|
| Thread: Serious Debates! Wolfman, Private Hudson and Dargon's Debate Forum |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · «PREV |
|
dEth8
Promising
Known Hero
|
posted March 15, 2003 05:05 AM |
|
|
Sad Case of Thievery
Quote:
PETA is a debunk group of freaks who best eat some meat to get some protein for their brains to work effectively.
Typical stuff..they write a snuff story so that all will whip out our hankies to whip away our tears at the inhumane treatment of fried chicken. They make it sound like, oh there has got to be a better way...and then finally at the end they admit to their whole scam...they are not trying to create a better environment for chicken McNuggets before we cook em...they are trying to get everyone to stop eating meat.
You know if you want to be a veggie more power to ya, but don't try all sorts of heart wrenching stories to cover your true motives of telling people what they can and can not do/eat....we already have enough thought police...now we got the food police.
The original PETA.orgsite. However, this domain was hijacked by some other group.
Therefore, I maintain that PETA is a group known as People Eating Tasty Animals.
Pretty sad scenario when a large vocal group is allowed to steal a person's domain name.
|
|
Bizud
Known Hero
Mighty Donkey
|
|
posted March 18, 2003 10:48 AM |
|
|
|
arachnid
Promising
Famous Hero
|
posted September 10, 2003 01:57 AM |
|
|
what a crap debate
____________
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
|
posted September 10, 2003 02:30 AM |
|
|
You missed it all, so poo on you, lol. Havn't seen this thread active in a long time.
____________
|
|
Sir_Stiven
Honorable
Legendary Hero
banned
|
|
posted September 11, 2003 05:01 PM |
|
|
lol wolftosser, you were hardly a part of the debate anyway. You were just the little tosser letting the older boys do the debate thingy 
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
|
posted September 11, 2003 11:10 PM |
|
|
Yeah well, I was more active in "Attack Iraq?". This whole thing kind of backfired on me, oh well. Someone else told me I should start a thread like this, so I did.
____________
|
|
Dingo
Responsible
Legendary Hero
God of Dark SPAM
|
|
posted November 24, 2003 02:02 AM |
|
|
Quote:
what a crap debate
Agreed.
____________
The Above Post/Thread/Idea Is CopyRighted by, The Dingo Corp.
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted November 24, 2003 02:23 AM |
|
|
As compared to a grave digger like yourself?
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
Peacemaker
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
|
|
posted November 26, 2003 12:14 AM |
|
|
I dunno if anyone is still interested in the latest debate in this thread, but I never saw the thread before today and just wanted to toss something into the mix to see if there were any bites.
I went to the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) as part of a special project in Honors class in about 1984. Back then they had the most advanced computer system in existence at that time generating a complex global atmospheric modeling program that predicted the mean warming trends which (as bort has pointed out in this thread) have continued to come to fruition over the last twenty years. We observed the basic statistical structure of the model, how the historical data was collected, what the effects of industrialization had been to present date, and several scenarios (depending on various projected particulate hypotheticals) for continuing future trends. Their methods were state-of-the-art, and the data, as it was explained to us during the project, appeared highly sound and well justified.
One of the things that stands out in my memory (again this could be a bunch of doo doo since it's been about twenty hard years) was that coastal city temperatures were actually supposed to drop during this process. I think it has something to do with a disequilbrium of the oceanic temperatures being interfered with by increasing greenhouse gasses, which at the same time cause the polar caps to melt. So while the coastal city mean temps may be falling, what you will find is the gross continential temperatures rising. I don't think anyone disagrees that if the global mean temperature increases as much as 5 degrees F it will pretty much wipe out everything as we know it, and we have gotten over 1 degree there in the past few decades. It is now a fact that a huge chunk of Antarctica (275 x 40 kilometers, like the size of a small country) has broken off (March 2000) and is floating into the ocean where it has broken into two pieces and they are now melting. The original Ice mass was called "B-15." Last I heard another fissure was detected and may cause a similar huge break-off. (What relationship this phenomenon bears to global warming is being debated, but to me it just doesn't look good...)
Now I could be wrong, but I believe that NCAR was and is mostly government funded. If NCAR was governmentally funded it is unlikely to me that they would be skewing their data in favor of global warming theory as an explanation for some sort of bias. The oil industry (perhaps the greatest offender in global warming theory) lies heavily in bed with the government in this country, and stands to lose a lot if global warming continues to fruit, and is acted upon by world governments.
I would challenge anyone to bring forth sources here that are anti-global-warming theory and reveal their funding sources (and/or political biases), since in my recent memory the only ones I recollect seeing were funded by entities that had profits to lose. (Again, sorry for being vague, I just remember thinking that when I saw them, and now do not recall what they were.)
<EDIT>
BTW Khaelo and others, if you Google "EPA global warming" you'll find a lot of sites with the most up-to-date info on this issue.
____________
I have menopause and a handgun. Any questions?
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted November 27, 2003 01:36 AM |
|
Edited By: Khaelo on 26 Nov 2003
|
the reason for the question
Coming from a liberal background and having been exposed to science from as early as I could read, I've always accepted global warming. It's always been one of those background things, like the earth being round and the dinosaurs having existed 65 million years ago. So, I was surprised to see dArGOn, a thinking and reasoning person, not accept global warming. When he implied that it was a theory promoted for specific goals, I naturally wanted to know who would make up such a thing and why.
DArGOn took the question as "innocent," which was confusing as well. What moral culpability is there in asking for information?
In the end, I'm not sure I buy his arguement, but hey.  I'm also not sure I buy the arguement that the trend is caused by pollution, either. The earth's temperature fluctuates naturally (i.e. the "mini ice age" in the 14th century). Of course releasing massive amounts of CO2 and nasty chemicals into the air isn't going to help, but I think factories/cars/etc. should minimize their emissions regardless of whether or not the earth is warming up. Releasing icky air is just gross.
Then again, being neither politician nor scientist, does it really matter what people like me think?
____________
 Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
|
|
