Atheists are the New face of the KKK

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#45 Dec 21, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
The sun spots have already started. And if you knew anything about science and history you would know the earth has heated up and cooled many many times over the history of the earth. So either heating or cooling cycles of earth is not nothing new. That is why there were ice ages that went away but yet returned again throughout the history of earth. They call that heating and cooling cycles.
The advances and retreats of ice sheets are not caused by sun spots. The sun spot cycle is a very rapid one.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#46 Dec 21, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh and like I said the sun spots have already started but won't hit there peak for 10-15 years. I love it when idiots don't understand that the sun doesn't just cool down in a year or two. It takes time for sun spots to multiply for the cooling affect to happen. DUH!
Read the articles again. The supposed cooling will not start until 2019.

What a Maroon!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#47 Dec 21, 2013
And goodnight replaytime.

I will correct your new errors tomorrow if someone else has not already done so.

“What U Don't Know U Fear”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

What U Fear U will Never Know

#48 Dec 21, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Read the articles again. The supposed cooling will not start until 2019.
What a Maroon!
Talk about an idiot. One sun spot has no affect. They have to multiply, build up which is what they are starting to do and won't become affective until 10-15 years. As I said and you seem not to understand when it starts it takes time to get to a point where the affects can be felt but the sunspots have already their cycle started. Kind of like plugging in your deep freeze, once you plug it in it starts working but won't be ready to freeze for at least a day or two. It doesn't freeze as soon as you plug it in, it takes time.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#49 Dec 21, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Talk about an idiot. One sun spot has no affect. They have to multiply, build up which is what they are starting to do and won't become affective until 10-15 years. As I said and you seem not to understand when it starts it takes time to get to a point where the affects can be felt but the sunspots have already their cycle started. Kind of like plugging in your deep freeze, once you plug it in it starts working but won't be ready to freeze for at least a day or two. It doesn't freeze as soon as you plug it in, it takes time.
You are again reading what you want to read and not what I or the articles you linked say.

The sunspot cycle has been going for a long time. The predicted possible changes to the Earth will not even start until 2019, and they will still be overpowered by AGW according to the articles YOU LINKED.

Se you tomorrow.

“What U Don't Know U Fear”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

What U Fear U will Never Know

#50 Dec 21, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You are again reading what you want to read and not what I or the articles you linked say.
The sunspot cycle has been going for a long time. The predicted possible changes to the Earth will not even start until 2019, and they will still be overpowered by AGW according to the articles YOU LINKED.
Se you tomorrow.
Exactly idiot. As I said the sunspots have already started, they are multiplying but the affects won't be felt for 10-15 years when they accumulate enough. DUH! You need to quit drinking only evo kool-aid and study other science as well.

“What U Don't Know U Fear”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

What U Fear U will Never Know

#51 Dec 21, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You are again reading what you want to read and not what I or the articles you linked say.
The sunspot cycle has been going for a long time. The predicted possible changes to the Earth will not even start until 2019, and they will still be overpowered by AGW according to the articles YOU LINKED.
Se you tomorrow.
Oh so you think when the sun cools it will not have a affect on the earth? You think the earth will heat itself? The sun is the major source of heat for earth. When the sun cools, the earth will cool. Wow you do need to go to bed. Your brain is shutting down on you. LOL

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Huntington Beach, CA

#52 Dec 21, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
16 Signs That Global Warming Is A Lie
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/12/16-signs-...
So, 16 against, 97,394 for

Looks like your pathetic little claims don't really hold up

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Huntington Beach, CA

#53 Dec 21, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly idiot. As I said the sunspots have already started, they are multiplying but the affects won't be felt for 10-15 years when they accumulate enough. DUH! You need to quit drinking only evo kool-aid and study other science as well.
You are seriously lacking in reading comprehension.

You're basically saying "Hey, I turned on the AC. The house will cool down eventually".
We're saying: "The house is ON FIRE".

Yes, the AC will _SLIGHTLY_ reduce the overall temp which will be climbing extremely quickly due to the fire.

Turning on the AC doesn't solve the problem. It doesn't even mitigate the problem.

The problem is the FIRE

“What U Don't Know U Fear”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

What U Fear U will Never Know

#54 Dec 21, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
You are seriously lacking in reading comprehension.
You're basically saying "Hey, I turned on the AC. The house will cool down eventually".
We're saying: "The house is ON FIRE".
Yes, the AC will _SLIGHTLY_ reduce the overall temp which will be climbing extremely quickly due to the fire.
Turning on the AC doesn't solve the problem. It doesn't even mitigate the problem.
The problem is the FIRE
Look idiot. The sun is the main source of heat for the earth. Turn that heat down and the earth will cool. It is not like trying to cool a house with AC when the heat source, which is the sun is still heating it up. All you doing is trying to counter-react the heat from the source in a confined space that is also sheltered from the heat source being inside out of the direct rays of the heat source. But with your analogy you don't have to use that much air at night when the heat source, the sun, goes down do ya?

