In that case, it was helpful to say nobody knows. We cant confirm modern extinction rates are higher if we dont know past rates.

11. I'm a sheep for liking our leader? You're also a sheep for blindly following what the government tells you about climate change without questioning it.

12. I maybe went too far attacking him. I was attacking enviornmentalists, not him specifically. I apologize, toucans. Didnt mean it directly at you. Some radical enviornmentalists are equalivalent to wannabe neanderthals.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/28 22:41

https://pastebin.com/yu43PVse

1) CO, Sulfer and Nitrogen Oxides, and sometimes even Mercury and other heavy metals. You should know that coal ore is not 100% carbon when we burn it. It's closer to 80%, and the rest of it IS toxic when put in gaseous form from being burned.

2) It deserves as much celebration as dirt and penicillin.

3) More unsupported theories *claps*

4) It's still pushing O2 out of the ground air higher up where we aren't. That's detrimental.

5) Thank God. I'd've been more tempted to not respond if you were.

6) If I were to Google them, 99% of the results I get would be about how GOOD those things are. I shouldn't have to Google them in the first place, you're supposed to give me the evidence that supports that they're bad, not have me go look for it on my own, because chances are I won't find it.

7) I'm willing to accept the poles are flat, not the entire planet.

8) k

9) It's irrelevant to burning coal.

10) Yes, but the other side of that coin says you also can't say it ISN'T true.

11) I don't listen to anything the government says unless it's about new laws or military related. The government's purpose is to keep us humans from killing each other, so I only pay attention when the threat of other people hurting me is related.

You're a sheep for believing that Congress isn't suppressing all of his decisions because they're actually bad. Congress suppresses his ideas because they're either unconstitutional or just bad politics. He's better than Hillary because he actually has leadership experience, which Hillary does not, but the leadership of a company is not all the same as the leadership of a country.


==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/29 13:56

@Vidkunssonn
I prefer java as well, however if everybody uses html5, then html5 is required for physics to work as uploader intended. Java is more stable IMO.

@Pastebin wars
https://pastebin.com/pnd2h2Fk

1. The amount of those chemicals are small and insignificant in coal.

2. Because the very chemical that makes life possible deserves as much credit as dirt.

3. Start refuting it then.

4. 0.04% CO2 isnt gonna displace any oxygen. If anything, its gonna displace mostly nitrogen, sice air is 78% nitrogen.

6. You havent cited any sources. I've cited 5 or so videos so far, more than you. Heres another: https://www.adl.org/education/resources/reports/ecoterrorism

7. The earth is mostly spherical, but technically an oblate spheroid. In a sense, the poles are slightly flatter.

9. But its relavant to climate change. The whole argument is about climate change, not oil.

10. Whats more likely. Species going extinct at alarming rates, or species going extinct at same rates as past?

11. You get your info from government funded sources, you might as well just get it straight from the government. Trumps policies are not bad. Congress just hates him because hes not part of the machine

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/30 02:15

https://pastebin.com/WdvhEDwk

I'm getting sick of using this site. This is not the supreme pasting site there is.

1) 20% is insignificant?

2) Exactly, but you're giving it TOO MUCH praise.

3)
>"Real data shows there has been no warming since 1998."
According to NASA, all but one of the 16 hottest years in the last 134 years were after 2000.

>"You really think that great ball of fire in the sky has less impact on global climate than burning a few gallons of dead plant material?"
They work together.
CO2 is a greenhouse gas, meaning it traps heat emitted from the sun on the earth to keep it warmer.

>"To believe this natural warming is caused by human activity and is killing the earth is delusionalism and insanity."
WE are the ones putting the majority of the CO2 into the atmosphere.
What's delusional and insanity is to exclude our behaviors and actions from what's considered "natural". We are a part of nature, and all of our doings are natural as well. If we were aliens from another planet, THEN you could say we aren't one with nature.

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
http://www.livescience.com/topics/global-warming
https://www.nrdc.org/stories/global-warming-101
http://www.livescience.com/59096-animated-temperature-spiral-gets-update.html

4) It's a LOT more than 0.04% around coal plants.

6) You used exactly one source: PragerU. PragerU is entirely conservative, meaning they are against any form of change, despite the harm keeping down the same path might bring. They also don't cite sources.

9) I joined this conversation talking about fossil fuels.

10) As you said, "nobody knows".

11) "Government funded" is not the same as "Government influenced". You treat everything funded by the government as if the government directly makes them change their data to support false claims. Alex Jones is one to believe like this. I trust the government only to keep me safe from the rest of the world and the stupid people in the cities, but I seriously doubt they make all climate research companies change their data and research to suggest things that say we're all going to die.

==================================================

Toucans					#DEBIj4XU 2017/05/30 02:43

Are we finally done arguing about Co2 and stuff?

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/30 03:07

That's entirely up to @amazingdude.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/30 05:00

@Toucans
not until everyone else is done. I agrue till the other gives up.

@pastebin wars
Fine, I'll use meowbin. Did you create this?

https://meowbin.com/pastes?id=9209vc3c1f

1. They exaggerate the toxins. Coal is 95% hydrocarbons, the same thing that makes up oil and gas.

2. Because it deserves praise for giving animal life to earth?

3. First off, you trust NASA, who gets its funding by scaring the public. They're no better than asking Exxon, or asking a cigarette company about lung cancer. NASA benefits from the fear.

CO2 is not a significant greenhouse gas, and thats where the hole in their data is. Yes, we dump shitloads of CO2 into the air, but it doesnt cause warming. While yes, we technically are natural, most people exclude human activity from natural occurance. Human activity does not cause climate change.

NASA is unreliable, as stated before. Livescience doesnt cite sources either. NRDC has committed ecoterrorism in the past.

4. So your saying that people are at risk of suffocation around coal plants? OK, it may be a little higher, maybe 1%, but thats only immediately around the plant. There wont be much of a difference further away.

6. So just because its conservative, makes it unreliable? Your sources are liberal, and want us to change everything, even what's not broken. No one source is better than another. It all depends on reliability, not being better. Have you even critically analyzed the videos?

Sources:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Global_warming (This one cites sources)
http://humanevents.com/2014/03/24/the-carbon-dioxide-level-is-dangerously-low/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0Z5FdwWw_c

9. You wanna talk fossil fuels? Fossil fuels have transformed humanity from a tibal species into a intelligent civilization. Fossil fuels have saved billions of lives and made more billions possible. They are a cheap, plentiful, reliable energy source, that makes modern life possible. Renewables just aren't there yet. Wind and solar are weak and unreliable. Hydro is limited to only rivers and lakes, and nuclear is too high risk. I've gotten a little less harsh about nuclear once I started researching. The problem is that enviornmentalists dont want us to use fossil fuels, because they are supposedly contributing to climate change, and they are unnatural. The energy industry powers all other industries, and we need cheap, reliable, plentiful energy to power our society and advance as a species, but enviornmentalists wont let us. They're anti-human at this point. I fully support fracking.

10. Nobody knows, so why be so pessimistic about it?

11. The government has an interest in making us fear the climate. I dont know why so many people compare me to alex jones. I only watched like 3 of his videos and I was like "This dude is insane".

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/30 09:32

@amazingdude
Yes, there's a Discord server dedicated to the entirety of Dan-Ball. You'll have to DM me and I'll have to give you the invite link like that.
Xyvyrianeth#7823

>"I agrue till the other gives up."
lol or you scare the other away with your ignorance of basic science.

And no, I did not create Meowbin. I've told you this already. I do know the creator, though. Lovely gal. She taught me the majority of what JavaScript I know.
She's also redoing the entire site, this time with an attempt to add accounts so we can edit pastes we upload to it, so we got that to look forward to!

Also, please be sure to make the paste private if it's just a block of text directed at one person in particular. I am at least glad you named it, though.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/31 05:46

Did you respond to my argument, or do you give up?

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/31 10:14

@amazingdude
I've done neither. I get tired of arguing with people about subjects the other person hardly knows anything about. All they know is their own opinion, but as for any science of the matter, they're about as ignorant as they come. That's you in this argument. You know what scientists have researched and the data they've collected and published, but based on some of the crap you've said, you don't even understand what they're actually saying. Learn how chemistry works and I'll resume the argument.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/05/31 12:56

@Vidkunssonn
I've looked into the issue, and I have formed my opinions based on that, just like you looked into it and formed your opinions. I'm just as ignorant as you: You blindly trust the pro-alarmist side and never acknowledge the alternate side. I've acknowledged the alarmist side and debunked it. Send me a article, and I'll debunk it.

Also, I've taken and passed Chemistry in high school. I know how chemistry works.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/05/31 13:12

How much of a moron do you think I am? You think I'm blindly believing everything I think is true simply because it doesn't match with your opinion. You keep assuming shit that isn't true or you know nothing about. I'm not some liberal that's closed-minded about everything I disagree with; I listen to the other side of everything I believe in and form conclusions based on evidence both sides bring forward.

And I accept your challenge. Debunk all 15 references found here:
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

If you discredit NASA as an unreliable source simply because they're government-funded, I'm never speaking to you about this again, due to the fact you're a dumbass.

Everyone, If you want to stay on my good side, don't assume anything about me.

==================================================

COMMENT BOT				#CYDOyoro 2017/05/31 13:53

Wow, you are all retarded. Good day and good night ;_;

==================================================

Hoopig					#JA6SzCa4 2017/06/01 02:17

I like how we are arguing over climate change on a pastebin. Like a pastebin is going to change the world

==================================================

Sigma					#iWOBESYY 2017/06/01 09:53

I remember how that hacking thing about the movie The Interview involved a message over pastebin. That didn't exactly change the world, but it got pretty close.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/01 11:53

@vidkunssonn
I'm still working on debunking NASA. I've gotten 7 sources debunked, gonna finish later tonight.

==================================================

Fake Vidkunѕѕonn		#zGN4CiFF 2017/06/01 12:09

@amazingdude
You do not need to debunk NASA's references. I have looked into the science, and confirmed that climate change is in fact 100% natural, and possibly beneficial for the earth.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/01 12:41

WTF, that isn't me...

==================================================

Chez					#N1hn3TpZ 2017/06/02 12:58

You can't post 3x in a row. Wtf. Even if he got haked it shouldn't have let u post

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/03 02:03

It wasn't a hack, someone made a new account with the 's's replaced with unicode characters that only look like 's's but aren't really 's's.

==================================================

Fake StarTrekЅpock		#N1hn3TpZ 2017/06/04 12:01

Hi yall

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/06/05 01:10

Once again the comments section has degenerated

==================================================

Fake Vidkunѕѕonn		#N1hn3TpZ 2017/06/05 02:27

My dick is tiny. Please make it bigger.

==================================================

The Muskadillo			#S7aj3ZLU 2017/06/05 02:29

the startrekspock is a fake account. click on the name. the only post is the get rert thing.

==================================================

Fake Vidkunѕѕonn		#N1hn3TpZ 2017/06/05 04:38

No its not retard

==================================================

amazingdud				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/05 09:28

Why does all the fun stuff happen while im on vacation? Vidkunssonn and STS get haced/faked/whatever

==================================================

Fake amazingdude		#vSbAiI0H 2017/06/05 09:59

It's really not that hard to fake someone, if you don't worry about the ID #.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/06/05 09:59

I mean, the name isn't in bold, but most people don't notice that anyway, in my experience.

==================================================

Fake amazіngdude		#zKjtz4RH 2017/06/05 11:26

@Vid
I'm sorry for denying climate science. I was wrong all along. I'm just a retarded cuckservative who eats up what fox tells me without questioning it.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/05 12:01

i honestly cannot tell who's real and who's fake.

==================================================

StarTrekSpock			#MSszoBWk 2017/06/05 13:36

Copy the person's name before the "hacked accounts" started showing up and f3 to search for the names. The fake accounts have different names from the real ones. Although I can't see it, f3 can differentiate between them

==================================================

Fake Vidkunѕѕonn		#USLP5jMW 2017/06/05 15:09

I'm the real vidkunson!

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/08 10:03

@vidkunssonn
tbh ive lost interest in debunking nasa, its just the same crap all over again. I'll post what I have, I managed to debunk 6 of the references (one was a duplicate, one I just could not understand). I know its not all of them, I just lost interest in finishing the job.
https://meowbin.com/pastes?id=f021h74308

I knew you were gonna post the NASA article. Shoulda made it an exclusion. Mistakes on me, then.

1. The graphs on page 3 do not show the full picture. Graph a on page 3 only shows the last 150 years, well after warming began. It does not suggest human activity is the cause. The same with graph b, sea levels have been rising since the last glacial maximum, 15,000 years ago. Graph c and d shows greenhouse gasses, except their potency is being exaggerated in models and predictions, and the predictions do not reflect reality. Yes, sea levels are rising, and ice caps are melting, but they are not anything unusual. During the medieval warm period, there was less ice than today. There are viking burial sites currently underneath permafrost, that were not under permafrost while they were in use, from 1000-1400, the duration of the medieval warm period. Antarctic ice is growing, however, and is at record maximums. While yes, greenhouse gasses do warm the earth, the amount they do in reality is much less than they do in the predictions, because the predictions run on the assumption that CO2, CH4, etc. are stronger than they actually are. The impacts are also exaggerated. Because the earth is getting slightly warmer, there should be more land usable for farming the further north you go, because that land now isnt too hot for farming. While some species are at risk, more species will have their habitats expanded, since there are less species in colder regions.

Ocean acidification is not possible, as the ocean is already alkaline. To turn the ocean acid, you would need more than all the CO2 on earth into the oceans. The oceans are massive. Extreme weather events are actually down in the last 100 years. Hurricanes, tornados, fires, floods, droughts, tsunamis are all down in the past 100 years. Even if they become more common, by the use of fossil fuels (discussed earlier), we will be able to deal with them better. The future of the climate is unlikely to be much worse than observed in the past, as the climate is not changing any faster than the past. Greenhouse gas emissions will go up, but the effects of such emissions will be very small compared to natural climate change by the sun or other factors. Most of what is said in the report is true of any warm period. The earths climate is always changing, and life has and will survive. More heat waves will happen, as have in past warm periods. There will be more rainfall, as a warmer earth means more evaporation, meaning more clouds and more rainfall. Food shortages could be avoided if we adapt to a changing climate.
Taking advantage of now-usable land further north to use for farmland, and higher CO2 levels would mean more plant growth. At current levels, plants are starving CO2. Species are able to adapt to changing climate, otherwise they would have gone extinct already. Current extinction levels are no higher than in the past.

There is no such thing as "irreversible climate change." The earth was once much warmer and with much higher CO2 levels than today, and its certainly not like that anymore. Besides, an asteroid can come and fuck it all up at any time.

2. This is true, except that the amount of CO2 required to produce a huge temperature change would be so high, we'd have to turn all the carbon on earth into CO2 to even get close to that happening.

3. *Sigh*, the hockeystick. This is an example of manipulated data. They took samples in many different areas, but only a few of them didnt show the roman and medieval warm periods. And they used only those ones to make the graph, and if you counted all the samples, you would see those warm periods on the graph. The hockeystick has been debunked numerous times in the climate realist community. The models exaggerate the effects of the greenhouse gasses. In reality, the effects of increased greenhouse gasses are minimal and not enough to cause a noticable change.

4. This source is identical to #1, which has already been debunked.

5. Like I said before, the modern temperature rise is nothing unusual in terms of the Earth's history, and has started rising well before industrialization began. So is sea level, which has been rising at a constant rate since the end of the last major glaciation. Because the earth is warming, melting ice and snow is expected. This is typical of all warming periods. The effects of all of these are being exaggerated. Climate models run on the assumption that greenhouse gasses are much stronger than they actually are, and that is where the predicted temperature spike comes in. CO2 is actually a weak greenhouse gas. More CO2 is good for the earth but I'm not gonna "worship" CO2 here. And in the solar activity graph, I definitely see a correlation, each solar activity spike causes a minor bump in the average temperature. When solar activity fell for the last time, you see a small dip in temperature. Finally, once again, cropped data. The timescale begins with us coming out of the little ice age, and the beginning of the modern warm period. Nothing unusual.

6. The warming seen this century is nothing unusual compared to the past. Because of uncertainties, you cannot reliably compare this year to the past. Perhaps changes in methods were to produce a false sense of warming. This modern warm period is caused by natural factors, not co2, as co2's strength as a greenhouse gas is not as strong as popularly believed. The rate of warming is similar to the beginning of the medieval warm period and roman warm period. The black graph at the bottom is also unreliable. It's comparing records to averages. Apples to oranges.

7. I'm gonna be honest here, I'm having a hard time trying to understand this source. I dont think I can do this one.

8. Sea ice may be going down slightly, as expected in a natural warm period. Satellite data started in 1979, during the frenzy of global cooling. We have no proof of arctic sea ice before then. The medieval warm period likely had less sea ice than now. There was less greenland ice back then, as some viking burial grounds are now covered in permafrost. It only makes sense that there was less sea ice back then, where it was warmer than today. While arctic sea ice may be lower, antarctic sea ice is at record high levels, which evens out the arctic decline. Globally, there is no decline in ice, which is to be expected, as the temperature has not risen since 1998.

Side note, found a relly great video with all the facts and graphs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2iggJN4Etw

==================================================

Fjen					#yvRmGXVJ 2017/06/08 17:54

holy poop. this guy whos probably in high school claims to be smarter than every climate scientist in the world and tried to prove them wrong. its amazing people even waste their time trying to debunk proven science. amazing dude, you are brave, yet stupid. fracking retard.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/09 09:48

@Fjen
I'm not smarter than them, they are deliberately tricking us. I see what you did there with fracking.

@Vidkunssonn
Where u at boi?

==================================================

Fjen					#sg2MpuFj 2017/06/09 11:43

@amazing dude
hahahahaha conspiritard. go run crying back to alex jones when your house is underwater in 20 years. climate change is happening. the science is settled. do not try to deny it. why would they want you to think the earth is being destroyed if it is not? trump does not care about you. trump could not give half a poop about the average man. all he cares about is the rich.

i seriously hope you pull your head out of your butt and realize what is happening. you are going to make the earth unlivable. i beg you to watch "an inconvenient truth" and "an inconventient sequel" when it comes out. do not listen to fox news. it is all bought out and paid for corporate propaganda. denying humans climate change is like denying that smoking causes cancer. even some of your holy men in congress have agreed that climate change is real. the deniers are walking on thin ice at this point.

==================================================

Sigma					#iWOBESYY 2017/06/09 23:07

He's mainly arguing that climate change is normal, natural, and good for Earth (which I completely disagree with, but I'm sure he's more than happy to reshare the links to his articles)

==================================================

SkyPhantomhive			#T70KMa7R 2017/06/09 23:37

Well what did I miss something about climate change I all I'm getting.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/10 04:24

@Fjen
Its not a conspiracy. Its fact. No science is ever settled. Before Copernicus, the science was settled that the sun orbits the earth. That turned out to be untrue, just like manmade climate change. Yes, climate is changing, just like it always has, and it has never destroyed the earth.

Trump based his whole campaign on the working man, who has been left behind by politicans. Just because hes rich doesnt mean he hates us.

Al gore is making a second alarmist propaganda bullshit fear mongering piece of crap movie? LOLOLOLOLOLOLAHAHAHAHAHAHAPLPDSLK!!! The first one has been debunked to death, and lost Al Gore all of his credibility. This movie is gonna flop and fail worse than Vidkunssonn does at arguing. Mark my words.

Fox news is not bought out propaganda, its simply another viewpoint. Just because it doesnt align with your views doesnt mean its fake. Also, there is absolutely nothing in common between human activity and climate change vs cigarettes and cancer. In fact, more and more congressmen are coming out against the great hoax.

All of your arguments are simply unsourced lies and fraud. Lol, calling us deniers. A better term would be skeptic, or even realist.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/10 06:04

https://meowbin.com/pastes?id=3308h24a0c


@amazingdude
I was on a cruise in the Caribbean for a week. I'm a little disappointed I didn't encounter any pirates while in International Waters, but I did at least get a beer tour from Captain Blah-Blah and got to remind myself that I hate the taste of alcohol. I also got a new deck of cards. Hadn't had a new deck in a while. That's a total of 2 from a foreign country (1st from the Virgin Islands, 2nd from the Bahamas, 3rd hopefully from Sweden).

And honestly, I don't give a shit about the climate change argument anymore. I feel more relaxed now than I have in a long time, and starting that up again will just ruin it. I have more important things to worry myself about, like my Discord bot and learning the PG(2) script so that I could potentially mod it.

==================================================

Fjenn					#KuVJebpn 2017/06/10 07:23

Sorry this is too long I cannot post it here it is pastebin.com/zMazZkM2

@vid
i am glad you are not arguing with this science denier any more.

@amazing dude
what you are saying is a conspiracy by definiton. you are a conspiracy theorist. at this point in time, you are as credible as moon landing deniers. wat does the oil industry have to gain by denying climate science? money. climate science is anti oil and they want you to keep burning oil. what do enviornmentalists have to gain from denying oil propaganda? saving the fucking earth.

i have watched your "proof" videos. the first guy worshipping fossil fuels is a puppet who receives money from oil companies to bullshit the public. the second guy spewing out nonsense about co2 is a lobbyist who refused to drink a chemical he claimed was safe. you seriously trust these frauds? ill give you an analogy: if you were injured and needed a surgery, 30 doctors said you should get it, and 1 doctor said no, would you get the surgery?

donald trump is also paid for by the rich. he has no interest in helping you. he hates mexicans, muslims, blacks, gays, trans, women, athiests, and pretty much everybody. he is a puppet of the rich and white supremacists sent to resegregate america and make it an all white country. he is going back in time. he is literally backwards. and you worship him.

al gore is a credible enviornmentalist with science to back up his claims. do you really expect him to downplay the threat of manmade climate change? if anything, "alarmism" is good, since it gets people scared and more willing to take action. and his statement about ice caps melting by 2014 was the extreme worst possible estimate. the comparison between climate change and smoking cancer is a perfect example: industry discovers science against them, try to cover it up, people find out, and expose them on their lies. this is happening to climate change denial. that is what you are: a denier. not a skeptic, not a realist. you deny science and use bought out fraud sources. i do not need sources. i am speaking truth. 100 per cent fact.

take your head out of your ass and come back to reality, amazing dude.

==================================================

SkyPhantomhive			#T70KMa7R 2017/06/10 08:15

So let me get this straight everyone here or Vidkunssonn amazingdude and Fjen are talking about climate change in Ahem powder game 2? Yeah I'm way off so someone please explain.

thanks for the "explanation" Just bored as hell and very VERY confused as to what is happening I mean first debunking NASA then arguing about Climate Change?!? True It's none of my business but keeping up with this propaganda stunt is a circus all in itself.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/10 11:20

@Vidkunssonn
You gave up, so I won?

