Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #70186] |
Fri, 05 March 2004 15:41   |
 |
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Bush is bad.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #70319] |
Sat, 06 March 2004 15:36 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| hareman |
And this surprises anyone that the President does this. They a history of this.
|
...?
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #70326] |
Sat, 06 March 2004 16:42 |
 |
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
The first two articles are editorials and mean absolutely nothing.
The third article is biased.
The reuters article didn't even load correctly, so I couldn't read it.
The BBC article is really the only credible article you have posted there, and even THAT is a little biased, though not as prevalent as the others.
The report itself is a joke. You said it was written by scientists? Nobel prize-winning ones, at that? You'd think a Nobel prize-winning scientist can write a concise report about the problems it's dealing with :rolleyes:. Half of the report is made up of crap like, | UCS report, page 7, first paragraph |
Researchers at the National
Weather Service gather and analyze meteorological
data to know when to issue severe-weather advisories.
Specialists at the Federal Reserve Board collect and
analyze economic data to determine when to raise
or lower interest rates
|
Well no fuckin' duh! Can you get to your point, PLEASE??? But no, crap like that goes on for pages and pages. Not until page 11 does it even BEGIN to make its case against the Bush administration. What you've learned up to that point is, "The Bush administration lies!" That statement is restated over and over again in many different ways. Oh no, they wouldn't add any evidence to support that conviction within the first three pages of writing now, would they?
And the point made on page 11 is crap, too. It's about the farce called "global warming." Here's a priceless quote, found on page 12:
| UCS report |
The deletion of a temperature record covering
1,000 years in order to, according to the EPA
memo, emphasize “a recent, limited analysis
[which] supports the administration’s favored
message.”
|
So, from the year 1000, people have been recording the termperature to see if there has been an increase in the average temperature of the world? :rolleyes:
Accurate temperature recording didn't start until about 100 years ago, if I remember correctly what my biology teacher told me.
Even if there were accurate temperature recordings of the last 1000 years, what's to say global warming is not a natural process of the earth? 1000 years is barely the blink of an eye, geologically speaking.
If I'm not mistaken, about thirty years ago, all of the eco-terrorists and tree-hugging hippies were afraid of global cooling, saying if humans kept on doing whatever it was they were mad about that the world would be plunged into another ice age. :rolleyes:
Here's an article explaining the truth about global warming.
Did I mention the evidence used in the report consisted mostly of biased and opinionated documents?
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
 (<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
 (<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #70378] |
Sun, 07 March 2004 02:40 |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
There's also a natural depletion of the ozone layer certain times of the year when part of the earth is facing away from the sun for several weeks. Without sunlight, the ozone depletes.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #70459] |
Sun, 07 March 2004 18:03 |
|
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Seasons of the sun
| The author of the article (posted above) |
Most people think of the sun as a featureless, unchanging ball of light. But the Sun actually has seasons, or cycles of activity and relative inactivity. Right now, we are approaching the maximum activity phase of the current solar cycle. The Sun is daily exhibiting many sunspots, flares and coronal mass ejections. We feel the effects of an active Sun here on Earth - radio communications, power distribution, orbiting spacecraft and even the weather are all affected.
|
Isn't it possible all of the warm temperatures we have been experiencing over the past few years could have been a result of increased activity of the sun? More than likely.
"Global warming" is not caused by the industrialization of human beings. It is merely a natural process.
And if the earth is heating up, then why did we have one of the coldest winters in a LONG time just last year? Pretty much everywhere in the United States was covered in snow, and Denver got around 7 feet of snow. Now, could it have gotten that much snow if the average temperature of the earth was increasing? :rolleyes:
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
(<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
(<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #70879] |
Tue, 09 March 2004 23:18 |
 |
IRON FART
Messages: 1989
Registered: September 2003
Location: LOS ANGELES
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Quote: |
And if the earth is heating up, then why did we have one of the coldest winters in a LONG time just last year? Pretty much everywhere in the United States was covered in snow, and Denver got around 7 feet of snow. Now, could it have gotten that much snow if the average temperature of the earth was increasing?
|
Thats right. The snow here in Cali was incredible. I had never seen anything like it.