Cool the heat source and you cool what it heats. It is very simple to understand.

“What U Don't Know U Fear”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

What U Fear U will Never Know

#55 Dec 21, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
So, 16 against, 97,394 for
Looks like your pathetic little claims don't really hold up
You better run because I saw on the news where chicken little said the sky is falling. lol

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#56 Dec 22, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly idiot. As I said the sunspots have already started, they are multiplying but the affects won't be felt for 10-15 years when they accumulate enough. DUH! You need to quit drinking only evo kool-aid and study other science as well.
You need to read your articles again.

The amount of possible cooling is less than the even the mildest of projected warming. Here:

"Prof Joanna Haigh, an atmospheric physicist at Imperial College London, said: "It would certainly be very risky to suggest that we rely on the sun's activity to compensate for global warming. In a future Grand Minimum the sun might perhaps again cool the planet by up to 1C. Greenhouse gases, on the other hand, are expected to raise global temperatures by between 1.5 and 4.5C by 2100.

"So even if the predictions are correct, the effect of climate change will outstrip the sun's ability to cool even in the coldest scenario; and in any case, the cooling effect is only ever temporary. When the sun's activity returns to normal, the greenhouse gases won't have gone away."

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Huntington Beach, CA

#57 Dec 22, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Look idiot. The sun is the main source of heat for the earth. Turn that heat down and the earth will cool. It is not like trying to cool a house with AC when the heat source, which is the sun is still heating it up. All you doing is trying to counter-react the heat from the source in a confined space that is also sheltered from the heat source being inside out of the direct rays of the heat source. But with your analogy you don't have to use that much air at night when the heat source, the sun, goes down do ya?
Cool the heat source and you cool what it heats. It is very simple to understand.
Except for the following:
1) You don't know that the sun spots will have ANY effect on cooling. I'll try and use terms you understand. The Sun is BIG the Earth is SMALL. Unless the sun spot directly effects an area on the sun which is radiating DIRECTLY at the Earth, it's not going to have any effect on our over all temp.

2) If you decrease the amount of heat coming from the Sun while simultaneously INCREASING the heat retention of the atmosphere, then you have to evaluate WHICH of these two things is having a bigger effect. IF the sun provides 1% less heat but we retain 400% more heat, then obviously we are going to INCREASE in temp rather than decrease EVEN IF the source is lower.

3) We've been in a cycle of LOWER sun activity AND STILL the temp has gone up. In other words, with LESS HEAT coming from the Sun in the recent past we've INCREASED IN TEMP. That would be known as the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you are claiming will happen in the future.

4) The people writing the papers you are cherry picking are EMPLOYED by the Koch Brothers and paid to write contrarian data.

5) EVEN THOUGH the Koch Bros employ people to do this, some of those people have STILL come out and said that AGW is a SERIOUS problem.

But none of that matters. You are a Conservative therefore you are a contrarian. NOTHING anyone says is going to convince you of anything.

What's going to happen is that 20 years from now, when water levels are higher and crops are failing, you're going to claim that you were on our side the entire time and pretend like you never held a different opinion.

Honestly, Conservatives have been on the losing side of EVERY SINGLE issue since the beginning of time. Every Single Issue.

The Earth is Round.
Blacks are people.
Slavery is bad.
Evolution is real.
And putting hundreds of billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere has an effect on the atmosphere.

DUH

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#58 Dec 22, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Except for the following:
1) You don't know that the sun spots will have ANY effect on cooling. I'll try and use terms you understand. The Sun is BIG the Earth is SMALL. Unless the sun spot directly effects an area on the sun which is radiating DIRECTLY at the Earth, it's not going to have any effect on our over all temp.
2) If you decrease the amount of heat coming from the Sun while simultaneously INCREASING the heat retention of the atmosphere, then you have to evaluate WHICH of these two things is having a bigger effect. IF the sun provides 1% less heat but we retain 400% more heat, then obviously we are going to INCREASE in temp rather than decrease EVEN IF the source is lower.
3) We've been in a cycle of LOWER sun activity AND STILL the temp has gone up. In other words, with LESS HEAT coming from the Sun in the recent past we've INCREASED IN TEMP. That would be known as the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you are claiming will happen in the future.
4) The people writing the papers you are cherry picking are EMPLOYED by the Koch Brothers and paid to write contrarian data.
5) EVEN THOUGH the Koch Bros employ people to do this, some of those people have STILL come out and said that AGW is a SERIOUS problem.
But none of that matters. You are a Conservative therefore you are a contrarian. NOTHING anyone says is going to convince you of anything.
What's going to happen is that 20 years from now, when water levels are higher and crops are failing, you're going to claim that you were on our side the entire time and pretend like you never held a different opinion.
Honestly, Conservatives have been on the losing side of EVERY SINGLE issue since the beginning of time. Every Single Issue.
The Earth is Round.
Blacks are people.
Slavery is bad.
Evolution is real.
And putting hundreds of billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere has an effect on the atmosphere.
DUH
That is not totally true. In the U.S. the Republicans have been the conservative part since its birth and it was anti-slavery. And when it came to the civil rights laws of the 60's there were more Republican votes than Democratic votes. The laws passed in spite of the Democrats, not the other way around. Sadly the Republicans now have gone all out apeshit on abortion and other "religious" causes.