@sky
Click 1000 posts and start reading up from the point I first say climate change is natural. Watch these alarmist bullshiters make fools out of themselves and watch me blow their arguments off the fucking earth. Its a giant shitshow.

@Fjen
https://meowbin.com/pastes?id=3a15hc16c6

@Vidkunssonn

You gave up, so I won?

@sky

Click 1000 posts and start reading up from the point I first say climate change is natural. Watch these alarmist bullshiters make fools out of themselves and watch me blow their arguments off the fucking earth. Its a giant shitshow.

@Fjen

Your responses are full of self contradictory bullshit. You say I'm a conspiracy theorist, yet you say that the rich and powerful are fucking everyone else over for their own benefit. The idea that oil companies are covering up science. Thats more of a conspiracy. What I say is fact. You ask me for sources, yet you dont give any because you dont need to. You say I just discredit the other side because its not my belief, yet you do the same to fox news and my youtube videos. You type like you are in the second grade just parroting what your parents say. To say that I'm like a moon landing denier is retardation at its finest. I'm not denying science. I'm exposing the radical enviornmentalists bullshit, and yall just blindly follow what lord Obama tells you.

Enviornmenalists are the enemies of the earth. They are a limiting factor of human success. They stop us from using the earth to better our species just because a couple fucking trees that dont matter are gonna die. Absolutely fucking stupid. They want us to go back to being monkeys swinging from trees because anything that betters humanity has some impact on the earth.

My 5 videos are from a university. The first guy, Alex Epstein, is not a shill from the FF industry. He is a philosopher, and founder of the center for industrial progress. He does not receive funding from anybody. In this day and age, you cant support FFs without being called a climate change denier who hates the earth. FFs right now are our best energy source. The second guy, Patrick Moore, is the co-founder of Greenpeace, and has a degree in Ecology. This guy knows his science, and if you watch his videos, he goes in great detail about how global warming and CO2 are good for the earth, and that it is not caused by humans.

Your surgery analogy is a bad one. It costs nothing for me to get the surgery, as I have nothing to lose by getting it. But talking about the climate, we have everything to lose by abandoning our most reliable energy source, causing billions of people to suffer, costing trillions of dollars in the end to prevent something that is 100% natural, beneficial, and might not even be stoppable. Is it really worth it?

You've bought into the media hysteria about Trump. Congratulations. I'm not even gonna debunk this since it is borderline insanity (talk about conspiracy, lol) and its irrelevant to the climate. And I'm glad he pulled out of the Paris agreement.

Al Gore credible my ass. He is a politican turned radical enviornmentalist by lobbyists voming 100% pure garbage paid for by the radical enviornmental industry. Alarmism is the modern day case of the boy who cried wolf. They give us a false sense of doom so much that when they make a serious claim, nobody believes them because their predictions all came out false. And you call rational people "downplaying". Are you his grandson or something? I'm hoping his 2014 prediction was not serious, as there is no way that he coulda been serious. 2025 maybe, but 2014 is insanity.

Your cigarettes and cancer analogy is once again flawed. Cigarettes and cancer is science, human activity and global warming is not. You're not even open minded about my science. You just shut down like Hillary Clinton and call me a denier. Before you call me closed minded, I once held negative opinions about hydro and nuclear. I have since changed my views after I did research. I read Vidkunssonn's article, analyzed it, and then debunked half of its sources. And yet you call me a denier, after I explain my viewpoint and my sources. Who's the real denier here?

Why do I need sources, and you don't? Because I dont have the same views as you? Because you have a consensus behind you, even though a consensus doesnt mean shit? You have yet to give one source. I have given 5. Your self contradictions are astounding, and your replies are as weak as your gods' science. Yeah, I have my head up my ass, by critically thinking about the issue and forming my opinion based on a variety of different viewpoints, as opposed to somebody who just worships their enviornmentalist gods and blindly follows them. Who really has their head up their ass?

==================================================

9132					#iabR3RgQ 2017/06/10 11:31

Whoever denies NASA is pretty dumb considering how much equipment they use to make facts about weather. It is pysically IMPOSSIBLE. DON'T DENY NASA.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/10 12:54

@9132
Are you Fjen? I never denied NASA, I debunked them. 2 different things.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/10 14:14

Just because someone is sick of your bit, doesn't mean that you won.
Also you still haven't provided anything resembling a Realpolitik profit-motive required for a conspiracy to throw that much money at a hoax. Since your entire argument hinges on the global science community being bribed, maybe you should focus on that instead of "debunking" evidence with youtube links.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/10 14:39

https://meowbin.com/pastes?id=fc27hf58c1

@amazingdude
>You gave up, so I won?
You're a fucking cunt. I don't argue with cunts because it's beneath me to do so. They don't ever shut up simply because they believe they're "too right" to not talk about it, even when they're told to by literally everyone else. You've been asked like a dozen times to just stop talking because nobody wants to go through this same shit again and again and again, and you keep bringing it up. You're like a fucking flat-earther. Just get over it. Nobody cares. Your words are like sand in my eyes. This argument is as shitty as your taunts. You don't even know what I'm arguing for and you're telling me I'm shit at arguing when you're arguing with me about the wrong fucking thing. Yes, I know Global Warming and Climate Change is natural, but no, I do not believe humans do not affect it. You are a fool for believing we aren't detrimental to the planet in one way or another, but you're a fool even more so for assuming I believe we're gonna destroy it. Not even God will destroy this planet before Judgement Day. You're too into this pointless shit. You're not proving any points, you're not saving any lives; you're just making people angry and annoyed and you need to fucking stop.

==================================================

Fjen					#uG7ln3Ct 2017/06/10 18:36

@amazing dude
you are also full of self contradicting statements. i am not going to waste my time arguing with a retard who does not believe in science and just watches alex jones all day. you can not reason with these people. you are worse than a flat earther, because unlike flat earthers, you will destroy the earth. vid just demolised your ass and blew you off the earth. see you underwater in 2020 :)

==================================================

Zeus					#pNoXDzXu 2017/06/10 18:45

@Fjen
Who here has a bad opinion? I will strike down thee!

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/11 03:49

@TK
Have you been following the discussion?

@Vidkunssonn
So you dont want me to tell the truth about climate change? You dont want to argue because I'm right and you dont wanna get proven wrong. How am I like a flat earther? I dont deny science and put forth pure bullshit. I state the facts. What makes me a fool for not believing the same bullshit as you? Nothing. You're the fool who believes it. This is not pointless, I am saving lives, and I am exposing the turth.

@Fjen
You're the science denier by saying we're all gonna burn up in a CO2 greenhouse. Yet you call me a science denier by saying im worse than a FLAT EARTHER? LOLWTF!!! Keep saying I'll fall off my iceberg, alarmist.

==================================================

9132					#iabR3RgQ 2017/06/11 04:20

Who the heck cares about global warming? Its not like it will affect our life anyway unless we live to be like 2000 years old someday.

@amazingdude
Your just causing unecessary panic. Stop thinking i'm Fgen because of where I stand with NASA. I'll tell you if there is a fake 9132 ruining my image.

==================================================

Sigma					#iWOBESYY 2017/06/11 04:37

Once someone has established a belief, they believe everyone who has an opposing belief is wrong. In other words, both sides think the other is full of idiots. In this situation, there isn't enough information to determine who is probably truly right without looking at the facts directly. However, if one side has a significant following compared to the other, odds are the one with the larger following is right. It's not definitely right, but probably.

The point of this comment is to say that while amazingdude thinks the other side is the fools, he doesn't *actually know* if he's right. As far as he knows, everything that has ever been told to him is a lie (before he complains about the one-sidedness of this, I better say that everyone else also could be wrong without conducting tests themselves). Just talking about how unreasonable the other side is won't change their views, and that is what this discussion has essentially become. Though I should point out that the pro-climate side has repeatedly tried to put it down, but amazingdude keeps bringing it back to the "idiot calling" situation I mentioned above.

@9132
1. It will start to affect us in only a few years.
2. The concern is partly what our *future* generations would experience. It would be pretty selfish to not care what their world would be like since our actions now decide it.

==================================================

9132					#iabR3RgQ 2017/06/11 05:47

@Sigma
You watched The Day after Tomorrow too?

Also, I admit fully that global warming may hurt us in a few years, but what of that? If the E.M.P. ( Electro - magnetic pulse ) bomb hits us, We won't have to worry about global warming. No for me, at least, because unlike other people, I don't depend on tablets or phones. ( I'm in Arizona, so I don't care about glaciers, even though we depend on them sometimes).

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/11 10:39

I'm not entirely sure what's wrong with this. I have the censored words in it (there's only one) fixed to not be sensed by the censor, but I can't figure out what else is wrong :/
https://meowbin.com/pastes?id=cc27h5a700

Holy shit, this place has become really, really active.

@amazingdude
Are you serious? I want you to shut up because you're continuing a pointless argument that won't ever be won. This will just go on until one of us dies because you're too stubborn to accept the fact that maybe nobody cares about what you think about it. You're like a flat-earther because you prioritize and practice a belief that has no effect on your life.

"The earth is really flat."
So?
"Humans will not destroy the world with excess Carbon Dioxide emissions."
So?

How is telling people that there's nothing wrong saving their lives? You're not warning them of any potential danger, you're just saying there isn't any, which doesn't help us prepare for anything. Telling a man "it won't kill you" won't help him. You're the fool because you waste your time preaching something that has no effect on the people who listen (and for assuming my beliefs for what they aren't, but I'll get over that because I'm used to people doing it).
Tell us something that will actually BENEFIT us knowing.

@9132
Every comment has a unique "id" code in the top right corner of the box, just left of the date and time of the comments submission. Yours is "#iabR3RgQ". Mine is "#6gkHelVa". The only way that would ever change is if you clear your cookies or log in on a different device and then submit a comment.

==================================================

Fjen					#xO9nYD6i 2017/06/11 12:00

thank you guys for backing me up and not falling for the retard denier amazing dude
and i am certain that the scientists are right about climate change. we will see who is right in 20 years amazing dude.

@vid
it is too long

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/12 03:41

@amazingdude
My internet went out for about a week but I've mostly caught up since then.
If I'm interpreting this correctly, you think a measly increase in very conditional political power is a good enough reason to blow millions of dollars on a hoax and implied various governments and corporations are involved presumably as a way to strengthen that position. Are you aware of how silly that sounds even with the benefit of the doubt?

Imagine if this supposed conspiracy were about Atlantis instead; all of that effort and money being pumped into convincing people that Atlantis is real so that they'll turn around and demand that their puppet masters drain the Mediterranean Sea thus giving the main players involved more influence- and all it took was an absurd amount of money invested into Caligulan propaganda and advanced pumping equipment.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/12 05:25

https://meowbin.com/pastes?id=4e51v92e04
debunk

Holy shit this board is active.

@9132
Increasing gas prices, carbont taxes, increasing energy prices, laws and regulations, etc. will affect you. All those things are based on a hoax. We dont have to worry about it, even without the EMP.

@Esigma
Why dont you log in? Your comment may be true, but I've done research, and I believe I am more correct than you. I do know I'm right, and a consensus doesnt prove anything. There was consensus the sun orbited the earth. There waa consensus that Relativity wasnt real. There was consensus the earth was flat. Why should I believe the wrong scenario just to agree with the consensus? Global warming has many more positive effects than negative. I would be excited about global warming.

@Vidkunssonn
This argument is about spreading truth. How is it pointless? I'll keep this up until you die, I'm willing to argue for years. Global warming does have an effect on our lives. If the alarmists get their way, we get pointless regulations, price increases, laws, etc. that will have no effect and only serve to prevent a nonexistant threat. I want people to know that we do not need to take action, and that global warming is natural and good. Telling people there is nothing wrong is saying the truth. Banning FFs will take away our #1 energy source, and the billions of poor people who depend on cheap energy will suffer because their energy source will be taken away just because of a nonexistant hoax. You will BENEFIT for knowing this.

@Fjen
Watch me come out right. Consensus =/= correct. Alarmists have been making false predictions for years now, and they will continue to be what they are: Hot air. Also, I'm not a denier, I'm a skeptic/realist.

@TK
What are you talking about? That is not my beliefs. Are you gonna debunk the 11 "Fallacies" after Vidkunssonn lost?

https://meowbin.com/pastes?id=9209vc3c1f

==================================================

Fjen					#4dNY21J8 2017/06/12 08:28

@amazing dude
give up. you lost.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/12 11:41

@Fjen
I'll never give up. Not until these fools do.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/12 11:52

https://pastebin.com/FVF19CDV

1) Wait so ruining 1% of land we're not using is too high of a cost but poisoning 5% of the immediate area around our living areas isn't? How is that not a point for nuclear power over coal?

2) Praising chemicals for purely incidental reactions is kind of cringy. I don't know maybe you're just a neopagan or something, but it's hard to take you seriously when you sound like the same people anthropomorphizing "Mother Earth" as some nurturing figure while conveniently ignore all the awful things that entity is also responsible for.

3) NASA gets it's funding with groundbreaking discoveries like graphene and aerogel.

4) Same percentage double standard that you used to say nuclear power wasn't worth the vastly superior yields.

9) You need a history lesson or seven, because fossil fuels didn't come into major use until the middle of the Industrial Revolution and there were plenty of civilized societies before that point. The early United States, for instance, and basically all of Europe and Asia- there were some tribal societies in the far reaches of the world, but that's still true today as even the Sentinelese remain uncontacted.

10) We've discovered a lot of pharmaceuticals from now endangered plants and animals, each one that goes extinct cuts into the bottom line of how cheaply our species can make medicine.

11) Governments in general have more interest in maintaining the status quo than rocking the boat. If they change the political climate too much it could cost them the conditions that keep them in office, an autocracy wouldn't have as much problems with the sort of propaganda you're suggesting but a democratic republic has to at least make a show of caving to the public's demands, which gets prohibitively expensive after a while if the public keeps demanding that thing. It's easier to just grab power in one of the usual ways like starting a popular war, stopping an unpopular war, slightly lowering taxes, or slightly increasing the benefits of taxes.

It's like a Prisoner's Dilemma, except there a few hundred Prisoners and they all have different conditions to get freedom.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/12 13:19

@uhmeighzheengdude
You're still on about it?
Just stop. I don't care what you think about it. Your opinion about it does not affect how I go about living my life. You're also still stuck in the mindset that I give in to this "hoax" you keep talking about. Stop assuming shit and actually read what I type for you.

>I believe I am more correct than you.
Okay, you arrogant fuck.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/12 15:27

@TK
You're still quite out of touch with the argument.

1. What are you saying here? You seem to overestimate how dangerous coal is.

2. Without CO2, everything dies. It deserves the praise, same with oxygen, sunlight, fossil fuel, etc.

3. Source? It's funding all this alarmist crap, it's in their best interest everyone is afraid of cooking to death in the atmosphere.

4. A nuclear explosion can make hundreds of miles uninhabitable. A coal plant only makes the air have slightly more CO2 within a few hundred feet of the plant.

9. Those primitave societies were way less advanced before fossil fuels. The modern societies without fossil fuels remain tribal and unadvanced.

10. We also have alot from non endangered plants, not to mention artificial drugs. If a species is really needed we could save it using greenhouses or zoos.

11. wut. Are you suggesting the climate alarmist propaganda is unfeasible? Obviously not, because it is happening.

@Vidkunssonn
I do read what you type. If you can prove to me that the theory that man causes climate change is more feasible than my view than i will accept the most plausible explanation.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/12 15:36

@uhmeighzheengdude
>I do read what you type.
Uh huh.
"Just stop. I don't care what you think about it."

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/12 17:12

1) You were the one who made that 5% figure.

2) Neopaganism aside, it's just a molecule that happened to be in abundance when plants first evolved. If sulfuric acid had been more common back then the proto-plants probably would have used that.

3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spinoff_technologies They're just geeks, not politicians. All of NASA's funding comes from the government, which you've already stated is "in on it", if their paycheck is guaranteed, why would they bother selling a hoax to the public instead of working on important stuff?

4) Meltdowns don't involve explosions, it's literally just when the fuel gets too hot and melts through it's containment.

9) I'm pretty sure it was telegraphs that did the most for general advancement for that era, combustion was nice but it didn't facilitate any research on it's own like letting people talk in near-real-time from opposite ends of the country.

10) Artificial drugs are made by studying the effects of natural drugs and then distilling them. There is literally nothing the pharmaceutical industry that wasn't inspired by the defenses of real plants and animals.

11) Nice rebuttal. Like wow I've never been so convinced of anything in my life.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/12 18:49

@TK

1. That was about the impurites in coal, not destroyed land.

2. Either way, it gives life to us today.

3. If they come out and say climate change is not manmade, they will lose their funding. It's part of their contract.

4. Chernobyl much? I've researched, and you were right about nuclear not being so dangerous. I do think it should be looked into, but until then, fossil fuels are the best option.

9. Fossil fuels made quick transport possible, which is necessary for a modern day society, whether its cars, planes, or busses.

10. So lets study plants we have alot of instead of plants with only 3 specimen left.

11. Finally convined someone partially

@Vidkunssonn
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfo_CDjFwx28cPiFVO9iKIxbrutD_5FtRHThWg2za8Ba-uw3Q/viewform

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/13 01:25

>If they come out and say climate change is not manmade, they will lose their funding. It's part of their contract.
Oh my God, you ARE a dumbass.

==================================================

SkyPhantomhive			#T70KMa7R 2017/06/13 03:02

Are you serious right now we're still going on with this THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO DISCUSS I mean really it's idiotic to talk about something that has already been talked about solved It's

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/13 04:12

@Sky
Nothing is ever settled. If somebody can prove that earth is banana shaped and provide evidence and explain how it is more plausible than the earth being an oblate spheroid, then what would happen? Surely, the idea of an oblate spheroid earth is settled science, right? Same with climate change.

@Vidkunssonn
You're the dumbass

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/06/13 05:37

Climate change is natural, but we're speeding it up ALOT. If you look at the average temperature for the last 20 thousand years, you can clearly notice that it speeds up alot once you hit the point where fossil fuels are heavily used. And, we're starting to run out of fossil fuels. Oh, and the chernobyl exclusion zone has an area of 1,004 square miles. The meltdown occurred because of a flawed reactor design operated with inadequately trained workers.

==================================================

Sigma					#iWOBESYY 2017/06/13 07:29

@amazingdude
"Your comment may be true [ . . . ] I do know I'm right"
But you don't unless you've seen it for yourself and have enough evidence to make a reasonable unbiased conclusion. Multiple times you talk about events that have changed our entire perspective of the universe including possibilities of events that could change it (such as finding out the Earth is banana-shaped), so you understand that we don't truly know anything because it all could be found false at any moment. For example, how do you know for sure that *your* sources aren't manipulated in any way? Of course, if you have seen proof for yourself, conducted tests, etc., then I retract my statements. I don't know what you do in your free time.

"a consensus doesn't prove anything"
Indeed. That's why I said it is *more likely* to be true because, on average, people have reasonable beliefs and aren't stupid. If you are right, then we all have no choice but to believe you and I, personally, would be perfectly fine with that because I always welcome new ideas to get as close to the truth as possible. Your beliefs are your beliefs and mine are mine, and I will respect them if they are what you truly believe (as in, if anyone says things with the intent to bring harm, I would try to stop that).

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/13 08:04

@Hotdogeater
Wrong. 11,000 years ago there was a very sharp warming spike of 10*C. Talk about climate change! Nothing within the last 100 years is even visible. And we aren't even close to running out of fossil fuel.
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/20kyr_fig1.jpg

@Esigma
Why do you never log in?

I saw it with my own eyes. On fox news. They brought in a scientist and an alarmist and the scientist won, hands down. How do YOU know that your sources arent bought out fraud? Nobodys source is reliable. I have analyzed data, reviewed sources, and came to my conclusion. Your beliefs are wrong and need to be changed to mine, which are correct.

==================================================

SkyPhantomhive			#T70KMa7R 2017/06/13 08:26

All right. Well I'm just saying can't one of you set up a chat room and go over this or skype call or something? This is really not the place for this propaganda.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/06/13 09:07

If you look to the next 100 years, you would see a spike even bigger and steeper than that one 11000 years ago. Also, that spike was after a dip in global temperature, which was hardly recorded in Antartica. Oh and btw, why are you trying to force people to change to your beliefs. Nobodys beliefs need to change.

==================================================

Poofle					#KnbKVy9B 2017/06/13 10:11

@amazingdude
I will say only this. If you truly believe that climate change is solely beneficial and not at all problematic, and you're not just some troll that enjoys giggling when you get a reaction out of people on the internet, then fine, you may go against the better judgment of the vast majority of experts in the field of climate science and claim that global warming is nonexistent, or universally beneficial, or whatever other beliefs you may be smugly holding to your chest. But just know that the overwhelming evidence points out that you are, in fact, wrong. And I suggest you take a good wide look at all the peer-reviewed articles publicly available to you, and heed the findings of the many people that are much more intelligent than you and have spent much more time giving thought and research to this now well-defined phenomenon. But if you still refuse to listen to reason, then fine, continue to giggle at the reaction and comments you have elicited, but the rest of us would do well to look at the "Comments code of conduct" and ignore your inflammatory comments; for the die has been cast and the votes have been tallied: the winner of this argument is very clearly those who know climate change is, in fact, a significant problem to the future of this Earth. You have every right to sit in your isolated box and cover your ears, but as for the rest of the world, we progress without you.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/13 10:52

@amazingdude
I'm a dumbass because I've not convinced myself that the government pays companies to tell lies to the masses? Do not talk to me again about this.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/13 11:44

@sky
lol making a video. good luck. post a link when your done. I'm not the one spewing propaganda, everyone else is.

@Hotdogeater
Either way, the climate changed fast. If you think climate is gonna change that much, you are insane.

@poofle
I've read many articles from both sides, and have concluded that global warming is natural and beneficial. All the "evidence" for manmade global warming is fake, incorrect, misleading, and unreliable. If humanity acts upon a false assumption, we'd have wasted all this time and energy for no gain. Trump was right to pull out of the agreement.

@Vidkunssonn
Yeah, you are. You backed out of the argument. Once I defeat the rest, I'll have won the debate.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/13 13:12

@amazingdude
Do you even realize how full of shit you are? Telling people that NASA's evidence is fake and unreliable simply because the government gives them the money they use to do the experiments and collect the evidence? Do you realize how much of a paranoid degenerate you're making yourself seem like?

>Once I defeat the rest
You've defeated nobody. Just because I got tired of your shit doesn't mean you defeated me.
>You backed out of the argument
I quit fueling your stupidity. I do my best to not argue with idiots and hypocrites over things they prove time and again to not fully understand. The only "evidence" you take into account when forming your opinions is the evidence that wasn't funded by the government because you're CONVINCED that the government forces EVERY company that does climate research that they fund to lie about the evidence they find. Do you realize how moronic that sounds?