</sarcasm>
It rained for 2 weeks. Thats all. I wouldn't call it the worst seing as the previous year it rained way more, and there were very violent winds.
| Quote: |
Quote from IRC
<[Digital]> get man_fucking_a_car.mpg
<[Digital]> ah fuck wrong window
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #70899] |
Wed, 10 March 2004 03:15 |
NHJ BV
Messages: 712
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Europe had the warmest summer in about a century. The winter has been average so far.
Predictions are that temperatures will rise a few degrees (0.7 to 3.5 degrees Celsius) the next 50 years, and the sea level will rise 20-30 centimeters the next century. These increases are, IIRC, the second-largest figures ever measured. I believe some of it is natural (we're in an interglacial), but human actions certainly makes it worse.
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #70907] |
Wed, 10 March 2004 05:57 |
NHJ BV
Messages: 712
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Crimson |
There's also a natural depletion of the ozone layer certain times of the year when part of the earth is facing away from the sun for several weeks. Without sunlight, the ozone depletes.
|
However, the ozone layer has been falling apart since at least 1980. A bit more or less ozone during different parts of the year doesn't matter here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #70960] |
Wed, 10 March 2004 15:10 |
|
|
Snowy outside for 2 months and a half, we're in March and the snow is melting, 3/4 of it has already melted.
Normally the snow is melting by the end of March here.
+ Since the water was being abnormal, there were lots and lots of of floods.
I suck cock and love it... absolutely love it. And I just got banned for being too immature to be allowed to post here.
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #71014] |
Wed, 10 March 2004 20:51 |
 |
Fabian
Messages: 821
Registered: April 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Global Warming
The earliest accurate temperature readings started in 1602, when Galileo invented the mercury thermometer. Most official temperature readings are at places like airports, so does a higher temperature tell you about climate or about the effect of paving rural landscapes?
In 1979, when the satellite record began, there has been no discernible global warming, despite predictions from computer models. In fact, the data actually show a slight cooling.
The climate is something that changes all the time, and any scientist knows that it is normal for a climate to change. What scares some scientists is that the recent change in temperature is happening at an unusually rapid rate. However, data on oxygen isotopes in ice and sea-floor cores indicate that the temperature in Greenland changed 7 degrees in as little as twenty years! This would be the equiviland of going from Boston weather to Miami weather in two decades.
Ozone Depletion
It is true that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), make their way, because of their high stability, up to the ozone layer. There they react with sunlight to produce chlorine, which acts as a catalyst to break up ozone molecules.
CFCs have been banned in most countries, however. So what accounts for the ozone hole over Antartica? Well, this happens because Antartica is the coldest place on the planet. During Antartica's long nights, polar stratospheric clouds (PSC), made of tiny ice crystals, form high up in the ozone layer. Most chlorine in the atmosphere is taken up into molecules of hydrochloric acid deposits on the surface of the ice crystals, and chemical reactions take place that form chlorine oxide (ClO). Chlorine oxide does not break up ozone molecules by itself, but in the presence of sunlight, it dissociates to form ordinary chlorine, which can disrupt the ozone.
During Antarctic winter, then, the supply of chlorine oxide builds up and there is no sunlight to get rid of it. When the sun returns in the spring, the chlorine oxide breaks up, freeing the chlorine. The result is a burst of ozone destruction--this is what causes the ozone hole. So yes, Crimson was correct.
Source: "From Quarks to Atoms." James Trefil
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #71266] |
Fri, 12 March 2004 16:38 |
|
IRON FART
Messages: 1989
Registered: September 2003
Location: LOS ANGELES
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Quote: |
However, data on oxygen isotopes in ice and sea-floor cores indicate that the temperature in Greenland changed 7 degrees in as little as twenty years!
|
7 degrees.....what unit?
And for 20 years that may not be a large amount, but the reason its becoming a threat is because there is growing air pollution. The long term affect (like 100 years) is very great.
I read a while ago in school that the world's temerature was rising by 1 degres celsius every year. In the short term this is again, nothing. But in about 100 years or so, things will be different.
| Quote: |
Quote from IRC
<[Digital]> get man_fucking_a_car.mpg
<[Digital]> ah fuck wrong window
|
|
|
|
|
| The Bush Administration Distorts Science to fit its agenda [message #71292] |
Fri, 12 March 2004 19:14 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
1 degree celsius doesn't seem quite right...that's an ENORMOUS temperature change over such a small period of time. If that followed, in 60 years most parts of the world would be boiling hot.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue May 14 23:37:23 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01035 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
