Is the debate over global warming true or false?

[Tide]

WW,

about details that don't pertain to my point

If they don't pertain to your point then you may want to consider not using them! :)

As I have said before, I think the science of climate change has been hijacked by politics and both the quality and objectivity of science have been degraded. I wasn't suggesting, nor do I believe, there is any kind of conspiracy but some healthy skepticism is in order regarding various claims from both sides - including government websites.

 

[WhiteWolf]

You have sort of proved my that I need to put as many details in a possible explain the detail explaining my point. Even though it may be a little side fact, if I leave out ONE word, including that quote right above, you take it completely out of context. Really that fact on how off topic you have got is kinda pathetic...

 

[Tide]

Then why don't you just get to the point? Global warming true or no? :)

 

[WhiteWolf]

It was kinda obvious that I don't think it is true, that could be infered from my first post, then I was challenged, so I support it with examples, you don't need to critisize tiny details that were just supporting examples, cause then I have to waste time and space like I am now to respond to people challenging these meaningless details

 

[Mystikal_Pooka]

Mystikal_Pooka because of its position (latitude and longitude) and when was it a warm greenland (thats another place) Your second question is self contradictory.

Sorry about that, I was in a hurry when i wrote that. I meant Greenland not Iceland. At around the time of Eric the Red it was a fertile green land. Now it is covered in ice.

Your second question is self contradictory.

How is it self contradictory? It in no way contradicts itself. Let me try to rephrase it so you can understand it better.

The current average temperature of the WHOLE Earth is the same as long ago, if not cooler.

I don't know how i could phrase it any other way but I'll try...

If the Earth's average temperature is not below what it was long ago, than it is about the same.

In other words, today's Earth is no warmer overall than in, say, Earth in the 1800's. Maybe some places are a bit warmer, but many places have become cooler as well, therefore balancing it out.

heres a math problem that outlines it: Current Avg Temp of Earth <= Historic Avg Temp of Earth.

 

[WhiteWolf]

Earth has relatively stable weather patterns if you think about it, sometimes you get unussually hot or wet weather. For example, Arizona has been hit with record rainfall, unbelievable amount of rain have falln in very short period of time.

 

[Tide]

WW,

waste time and space like I am now to respond to people challenging these meaningless details

Whatever! I advise leaving out the meaningless details in the first place if you don't have time to clarify what you write. From my perspective, when you give a blanket condemnation of .com websites but give a free pass to .gov websites to dismiss your opponents case and bolster your own -then, in fact, you're not making your case. If any tangency exists, you created it.

Ciao!

 

[WhiteWolf]

drop it, i already did...and there you go again saying I was generalizing all .com and .gov, when i clearly said that certain sites depending on their purpose deserve certain degrees of consideration, yet another example, even though someone is going to find some minor flaw with it by some act of god, you don't take all you facts about gun control from the aclu website (or something similar!), all that they will say is about all the deaths caused by school shootings to pull at people's heart-strings. It is one-sided. Many of the .com sites that were presented was doing everything they could to prove GW was a real problem, not just presenting facts that would allow one to come up with their own decision. I wasnt generalizing, and I clarified that!