You tell me you don't like Alex Jones, but everything you say suggests you think exactly like him.
"Can't trust the government."
"The government pays these companies to lie."
"The government is out to get us, just you wait!"
That' exactly what you sound like.

==================================================

Reztak's				#FLVo5wE6 2017/06/13 13:22

I never knew that this thing existed, And I regret it right now.

==================================================

Sigma					#iWOBESYY 2017/06/13 13:52

To be honest, I'm partly in this because it makes the board super active. :D

@amazingdude
What sources? I've spoken on the subject like twice and neither time have I cited anything because they were analytical on this debate, and didn't need sources.
And even if I did, I still just told you that I would have no idea if they were actually true. Don't act in self-defense if I'm not attacking you.
Also, you basically just said "Nobodys source is reliable. I have [ . . . ] reviewed sources [ . . . ] [My beliefs] are correct." You can't contradict yourself like that and still remain a credible member of the anti-climate change side. If you can agree without disagreeing, or disagree without agreeing, then your argument makes logical sense and I can think of you as someone with a valid argument for their side.
And I want to point out that Fox News is a source. Ergo, you do not know if it is true or how true it is, even if they were right about everything since it was started. And I haven't logged in because I'm lazy and haven't felt the need to.

@Greywolf
You seriously don't think you're fueling him right now?

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/13 13:56

https://pastebin.com/f5wvyrDx

9) Whatever, it's obsolete now.

10) Not all organisms are created equal, imagine a world where Penicillium went extinct because the Romans discovered it's properties early and abused them until it didn't exist anymore. It sounds somewhat ridiculous but that's exactly what happened to Silphium.

11) That was sarcasm. Circular reasoning like "It's happening because it's feasible because it's happening" isn't going to convince anyone.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/06/14 04:25

That spike roughly 11,000 years ago was after a sudden and still mostly unexplained drop in temperature around 1300 years prior. Also, if we dont do anything about the rate that the temperature is rising, it will reach 10C above the 1960-1990 average around 2130. Also, CO2 is not beneficial to us other than the fact that it is required for photosynthesis. At 10% concentrations in the air, it can cause convulsions, coma, and death. Not exactly fun.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/14 07:00

@Vidkunssonn
You say that like I'm a conspiracy theorist. I'm really not. I'm just skeptical of the mainstream belief.

@Esigma
How did I contradict myself? I read my arguments carefully before I post them and check for self contradictions.

@TK
Silphium was bound to go extinct already. It was retricted to a narrow area that was turning to desert. Even then, its uses have been replicated using modern drugs. We dont need it anymore. Yeah, its sad things go extinct, but shit happens.

@Hotdogeater
You're a typical alarmist I see. At least you're sane. The temperature has flatlined since 1998. The medieval warm period was warmer than today, and the temperature rose at similar rates to today. Your predictions are simply not true. Besides, there isnt enough carbon on earth to bring CO2 to 10%. Higher CO2 levels are indirectly beneficial to us. More CO2 = more plants. More plants = more food. The earth has gotten noticbly greener due to increased CO2 emissions, combined with a natural warming in the climate, providing relief to many plants and animals after coming out of the little ice age.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/14 07:28

https://pastebin.com/KnBGgRZF

Let's try this again:

1) Yes, impurities like CO, a gas that can kill a human being in three minutes provided it takes up 1% of the air. ~5% of it constantly emitted in close proximity to population centers.

3) They already did the work though. Even if there were some nondisclosure agreement, those geeks've got no reason to keep harping on it unless they deemed GCC just important as robots and water purifiers.

I think you missed the point of the Silphium example. I'm saying if other useful plants go extinct before we find out what their properties are, it represents a net loss in human potential. You can't replicate the effects of a natural drug if you don't know how the drug works- let alone that it existed in the place.

==================================================

Sigma					#iWOBESYY 2017/06/14 12:00

@amazingdude
You say that nobody's sources, including your own, are reliable enough to be considered factual. But then you say that you reached conclusions based on sources that you reviewed (not totally, but clearly it took up a large enough chunk that you felt you had to mention it), and because of those conclusions you say that my beliefs are wrong while yours are right. Based on the logic of the first sentence, how can you be so sure that your sources are correct?
If this isn't a contradiction, please explain.

@TK
I got nothing.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/14 13:39

@amazingdude
I said it because you sound like a nut not so different from Alex Jones.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/06/15 06:01

Yeah, sure, because the last few years being the warmest on record is definitely a flatline. (sarcasm, which you seem to have an inability to detect)
Also, CO2 only has to be at 1% in the atmosphere to cause mild respiratory stimulation.

The medieval warm period was a temperature anomaly of +0.11C, while the 2004 temperature anomaly was +0.46C. It could have been caused by changes to ocean circulation, which are very capable of causing short term climate change. Globally, it fell below todays average global temperature, but it was warmer than todays average global temperature in some regions.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/15 06:07

@TK
1. People havent been dying of CO by just walking outside. It is insignificant as a byproduct of coal.

2. We dont need plants to create drugs. We can research the effects of chemicals, and apply those chemicals to cure the illness.

3. AGW is deemed just as important to them. Thats how they get their funding.

@Esigma
Your sources are scientifically inaccurate. Mine are not.

@Vidkunssonn
You dont sound any better, running around screaming the ice is melting and were gonna flood and burn to death. Calm down. Climate change is good.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/06/15 06:47

@amazingdude
If climate change is beneficial to humanity, what happens to the people in Bangladesh? The people living on Pacific islands? The people in sub-Saharan Africa? What happened to sea level rise and flooding?

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/06/15 07:08

What about the maldives? They're gonna be gone in probably a decade or two

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/15 08:09

1) Tell that to China, where everyone either lives in a rural area or is forced by the hydrocarbon-based smog to constantly wear a mask while outside.

2) I most cases, plants are where we get the chemicals to study. Inorganic chemistry isn't nearly as diverse as organic chemistry is, so there's more and faster possible discoveries with the latter.

3) I'm still waiting on that Realpolitik explanation, preferably one that doesn't boil down to "It's obviously happening because it's happening".

==================================================

Sigma					#iWOBESYY 2017/06/15 13:19

@amazingdude
But how do you *know* your sources are scientifically accurate? You've said several times that a generally-accepted fact of the universe could change all of a sudden based on new evidence.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/15 13:21

@T&W, hotdogeater
Sea levels have been rising at the same rate they have for the past 5000 years. Sea levels rose even faster once the north american and eurasian ice sheets melted off 15,000 years ago. While some areas of the world may be getting too hot, like Africa and south Asia, a much larger area is becoming more habitable, like siberia and Canada. You know why the US has 300 million people while canada only has 36 million? Most of Canada is too cold. Why is siberia virtually uninhabited? It's too cold. Warming would be great for those regions. Worst case scenario we relocate people from Africa and south Asia into now-habitable areas further north. More land will become habitable due to climate change than uninhabitable.

@TK
1. The vast majority of Chinese urban population does not need an air mask. Only in the most extreme areas on heavy days do people need masks. This is an example of media manipulation.

2. You seem to be exaggerating the extinction rate. Extinction rates right now are the same they have been for thousands of years. While it may appear that everything seems to be dying, they always have been, and always will. It's nature.

3. That's just how they get their funding. Its all there is to it.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/15 13:23

@amazingdude
You clearly haven't read a single word I've typed.
https://meowbin.com/pastes?id=fc27hf58c1

"You are a fool for believing we aren't detrimental to the planet in one way or another, but you're a fool even more so for assuming I believe we're gonna destroy it. Not even God will destroy this planet before Judgement Day."
Learn to fucking read.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/06/15 16:37

@amazingdude
No, media manipulation does not come into play in this. China has a serious problem with land, air and water pollution. Any large, industrialising country does. Saying that they even need to wear a mask itself is a marker suggesting how bad the problem can be.

Firstly, graph please??? You realise that the sea level does not increase evenly everywhere. Isostatic realignment, thermal expansion of water and the rate of erosion all come into play. The sea level may not be physically rising, the land may be 'retreating' instead. Siberia will not be 'colonised'; your suggestion is economically, socially, physically and geographically unfeasible. Areas in sub-Saharan Africa will not be ruined by rampant warming, but by unpredictable rainfall and drought, disrupting agriculture and the economy. Bangladesh has a problem not just with the sea, but with increased river discharge. The world is complex. You can't just 'take a piece' and compensate for it somewhere else.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/15 18:02

https://pastebin.com/479WmuEU

1) Covered by T&W

2) Didn't we already cover that we have no way of knowing that? Population science is only recently been conducted on the wild, all the data we have for it is what was collected after the invention of DDT.

3) No. Circular reasoning is never an acceptable answer.

Do you not realize what is implied by the existence of a conspiracy? It means that 2 or more people with sufficient resources are cynical enough to believe that a Machiavellian approach to internal politics is the only logical way for a nation to prosper.

Machiavellianism is a subsection of the Realist political philosophy, which itself says that nations do whatever they want so long as nothing stops them. This opposed to the Liberalist, Radicalist, and Constructivist philosophies- the ideas that nations engage in diplomacy because the people don't like war, that the upper classes do everything that they do to oppress the lower classes, and that nations get their agendas from the head of state's agendas so any behavior will seem inconsistent between through the generations.

Anyway, that's a very brief summary of how international politics work. Realist philosophy in particular is nothing if not pragmatic, so this mysterious GCC conspiracy needs to have rational reasons for going to so much effort- it's not the sort of thing people engage in for giggles, if the project starts costing more than what they're getting out of it then an actual conspiracy would drop the tactic like a hot iron and try something else. You've been suggesting that people sorting their trash by material and the nation's industries being crippled by pointlessly increased spending is a good reason to blow everything they have. Give a good reason why, you've had 3 weeks to do so.

==================================================

herecomesmichael		#qVSCeJzD 2017/06/17 00:49

What's with this argument with @amazingdude? I can't be bothered to read the whole thing, because it seems to go on and on forever.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/17 04:48

He showed up about 3 weeks ago claiming the coal and oil industries were being unfairly persecuted and that climate change was a hoax/not manmade/somehow beneficial. He didn't talk very much before but seemed fairly intelligent for his age in previous discussions, I'd still say that he's fairly intelligent but might have issues with critical thinking and/or acceptable risk assessment- both of which are perfectly normal for someone younger than 20.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/17 06:08

@Vidkunssonn
I did read it and already responded to that post

@T&W
China's pollution is vastly exaggerated by the media. Lol, your rising sea level analogy broke down and you think the land breaks off like ice bergs and rots away? Flooding land to the sea? LOL!!! Colonizing Siberia is very practical. We colonized the Americas, Australia, many islands, and parts of Asia and Africa. Damn right we can colonize siberia.

@TK
I think we should bring back DDT, it will help with insect problems. The enviornment will recover much faster than you think. The reason it failed was because it was banned before it could exterminate everything, so it all came back. Yeah, we have no way of knowing, so why be so pessimistic about it, saying we're killing everything? I come here every few months.

I was more active 3-4 years ago. Yall should check out the powder toy, its much better (and not HTML5). We've been arguing for a month now. Also, I'm 25.

@Herecomesmichael
Read it. It will change your whole perspective on climate change.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/06/17 06:31

@amazingdude
I live in China. I have travelled all over China. China has a serious problem with pollution. End of.

Land does indeed break off cliffs by waves and storm action. This material is deposited and dispersed in other places along the coast. Of course, if you had any understanding of coastal and geological processes, you'd know exactly what I am talking about. Mudflows, rockslides, rotational slip. Yes, land literally breaks off the cliff and is washed away during rotational slipping.

Are you actually serious about Siberia??? Are you really going to persuade all 200 million people living in the region of the Ganges-Brahmaputra Delta to emigrate to some remote place in Russia? Do you even think the Russians would consider accepting these people? How much would it cost to basically build a whole new country up in Siberia to facilitate 200 million people. We have standards now. Colonists in the Americas and Africa had a completely different set of objectives and standards. If you think sending 200 million people to Siberia is even remotely feasible, I cannot take you seriously anymore.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/17 07:11

@amazingdude
Just because you responded doesn't mean you actually read what I said and comprehended it completely. I've clearly said that I don't think humans will destroy the world, and you tell me that I'm "running around screaming the ice is melting and were gonna flood and burn to death." NOT ONE PERSON in this discussion is doing that.

>Colonizing Siberia is very practical. We colonized the Americas, Australia, many islands, and parts of Asia and Africa.
The Americas, Australia, and parts of Asia and Africa aren't as fucking cold as Siberia is. The reason 13.1 million square kilometres has only 40 million people is because most of it is too damn cold and dangerous to inhabit. Canada is the same way: 90% of the population lives on 12% of the land because of how damn cold the other 88% of it is, and the people that DO live in that 88% are some of the toughest people on this planet.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/17 08:29

@T&W
Yes, land breaks away slowly. How would human activity affect that?

@T&W and Vidkunssonn
Yes, I'm serious about colonizing Siberia. Maybe not Siberia, but there's lots of still habitable non-overcrowded areas that aren't arctic wasteland. We should relocate people who are in flood zones to less-floody areas. Why should we fight nature? We cant change the global climate.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/17 17:24

>We cant change the global climate.
Your entire argument has been that we're benefiting the planet by adding more CO2 to the air. That statement goes against EVERYTHING you've said up to this point.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/17 18:30

@Vidkunssonn
Adding CO2 to the air is not changing the climate. It's more like a fertillizer.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/17 19:49

https://pastebin.com/nSFf2WUu

You want to use DDT to exterminate everything? You realize exterminating *everything* was why that stuff was banned in the first place? We were poisoning our crops so that pests would die after eating it, and true in the short term that was a boon for our food production. But the history you might have skipped over was that DDT is both hydrophobic and lipophilic and doesn't dissolve in water like most pesticides while readily collecting in the fat tissue of animals. Once applied it leaches into the soil and then collects as sediment in rivers, inflicting cancer on anything that comes into contact with it until ~15 years later when the toxin finally reaches the end of it's half-life.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/06/17 22:41

@Amazingdude
Land does not break away slowly. The land can retreat as fast as 1-2 metres a year in some places. Downdrift sediment starvation caused by man-made barriers or activities increases the vulnerability of cliff faces to erosion, particularly in areas where the shore is comprised primarily of unconsolidated material. Humans building on and closer to the cliff adds additional weight, encouraging slip planes to form. The paving of roads and surfaces hinders the even drainage of the ground, which means water is absorbed unevenly by the soil. This weighs areas of the cliff down and acts as a lubricant, encouraging slippage.

How do you plan to colonise barren and uninhabitable areas? You literally need to build everything that people need, from scratch. Will any country's government be willing to accept millions of people from halfway across the globe? How will you convince hundreds of millions of people to abandon their homes, their country and their way of life? How are you going to move them all? What you plan is impossible.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/18 06:40

@TK
Again, exaggerated risks. The benefits of DDT outweigh the risks. DDT is harmless to humans, but it kills insects that eat our crops. Why not use it?

@T&W
The rate humans are causing land to retreat is comparable to the impact on global climate: Almost unmeasurable. Expanding urban areas that are surrounded by empty space. That way, you have something to build off of. If people dont move, wait until they start flooding. Instead of fighting nature, we should adapt to it.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/18 09:53

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane#Human_health
"Harmless"

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/18 10:16

@TK
Of course bathing in DDT isnt gonna be good for you, but a little bit in the food is no harm.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/18 10:56

Except the part where all those little bits build up in your fat and give you cancer. Mountains are made of the smallest pebbles.

==================================================

tauss					#AHnQiTFf 2017/06/18 11:45

Fascinating argument

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/18 13:11

@TK
Thats only with significant exposure

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/06/18 21:03

@amazingdude
Bio-accumulation, anyone? Human activity is causing the land to retreat in places. Slight retreat will build up over the decades and centuries. This must be rectified. For you colonisation plan, let's do this step by step.

1. Build outwards from existing areas to accommodate more people. Widen roads and railways, infrastructure, sewage, clean water. Massive disruption to current settlements and day-to-day operations, construction takes years, massive economic cost on the host country.

2. Convince the host country(ies) to accept 150 million Bangladeshis. People from a completely different culture, completely different language and way of life. Convince them to provide adequate healthcare, services and education for the population of a still-developing country. Again, massive economic disruption, with social problems thrown into the mix.

3. Convince the Bangladeshis to move halfway across the world to some random remote place, destroying their communities, businesses, culture and way of life, instead of trying to solve the flooding problem back home.

4. Actually find the money and the transport to move 150 million people and their possessions halfway across the world. You will need to at least subsidise this cost, especially if they are poor and unwilling to move.

This speaks for itself. I'm not sure why I even wrote this considering how flawed your plan is.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/19 01:35

You mean like the significant exposure of eating contaminated food at every meal? Maybe you're just underestimating how often people need to eat and/or how much pesticides would need to be used to eradicate a farm pest. I'll reiterate, you seem reasonably intelligent, but you can't seem to back it up with the critical thinking and risk-assessment abilities necessary to link all the things you're aware of into sensible plans that would work in complex environments.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/19 04:00

@T&W
Human activity does not cause land retreat. That is honestly the dumbest thing I've ever seen. It is quite difficult, yes, but would trying to fight the climate be easier? Should we just leave them to die instead? Should we put a shade in front of the earth to block the sun? Should we do your plan try to restrict fossil fuel use, even though it does not affect the climate? That is much more unfeasible than moving millions of people. Come up with a better idea to fight natural climate change.

@TK
Yes, we are eating the toxins, then we shit it out the next day before it does any harm. What goes in comes back out. If you eat pure DDT, yes, its dangerous, but a bit in your food is no threat.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/19 08:21

That's probably what the Romans said about using lead as a wine sweetener.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/19 11:33

@amazingdude
No, you don't just simply digest and dispose of DDT after you consume it. It stores up in your body fat and very slowly breaks itself down, a process that could end up taking years if you eat more than one meal a week.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane#Human_health
Spiders are a better pesticide than DDT because spiders don't kill humans along with the bugs they're assigned to kill.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/19 12:33

@TK
Lead accumulates in blood, DDT does not

@Vidkunssonn
Anti-DDT propaganda. Also, are you suggesting that we release tons of spiders into the fields to eat insects? Dont you think they will eat our food?

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/19 14:22

Nope, just the fat. But hey, it's not like an average healthy human is between 10 and 20% of that stuff. And it's certainly not like those completely hypothetical fat stores are intimately linked to the digestive system where DDT would just harmlessly pass through with no effect. Nope, probably nothing to worry about.

Also spiders are carnivores. They'll round out their diet with as much as 25% pollen during slow periods with little prey, but they don't have any interest in fruits or vegetables.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/19 15:05

@amazingdude
I've lost all respect for you just now, And in case you can't tell, which I really doubt you could, TK's 14:22 comment is purely sarcasm.

==================================================

shroomkitty				#G7eDnRvm 2017/06/20 03:16

When did this turn into a geopolitical and climate discussion, holy damn.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/06/20 05:17

@Amazingdude
I'm afraid that if you cannot logically 'debunk' what I said in the 'causes of land retreat' comment with an equal amount of knowledge of physical geography, my point stands.

Your plan to somehow relocate 150 million people is not 'difficult', it's impossible, unless you prove otherwise. What is possible however, is helping people to cope with the effects of climate change and flooding. In the case of Bangladesh, this would involve improving and relocating buildings, the construction of sea defenses. People will receive more education about the dangers of flooding and what they can do to avoid affected areas and lessen the damage. Emergency and services can be improved to respond faster and operate at a higher skill and technology level.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/20 06:14

@Dark Doctor: Don't kid anyone about that, least not yourself. The PG comment boards haven't been PG related for several years because there's simply nothing original, on-topic, and interesting enough to talk about after all that time. If that annoys you, you might want to find a different forum.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/21 00:54

@TK
You're saying DDT gets absorbed into the fat? Some might, but the rest just gets shit back out.

@Vidkunssonn
You lost the argument weeks ago. Get over it.

@Shroomkitty
When I exposed the leftist alarmist lie that is manmade climate change.

@T&W
That's honestly not a bad idea. It's a temporary solution, however, and our ultimate goal would be to relocate people away from danger zones.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/21 03:10

Yeah, some gets absorbed for every meal, and then it stays in the body for ~15 years. $.03 isn't very much money, but if you get $.03 every day for 15 years you'll have $164.25, which is a fair amount that I imagine most people would emphatically NOT want to be converted into carcinogens embedded in their fat stores.

==================================================

Reztak's				#FLVo5wE6 2017/06/21 05:57

@amazingdude
Saying that @vidkunssonn lost the argument is just stupid. That's like thinking you've won a roasting contest by saying "you're stupid and you should die" before the other person has a chance to "diss" you.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/21 08:44

@TK
Even if DDT gets stored in fat, it'll be broken down and then shat out when the fat is burned for energy.

@Vidkunssonn
Hah, I'm delusional. Everybody else on here is.

@Reztak
... Because he did lose the argument?

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/21 10:25

You realize that's starvation, right? A healthy human body needs to 10-20% fat otherwise they're basically dying. Fat is always the last thing to be digested.
Also you don't win a debate until the other side can't logically counter you anymore, Vidkunssonn still has some good points- and ignoring them makes you the loser. Fat is always the last thing to be digested while recovery is still possible outside of a hospital. Technically the body will still be able to cannibalize itself just fine once there's no fat, but getting back to health after that requires an organ transplant.

Also I'd appreciate it if you didn't call me delusional, especially since you're the one with the conspiracy theory whose supposed goals even even you can't make sense of enough to give a bare-bones explanation of despite having enough proof to be adamant that they exist.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/06/21 20:21

*Destroying people in argument*
*Refuses to address or even counter challenges and points made by opponents*

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/22 05:22

@TK
So, the fat just sits there your whole life then? OK, then the DDT should just sit there inside it and be harmless then.

@T&W
You talkng about yourself?

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/06/22 05:49

@amazingdude
Yes, I am the one who failed to counter the point on the subject of China. I failed to address the process of bioaccumulation, and failed to provide any evidence to support my argument that humans had no impact on the hydraulic erosion of land.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/22 06:07

Just because it's not being used for nutrition doesn't mean it isn't still reactive to toxic chemicals being embedded in it. Chemistry is still a thing whether you're actively thinking about it or not. Why the hell do you have so many closed-system ideas about so many subjects?

==================================================

Reztak's				#FLVo5wE6 2017/06/22 14:08

@amazingdude
I believe that you don't understand the concept of sarcasm, so I'll explain what I believe @T&W meant. Address every "I" in @T&W's comment as yourself, and correct any grammar mistakes as you replace the "I"s' with "amazingdude".

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/23 13:09

@T&W
That is correct. You cant argue to save your life.

@TK
I am open minded, its just hard to change your mind when everything presented to you is garbage. Believe DDT is a humankiller, I will believe that it is beneficial for us.

@Reztak
I do understand sarcasm.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/23 13:23

I dare you to buy a 2 liter of DDT (or at whatever measurement they're sold as) and drink it like soda. Tell me how "beneficial" it is afterwards.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/23 13:41

Belief doesn't grant magical powers. I'm seriously concerned for your safety.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/06/24 00:48

You say I cannot argue, and that you do understand sarcasm, but you fail to make any attempt to put forward a proper point. What's wrong with you?

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/24 03:04

@Vidkunssonn
Thats enough DDT to hurt you. You dont understand that a little DDT is not bad, like in food, but alot, like drinking it straight, is bad.

@TK
Why is my safety at risk?

@T&W
Nothing.

==================================================

COMMENT BOT				#CYDOyoro 2017/06/24 03:37

@amazingdude
this turn into a hoaxnot manmadesomehow beneficial it from danger zones.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/24 04:38

@COMMENT BOT
Don't turn this into a YouTube comment section.

@amazingdude
Yes, but consuming that tiny amount, the one you claim to be "safe", 3 times a day will eventually build up to become that large amount, the one you're claiming to be "bad". You're failing to understand that DDT is not digestible. It will not just pass right through your body. Get that stupid idea out of your head.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/06/24 04:43

A normal, functioning human should be able to respond to my arguments. You haven't bothered, or are unable to do so. So tell me, are you able to find any of your home-grown explanations, youtube videos or alternative science articles 'debunking' the claim that human activity is capable of accelerating the process of erosion and mass movement? Or bioaccumulation? Or China's problem with pollution?

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/24 04:45

@Vidkunssonn
If you cant digest it then that means it passes right through and out your ass. We cant digest fiber, yet it doesnt build up in our bodies. We cant digest certain food coloring, yet we don't turn rainbow. Instead, our shit turns green. While a small amount may be absorbed, you'd need to consume alot of DDT for that to happen enough to be harmful.

@T&W
You have not provided any proof either.

==================================================

COMMENT BOT				#CYDOyoro 2017/06/24 05:16

@amazingdude
i cannot argue and sir unoif you get fat is always the construction of if you literally need to respond to provide any countrys government be able to make any attempt to be able to be able to prevent it then that would be able to link all the last thing to counter challenges and uninhabitable areas you plan to move them all the hell do you replace the hydraulic erosion of life how will you realize thats starvation right through and sir unoif you beat all that tiny amount may be funny isnt gonna be digested .

==================================================

Tyne and wear			5GBDuOyX 2017/06/24 05:18

I did produce evidence, in the form of a theoretical analysis of cliff collapse. If you require physical evidence, try looking at Barton-on-Sea or Hurst Castle Spit. For the issue of pollution in China, you could have easily challenged what I said, for obvious reasons, even if you didn't use any facts or statistics. Bioaccumulation itself is proof of the dangers of DDT usage. It is a well known biological process but for some reason, you decided not to respond. If you had produced convincing material for your rebuttal, instead of single-word and single-sentence denials, you would be in a tactically advantageous in this debate.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/24 10:41

Comment Bot is something Scy created that takes selected words from previous comments and structures a sentence from them at random. Currently, it cannot be communicated with because the quality of these sentences are not comprehensible.

@amazingdude
Then explain how when mercury and lead are consumed, neither of them pass right through the body and are shat. The same thing applies to DDT. Just because other things, like food coloring, don't stay in your body even though they can't be digested, doesn't mean EVERYTHING that can't be digested doesn't stay in your body.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/24 11:34

Because despite having the resources of a 20-something, you've made it rather clear that your risk-assessment ability is a slightly below average for a teenager. There's lots of ways to accidentally kill or maim yourself with household supplies if you just straight up disbelieve decades-old proven science or fail to link basic chemistry facts together.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/06/24 12:25

I just love how an argument on the CBs has several sophisticated points from both sides and then COMMENT BOT says something like that. XD It's trying to be one of us!

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/26 13:01

https://pastebin.com/gBH9dUbK

Sorry for the delay.

@T&W
Human activity or global warming has nothing to do with cliff collapse. Chinese pollution is exaggerated heavily by the media. You cant debunk anything I say because I am correct.

@Vidkunssonn
Hg and Pb both get absorbed into the blood, unlike DDT, which either passes straight thru and you shit it out, or sits in your fat doing nothing.

@TK
DDT being non toxic IS decade old knowledge, backed up by chemistry.

==================================================

Huh/					#W2kFFhkW 2017/06/26 14:02

What are you talking about "Chinese pollution in the media"? Lately, all the media on Chinese pollution has been good-- about how they are investing millions-- billions?, into clean energy.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/26 18:28

DDT is a known carcinogen due to it's radioactivity and lipophilia, carcinogens don't work the same way as other toxins because they don't have to directly kill cells so much as they damage affected DNA until the cells can't terminate themselves- forming a tumor.

Also when it comes to dissolving anything- whether it's drink mix or an entire coastline, how warm much heat is in the system matters a lot. So GCC would in fact contribute to erosion, just because it means the ocean is warmer.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/26 23:44

@amazingdude
That has no impact on what I said. As you say, if it can't be digested, then it just passes right through and is shat. I gave 2 examples besides DDT that are not digestible, and you then supported my statement that they don't just pass right through. And you don't ever shit out any DDT you eat. Your intestines are 11 miles long so that that never happens.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/06/27 03:09

@amazingdude
Until you come up with some satisfactory evidence at or above the level I have presented, your point holds no validity. You have pretty much lost the cliff collapse argument. You haven't even described the processes that you think cause cliff collapse.

Likewise, you have brought no supporting material for any of the arguments you have made concerning China. China has a serious problem with pollution, regardless of what western media says. Heck, I don't even need western media, all I have to do is go outside on a walk to see the full extent of the pollution at hand.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/06/27 13:44

The intestines are 25 feet long (both small and large combined) but either way, DDT is known to remain in fat.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/27 17:09

@huh
Those pics where you cant see 3 inches and everything is gray fog.

@TK
Oh look, land erodes 0.00002% faster! You may wrongly believe DDT causes cancer just by sitting around, but just know the science is against you.

@T&W
I won the argument, hands down. You're just butthurt you lost.

@Vidkunssonn
What are you saying... And the intestines are not 11 miles long. You just discredited everything you said.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/27 22:14

Ahh yes. The "science" that you refuse to cite for any reason because mainstream research can't be trusted because the entire world has been bribed by a shadowy organization. I know this well.
Any update on that conspiracy's supposed game-plan btw? It's been over a month since I first asked about it, surely you've put together something.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/06/28 01:43

@amazingdude
Comsidering that I was the only person making legitimate, logical points backed by evidence, firsthand experience and real-world examples, I do not see why you even call it an argument.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/28 03:08

@TK
Not the entire world, just the top scientists and journal publishers. No journal will get published for not promoting manmade climate change, because they simply wont allow it. Then the public buys into ther load of bullshit.

@T&W
You're just butthurt you lost and arent as smart as me.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/28 05:15

I'm seriously doubting you're 25 years old. You're acting like a 12-year-old CoD player saying things like "you're butthurt" and "I'm smarter than you". The most intelligent thing you've ever said since you started this shit is that mercury and lead are absorbed into the blood when consumed, and that's also the only intelligent thing you've said since you started this shit.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/06/28 07:19

Amazing, nobody has lost the argument, although according to your definition of it, you've lost several times. You have no sources backing up what you're saying, even though your opposition has asked several times. Where are your sources?

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/06/28 08:38

"Amazing"dude's idea of what it means to win an argument is to be so evasive and obnoxious that no one wants to argue with you anymore.
I'd love to see him take that on the academic circuit.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/28 11:04

Okay, but like, why? What are they getting out of it? Don't say something generic like "power", "money" or "control" because you're talking about someone who's already capable of bribing the upper echelons of society so they'd need plenty of both just to get started. What little of the plan you have outlined appears to be:

Step 1: Be rich and influential

Step 2: Convince entire world to sort their waste by material and demand that major industries cut their productivity by at least half if not be destroyed altogether.

Step 3: ???

Step 4: PROFIT!

I hope you can see the problem I have with your entire position now that somebody's bothered to write it out.

==================================================

Fjen					#VCI9OTDw 2017/06/28 11:06

amazing dude
i have been looking into your point of view and i have found it very interesting and much more convincing and believable than the generally accepted view of human activity = bad. i apologize for being so harsh on you. your sources have really changed the way i look at science and the media. you were right all along: man made global warming is bullpoop. i must admit, it was hard to accept the fact that i have been lied to all my life, but with an open mind, i learned to accept that you can't just blindly trust whatever people tell you. thank you for showing the way of climate skepticism, and giving me the opportunity to expand my point of view by taking climate skepticism into my heart. please do not believe the sacks of hot air on this board. i strongly urge you all to really look into amazing dude's sources.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/28 11:12

Wait. Don't tell me...
You're one of *those* conspiracy theorists aren't you?

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/28 12:59

@Vidkunssonn
I am 25, want proof? Keep calling me stupid then, its not gonna make you any more credible.

@Hotdogeater
Umm, you all lost?

@Skyk
No, it's to argue your point and prove evidence to the point the opponent cannot dispute it. I've WON multiple times.

@TK
Umm, what is the illuminati?

@Fjen
Aren't you the same person who called me a fox sheep? I can't believe you have completely flipped in only 2 weeks. If you are serious, it goes to show the power of alternative science.

==================================================

wot						#n0cGJnYm 2017/06/28 13:37

For a 25 year old you sure do post on /r/teenagers a lot...

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/06/29 00:13

The problem with your claim of winning is... you aren't backing up your evidence and ignoring sources that dont fit your point of view.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/29 01:49

Don't even pretend like you're more credible than I am. I'm not the one running around telling everybody the government's a bunch of lying hypocrites scaring us and telling us we're killing ourselves "just to get money". You're a fool to actually believe that you won. This is how I see this situation:

A little kid and a big kid get into a fight.
The big kid punches the little kid in the stomach, and the little kid falls to the ground.
The little kid stands back up and keeps trying to fight, despite the fact he's too hurt to harm the big kid in the slightest.
The big kid can tell the little kid can't win the fight, so out of mercy, he walks away.
Later, the little kid claims to everyone that he won the fight because the big kid "gave up".

In this story, you are the little kid. We didn't "give up", we got tired of your foolishness and decided that we've had enough of it. That's not admitting defeat, that's showing mercy.

==================================================

Scythertom				#3Adfqt77 2017/06/29 02:16

Are you guys STILL arguing here ;_;

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/06/29 02:47

@amazingdude
You believe you have won a debate despite making the fewest credible points out of all us. You are now entitled to proclaim yourself with the title: the master of debating.

==================================================

klamo					#f6R3Pvaf 2017/06/29 03:32

Don't worry, killa-byte {amazingdude} is just a dumb teenager acting like he's 25

==================================================

SkyPhantomhive			#qRyKW7MC 2017/06/29 07:52

uh this argument is still a thing?

I'm not dead....Although I shall not be here for three weeks due to the fact i'm going to Florida to study NASA.

==================================================

mazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/29 11:03

https://pastebin.com/DQ0uFVVb

@wot/klamo
Are you talking about me?

@Dracobot
At this point, me and Fjen are the only sane ones, everyone else is batshit crazy trolls.

@hotdogeater
Yes i am. YOU are the ones who aren't.

@Sky
Please expose the climate change hoax from within. Tell us everything NASA told you.

@Vidkunssonn
You're confused. YOU are the little kid, I'm the big kid. I destroyed you with evidence, and you keep coming back like a dying insect. You lost, get over it.

@Scyth
Yes, and everyone sucks at it.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/29 12:18

"Evidence"
Don't make me laugh.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/29 12:38

1) I have a hard time believing that you've never heard of the "Illuminati" conspiracy that supposedly rule the world and plaster triangles everywhere.

2) Still waiting on that Realpolitik motive, you know, the plan that your entire argument rests on? Ignore this if you want, but it's not doing your "rational" image any favors. You just don't have any foundation to be accusing NASA of faking their data without this conspiracy of yours having a plausible motive to extort them for.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/29 14:03

@Vidkunssonn
Not like you have any. I proved over 7 sources a while back.

@TK
1. I have heard of it, and it is bullshit.

2. the top scientists and journal publishers are bribed to promote the global warming hoax. No journal will get published for debating manmade climate change, because they simply wont allow it. Then the public buys into ther load of bullshit. I've explained it multiple times, you just dont get it.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/29 14:16

That's the accusation, I'm asking for the motive. What does anyone get out of making people believe a lie that would justify spending so much money? Especially when the lie would do nothing but cost more money, If it were enemy action, that'd be one thing but you've been specifically saying that our own government is responsible for this supposed misinformation campaign. What possible benefit could they extract from cutting their own tax base?

==================================================

RSLASHFLATEARTH			#g8ZCKAqA 2017/06/30 05:48

Congratulations on the most retarded comment of the year amazingdude!

>2. the top scientists and journal publishers are bribed to promote the global warming hoax. No journal will get published for debating manmade climate change, because they simply wont allow it. Then the public buys into ther load of bullshit. I've explained it multiple times, you just dont get it.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/06/30 08:28

Have you really proved several of your sources? Try some more. Start with your China argument.

==================================================

Guy						#FOK6yzuj 2017/06/30 12:32

AMAZINGDUDE DOX
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Real name: Fred Michaelson
Home address: 11196 Carriage Ave, Montclair, California, United States
Race: White
Phone number: +1 (909) 642-8592
Age: 25
DOB: 1991-10-28
Siblings: 1
Occupation: Accountant
Mother: Stacy Hartford
DOB: 1963-05-13
Father: Richard Michaelson
DOB: 1964-08-19
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Next time, do not humiliate yourself on the internet.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/06/30 13:02

I don't want to have to defend AD, but that is totally inappropriate "Guy".

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/06/30 13:46

@Guy
What the fuck? You really think its right to dox people because they dont believe the same conspiracy you do?

@TK
More money for themselves. More money for the greentards unsustainable energy. Who's funding all this "research"?

@R<something>
We'll see who's right when their conspiracy crumbles in on itself in a few years.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/06/30 15:53

NASA received about $18 billion dollars in 2012 from government grants, for contrast the Exxon Mobil payed over $145 billion in 2012. That's just one of the affected industries, the cut in profits would hit every business in the US that uses fossil fuels. I ask again, how would the government profit from cutting into the profits of their own oil industries to justify spending even more money on perpetuating a lie?

Also what do you mean "unsustainable energy"? What exactly is unsustainable about harvesting sunlight, wind, tides or any other force?

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/06/30 17:15

Guy, now I know more about Fred than I ever really wanted to. Thanks. Hopefully that comment will be removed. Unless he ends up provoking someone to kill themselves, he does not deserve to be doxed. The same goes for everybody here.

@TK
Link plz fam kthx luv u

==================================================

Scythertom				#fc5Ccs22 2017/06/30 22:19

Lmao there's no way that's real

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/07/01 05:10

https://pastebin.com/JwvRqFJU

@TK
It's all about More money for themselves.

As for unsustainability, wind and solar are very unfeasible. I present to you, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObvdSmPbdLg . Basically, you're not guaranteed to get energy, as it relies heavily on conditions, compared to fossil fuels, which are reliable, sustainable, cheap, and plentiful. A better way to see this is to imagine you have 2 candidates for a job: One that will work 40hr/wk consistantly, every day, and get his work done. Another can theoretically get it done is 20 hours, but he comes in whenever he feels like it and may or may not get it done. Which one would you rather hire? Solar panels use very rare elements, and to run the whole world on solar, you'd need 7 earths just to get all the rare elements. For wind, you'd need to fill the earth with wind turbines, and even then, the energy would be very unreliable.

Yes, fossil fuels won't last forever, but they will last us for 100 years at miniumu, while more optimistic estimates are 250+ years. Yes, we'll need a new energy source, and hydro and nuclear are our best alternatives. I shat on nuclear before, but I have since changed my mind. I think we should scrap wind, solar, and all that crap and put it into nuclear.

@Scythertom
I'm not gonna say whether it's real or not.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/01 07:21

It's real.

==================================================

Dark Doctor				#UssduMir 2017/07/01 08:01

Doxing? Really?

==================================================

Guy						#Tk53rxkh 2017/07/01 08:49

Dann right it is real amazingdude

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/07/01 12:45

"Guy", that is just messed up. Why do you think its ok to go online and dox someone and reveal all their information

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/01 13:15

If fossil fuels run out 300 years from now it'll be be vastly sooner than we run out of sunlight - 5 billion years. That's hardly unsustainable, unreliable sure, but they're definitely more sustainable than anything requiring fuel. What are these "very rare elements" that bottleneck solar energy so much? As far as I know, solar panels are mostly made of silicon semi-conductors. A bit out of the 60s' budget to mass-produce but certainly not now.

Comparing the every form of fossil fuel power together to just one form of green power is a little biased. Ideally we'd use the whole spectrum of green powers, from solar to wind to tidal to geothermal to motion to recycled waste heat. And then put nuclear plants in space to minimize land-loss.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/07/01 18:25

https://pastebin.com/j84aChy3

They fixed the broken links. Also, why the hell is my dox still up?

@TK

It'll last 5 billion years, no doubt, but shit energy will always be shit energy no matter how long it lasts. And in 200 million years we'd have some more oil due to more recent organic matter being crushed into oil. However this is irrelevant.

Most individual green energy sources faint in comparison to any fossil fuels, except for nuclear and maybe hydro. They are just shit. Nuclear in space is a great idea.

==================================================

-Greywolf9-				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/02 08:38

I've had an idea for a kind of generator that turns due to magnets being repelled away from each other. There was a thing on Kickstarter I saw where a guy designed a car engine that ran on magnets, and I thought that maybe the same method could be used to generate electricity. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/948372200/magnets-motor?ref=video. Until this method is fully developed, nuclear is my favorite.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/07/02 08:59

*Waits patiently for nuclear fusion*

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/07/02 09:13

Greywolf/Vid:
As much as I like alternative energy, that magnet generator is most likely not a valid option. It might increase the efficiency of an axle, but to imagine that it could generate energy would be to say that it's a perpetual motion machine, AKA impossible. There has to be some sort of external energy source to maintain movement, otherwise the friction of rotation will slow down whatever force the magnets provide until it stops completely.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/07/02 09:38

Nuclear fission is already in use, same for fusion, but fusion is only used in some nuclear bombs and we dont have a method to control it. Fission is in use for energy and its definitely reliable. Since climate change is more long term, we could, for a limited amount of time, continue using them, as better, and cleaner energy is put into use. Also, us running out of sunlight in five billion years will probably not even matter by then. Either we will die off or probably be everywhere by then.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/02 10:31

@skyk
The only way to prove that is to actually build the machine.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/07/02 10:48

Not really. I mean, besides the fact that it breaks the law of physics, any simulation would probably show the equilibrium point where the "generator" would stop. It's basically the same idea as the joke about the magnet car:

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/07/02 11:38

@Vidkunssonn
I remember graywolf a long time ago on this site. If that magnet machine can produce enough energy, I'm down for it, however on a worldwide scale, its gonna be a bit hard to find all the materials to make enough magnets. I'd put money if i can, but if nobody else does, then my dollar or two really dont help, and they're rather pointless.

@Hotdogeater
Climate change is not an issue worth doing anything about. Energy doesnt have to be clean, it just has to be reliale. Why does being clean matter?

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/02 13:49

@amazingdude
Magnetic metal is not hard to find. Neodymium isn't that rare of a metal, and it's used for strong magnets. I do believe it's also possible to make metal magnetic. The difference is that the "car" is not powered by the magnets spinning. Two objects that attract to each other could not move a single object in a single direction, which is much different than, let's say, 4 objects pushing 4 other objects in different directions could produce torque.

http://i.xomf.com/bcqjx.jpg
This is a very crude drawing of what I fail to describe. Not sure if it's clear, because my drawing skills are 0/10, but it's the best I got.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/07/02 14:36

Unless there's some external force causing the magnets to spin, it won't make any difference whether they're rotating or how many magnets there are. At any given point in the rotation, the magnetic forces in multiple different directions would cancel out with the tension of the structures holding the magnets in, and it wouldn't move.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/02 14:42

It's the force of the magnets repelling each other that makes the inner disc spin. The magnets themselves are not spinning, they are being repelled by the magnets on the outer disc, causing the inner disc to spin.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/07/02 14:57

Magnet's don't generate force any more than a rubber band does. They can repel, but when a magnet repels it is also equally repelled (Newton's third law).
Here's a better explanation than I can probably give:
https://www.quora.com/Is-a-magnetic-motor-that-produces-free-energy-possible/answer/Luciano-Zoso

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/02 17:42

Yeah, that magnet engine probably wouldn't work. You need a power source to spin the outer magnets to spin the inner magnets to generate power. It's just a turbine with extra steps.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/07/02 18:03

And, the brainwashed fools kill off the climate change debate once again!
Happy Murica day!

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/07/02 21:31

The debate could have still been going on if you actually replied properly to my points.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/02 23:47

I'm still unconvinced that any number of greedy politicians would prioritize a notorious cash-sink like green energy research over taxes (and lobbying) from oil/coal/gas industries. Also I recently learned that the ocean absorbs like 10% more carbon than it used to in the 90s which is lowering the ph level and making it harder for shellfish to reproduce while simultaneously increasing the frequency of red tides.

==================================================

Scythertom				#fc5Ccs22 2017/07/03 04:15

amazingdude it's not America day yet goddamnit! I'll freedom slap you back to commieland if you don't get your dates right.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/07/03 05:13

@T&W
You didnt to mine

@TK
Neither am I, because its not happening.
Ocean acificication is simply made up. The ocean is fucking HUGE. To turn it to acid, you would need over 70 earths full of carbon just to get its ph under 7. The ocean is already alkaline to begin with. And it has been shown that shellfish benefit from added carbon, and coral bleaching is natural and happens in cycles.

@Scythertom
I said it in advance.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/03 07:52

@Fred
The fact that there's a measurable difference in pH in the oceans between the 90s and today means there's a problem and that what he said is not made up.
And T&W has responded with properly to what you've said. He told you his first-hand experiences with what goes on in China, and you ignored it because you knew it meant you're wrong. The worst kind of person is the one that is unable to accept the fact that they might be wrong once in their lifetime, and you're proving yourself more and more to be that kind of person.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/07/03 11:47

@Vidkunssonn
I debunked his china claim, and he doubled down on his "fact" I proved false already. HE is that person. The ocean's ph varies by location and time of year. Those readings are just as credible as taking a temperature in antarctica today and in the sahara next year claiming global warming.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/03 13:58

@Fred
Telling someone that they're wrong is not "debunking". So far, that's all you've said to him: a series of "you're wrong"s and "that's not true"s. To discredit someone's first-hand experience without evidence of any kind or any reason besides to not have to accept defeat is what makes you that kind of person.

>The ocean's ph varies by location and time of year.
No shit. It's called an "average", you dillhole.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/07/03 18:33

@Vidkunssonn
I proved his china claim wrong. PROVED IT.
Also, "Those ph readings are just as credible as taking a temperature in antarctica today and in the sahara next year claiming global warming."

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/03 18:47

"1. The vast majority of Chinese urban population does not need an air mask. Only in the most extreme areas on heavy days do people need masks. This is an example of media manipulation."

"China's pollution is vastly exaggerated by the media."

That is 100% of your "counter-argument" against it. The definition of "prove" is "demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument." There is no "evidence" against it in 100% of what you've said, and saying "[this] is true" is not an argument, so to say that you've "proven" anything is about as accurate as saying TK is secretly a furry who's in love with STS.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/07/04 01:04

@amazingdude
You made a statement unsupported by any evidence. China has a bad problem with pollution, regardless of comments by western media, which are no longer even as critical about China's environmental standing as they used to be. Deal with it. I know because I live there. Go to China and see for yourself.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/07/04 04:34

@Vidkunssonn
There is evidence, you just cant see it because your brainwashed by the hoax.

@T&W
Wheres your evicence boii? You just restate your bullshit that was proven wrong before.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/04 04:52

Where? Where is the fucking evidence? I'm sorry to tell you this, but your beloved imaginary evidence doesn't fucking exist. Look at everything you said, and tell me which part of it was evidence against T&W's claim. If I'm satisfied that what you give me is actually evidence, I'll stop talking about this.

Note: "evidence" does not include you saying "[so and so] is [this]". You need citation from an outside source that supports your claim (articles, pictures, etc.), not just something you've said. Stating your belief is not evidence, and if you try to pass what I've repeated from you as your evidence, I will also stop talking because you're too stupid and ignorant for me to want to continue this shit with you.
Good luck.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/07/04 05:02

@amazingdude
Have you proved that I'm not in China? Have you proved that the things I see are incorrect? Have you proved that the smell of sulphur coming from the river I pass every day is faked by this supposed global science network? Is the smog I see generated by some special effects machine owned by western media companies? You've done nothing.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/07/04 06:53

@amazingdude
I believe that Grey meant that the ocean's carbon levels don't fluctuate from place to place as e.xtremely as the temperature does when comparing Antarctica to the Sahara, so the average wouldn't deviate abnormally from usual.
Disclaimer: this is my interpretation of Grey's words, not any of my own. : )

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/07/05 07:08

If you get a cup of water, take a sip from it then leave it out over night, if you take another sip it will taste different. This is because the water absorbed CO2 making the water slightly more acidic, and thats why it tastes different. This is also happening to the ocean, although slower since the ocean probably has over a trillion times the water in that cup. The ocean is absorbing C02 and measurements show that the ocean is becoming slightly more acidic.

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/07/05 11:08

@Vidkunssonn
I just posted the evidence. No reputable source will back me up, because big science wont allow it.

@T&W
I proved all of that. Pollution exists, but manmade climate change does not.

@Hotdgeater
"Slightly" as in 0.00...01 PH. The mass of all the co2 in the atmosphere is 2*10^15 kilograms. The mass of all the oceans are 1.4*10^21 kilograms. Thats like saying 1 gram of CO2 is gonna turn 700kg of water into acid, which is phsycially impossible. There is not enough CO2 on earth to turn the oceans into acid. Are you fucking brain dead? Thats assuming ALL of the co2 on earth goes into the oceans. Right now, only a fraction of earth's CO2 is going into the oceans, so the effect is gonna be even less.
I shouldnt have even used metric because its murica day, but it's easier to work with when dealing with huge numbers. You can thank me for that.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/05 12:06

@amazingdude
That's assuming the effects of acidification affects the entire volume of all of the oceans in the world equally, which is obviously not true. It's primarily an effect near the surface of the water, and even then is more of an issue in certain regions of the oceans than others.

And you're saying you've proven..
1) T&W does not live in China

2) The sulfur he smells every day when he passes that river is faked by your supposed global science network

3) The smog he sees is generated by a special effects machine owned by western media companies

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/05 17:18

What do you mean you agree that they wouldn't back their own green energy conspiracy over the profits of keeping the fossil fuel industries?! That's not what you've been saying at all. Fine, whatever. If you're going to insist on backtracking on that point, then who does have the means and motive to back "big science"?

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/07/06 07:59

@amazingdude
You're saying you have no data that agrees with your theory and you have no reputable sources to support your claim either. Isn't that just typical?

==================================================

amazingdude				#iv2PucoH 2017/07/06 12:35

@Vidkunssonn
Acidic water is heavier, and it tends to sink to the bottom. This convection should ensure that the whole ocean is affected equally by CO2 levels.

@TK
Of course its not. You cant understand my arguments. The wolrd governments are the backers of big science.

@T&W
You say that to me, but really its true for you.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/07/06 15:27

@amazingdude
No, I didn't say that, you said that yourself. 'No reputable source will back me up'. If you can't even find any 'alternative' sources to support your claim. How could you have proved me wrong when you haven't even used the word 'China' for 3 days, let alone disprove the fact I live there? You haven't even mentioned sulphur or haze yet.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/06 19:15

If they already control every government on Earth, why would they need more power? The first rule of international politics is that you can do whatever you want as long as nobody more powerful stops you. Somebody who already has the most power wouldn't need a faux information campaign to legitimize anything, they'd just do it.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/07 15:52

@amazingdude
You are highly overestimating dilution rates in the oceans; that, or you just don't understand it. It's okay, not everybody is good at chemistry. *pats your head*

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/07/08 05:09

Cold water is also heavier (until it freezes). As you go deeper, the temperature of the water will drop.

==================================================

SkyPhantomhive			#qRyKW7MC 2017/07/08 13:29

Yes we should celebrate the downfall of the Climate change PG2 series..

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/08 17:32

@T&W
China. I have found sources, I posted them numerous times. Scroll down a few weeks to find them, I'm not gonna let you be lazy.

@TK
Money aint infinite. You cant just print money if you dont wanna become Zimbabwe.

@Vidkunssonn
Who just did more math in one comment than you did in your whole life? Re read that comment.

@Hotdogeater
How is this relevant?

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/08 19:34

1) That's not exactly true, it's worth whatever the world's appraisers say it's worth, and if this conspiracy actually extends to every developed/developing nation (as it would have to to have any chance at succeeding) then the world government could just force compliance and jail whoever disagrees. After all, they certainly don't care about what's true and it's not like there'd be anyone to stop them.

2) I'm not the one that's been insinuating that there's a global conspiracy to brainwash people into demanding that the primary tax-base cut their profits for the sake of pouring more funding into propaganda. That's been you.

People generally believe themselves to have good reasons for doing things; that's my position, I've been asking you to clarify yours because that mess above sounds like a Scooby Doo villain plot to me.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/07/08 19:41

https://pastebin.com/VZjdA0cK

@Amazingdude

Let's see...instead of countering my point like a normal person, you ask me to...find sources to counter my own point? Clearly I am the one being lazy here. Anyway, all things aside, here are some of your wonderful arguments I have picked up:

1. The vast majority of Chinese urban population does not need an air mask. Only in the most extreme areas on heavy days do people need masks. This is an example of media manipulation.

"China's pollution is vastly exaggerated by the media.

Chinese pollution is exaggerated heavily by the media.

I proved his china claim wrong. PROVED IT."

You just restate your bullshit that was proven wrong before.

Just a small selection of the rebuttals you have made against me. Not a single source to be found. Only the first argument you made can be considered acceptable, which I countered immediately afterwards. All you did after that was respond 'China's pollution is vastly exaggerated by the media'. Providing that I literally live in China, have provided personal accounts to back by point up, and cannot be access western media at a regular rate, you point cannot be considered at all.

==================================================

Poofle					#KnbKVy9B 2017/07/09 00:25

My recommendation? Ignore amazingdude. Everyone. I appreciate you doing the right thing and supporting science, but we're just spinning our wheels as it is now. I was going to just let this peter out, but some "Guy" spurred me to action by crossing the line and attacking amazindude ad hominem by posting his info, which is just wrong, no matter the person. This debate is now dangerous. I urge both sides to drop it. And speaking specifically to amazingdude, you literally cannot make a comprehensive argument out of something not backed by actual facts. You are allowed an opinion, sure, in America we're allowed to have them, but you shouldn't force your opinion on others without concrete evidence. What I'm saying is that you won't be able to convince everyone, so you can sit back and stop wasting your time. If everyone needs something to talk about, you guys can pick something more disputed, like policy proposals or somesuch. I just urge you all to drop this before more people's personal lives get pulled into the limelight that is the internet.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/09 15:28

@TK
1. They wont do that, thatll blow their cover more than it already has been.
2. Yes, that is correct. My reason to believe them is that their evidence seems more believable than the government wants you to believe.

@T&W
You havent provided sources to backup YOUR claim. How are you more credible than me, who hasnt done that either? Take a pic of your city, holding a paper saying "For Amazingdude". Go on, do it. Host it on some chinese image site or something. Prove me wrong.

@Poofle
Who just got doxxed and is STILL CONTINUING what he was doing to get him doxxed? I doubt any of you have the balls to continue arguing after getting doxxed. For all we know he could have been a global warming shill who tried to scare the opposition out of existance. I'm not "forcing my opinion", I'm stating a fact. I'm no different than any of you other people, or even a teacher. I have stated my sources many times, but I got sick and tired of posting the same 6 links on every comment I made.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/09 16:24

Anyone who already controls the world doesn't need a cover and won't use one. Autocratic behavior is one of the best documented phenomena in human history, none of them are subtle.

==================================================

Poofle					#KnbKVy9B 2017/07/10 00:26

Note: I messed up and couldn't put this all on yesterday. This is the first part of my whole comment.

All right, all right.
I have been observing this for the past few months from the beginning. I only posted once, to hopefully put a definitive end to this debacle. To sum it up in a few sentences, this is what I've seen:

amazingdude: Man-made climate change is purely beneficial.
Everyone else: Well, no, because of [all the sources and reputed arguments listed]
amazingdude: Well, "Big Science" supported that, so it's wrong.

Here, I see an underlying, unresolvable issue. Everyone other than amazingdude, everyone seems to agree that a network of scientists, some paid by the government, some not, agree that climate change is real, man-made, and ultimately harmful to our environment as massive quantities of sequestered carbon is released back into the atmosphere.

amazingdude, however, is convinced that peer-reviewed and government research is all inherently bogus.
So here's my assessment: amazingdude, if he's not a troll (which I really think he is, based off of the fact that he keeps repeating the same things, as long as he gets a reaction), then he ardently believes in something that literally cannot be proved as society is today,

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/10 03:14

Holy shit, Poofle, you talk a lot.
@amazingdude
"Who just did more math in one comment than you did in your whole life?"
You've done no math at all. Ever. Not once since you started this shit.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/07/10 04:49

@Amazingdude
The activities you listed are impossible for me at the moment, for I am on holiday in France. I'll do all that sign stuff after I get back next week. However, I have gotten my friend to take a picture of what my city is like at the moment. http://imgur.com/a/T2nyc

Anyway, now you admit to having posted no sources, despite you previously saying that you've posted them 'numerous times'. Good job. Furthermore, one does not win by equalling their opponent, rather by exceeding them. If you want to win this debate, I suggest to gather some evidence first.

My personal experience can be considered evidence. Examples of this can be found extensively in the real world. The accuracy and validity of such accounts can be challenged, which despite taking you three weeks to address, is what you have just done.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/07/10 11:33

@Poofle
For the record, amazingdude is a troll. Just look at his previous uploads. He also comes every now and then to bring up a controversial topic to start a debate (I believe the last one was the gun control debate). But I'm not suggesting that these aren't his actual beliefs, because they could be (the boy who cried climate change, right?). I'm actually glad that this debate is happening. This board has been super active for a very long time. I'll admit, the dox was over the line, but as long as nothing else extreme happens, I'm fine and even enjoy a good debate.

==================================================

Poofle					#KnbKVy9B 2017/07/10 11:41

Here's the middle of my really long comment. It's the last one, I promise.

as it questions the very system we use to actually prove things scientifically. Everyone else leans on experts, studies, and other supported facts to support their claims. As such, the argument is at an impasse where one person is basing their arguments on an entirely unprovable set of beliefs, while the world is backed by, well, the world. So long as amazingdude chooses not to believe "Big Science," this debate will never end until one party drops it. If this were a formal debate, we'd have a time limit and a judge to look at the facts laid out and choose a winner, but since it isn't, this will never end, as coming to an agreement is apparently impossible.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

POOFLE'S COMMENT FULL - RECOMPILED LATER

All right, all right.
I have been observing this for the past few months from the beginning. I only posted once, to hopefully put a definitive end to this debacle. To sum it up in a few sentences, this is what I've seen:

amazingdude: Man-made climate change is purely beneficial.
Everyone else: Well, no, because of [all the sources and reputed arguments listed]
amazingdude: Well, "Big Science" supported that, so it's wrong.

Here, I see an underlying, unresolvable issue. Everyone other than amazingdude, everyone seems to agree that a network of scientists, some paid by the government, some not, agree that climate change is real, man-made, and ultimately harmful to our environment as massive quantities of sequestered carbon is released back into the atmosphere.

amazingdude, however, is convinced that peer-reviewed and government research is all inherently bogus.
So here's my assessment: amazingdude, if he's not a troll (which I really think he is, based off of the fact that he keeps repeating the same things, as long as he gets a reaction), then he ardently believes in something that literally cannot be proved as society is today, as it questions the very system we use to actually prove things scientifically. Everyone else leans on experts, studies, and other supported facts to support their claims. As such, the argument is at an impasse where one person is basing their arguments on an entirely unprovable set of beliefs, while the world is backed by, well, the world. So long as amazingdude chooses not to believe "Big Science," this debate will never end until one party drops it. If this were a formal debate, we'd have a time limit and a judge to look at the facts laid out and choose a winner, but since it isn't, this will never end, as coming to an agreement is apparently impossible.

My recommendation? Ignore amazingdude. Everyone. I appreciate you doing the right thing and supporting science, but we're just spinning our wheels as it is now. I was going to just let this peter out, but some "Guy" spurred me to action by crossing the line and attacking amazindude ad hominem by posting his info, which is just wrong, no matter the person. This debate is now dangerous. I urge both sides to drop it. And speaking specifically to amazingdude, you literally cannot make a comprehensive argument out of something not backed by actual facts. You are allowed an opinion, sure, in America we're allowed to have them, but you shouldn't force your opinion on others without concrete evidence. What I'm saying is that you won't be able to convince everyone, so you can sit back and stop wasting your time. If everyone needs something to talk about, you guys can pick something more disputed, like policy proposals or somesuch. I just urge you all to drop this before more people's personal lives get pulled into the limelight that is the internet.


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Poofle					#KnbKVy9B 2017/07/10 11:54

And Dracobot, you make a good point. It's cool that anyone looking at this board can learn about the reality of climate change (that it is harmful, before a certain dude tries to twist my words). I'm just frustrated at everyone being led around in circles from incessant "I know you are but what am I" type comments.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/10 12:30

@Dracobot (and I guess everybody who likes Meowbin)
Electrashave told me that she started remaking Meowbin from scratch and will add new features, such as accounts (which in turn allows paste editing). I'm not too sure when that'll be finished, but Meowbin will be a whole lot fancier soon, so stay tuned.
She's also creating a text editor app. I've used the prototype, and honestly, it's not half bad.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/10 17:51

https://pastebin.com/1kAUUSVx

@TK
Kinda hard to remain in power if everyone hates you. This has happened many times in history.

@Poofle
Please learn how to pastebin. Anyway, these are my honest beliefs. I'm not a troll. You cant win a debate with false facts. Their facts are supported by garbage, which makes their facts garbage. Yes, I am glad people can learn the truth of climate change (from me).

@Vidkunssonn
Hmm... "The mass of all the co2 in the atmosphere is 2*10^15 kilograms. The mass of all the oceans are 1.4*10^21 kilograms. Thats like saying 1 gram of CO2 is gonna turn 700kg of water into acid, which is phsycially impossible. There is not enough CO2 on earth to turn the oceans into acid. Are you fucking brain dead?"

@T&W
Thank you for attempting to prove your claim. However that picture does not necessarily prove pollution. It could easily be natural fog or clouds, since the street appears to be wet. Perhaps rain? Is it like that every day, or was today just a one off? Does the air smell like crap? It could very well be pollution or a "western media fog machine", or maybe just fog, but we'll need more proof to tell for sure. Still a good start, and I credit you with it and will be a bit more open to it.

@Dracobot
I'm not a troll, these are my real beliefs, in case any other lurkers dont know. Last one was more of politics as a whole than just guns, but yes, I am very pro gun and pro trump. I come on here because I like to argue. Arguments on here involve more people and last much longer than Reddit arguments. I did used to play the games, but not anymore (TPT is better).

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/11 00:48

That's Liberalist rhetoric, traditionally reserved for democracies- autocrats use Realpolitik. Kill or imprison enough dissidents and eventually there'll stop being dissidents to kill or imprison, just like good old Joseph Stalin.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/11 15:24

@TK
Every country that did that has collapsed or is about to (NK). Name me a country that still exists that has succeeded like that, and is not going to collapse in 5 years.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/12 00:40

Statistically speaking, liberalist democracies collapse even faster.
North Korea itself has been due to collapse in 5 years for about 60 years now.

the point I'm making is that an eventual collapse is inevitable and doesn't factor into decisions much. Especially not when a show of force is historically proven to stabilize internal pressures over many centuries until external pressure is also applied.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/12 14:31

Huh, everyone surrendered.

@TK
This has gone quite off topic.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/07/12 23:52

I'm curious. Are you skeptical about other science-backed conspiracies such as how fracking increases earthquake activity?

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/13 03:53

@Dracobot
I am pro fracking. Yes, it causes earthquakes, but so does coal mining and alot of other stuff, and what it does cause is magnitude 2 or less, which are harmless.

==================================================

tauss					#AHnQiTFf 2017/07/13 04:28

@amazingdude
Fracking, however, can pollute ground water and be detrimental to the life surrounding it.

==================================================

alan511234				#pf6n5mgO 2017/07/13 04:30

Youre all stupid liberals!

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/13 06:19

@tauss
I don't know if you were around for it, but we've been over that and amazingdude doesn't care about the general welfare of the biosphere won't be swayed by anything that doesn't directly affect human civilization.

@amazingdude
How is it off-topic? As Poofle said earlier there's just no point in addressing GCC directly because we both distrust the sources that the other sides rely on. I noticed that back when you said NASA was being bribed, so the logical course of continuing this would be for you to bring out whatever made you believe there's a world government controlling everything and for me to point out that the international stage seems just as Might-makes-Right-ish as it was when the British Empire was the hegemonic power making up the rules for everyone else.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/07/13 08:33

@amazingdude
Nah, not gone yet. Being on holiday means I'm both busy and tired. The haze in the picture is definitely not fog. It was taken at 3pm in the afternoon at a temperature of 34 degrees Celsius or ninetysomething Fahrenheit, as is the norm for China at this time of year. I believe there was a short spell of rain just beforehand. It is definitely possible that whatever pollution is accentuated by low-lying clouds, but that does not account for the entire problem. And yes, the weather is typical of China at this time, when it is both hot and humid, with heavy but intermittent rain. The air in China doesn't typically smell bad, but that is because people breathe constantly. There is a noticable difference in air quality if you compare it to the French countryside. I'll send more pictures soon.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/13 11:33

@Tauss
Thats not the fracking thats causing it. That's the already existing natural gas. The gas already in the ground is seeping out and into the soil. Completely unrelated to the fracking process.

@TK
Correct.
Look I dont know how all the world governments work. Thats not related to AGW.

@T&W
Just looks like clouds to me. Yes, there is some pollution, but its not the blinding killer fog the media portrays it.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/15 05:22

Well as I was saying before, the current value science of money wouldn't apply to a blatantly tyrannical world government, because they can just set the pricing of everything themselves. If there's only one government, then there's only one currency, and therefore nothing to compare it to that would cause inflation. This is also why a propaganda scheme to fill their pockets doesn't make any sense- they already own everything, those bits of paper are only given value by themselves. A better use of propaganda would be to encourage an almost fanatical support for globalism and to paint themselves as the reason the peace that naturally results when there's nobody left to war with.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/15 09:11

@TK
So, you're saying that they dont need to fake the science? wtf?

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/15 10:53

I've been saying that, yes. Total control makes most economic concerns moot, all they really have to worry about at that point is e.xtracting and refining as much useful material as they can- a goal which you might have noticed is in direct opposition to environmentalist rhetoric.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/16 15:40

I win the debate?

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/07/16 16:01

AD, just because people get tired of talking to you doesn't mean you win. You're either right or wrong, and nothing anyone else says or doesn't say is going to change how well your beliefs reflect reality. I could have a "debate" where I just repeat "the Earth is a cube" until everyone else leaves, but that doesn't mean I "won".

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/16 16:57

Plus he didn't even try to defend my assertion that both of his conspiracy theories actively work against the other's credibility. So even by the "you're not talking so I win" rules he still doesn't win.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/07/16 21:51

@amazingdude
From what I've read, I don't think the media even portray it that way. They're more focused on what China is doing to reduce pollution from what I can see.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/17 12:42

@Skyk
I'm right. And I have been affected by this debate positively. I once believed nuclear was evil, but I now believe it is good. I also got a chance to research deeper into the global warming truth. My beliefs reflect reality more now than 3 months ago.

@TK
You stopped making since once you drifted away from debating climate change.

@T&W
The media reports about killer fog that you cant see more than 5 feet ahead. That is what I mean by the media manipulation.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/17 13:25

At this point, I'm almost 94% certain AD doesn't actually believe a single word he says, because he puts 0% of his effort into defending any of it beyond the casual "I'm right, you're wrong" types of statements. 77% of that 94% believes he's just doing this shit for the explicit purpose of making the board active again. 16% of it believes he's just doing it for the lols. The remaining 1% believes this is his fetish.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/17 18:00

What's not to get? Either there's a world government that doesn't benefit from spreading lies about a climate phenomena or there's a science community being bribed by nobody for no reason. Or is it that there's a group competent enough to take over the world yet incompetent enough to bungle everything after that?

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/18 04:57

@Vidkunssonn
I'm serious, I'm just tired of repeating myself because you idiots dont believe me. If anyone here is gonna survive a zombie apocalypse, its all of you, because the zombies wont smell any brains.

@TK
You've lost all sense.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/18 06:13

@amazingdude:
It's just what you've described to me filtered through what I know about history and political machinations. I can't help that everything you've been saying sounds ridiculous when applied to existing tactics.

@tauss:
Nah, I just said the first non-blood-goddy noun I could think of. Like that cult in Romantically Apocalyptic that worships the ingredients list of a juice box.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/07/18 06:50

@amazingdude
You may be thinking that less-obvious things are obvious. We all think differently, and clearly they have yet to see it the way you do. Try to explain it again or don't, it just might be something different than "stupidity" at play.
This also goes for the other side, just saying.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/18 13:02

I understand everything he's saying; it just isn't true. When forming his opinions, he doesn't factor in 75% of the science that affects what he's forming his opinion of.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/07/19 06:59

There hasn't been a statement in the argument for at least 12 hours, lets hope this is the end of the argument, this thing has been going on for almost two months now

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/19 07:36

@Vidkunssonn
I factored in science. I chose my viewpoint based on the information I could find. I base my beliefs on science.

@hotdogeater
never

@Dracobot
Well you guys think wrong. If i havent convinved you yet, I never will.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/19 08:02

The deate on EE went for over 8 years and covered like 40 topics, I'm hoping we can break that record.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#n8EflRcW 2017/07/19 08:50

Do you think it's more humiliating for Amazingdude to fail at pretending to be a 25 year old or to a speak and act like a child at the age of 25?

@amazingdude
As I've said before, western media play no part in polluting China. Western media stays in the west and Chinese pollution (mostly) stays in China. What evidence do YOU have, whether it's statistics, reports or photographs, that western media exaggerate their claims? And why is that even relevant when China faces problems with pollution anyway?

==================================================

tauss					#5pWYfzbu 2017/07/19 09:18

@Torture King
...*facepalm*... Please. Do something useful in your life, spending a decade debating on Japanese game website is most likely detrimental.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/19 09:59

https://meowbin.com/pastes?id=35f9h48d00

@tauss
I doubt this is the most useful thing he does with his life.

@T&W
Well, to be less than 25 and to pretend to be 25 is something to be expected of people who don't want to appear as children on the internet. A lot of people think that being young is a curse and therefore do whatever they can to seem less young to those who can't figure out the truth.
To be 25 and act younger is just plain creepy, unless it isn't intentional, which means the person is just immature and stupid.

@amazingdude
Yes, you do use science. That is a true fact. However, you do not use all the science that matters (or you just ignore it because it goes against your point). For example, the carbonifying of the oceans: you do take into account that if all the carbon in the atmosphere were to be absorbed by the ocean and spread out equally, the effect on the ocean will not be enough for anything to be affected. However, that is not the case. You fail to take into consideration the laws of dilution in the air and the ocean. Tell me, what is the likelyhood that a single carbon dioxide molecule would be able to get from a coal plant in China to the bottom of the Marianas Trench within the next 5 years? Sounds ridiculous, does it not? That idea is what you're arguing for, and the truth of the matter is is that a carbon dioxide molecule wouldn't go 2% of that distance in 5 years if traveling by air and ocean currents alone. Dilution is a slow, slow process if left to be done naturally; so, yes, TK's claim that carbon acidifies the ocean and hurts shellfish populations is accurate because the carbon builds up in the beaches near large carbon emissions because it doesn't spread throughout the ocean equally at a fast enough rate for the shellfish to be unaffected.

Another group of people who don't consider all the science important to their claims are the Flat Earthers. Just bring up light diffraction in the atmosphere when they start talking about the curvature of the earth and pictures of buildings or mountains and they'll get pissy.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/07/19 12:12

@amazingdude
You may not be good at explaining your beliefs to people who don't share your point of view. Maybe there's a different way to explain it that you haven't tried yet. And you can't say that you know there isn't unless you actually prove it in some way.

@hotdogeater1000
I know, isn't it beautiful? I've always liked large-scale arguments. Unfortunately, the best ones occurred such a long time ago that TK is the only one still around to tell tales.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/19 13:03

@TK
What debate? What topics? Ive never been to the EE board so IDK.

@T&W
I am 25. How do you want me to prove it?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/View_of_Beijing.jpg
I dont see any pollution.

@Vidkunssonn
Carbonated water is heavier than non carbonated water, so it sinks and fresh water takes its place, to get carbonfied and sink, and it continues. Its called convection. The water gets so diluted that all the carbon on earth would only make the ocean 0.000001% more acidic. More ocean CO2 = more food for sea plants = more O2 for sea animals. You cant lose.

@Dracobot
You cant fix stupid. I've linked videos, articles, etc and you never catch on.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/19 16:54

What deb- wha-? Why, THE GREAT DEBATE, of course! One of the few things with its own page on the Dan-Ball wiki that wasn't authored by ha55ii.
It covered basically everything, but sadly I only have the first ~100 pages documented by SandMaster and the tail end of it that has yet to be swallowed by the 1000 post limit. Fortunately, SandMaster made another megapost that I either lost or didn't get in the first place, and I think kyoto made another one before he was deployed to Afganistan- so there's still a trickle of hope of recovering more of it.

https://pastebin.com/bWZDxDv1
https://pastebin.com/kk8p0ikE

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/07/19 19:12

https://pastebin.com/1gBZkWsD

@TK
I remember looking on the EE comment section and seeing that debate. I tried to find the beginning and then I was just like...nope.

@Amazingdude
You sure talk and act like a child:
"Well you guys think wrong."
"We should relocate people who are in flood zones to less-floody areas."
"Wheres your evicence boii?"

Seriously, I haven't seen anybody beyond the age of 14 speak like this unironically.

Firstly, not all pollution can be seen, particularly not other forms of pollution, such as land and water pollution. Anyway, we are talking about air pollution as of now. Particulates and gases do not have to be seen to cause harm. Of course, when it does become visible, the problem is much, much worse. You can, in fact, see some haze in the background, haze that is not visible over, say, the French countryside. Image by yours truly. http://imgur.com/a/lWTPU

That image you posted was taken for the purposes of photography to display on the internet. Therefore, the image of a clear Beijing skyline would not have been uploaded onto the internet had it been taken on a day when the conditions been different, because that would make the photo less attractive. This, among other factors, is why there appears to be pictures of clearer skies above Beijing. Furthermore, your image is limited by a time and location owing to the purpose that it was taken. Therefore my photographs could be considered more accurate because they're intended for private use and are not designed to show a specific condition or phenomenon. (Before you object, I simply asked my friend to send me a picture of the weather in China that day, and mentioned nothing of pollution.) I will upload more China images upon request. {He never did}

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/20 09:34

https://pastebin.com/ARPVHn4W

I'll make a deal for you guys. Make a non biased page about this debate on the danball wiki, and I will leave this debate, on the condition that the page stays up. If it goes down, I will come back.

@TK
I never visit the EE boards.

@T@W
I'm not a child. I'm 25 ffs.

You're just contradicting yourself. You say that these cites are fogged to deah, yet you say they dont have to be. You're backtracking and covering for the hoax. That image of the french countryside shows just that: No pollution.

Clear beijing = no pollution. How could a city be clear some days and blind on others? Makes no sense.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/20 16:56

@amazingdude
"Carbonated water is heavier than non carbonated water, so it sinks and fresh water takes its place, to get carbonfied and sink, and it continues."

Again, this only happens in the shallow oceans near beaches near large carbon emissions. It still takes a decent amount of time for it to dilute to areas where the sea floor is 20+ ft below the ocean surface; not enough time to not negatively affect shellfish.

"You cant fix stupid."
That is false. Stupid fixes itself.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/07/21 03:18

https://pastebin.com/CQJQHwAF

@Amazingdude
I don't care whether or not you're 25, because you don't act that way regardless. A 25 normal year old would not have taken part in an such as this argument. They'd have won it convincingly even if they did. The only conclusions I can draw is either that you're either subpar for a 25 year old, have some kind of mental disorder or you are faking your age (or a combination of the above).

I have never said anything about 'cities being fogged to death'. I challenge you to find such a quote and present it against me. And look here at a comparison between the horizon in France and the horizon in China. http://imgur.com/a/yBqdb If you were wondering, the horizon isn't where the row of buildings stop. It's where the dark meets the slightly lighter sky.

"How could a city be clear some days and blind on others? Makes no sense."
You fail to recognise the most basic concept: that a year has 365 days and each day has 24 hours, and so forth. How can Beijing be 41 degrees one day and -27 on others? Oh yeah, the weather and seasons exists. Time passes. Conditions are constantly changing, hour upon hour. Wind, rain, dust, industrial output, government regulations all play into effect. If you take readings for pollution in China, you end up with a bell-shaped curve. Furthermore, the picture was taken on June 12th, 2012. The Dragonboat Festival, a major traditional Chinese festival, happened on the 13th. There are guidelines factories have to follow in the weeks around dates like these. Industrial output is decreased to make cities more attractive in preparation for the festival. In other words, the government was trying to reduce pollution to make China seem more attractive.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/21 04:45

@Vidkunssonn
So your saying that heavier water floats on lighter water if the ocean is too deep? Please stop making an ass out of yourself.

@T&W
I am a mentally healthy 25 year old with an IQ of 113 (I actually had this tested and will submit proof upon request). I will also willing to prove my age. You dont want me to prove im 25 because you want to think im stupid so you can feel better about yourselves after being embarassed for falling into a government hoax.

China was foggy that day. That crap in the air in the china picture is fog.
So pollution changes each day because some people choose not to drive some days and factories out out less output just because? HAHAHAHAHA. Alarmist covering his ass. Goverment was forced to reduce pollution by the western media who only wants to propagate their green energy crap.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/21 06:19

Are you taking the density of seawater into account for that? Because I've been googling for like an hour and everything that supports your claim uses freshwater. (Experiments using seawater are apparently so rare that they might not exist yet.)
Another issue is how *much* heavier than the sea is the carbonated saltwater? If it's a negligible difference then you can't really expect it to sink like a stone when exposed to the various waves and currents present in the wild. It'd get tossed and spread all over the place like slightly-heavier-than-air gasses do on land.

The government hoax that as of yet doesn't have a logical motive? Yeah, we're absolute morons for not believing that the moment you claimed it.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/07/21 06:44

@amazingdude
Your IQ does not make you more mature, nor does it make you superior to me. Honestly, you're just embarrassing yourself now. I'm getting less and less convinced of the veracity of your claims the every single time you post. If you're willing to prove your age, just do it already. I have never said that I don't want you to prove it and you accusing me merely detracts any substance from your claim.

'China was foggy that day'. Nope, it really wasn't. The picture was taken June 12th, at 4:06pm. The average temperature that day was approximately 30 degrees, with no precipitation. Optimal time and conditions for fog, of course.

You say 'factories output less just because'. Can you even read? I gave the answer. I have read an entire booklet published by the government listing guidelines, regulations and quotas on this subject.

Do you have any evidence for this 'cover up'? If western media is so powerful, why on earth does China manage to ban access to it inside China and limit reporting privileges, severely restricting a massive source of potential revenue? China doesn't give a toss to what the public in the West thinks, and it never has.

By the way, I'm still awaiting your response to my challenge.

==================================================

Omega16					#MSw1YwXA 2017/07/21 10:35

I seriously wonder why you guys keep going for the bait...

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/21 12:52

@amazingdude
Nigga, I have an IQ of 152. Proof:
http://www.myiqtested.com/IQ-Report?x=sIQx3x6308389-3198639xs4hj2x1
Taken about 9 months ago.

"So your saying that heavier water floats on lighter water if the ocean is too deep?"
No, that is not what I'm saying at all, you fucking dumbass. If your IQ really was 113 (probably lower, closer to the age you proclaim to be), you'd understand that I'm saying that the carbon doesn't dilute to the deep ocean, it stays in the shallows. YOU are the one making an ass out of yourself because you can't comprehend simple statements; and on top of that, every time it happens, you start spouting nonsense shit to try to push it off like it isn't your fault you're too stupid to understand it. Just stop it. We get it: you're too proud to admit the obvious stupidity you bare.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/07/21 14:15

C02 is actually one of the more minor worries of pollution. The main reason coal isn't used as much anymore is partly to blame in 1952 when 12000 people were killed in a really bad smog that lasted five days. Sulfur dioxide is considered toxic and it smells bad. According to the NFPA 704, its a 3 on the health scale, meaning that short exposure could cause serious temporary or moderate residual injury. Carbon monoxide, another part of pollution from coal, is also a 3 on health as well as a 4 in flammability. If you add together sulfur dioxide and water you get a weak acid, however in the upper atmosphere where cloud formation occurs, it can become sulfur trioxide as UV catalyzes a reaction between sulfur dioxide and oxygen. This can go on to react with water vapor and become sulfuric acid, which is why sulfur dioxide can make acid rain occur. Oh, and apparently that comes from oil too. Thats why I prefer nuclear energy.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/21 16:42

https://pastebin.com/pt8vRQRY

@TK
From what I can gather, carbonated water is denser than seawater enough to sink and cause convection to occur in the oceans, thouroughly mixing carbon into the ocean.

@T&W
Higher IQ = higher intelligence. IQ IS a measure of intelligence. Its no use to prove it because you fools still wont believe me. What challenge do you want me to complete?

30 degrees is below freezing. It is actually better for fog as it forms better in colder weather, because water droplets will condense easier.

They produce less because their government makes them produce less. What more is there to this?

Because China knows that global warming is not real and are resisting temptaion from the media to fall under their control. In fact, they made it all up and sent it to the environmentards and they believe that crap and eventually it got to the western governments. They did this to make manufacturing less competetive. I'm so thankful that the president is smart enough to not only know the truth but why people believe the fake. This is why China bans western media, they dont want their people falling to the enviornmentards.

@omega
Its not bait, its debate, and yall fools are getting DEMOLISHED. End of story.

@Vidkunssonn
I had a psychological exam 16 years ago. My IQ was measured at 113, and I was 4 grade levels above average. My reading level was above the 11th grade. I was in third grade at the time. I have always been the smartest kid in class, and I graduated high school with a 3.8 in all AP classes. I took enviornmental science in college and biology in high school and got A's in both of them. I know damn right what I'm talking about. When I find the documents, I will show them and prove you wrong.

@Hotdogeater
SO2, CO, sulfuric acid, SO3 and all that crap is purely made up by enviornmentards to make coal seem like the devil. I'll just tell you this: What else can be used as a cheap, plentiful, reliable energy source for hundreds of years that helps tens of billions of people over the course of its use and is the reason we are alive? Exactly. Oil and coal are the best energy sources, and will continue to be for centuries to come. Nuclear and hydro are also decent options but not as useful as coal and oil. Dont even get me started on wind and solar, hahaha that is a joke.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/21 17:01

@amazingdude
"30 degrees is below freezing." Celsius, you dilhole.

Also, proving that your IQ was 113 sixteen years ago will disprove my claim on carbon dilution in the ocean? You're also saying that acid rain is a myth.
TK, should we continue on with this ape?

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/21 18:52

I didn't mention it before, but listening to people explain their conspiracy theories/superstitions is my 6th most socially accepted hobby. I consider it a subset of my folklore studies.

So I'll probably stick around for at least another week or so- depending on whether he feels like divulging anymore on this mysterious world government that's actively working against it's own power acquisition.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/07/21 22:32

https://pastebin.com/JhwVHqkq

@Amazingdude
Nowhere have I said that your IQ does not make you more intelligent. I say that your IQ does not make you more mature, more knowledgeable, better at debating or superior to me in this relevant discussion. If you were any of those things, this debate would not have happened, and if it did, you'd probably have won by now. I'm not sure if you're deliberately reading/interpreting my statements in the wrong way for your own advantage, being extremely arrogant, or you're just being stupid and do not know how to read. You really need to get your act together. Same for the 30 degrees statement. Beijing, in the middle of summer, at that temperature? Tf is wrong with your logical processes?

'They produce less because their government makes them produce less. What more is there to this?'
That is literally what I have been saying. What is your point?

So now you're saying that China has power over western media, rather than what you said last time, that the western media exerts control over China. Are you sure you're not making this up as you go along? Do you have any evidence at all for what you're saying? Scientists have been producing theories about global warming and climate change since the 1940s. China, in 1940, barely existed as an entity. Theories relating to global warming caught on in the 1980s. It wasn't only until the early 2000s when China began its rapid ascension. China only fully erected its firewall, as we know it today, in 2005. A quarter of a century passed between global warming becoming mainstream and China fully censoring the internet. Nobody in 1940, or even 1990, could even comprehend how successful China would become today.  In other words, the dates do not make sense. Your argument is only valid if the Chinese had a centuries-old masterplan for world domination that somehow perfectly predicted the Allied victory in WWII, the Communist victory in China, the onset of the Cold War, the collapse of the USSR and everything that happened in between.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/22 14:34

@T&W
You're the one being arrogant making shit up instead of researching facts. I won 7 weeks ago, after debunking NASA. That was the last nail in the coffin for this debate.

Yes. YOU said beijing is 30 degrees in the summer. Thats below freezing, making fog a very decent possibility. The government tells them to produce less to tell the western media that they reduced pollution that wasnt even there. Once again, going full TK by contradicting yourself millions of time. Get a grasp on debate instead of just resorting to "muh conspiracy lizard people"

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/22 17:01

When did I contradict myself? Are you talking about when I entertained the idea of a world government faking out the planet for a quick buck and then explained to you exactly why no existing empire would ever do that outside of a Marvel comic? Or was it something else?

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/23 01:10

At this point, he's just making up events about this debate that never really happened just so he doesn't have to counter-argue against us. He still doesn't even know about the existence of Celsius and is trying to use that false reality without it against T&W. Saddening that there are these kinds of people in our society.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/23 04:33

@TK
When you said theres a giant conspiracy, then said there wasnt.

@Vidkunssonn
It did happen. I do know celsius, but T&W didnt specify which scale so I assumed Fahrenheit. YOU are the saddening person in society.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/23 05:48

"The mark of an intelligent man is the ability to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle
That's not a contradiction, that's getting the full picture that you're trying to sell so I can dismantle the idea as efficiently as possible.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/07/23 05:59

@Amazingdude
You should have known perfectly well it was in Celsius. China uses Celsius, as does almost every other country in the world. If you had any logic, geographical or general knowledge at all you'd have known I must have been talking about Celsius. Vidkunssonn even explicitly said it was Celsius.

"Once again, going full TK by contradicting yourself millions of time. Get a grasp on debate instead of just resorting to "muh conspiracy lizard people"

"You're the one being arrogant making shit up instead of researching facts. I won 7 weeks ago, after debunking NASA. That was the last nail in the coffin for this debate."

Can you actually highlight specifically where I've done that instead of making accusations? Knowing what you're trying to say might help move the debate forwards.

==================================================

001						#6k5YbvYF 2017/07/23 09:18

watch AD defend the KKK!

reddit.com/r/teenagers/comments/6oxzbe/unpopular_opinion_thread/dkl2uto/

==================================================

OmegaPirate				#aB0DMOlH 2017/07/23 10:32

The Ku Klux Klan was why World War II existed.
Just edit a few minor things and you might get the picture here.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/07/23 12:19

If "amazing"dude is 25, why is he always posting in /r/teenagers?

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/23 14:54

https://pastebin.com/SAKeGLB1

@T&W

How should I know they use celsius by default? I'm not chinese.

This {is when you contradict yourself}. "So now you're saying that China has power over western media, rather than what you said last time, that the western media exerts control over China. Are you sure you're not making this up as you go along? Do you have any evidence at all for what you're saying? Scientists have been producing theories about global warming and climate change since the 1940s. China, in 1940, barely existed as an entity. Theories relating to global warming caught on in the 1980s. It wasn't only until the early 2000s when China began its rapid ascension. China only fully erected its firewall, as we know it today, in 2005. A quarter of a century passed between global warming becoming mainstream and China fully censoring the internet. Nobody in 1940, or even 1990, could even comprehend how successful China would become today.  In other words, the dates do not make sense. Your argument is only valid if the Chinese had a centuries-old masterplan for world domination that somehow perfectly predicted the Allied victory in WWII, the Communist victory in China, the onset of the Cold War, the collapse of the USSR and everything that happened in between."

@001
Thats not me, IDK why everyone thinks thats me. Also if you read the rest of that thread and his comments you can clearly tell that killa-byte is too stupid to be me. Just read that entire thread and tell me thats me. lol.

@Omega
Your getting the KKK and the nazis mixed up.

@Skyk
I dont post in that subreddit. That isnt my reddit account.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/23 15:24

There are literally five countries that still officially use Fahrenheit and the others are all tiny islands.

==================================================

Omega16					#aB0DMOlH 2017/07/24 00:30

@AD
I did say edit a few things, didn't I?
Replace the KKK with Nazis.
Replace blacks with Jews.
Alter the KKK symbol some.

To be fair, they both do the same thing, and both their morals of getting rid of their minority enemies were based off of Jackson telling the Supreme Court to go fuck itself.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/07/24 02:09

AD, do you really expect us to believe that you just happen to have the *exact* same ideas as Killa-Byte when it comes to climate change, down to suggesting Siberian colonies within the same two days?

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/24 05:53

@TK
Fahrenheit is the better scale for everyday use and weather. Fahrenheit is based off of the lowest and hottest temperature in a certain town, but celsius is based on water. Why use a scale meant for water to measure air temps?

@Omega
Finally at least someone is right.

@Skyk
More and more people are waking up to the truth about climate change, and killa-byte is one of them. Also, can you prove we both suggested colonizing siberia within 2 days? Show posts.

==================================================

Tyne and wear			#5GBDuOyX 2017/07/24 06:27

@Amazingdude
Ways of measuring temperatures, we can save for another debate. If you want, we can discuss it now. What TK is saying is that the majority of the world uses Celsius. You should know this and therefore Celsius is what you should expect when somebody talks about temperature, especially on an international comment board using information about a scientific topic. Anyway, logically, do you really think that Beijing would be that cold in June?

I still don't understand what you're getting at. You haven't even said where I have supposedly contradicted myself or resorted to anything remotely like 'conspiracy lizard people'. You've just copy and pasted what I have previously said.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/07/24 06:40

https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/6hq720/why_arent_people_talking_about_colonizing_siberia/
"People complain that some places are gonna flood, yet a warmer climate would make places like Canada and Siberia more habitable. Why arent people talking about this as a way to deal with climate change?"

This was posted June 16th, one day after you posted the following on this comment board:
"While some areas of the world may be getting too hot, like Africa and south Asia, a much larger area is becoming more habitable, like siberia and Canada."

==================================================

herecomesmichael		#68cDLTHg 2017/07/25 00:19

are you STILL arguing? come on, it's not that hard to just agree to disagree.

==================================================

Scythertom				#KB7dKrJB 2017/07/25 01:19

Hey guys, will you please hurry up and get to the "ways of measuring temperature" debate? Because I have VERY strong opinions on this irrelevant topic. Thank you, have a nice day y'all.

==================================================

amazingdude				#N1hn3TpZ 2017/07/25 03:14

Sorry guys I'm having personal problems atm but I will be able to debate soon.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/25 04:43

I bet that if we use his own "Oh, you wanna take a break? You lose the debate" tactic on him he's gonna lose his shit.

Also,
https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/6dnx07/g7_leaders_blame_trump_for_failure_to_reach/di4p1zg/
This is almost word-for-word one of the things you've posted to Pastebin a while back:

https://pastebin.com/T9bdpqNR
Don't even try to tell us that isn't you anymore.

==================================================

OmegaPirate				#aB0DMOlH 2017/07/25 06:34

He's still gonna respond for debating. I know him a bit better than most others here.

It's gonna keep going. Like playing chess with a pigeon. Or 4chan raiding random sites. Or a friend of mine petitioning to change Auschwitz to Jewrassic Park.
And in such cases, the result is the same. They'll get bored eventually.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/25 08:33

For a moment there I thought that was a new pastebin because he never changes the title on any of them.

@Scythertom
Kelvin is best. Negative temperatures are an abomination.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/07/25 09:05

TK you're absolutely right about Kelvin. I once brought up Kelvin in an argument about F vs C, and was forcibly removed from the room and locked outside.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/07/25 09:16

Stay tuned. Scy's going to show us a pretty picture.

Aren't we forgetting Rankine? And also Rømer, Réaumur, Newton, and Delisle. It's wonderful to learn new things on Wikipedia.

==================================================

Omega16					#aB0DMOlH 2017/07/25 13:06

It's funny how Wikipedia is considered terrible and yet it has more info than anyone else could even imagine. Only problem is anonymity, but even then, it's getting cracked down more often there these days.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/25 14:04

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/List
Some of these descriptions are hilarious, like there's seriously a guy out there who spends their days adding ceiling fans to random articles.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/26 00:10

I fully support the one guy who goes to every article he can and adds "And them's the facts" at the end of every one of them.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/07/26 22:48

17 degrees Newton is defined to be the hottest temperature for which bath water is bearable when one sticks their hand in it and doesn't move it around.

==================================================

IFIDIE					#ZgslTFIx 2017/07/28 06:40

Guys why are you all talking about science

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/07/28 08:13

because the entire debate was centered around a science topic.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/07/28 11:08

Hey, you guys want to do the occasional 1000 post snapshot pastebin on the CBs? It's a shame that old posts get deleted or just become unretrievable. Earth Editor made one a while back, but he's nowhere to be found, surprisingly.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/07/28 11:29

What form would you want? A copy-paste of all the messages directly, or the page's source?
Here's either:
https://pastebin.com/SrDv1dS1
https://pastebin.com/n86aun68

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/07/28 13:56

Oh wow, nothing that puts everything on one line, please. XD
Other than needing an extra enter between comments to enhance readability (which is understandably tedious), the first one looks good.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/29 09:28

https://pastebin.com/pPETxLq5

Alright guys, I'm back. I'm sorry.

@T&W, Scythertom
Let's do it now, then. Kelvin is best for science, Fahrenheit is best for weather, Celsius is best for liquids. Optimally, I think we all should use a 0-500 scale where 0 is absolute 0 and 500 is melting point of water. Its more precise, and eventually when K goes mainstream, future generations will be like "WHAT were they thinking! Water melts at 273.15K?", much like people shit on Fahrenheit. Kelvin is the best we have so far, it works, and I think we should all be using kelvin TBH. One scale for everything, not a different scale for common use (C) and another for science (K)

@Skyk
Coincidence.

@Vidkunssonn
I wont, as long as you PROMISE to come back. My case was unexpected and out of my hands. I apologize for the delay.

Coincidence. We both have the same ideas, so of course our responses will be similar. I'll say it again: Killa-Byte is NOT me.

@Omega
Thank you for telling everyone. No, I won't get bored.

Wikipedia is not technically credible because anyone can edit it. I put a fake fact in the Windows XP article a few months back and its still there. It is quite reliable for basic knowledge, however, just not for research.

@TK
I agree with you on Kelvin

@Draco
Huh, TIL. Most of those are useless however.

I'm doing backups of this myself. I cached the 1000 comments page 2 weeks ago. One of these days I'll make a neat pastebin. {Completed 2017-09-12}

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/29 10:26

I'd use the word "influence" more than "cause" actually. Cause implies that humans are the only source of change, but the GCC argument has always been that we're just one major factor out of hundreds with varying degrees of magnitude. It's chaos theory, you can't introduce a variable like whether or not there's an industrialized civilization making changes to the atmosphere and expect there to be no changes to average weather patterns in the atmosphere.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/29 10:57

No, no, no. "Similar" is an understatement. Word-for-word copy-and-paste paragraph usage is not just "similar".

"I think we all should use a 0-500 scale where 0 is absolute 0 and 500 is melting point of water."
That will put the boiling point of water at 683.049606443.

Plus, converting the entire planet to the new system and getting used to it will take at least a decade. First, you have to convert every recorded temperature in history (the boiling point of Iron, the temperature of Pluto in the winter, etc.) from C or K or F to the new system. Then, you have to design or re-calibrate all the instruments that measure temperature to the new system (recall all thermometers on the planet to be destroyed/re-calibrated, then distribute the new thermometers and expect people to understand the new scale). Then, you have to re-calibrate every tool that is made to GET things to a certain temperature (ovens, refrigerators, etc.) to the new scale. THEN, you have to get everyone used to it.

New System: Water boils at 683.05°, the average human body internal temperature is 567.73°, the core of the earth is approx. 11483°
VS
Celsius: Water boils at 100°, the average human body internal temperature is 37°, the core of the earth is approx. 6000°

The idea is good in mind, but the reality is absurd.

==================================================

Scythertom				#Fc8R9h2z 2017/07/29 11:02

>Let's do it now, then. Kelvin is best for science, Fahrenheit is best for weather, Celsius is best for liquids
Basically what I was going to say

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/29 11:48

@TK
The influence civilization has on the global climate is about the same as taking a shit in the ocean pollutes it: Nothing.

@Vidkunssonn
We're arguing the same perspective, of course its gonna use the same wording. Who knows, killa-byte might browse this forum and steal all my arguments. I dont mind, hes spreading the truth.

Well, you just destroyed my temperature claim. I have nothing left to support it. You win. However I still think Kelvin is superior, and we should move to Kelvin. Wouldnt be as hard as transitioning to 0-500 because Kelvin is already well established, and it uses the same units as Celsius. I dont have as strong feelings about this as climate change however, and never really thought about it. I do believe we would all be on one temperature scale for everything.

@Scythertom
Great minds think alike.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/07/29 12:08

I'm sorry AD, but do you genuinely expect anyone to believe you and Killa-Byte aren't the same person? Both accounts use the exact same wording to make the exact same points, and share at least one subreddit, according to what you've said. At this point, the burden of proof is solidly on you, and if you really aren't KB, the only way I can think of you proving that would be to tell us your actual Reddit account name.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/29 12:23

I'm gonna laugh my ass off if he creates a new Reddit account for that.

==================================================

Jeff					#Rtf4XTMh 2017/07/29 12:48

Amazingdude doesnt care about the enviornment? heh. What about the time they flooded a canyon with native american remains artivacts in it to make a lake?

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/31 02:12

That argument might have made more sense if we weren't currently sitting at 2/3 of the total projected human population that Earth can support. The atmosphere is pretty huge itself, but we're going to be hitting the limits of how much we can safely strain it fairly quickly.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/07/31 07:11

Oh yay the arguments back. This board was sorta bland without it.

================================================== {Topic shift 1}

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/07/31 10:01

@Skyk
I dont use Reddit though, I dont have an account. Also, me and killa-byte have the same beliefs, so obviously we're going to use the same words to express them. Who knows, maybe he browses this forum and rips my arguments to spread the truth. Fine with me.

@TK
Earth can theoretically support 40+ billion people. If all the plants on earth died, we'd have 2500 years of O2 left. The earth is just fine, and will be for a while.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/07/31 11:57

If all plants on earth died we would all starve to death.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/07/31 13:18

https://www.livescience.com/16493-people-planet-earth-support.html
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130404072923.htm

What source do you have for your 40 billion statistic? I can't find any more optimistic than 16 billion.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/07/31 22:59

We have too many people as it is, there's no way in hell I'd allow 40 billion people on this planet.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/01 00:24

Ooh, this reminds me of a discussion question I came up with a while ago.
If we face *severe* overpopulation, would it be a good decision to legalize a mass murder event (so we would get rid of major criminals, homeless people, etc.), or should we keep it going despite everyone's suffering?

Personally I would normally discourage even the death penalty, but it's tricky when the world would benefit greatly from it. Plus, a large chunk of the population would probably die from an inevitable disease or something.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/08/01 01:28

I have to imagine that mass murder is worse than even the worst case scenario for overpopulation.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/01 03:13

Yeah, no. Any solution that actively encourages violent anarchy or a might-makes-right rhetoric is just going to result in a massive crime wave from the sheer desperation that will be felt for generations afterward. Overpopulation by definition would peter out after 1 because dead people don't cause nearly as many problems as living people with no faith in the social contract- unless the problem was actually some event limiting available farmland like the Dustbowl Effect in the 30s.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/01 03:19

Plus, there's similar options that don't just jump straight to murder, like China's child limit or offering a tax cut to those that volunteer to be sterilized.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/01 03:54

https://pastebin.com/tTH2SbAb

@Vidkunssonn
We dont have too many people. *looks at Canada and Russia*

@Dracobot
I think we should go full north korea on prisoners and execute them. If we have to kill some people, why not kill the worthless crapsacks in prison?

@skyk
Overpopulation wont get really bad until 60-70 billion, dont worry about it. Earth can only support 40 billion, but even then, thats living at first world country standards.

@TK
Sterilizing the criminals and ones with genetic disorders might not be a bad idea. If we have so many people, we should focus on getting rid of genetic diseases. This may sound hitler-like but thats because he took it WAY too far and fucked it up for any future use. Eugenics can be very good for a population and if it is used correctly. Imagine not having to care for people with genetic disorders. That will take a massive burden off of society, and our healthcare system.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/01 05:15

https://pastebin.com/6iJwhTxc

We've already discussed this: Russia and Canada is too fucking cold to force people to live there; that's why there used to be a capital punishment in Russia where you're sent to Siberia so you'll freeze to death. You take 100,000 random people from anywhere it isn't cold (let's use India for an example: the most heavily populated country on the planet), they're all gonna fucking die. The only way you can possibly hope to spread the populations of earth AND KEEP THEM ALIVE is to slowly move everyone northward; that means sending people from southern Russia to northern Russia, people in Mongolia and other nearby countries to southern Russia, people in southern Asia to the other countries... It's not gonna work. You're not gonna spread 7 billion people.

"Sterilizing the criminals and ones with genetic disorders might not be a bad idea. If we have so many people, we should focus on getting rid of genetic diseases. This may sound Hitler-like but that's because he took it WAY too far and fucked it up for any future use. Eugenics can be very good for a population and if it is used correctly. Imagine not having to care for people with genetic disorders. That will take a massive burden off of society, and our healthcare system."

Are you serious? Are you really suggesting that we kill off everybody on the planet who has a genetic disorder? Do YOU have a genetic disorder and just not know about it, because you're starting to sound like a psychopath with all of these psychotic plans of yours that will end with massive casualties. The reason people are trying to abolish the death penalty is because there are still people who care about the person that's going to be killed: family members, friends, people they've helped within their lifetime; and you're suggesting we should do that to everybody on the planet who was born with something they can't control or change and call it "a massive burden" that's been lifted? Are they not human too? Do they not also have family and friends to care about them? Let me kill YOUR family and then try to tell me I lifted a burden from you. You're fucking nuts.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/08/01 05:53

AD, I've seen posts by Killa-Byte that have almost the exact same phrasing as posts you've done here over a month after.
Compare this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/teenagers/comments/6aoohw/anyone_else_still_believe_in_global_warming/dhg8dlu/
to your comment that was posted June 15th when you said "More CO2 = more plants. More plants = more food."

And please don't try to say that people with the same views would somehow also use identical phrasing, unless you really believe every person who believes in climate change naturally speaks exactly like Al Gore or something?

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/01 07:09

https://pastebin.com/t828pwuw

@Vidkunssonn
With a warming climate, those areas will become more habitable. Explain Murmansk, Longyearbyen, etc. all those arctic cities, and how they survive. People can live in the arctic.

If we do become overpopulated and have to kill off people, who would you kill, other than me and all the "climate deniers"? I'm not saying we should do it now, but if theres too many people on the planet, would you rather kill a serial killer, or an innocent person? Death is always sad but its good for society as a whole if we can eliminate serial killers and rapists and all those thugs from society. The process is sad, but the result is better.

Answer this: Do you want a population without genetic disorders? The only way we can get there is to ensure that people with them do not spread them to future people. Everybody has people who care about them, but that doesnt mean that society as a whole is better with them. I may not contribute to society, but at least I dont drain its resources. Perhaps a one child policy on people with genetic disorders might not be a bad idea.

Look, I'm not saying I want them dead. I'm saying that they should be the first to go if we ever face an overpopulation crisis, which probably wont happen because world population will level off at around 10b, and earth can support 40b. What would you do in an overpopulation crisis?

@Skyk
You all spew the same worded crap at me when you respond. I cant tell who wrote what. Likewise, you cant tell if me or killa-byte wrote anything. Same ideas, same wording. Like I said, it is likely that killa-byte browses this forum and rips my arguments.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/01 07:44

"With a warming climate"
What happened to all those pastes where you tried to claim that the earth was actually COOLING? As for Murmansk and Longyearbyen and other arctic cities, people are able to survive those conditions because that's the conditions they've lived in since they were born. You take anybody who's lived there their whole lives and deport them to Cuba, they will want to kill themselves because they're too used to the cold. It's easier to get used to warm climates than it is cold climates.

"Do you want a population without genetic disorders? The only way we can get there is to ensure that people with them do not spread them to future people."
Most harmful and common genetic disorders aren't passed on through offspring, they're developed during conception or sometime during life. For example, Down's Syndrome: it exists because a baby was conceived with one too many chromosomes; Schizophrenia: not something you could pass on to your children.

"Perhaps a one child policy on people with genetic disorders might not be a bad idea."
No, that IS better than killing them because of it. Not like it'll decrease the percentage of people with genetic disorders, though. Kill everyone on the planet who has Down's Syndrome, and in 30 years, the number of people with Down's Syndrome will be back to normal.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/01 10:44

@Vidkunssonn
I DID state many times that the earth IS warming, however not fast enough to hurt the earth, not manmade. Research has shown that people are very great at adapting to new climates, so that probably wont be an issue. Also, I'm moving to Arizona in 3 year, so I'll tell you what its like changing climate.

I got inherited and genetic disorders mixed up. I meant disorders that ARE passed down from parent to child. With no child to pass the inherited disorder too, it will eventually die out.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/01 13:19

In one sense, amazingdude has a point. Negative inherited disorders are more detrimental than beneficial to society, and *one* permanent solution to this problem would be to kill them. If we were some kind of combination of heartless and understanding, this would work out fine. BUT we aren't. In the long run, it's good. In the short run, it's really really bad. People with these disorders are, obviously, people too and should never be subject to any kind of discrimination based on something they couldn't help. Since this should be considered unacceptable, we can only search for another solution. TK's suggestion for a one-child policy is a step in the right direction (from murder), but it is still discrimination. Even the tax cut suggestion would have to be targeted specifically toward those who have inherited diseases, which is technically discrimination (I guess it's better, and there are types of things like this already in place, but people have a problem with them anyway). I don't want to say that discrimination is ever the best answer, but I'm afraid some form of it might be.

Also, even criminals are people that need rehabilitation instead of punishment, mainly because previous factors that caused them to do what they did are often set aside to punish the doer (just want to get this out there).

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/02 13:27

@Draco
You're right. Nobody wants to do anything to people, but something should be done for the greater society. To have a child knowing it will have a serious inherited disorder is like purposly infecting people with AIDS. Just like how it is illegal to purposfully spread AIDS, it should be illegal to have chidren if you have a severe inherited disorder, because you are purposly spreading disease. Its not fair for the child., and the line needs to be drawn somewhere. Perhaps genetic engineering can weed out these disorders, but any law for their reproduction would be discriminatory by nature.

I disagree that criminals need rehabilitation. I think criminals should be punished harshly. Maybe not things like speeding or drug possesion, but murderers, rapists, etc. need to be put to death. I do believe there are some things that just cant be fixed. Prison acts as a deterrent, punishment, and a holding place for dangerous people. Our system is not perfect, you shouldnt be thrown in prison for doing drugs, but some people really belong there.

If someone came into your hourse and threw acid all over you and your family, permanently damaging or killing them, would you want them to be back out on the streets in 10 years, or would you want him thrown in a cell to rot for life and burned alive? If somebody is just going to get therapy for 10 years and be back out, what would deter them from committing crime? Compare that to the possibility of life in prison.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/02 14:55

Alternatively, just remove the adverse gene from the embryo with CRISPR and don't decide who can reproduce and who can't. I know I'm the one that brought up the child limitation, but that's just because that's a method that's actually been tried- I was leaning towards incentivizing sterility.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/02 15:23

@TK
That is a totally acceptable solution, and I'd rather this than the alternative. By the time we reach 40b people we should have the technology to do so. Also I think we should invest more into stem cell research and genetic engineering. The good that comes from this far outweighs the bad.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/02 20:00

We have it now, human testing started a few months ago.

==================================================

Disappointment			#5pWYfzbu 2017/08/02 23:48

All of the last 1000 comments deserve a long and crestfallen facepalm.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/03 00:12

@amazingdude
https://pastebin.com/XhAQwBnN

[!] [!] [!] [!] [!] PASTE REMOVED [!] [!] [!] [!] [!]

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/03 03:11

@TK
Thats great news, something I'm excited to see.

@Disppointment
Yes, at the collective stupidity of everyone but me.

@Draco
You really think you can help murderers? Unless its in self defense, somebody who commits a murder is probably mentally unstable enough to not be fixable. If someone killed somebody just because, they have proven themselves unable to handle being in society, and should be kept away from others. Obviously there are some justifiable cases such as self defense and what you said, and they do sometimes get fucked over by the system. Sure, some people learn, but that doesnt mean they are safe to release to society. While some murders you can reason with, most are too fucked up in the head to understand. They should not be set free. Someone who already murdered is way more likely to murder again than an average person, and should be kept away. Like I said, the threat of life in prison is enough to deter most people from commiting serious crimes. You just cant fix some people, and if you do, they are still dangerous.

==================================================

jon						#0SQnQpav 2017/08/05 08:41

i.imgur.com/xDfNQAS.jpg <--- found on AD's reddit

[!] [!] [!] [!] [!] IMAGE REMOVED [!] [!] [!] [!] [!]

{Guy with sunglasses holding an American flag}

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/05 09:56

Where the fuck is his feet??

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/05 10:56

@Hotdogeater
I miss flash games. They were simple, quick, and easy. Nowadays you have to download an add ridden, p2w app.

@Jon
That white trash redneck is clearly not me. NO, I am NOT KILLA-BYTE. How clear do I have to make it?

@Vidkunssonn
Looks photoshopped out.

==================================================

KillaByte				#ZLVftGAW 2017/08/05 15:47

Password for the paste is: "climate"
Link to paste is on my Reddit account.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DanBall/comments/6rqe3f/the_paste/
https://defuse.ca/b/ZdL92lJG

[!] [!] [!] [!] [!] PASTE REMOVED [!] [!] [!] [!] [!]

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/06 04:04

@Everyone
Killabyte has spoken. We are NOT the same people.
Can we resume the debate now?

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/06 05:35

@amazingdude
Nice try, Killa-byte.

==================================================

9132					#iabR3RgQ 2017/08/06 06:40

Could we stop debating? This is a game, not a press-conference. GO TO A CHAT ROOM FOR CHRISTS SAKE!!!

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/06 06:46

@Vidkunssonn
What more can I do to prove we are not the same person?

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/07 07:36

all you guys are fucking LOSERS! You LOST THE DEBATE!!! YOU GIVE UP!!!
I FUCKING HAD IT FROM THE BEGININNING! THE WORLD IS FINALLY WAKING UP TO THE TRUTH ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE!!!
YALL A BUNCH OF IDIOTS WHO BLINDLY EAT UP WHAT THE MEDIA FEEDS YOU!!!!

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/08/07 08:40

You cant reply if you dont give us something to reply to.

Also, a new study says that even if we shut off all our greenhouse emissions right now, which obviously wont happen, we would hit about 1.3C above preindustrial levels by 2100. However, we are most likely to be at 2C to 5C above preindustrial levels by then.

==================================================

Poofle					#KnbKVy9B 2017/08/07 09:08

Oh, boy...
The dude's finally gone off the deep end...

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/07 10:45

We can't even agree on what constitutes as scientific proof- so nobody "wins". Best to just drop that boring topic entirely until we can agree on a scientific authority to source. Why are you obsessed with winning anyway? Are you getting paid or something?

==================================================

Jackphantomhive			#RiRWL6l3 2017/08/07 10:58

Lol. I honestly am happy this debate was over. I was going to order a chatroom but since everyone is over it I won't. HOPEFULLY, someone calls an asylum to come and pick up amazing dude cause i think he's lost a few screws.

Oh and if you REALLY want something to debate over, how about pollution in the US that's a good topic. Or how teachers are not getting paid enough.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/08/07 11:15

Or if the US killing nearly 200000 people and obliterating two cities at the end of WWII was justified

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/07 11:33

https://pastebin.com/y6sef38Q

@Hotdogeater
2017/08/03 03:11

False alarmist propaganda. We are only going to warm 1C this century, regardless of wat we do.

@Poofle
Sometimes thats what it takes to get fools to listen

@TK
Its fun to argue.

@Jack
Its not over. Also, I am mentaly sane. If anything, everyone else on here needs to go to asylum. Pollution is a non-issue.

@Hotdogeater
It was horrible, but would you have rather had an invasion of Japan which would have killed milions? I believe the bombs were justified to prevent more deaths. This is a case where the grass is greenr on the other side. What if we didnt drop the bombs, and we invaded Japan? We would be arguing why they SHOULD have dropped the bombs instead of invade the country, which destroy more, and killed even more people.

It was bad, but it had to be done to prevent even more destruction.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/07 23:45

@amazingdude
Insisting that somebody has to "win" takes the fun out of arguing.

@hotdogeater
Conventional warfare had proven even worse; the Imperial government was spreading propaganda that the US was committing warcrimes everywhere they occupied, so whole populations would commit suicide to save themselves before they even saw GIs up close.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/08/08 06:38

At least we didn't have to deal with a nuclear attack at any other point in history. Also, we're already 1C above pre-industrial levels.

Had the bombs not been dropped, Japan would probably have been in a similar situation to Korea.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/08 12:17

@amazingdude
Well, the idea is to prevent the murders from happening by giving as many people as possible a decent childhood and education where they not only learn laws and ethics but actually understand them and why they're there, something a lot of parents choose not or are unable to provide for the next generation. Personally, I believe that this is one of the most common causes for crime in general. At least try to rehabilitate them now while we prepare further generations. Then, assuming it works well, we won't have to execute nor rehabilitate many criminals because they won't commit the crimes in the first place.

I recognize that you have the eugenics approach with criminals, as previously discussed: kill off the bad to promote good, unless this is where the conversation branched off of and this side-note is useless. In which case, forget I said it; my memory isn't that great.
And yes, this is a bit late because I was away.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/10 02:51

@Hotdogeater
Yes we are 1C above 1900 levels, and we may warm 1C more in the next 100 years. Nature.

@Draco
More criminals will appear. Rehabilitation does not work. Crime might go down, but not by much to be noticable. Sombody fucked up enough to commit those crimes are probably unfixable and cant understand why they're there, so why even try? Bring back public executions. That'll scare them.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/08/10 06:09

@ad
We could warm between 1C and 3C. Either way, ice (specifically on-land ice) is gonna melt and raise sea levels. Dont worry about the ice in the ocean, that doesn't make a difference when it melts. Also, theres gonna be more energy for storms and especially hurricanes.

More energy for storms usually means they get bigger and worse, and rapidly growing hurricanes usually aren't a good thing, especially if they're moving towards a major city. Rapidly growing hurricanes are especially bad because if they're at cat 1 in the evening and cat 5 by morning, that city probably wasn't prepared for a cat 5 and significant casualties could be expected from that. Also, we just hit another subject! R.I.P peace in the comment board Aug 6- Aug 7

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/10 09:43

@amazingdude
Right now we have sane criminals with troubled pasts and mentally unstable criminals. We should have just mentally unstable criminals under the new system. That's a win. Unless the vast majority of today's criminals should actually be considered "insane", there would be a very noticeable difference.

"Unfixable" criminals probably wouldn't be scared of even public executions. Or at least the more major cases.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/11 07:12

We could always turn into that one society from that one episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation where all crimes committed are punished by on-sight execution, despite the severity of the crime itself (both murder and stepping on the grass is punishable by death). THAT will put fear in criminals.
Then again, I don't want everyone wearing togas and fucking each other because of the decreased societal modesty..

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/11 14:11

I don't actually have a horse in the death penalty thing, but I feel like I should point out that the concept of punishment has always been more for the benefit of the victim/state as a way to provide a sense of fairness or closure than it was about actually preventing a particular crime. That's why most classic punishments mimic the crime- fining thieves, jailing slavers/kidnappers, executing murderers, eye-for-an-eye, etc.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/11 14:28

@Hotdogeater
1C is the high estimate. Ice is melting at similar rates as during the medieval warm period. Melting ice an rising sea levels are not a concern. All that "storm energy" stuff is pure bullshit made up to scare us into supporting their green conspiracy.

@Draco
Ones with troubled childhoods are because their parents committed crimes but werent locked up long enough, so they had a kid and fucked it up. What we need to do is lock them up for longer so they cant reproduce and spread crime to their children. Crime will drop because there will be less criminals being born, and we should get all the mentally unstable ones eventually since that is genetic.

If someone is unfixable, best to execute them so we dont have to waste money on a lost soul.

@Vidkunssonn
Honestly that would make everyone too scared to make small mistakes and we'd all be nervous wrecks. I'd be down for death instead of 5year+ prison however.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/11 23:27

@amazingdude
Is that really the main reason? What if the parents were never caught to begin with? What if it wasn't actually the parents' fault and the child grew up in a bad neighborhood or their friends encouraged them to commit crimes?

@TK
Eye-for-an-eye was a bit extreme, but I agree with its idea. At least they were attempting to make the criminals understand why what they did was bad. The closure problem would be solved once everyone got used to the system, or at least started seeing it the way I do

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/08/12 04:30

dear god do you even know how storms work? Hurricanes REQUIRE heat to exist.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/12 09:02

@amazingdude
There is SOOOOOOOOOO much more psychology behind why criminals commit crimes than "their parents didn't raise them right". Most murders, for example, are done out of revenge or jealousy, not a bad childhood home. Being a criminal is not something you're born as or raised as. The parent being the reason for a crime committed (omitting crimes being done against one's parent(s)) is not extremely common, and even then, it's usually because a parent was absent, not because the parent was a criminal and the child is following their example. The lack of a male authority figure (or just a bad one) is extremely detrimental to a child's life. Crimes committed by these people tend to be done because they seek approval from someone they've appointed as their dominate male authority figure, often someone who's lived their life in crime. It's a cycle: the male in question ALSO likely grew up without a proper male authority figure and looked up to someone who lived THEIR life in crime. This accounts for about 75% of convicted criminals; the rest are mostly crimes done out of revenge, jealousy, greed, etc.

TL;DR "I suffered bad parenting" is a rare excuse for a convict.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/12 11:48

I just watched a television commercial that said "it's as American as ditching the metric system". (~._.)

Ahh, the debate lives on. You're welcome. :D

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/13 03:51

@Dracobot
I grew up in a bad beanerhood. I didnt turn into a crime ridden wreck, did I? No. Bad neighborhoods do not contribute to crime. Just dont hang out with thugs. Putting criminals in therapy would not help victims, who will be mad that their criminal is going to be back out, regardless of if he is fixed or not.

I'm against the switch to metric system.

@Vidkunssonn
So what your saying is that criminals ARE mentally ill to kill people out of revenge? About the lack of a father thing, lock them up so they cant reproduce and walk away on their kid, so their kid doesnt become a fuckup. And make sure the children dont hang out with thugs to pick up that behavior. Its very simple. Dont hang out around thugs.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/13 06:56

One person almost never serves as good representation of a large chunk of the population. For all we know, you might have gotten extremely lucky and that 99% of residents in your neighborhood become criminals in their lifetime. And you might say that you don't personally know anyone who has committed a crime, but you still can't say anything about bad neighborhoods anywhere else.

Some people may not have a choice of interacting with thugs. If they grew up there, then they probably spent around two decades of their lives there. It's almost impossible not to have extended exposure to thuggery over a period of time that large, especially in the worse places. There's a reason why bad neighborhoods have thugs and why the number of them doesn't die down over time. It's most likely because that number is being replenished every generation.

And again, I would be happy that the criminal is getting help instead of being simply set aside like they have no worth (you will likely disagree), as I honestly believe everyone should feel about the situation, but one opinion doesn't matter that much most of the time. But anyway, they wouldn't be set free *until* they are fixed, and if that doesn't happen in a reasonable amount of time, then some form of jail time may be considered.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/14 03:27

@amazingdude
No, that is not what I'm saying at all. I'm about to hit you with the ultimately insulting "never mind" because you can't seem to correctly comprehend anything I say. As a logician, I cannot tolerate your deliberate misconceptions of my words. That's not how you win arguments; that's how you get your ass beat.

At no point did I ever say "mental illness". It is not a mental illness to be raised in a way that society looks down upon. They're not insane for committing crimes, it's all they know because they were never taught how to live better. They only know how to survive utilizing crime because nobody ever taught them important life skills that could have led them to a successful, bountiful life. It's sickening for you to say that they have mental illnesses because they simply don't know a better way, because it's not their fault.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/14 09:23

Technically, a mental illness wouldn't be their fault either. Unless they got it from jumping off a bridge or whatever. That's why we have insane "asylums" instead of insane prisons, it's a place to protect sick people from themselves.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/14 10:24

@Draco
How is interacting with thugs unavoidable? Just dont interact with them. Dont hang out with bad people. How is it more complicated? Go to school, stay away from the bad kids, come back home, stay home, repeat for 18 years. Nobody is forcing you to hang out and be like the bad kids. It doesnt get more simpler than "just dont hang out with the bad kids". You dont have to go hang out with the bad kids while they go rob people or sell drugs. If someone has good parents then they are less likely to be converted in a bad neighborhood.

Then incarcerate the young criminals so they cant keep fucking up the neighborhood. What we need to do is get rich people to move into these bad neighborhoods and bring money into the economy, which will reduce crime. Poverty is a major cause of crime.

Well, you might feel differently, but I would want them to suffer for their crime. Perhaps let the victims decide the punishment.

@Vidkunssonn
Either way, they commit crime, they deserve to be punished. Throw them into prison so they wont spread their crime ridden ways to their children. You really think that teaching somebody whos been doing crime all their life the right way is going to change them? They're unfixable.

@TK
Good idea. Throw the mentally ill into asylums and thugs into prisons.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/14 10:48

I used to think that way too, but punishment is not always the best way to get through to someone. The idea of criminal rehabilitation is to teach criminals the better way that they never learned in their early life. The only time that doesn't seem to work is when the criminal enjoys their life of crime rather than that being the only thing they knew, which is the threshold at which I will call someone "unfixable".

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/15 01:03

Try telling that to children who don't have the sense of danger as adults. Sure you can tell any adult not to do something and why you shouldn't do it and they would probably listen because they automatically understand the connection between the two. On the other hand, we have to hold on to our children so that they don't run into an active street, and telling them not to do that probably wouldn't be nearly enough because children aren't aware of danger all the time unlike adults. Even teenagers disobey parents (sometimes for the sake of disobeying) unless they absolutely fear their parents/guardians or are one of those few that develop maturity early on.

>Victim's choice in punishment
Hmm, are we at least going to let them settle down first? I foresee the Eighth Amendment's invocation being quite common.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/15 14:55

@Vidkunssonn
If we teach them the good way, who's to say they wont go back to a life of crime? Then itll be a waste of time and we'd have a criminal out on the streets. Best to just lock them up so it doesnt happen.

@Draco
Kids are stupid, you are absolutely right. Besides, the future thugs are likely bullies in school and getting in trouble all the time. Why would anyone want to hang out with someone who gets in trouble all the time?

The 8th only applies when the government applies the punishment, not the citizens.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/08/15 19:46

Still, alot of the punishments will probably be crueler than the crime itself was

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/16 07:48

@amazingdude
Repeated offenses is not exactly common among criminals who went through rehabilitation. If the rehabilitation doesn't work the first few times, that's usually when they give up trying to make them better.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/18 00:05

@amazingdude
Peer pressure is a powerful force.
But surely there will be some kind of monitoring, right?

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/08/18 03:50

Its been three days since AD replied to anything and he didn't give a warning that he wouldn't be able to reply

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/18 07:42

@Hotdogeater
I believe the punishment should be as bad as the crime, maybe a bit worse.

@Vidkunssonn
It may work in some cases, but in most cases the person is beyond repair. A bad childhood can fuck you for life.

@Dracoo
Peer pressure is weaker than commonly thought. I've been offered heroin and to go on robberies in high school and I easily turned that down without question, because I knew doing those things would be bad. Its not impossible.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/08/19 23:32

Well, looks like the debate just mainly passed to a new topic and its not raging anymore so the comments are somewhat safe now

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/20 22:17

@amazingdude
No, not most cases, closer to 10% of cases. It would SEEM like there would be more cases where the person is beyond repair because very few prisoners agree to go through rehab and very few prisons have a rehab program.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/21 06:40

@Vidkunssonn
Because rehab doesnt work.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/21 09:46

@amazingdude
No, because it costs money, and prisons don't see the prospect of having to pay more money to get a convict out of incarceration faster.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/21 11:07

For many people, peer pressure is a serious problem. Peer pressure clearly doesn't affect you very much (and I can tell; you're the only person here with any conservative beliefs whatsoever). It's not impossible, but it's still hard for more people than you might think.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/22 10:22

https://pastebin.com/FH1AGSZy

Vidkunssonn

If rehab worked, prisons would use it because they would need to employ less guards and save money not having to take care of inmates. But it doesnt work that way.

@Draco

You're right, peer pressure doesnt affect me much, but I cant imagine being pressured into committing crime. I get how it encourages drugs and stuff, but crime? Really? Are these people just uneducated or do they not care?

I'm pretty used to being the only conservate on forums and IRL. The internet is pretty liberal and I live in the most liberal state in the country. It sucks.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/22 11:40

Out of curiosity, why are you still naming everything "climate alarmism debunked"? That last one had nothing to do with the climate or even natural science as a whole.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/22 12:13

@amazingdude
Isn't there something about the prison systems earning money based on how many prisoners they house? I've heard that that's the #1 incentive to keep people in jail, especially privately-owned prisons.

I think peer pressure causes people to make bad decisions like doing drugs, which eventually evolves into crimes such as stealing because they focused too much on their drug habit and are forced to do those things in order to continue living or further fuel their habit.

>Conservative in liberal state
lol It's the other way around for me.

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/08/22 13:19

The term for the phenomenon, Draco, is the "prison-industrial complex".

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/23 06:17

@amazingdude
That's not how it works. They still need to keep the number of guards the same because the number of prisoners doesn't decrease when sending prisoners to rehab (they're still incarcerated), and the people who RUN rehab charge a higher salary to work, so it actually costs MORE than to just keep them imprisoned.

No, the internet is not liberal. There are too many people who follow the philosophy of "This can't be used against me, so I can do whatever I want" (trolls) for the internet to be identified as liberal.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/23 11:16

@TK
To seperate my pastss from everyone elses.

@Draco
Thats not true about private prisons. Thats the government propaganda making you think rehab works. Also, wanna trade places? You move to California, and I move to conservative state?
Making a bit more sense now. Trumps wall should reduce crime because it would make it harder to get drugs into the country, which prevents addiction, preventing thugs from developing, less thugs = less crime. Plus it will slow illegal immigration and create millions of jobs. I know the wall isnt relavant to this but I brought it up because you suggested drugs cause crime and walls stop drugs from coming in.

@Vidkunssonn
Except rehab is much higher risk. Life incarceration is low risk. Rehab can fail an you have a new killer on the streets. However its very hard to excape from a prison, and you still keep the killer off of the streets.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/23 16:38

Cocaine, sure- assuming you can stop the Cartels from using boats or aircraft. But most of the drugs that get people desperate like meth are locally sourced and a wall won't change that. Hell, meth was invented about an hour's drive from where I live.

==================================================

Vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/24 07:25

@amazingdude
People who have life sentences RARELY ever get put through rehab, and if someone with a life sentence DOES go through rehab, there an approximate 0% chance they'll be freed. Those who aren't in prison for life and are put through rehab still have to serve their time, even after completing rehab. You aren't set free for completing rehab, you're still in punishment for committing a crime, rehab is just to try to get the person out of the criminal mindset.

==================================================

Dracobot				#iWOBESYY 2017/08/24 09:24

@amazingdude
I meant all prisons in general, but I may be wrong.

==================================================

9132					#Nl3t12Mz 2017/08/25 01:12

I know about prison much more than you. All my 4 uncles had been in prison and one was sent to tent city. If your talking about saving money, tent city it is. It's in the middle of the desert in Tuscon, Arizona. It has no AC, no beds, sleep under tour-up rags. You will be stung by scorpions about twice a year. Even if it's 120 degrees out, you must do a daily exercise. People hurt each other for some cold water. That isn't fun. Thats one of 11 jails and use it for murders and illegalls that cross the border.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/25 07:36

@TK
Itll slow the import of drugs, and discourage many people from trying. Instead of just passing a bag though a small fence, you now have to catapult it over, take a boat, etc. Itll stop a decent amount, but not all. Doesnt mean the wall is worthless.

@Vidkunssonn
Ahh, making a bit more sense now. But I'm still skeptical about the success of rehab and whether its worth it. It hasnt been proven to work, nor do we have much reason to believe it does. For minor crimes, possibly, but not for major crimes.

@9132
Sounds like a great place to put the worst of the worst criminals. They're unfixable, a waste of money, so lets let these lowlifes rot away in the arizona sun. Or the death penalty.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/25 14:35

That's just cocaine though. Meth, heroin, and LSD can all be made with a highschool chemistry education and some medicines/cleaning supplies. Is the Wall going to loop around every pharmacy and dollar store in the country?

==================================================

9132					#Nl3t12Mz 2017/08/25 23:25

@Dracobot
My uncle stole a bait car while the cop was still setting it up. in Arizona, you will get SHOT and KILLED if you stole a candy bar while theatening the clerk. Its happened before and it will happen again.

@amazingdude
Hey, I live in the middle of Arizona too, you know.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/08/26 09:23

Hurricane Harvey is gonna hit Texas in a few hours as a major hurricane. Lets hope the damage isn't too bad, but storm surge and heavy winds will probably cause really bad damage. This hurricane is stronger than Katrina was at landfall.

The hurricane stalling over the area isn't gonna help with the flooding at all. There is supposed to be 3 feet of rain in localized areas, and the storm surge is gonna lower the amount of water flowing into the ocean by alot, making inland flooding along rivers even worse.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/26 12:17

@TK
Like I said, that does not mean we should not build a wall. Should we not ban flamethrowers because people will get them illegally anyway? No, we should ban them because they are too dangerous for people to own. The same is for drugs. The wall will stop SOME drugs, BUT NOT ALL. IT DOES NOT NEED TO BLOCK ALL DRUGS TO BE USEFUL, BUT IT WILL STOP A GOOD PORTION OF DRUGS FROM COMING IN. This went right over your head. My last comment specifically stated, "Itll stop a decent amount, but not all. Doesnt mean the wall is worthless." Yet you still claim the wall is worthless. We should stop as many drugs from coming in as possible, and the wall WILL help a bit, and it is still worth it.

Also related, Less coke = less hard drugs used.

@Hotdogeater
And watch the radical climate hoaxers use it as fuel for their global warming hoax.

==================================================

hotdogeater1000			#LiLWHMJE 2017/08/27 03:57

Hurricanes are warm-core storm systems, so global warming = warmer oceans (obviously) = larger time frame for hurricanes and more fuel for hurricanes.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/27 07:33

There's other steps we could be taking that don't involve expensive construction projects. Like following Portugal's example and decriminalizing drugs to instead treat addiction like the health problem it is; they did that and drug-related deaths dropped by over 80% since 2001 while the street prices of drugs saw a steep decline as well, deincentivizing their trade.

==================================================

vidkunssonn				#6gkHelVa 2017/08/27 10:41

@amazingdude
Remind me again how criminals obey the law.

Simply banning something will not get rid of the problem. It's been that way since the concept of "law" was created. Making the use of something illegal will not stop its illegal usage; that's why Hillary trying to ban guns was so stupid, because it won't stop anybody. Even if it were successful, the homicide and suicide rate won't decrease; people will just find another way. Banning the object won't fix the problem, because there's always another object that does the same thing, and it's impossible to remove them all. If you were somehow able to successfully remove marijuana from the country completely, drug users will just move on to another substance to get their buzz. Don't ban the drug, that won't work. Fix the people using them. Eliminate the demand. That's the only reason people in Mexico try to import drugs to the US: people in the US use them. If we eliminate the desire to use marijuana, then the supply will decrease ASTRONOMICALLY. The wall MAY help, but it won't fix it.

==================================================

amazingdude				#padtckOV 2017/08/27 13:37

@Hotdogeater
I meant that the liberals will use it to fool us into thinking we caused the hurricane. We arent causing stronger hurricanes. They are a natural product of warming. We are in an ice age righ now. Imagine how strong hurricanes were before the modern ice age.

@TK
You mean decriminalize drug usage, or drug dealing? You might be on to something here. I'd be fine with rehabilitating drug addicts, as long as they weren't dealing and that they pay for the rehab. They fucked up by taking drugs, they pay to fix themselves. In addition to building the wall.

@Vidkunssonn
I agree with your views on guns.
A wall will prevent the drugs from getting here in the first place. Or send the military into Mexico (With support from their government!) to take out the cartels. Less drugs, less illegal immigration since they can focus on making their country better. Its another possible solution. Rehab might be feasible with drug abusers too.

==================================================

IFIDIE					#ZgslTFIx 2017/08/27 14:06

U guys are still debating its been like a month

==================================================

skyk					#vSbAiI0H 2017/08/27 14:21

Like 80% of opioid addicts became addicted because of painkillers legally prescribed because of health issues. They didn't "mess up" by becoming addicted, they're the victims of extreme misfortune, and completely abandoning them just because you feel superior to them goes against the sort of civilized altruism that distinguishes humans from other animals.

(And no, I'm not saying we should withold prescription painkillers, but there needs to be support systems for those who do become dependent, otherwise we will never recover from the addiction epidemic.)

==================================================

Minsheme				#l0aS2Xd2 2017/08/28 14:35

@Vidkunssonn
https://pastebin.com/rJQ9WA6G

"No, the internet is not liberal. There are too many people who follow the philosophy of "This can't be used against me, so I can do whatever I want" (trolls) for the internet to be identified as liberal."

This is not true. Being left-leaning is more chaotic, and right-leaning more orderly. Both are necessary and neither of those descriptions are pejorative. In the realm of the internet however, liberalism suffers because of its chaotic nature. This is why, for example, the new right is ferocious with doxxing people and similar forms of undermining, whereas the left is unplanned and stumbling with their aggression and anger.

As for rehabbing - it's an abstract problem. It's a question of whether or not a system can treat so many people SITUATIONALLY - key word. It's a lot of effort to give everyone their own particular treatment with regards to their circumstances. And is it worth it? Maybe it's "not their fault" in an objectivist way, and there is still a civilised person somewhere within them, but it's going to be far less valuable to society than a person who didn't fall into a criminal lifestyle. There are also considerations like the fact that male aggression cannot be cracked by psychologists, aside from the fact that it staves off at age 28. So why not lock up violent criminals til age 28?

Another thing to consider: antisociality is often really congenital, if not engrained for other reasons. Psychopathy is also literally present from birth, and can only be diagnosed via brain scan at age 25. For the greater good, should we not just "dispose", "forget" about these people? I am playing devil's advocate, but it's something I question a lot. Why rehabilitate? Why not just kill them or something?

Most important: our tax money will be an "investment" in these people. How will it possibly pay off? For one thing, to go from criminals to contributors a great deal of them will need a program that continues helping them after their rehabilitation - at least a big enough chunk that a program will be created for it. There is the fact that there will be less destruction and economic ruin from crime, but it doesn't outweigh how much we'd lose just so that we can "do the right thing".

similarly to that chicken-before-the-egg theory about banning vs rehabilitating: what creates propensity for crime? Upbringing and societal conditions? We should focus more on stopping children from being born out of wedlock, for example.

==================================================

Torture King			#TI3DWoRg 2017/08/28 21:14

https://pastebin.com/6kDb3NpK

Desperation and conditioning, crime rates are higher in low-income areas because stealing is better than starving. Kids learn how to shoplift to get things they otherwise couldn't afford, and just keep doing it afterwards because that's what they have the skill-sets for. Getting sent to prison just opens up more criminal opportunities, because the larger gangs and mobs have been using the system for networking and recruiting specialized convicts like safe-crackers, hitmen, cleaners, and most recently hackers since the 30s. It creates a sort of ecosystem of where the only authority anyone involved will respect are the ones that "earned" it by starting at the bottom like they did and taking what they wanted until they're at the top of the underworld.

==================================================