“What U Don't Know U Fear”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

What U Fear U will Never Know

#59 Dec 22, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to read your articles again.
The amount of possible cooling is less than the even the mildest of projected warming. Here:
"Prof Joanna Haigh, an atmospheric physicist at Imperial College London, said: "It would certainly be very risky to suggest that we rely on the sun's activity to compensate for global warming. In a future Grand Minimum the sun might perhaps again cool the planet by up to 1C. Greenhouse gases, on the other hand, are expected to raise global temperatures by between 1.5 and 4.5C by 2100.
"So even if the predictions are correct, the effect of climate change will outstrip the sun's ability to cool even in the coldest scenario; and in any case, the cooling effect is only ever temporary. When the sun's activity returns to normal, the greenhouse gases won't have gone away."
2100 is quite a few years away. When the cooling periods peaks in 10yrs we won't be warming. Think of it like the green houses gases are insulation holding heat in. Lower the amount of heat coming in and you lower the temperature the insulation holds in. Now even when the sun goes into its cooling period we will continue to put more green house gases into the air. So between now, the start of the cooling period until the end of the cooling period, when ever that may be(40-80yrs), They better come up with a plan to lower the green house gases or when the sun comes out of its cooling period it is going to get rather toasty here on earth for our future generations.

“What U Don't Know U Fear”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

What U Fear U will Never Know

#60 Dec 22, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Except for the following:
1) You don't know that the sun spots will have ANY effect on cooling. I'll try and use terms you understand. The Sun is BIG the Earth is SMALL. Unless the sun spot directly effects an area on the sun which is radiating DIRECTLY at the Earth, it's not going to have any effect on our over all temp.
2) If you decrease the amount of heat coming from the Sun while simultaneously INCREASING the heat retention of the atmosphere, then you have to evaluate WHICH of these two things is having a bigger effect. IF the sun provides 1% less heat but we retain 400% more heat, then obviously we are going to INCREASE in temp rather than decrease EVEN IF the source is lower.
3) We've been in a cycle of LOWER sun activity AND STILL the temp has gone up. In other words, with LESS HEAT coming from the Sun in the recent past we've INCREASED IN TEMP. That would be known as the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you are claiming will happen in the future.
4) The people writing the papers you are cherry picking are EMPLOYED by the Koch Brothers and paid to write contrarian data.
5) EVEN THOUGH the Koch Bros employ people to do this, some of those people have STILL come out and said that AGW is a SERIOUS problem.
But none of that matters. You are a Conservative therefore you are a contrarian. NOTHING anyone says is going to convince you of anything.
What's going to happen is that 20 years from now, when water levels are higher and crops are failing, you're going to claim that you were on our side the entire time and pretend like you never held a different opinion.
Honestly, Conservatives have been on the losing side of EVERY SINGLE issue since the beginning of time. Every Single Issue.
The Earth is Round.
Blacks are people.
Slavery is bad.
Evolution is real.
And putting hundreds of billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere has an effect on the atmosphere.
DUH
I agree it damages the atmosphere. I also think shooting rockets up through our atmosphere into space also damages it. Every forest fire adds to greenhouse gases. If you heat with wood or natural gas you are adding, if you drive you are adding, factories are adding, coal plants add, nature adds, etc etc. Basically the way of human life is adding and will keep adding and you will not change that until you change the way humans live or come up with a magical fix for it. People care more about making hundreds of billions of $dollars more than they care about the hundred of billions of tons of carbon that are getting produced and put into the atmosphere.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Huntington Beach, CA

#61 Dec 22, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
That is not totally true. In the U.S. the Republicans have been the conservative part since its birth and it was anti-slavery. And when it came to the civil rights laws of the 60's there were more Republican votes than Democratic votes. The laws passed in spite of the Democrats, not the other way around. Sadly the Republicans now have gone all out apeshit on abortion and other "religious" causes.
You are combining two terms which are not the same thing.

Conservatives = Opposing Progress
Republicans = Political Party

At one time the Republicans were not Conservatives, they were progressives. During the Civil War era, the Democrats were the Conservatives, not the Republicans.

That all changed during the nadir under Wilson. The parties essentially switched.

Now the Republicans embrace Conservative ideals like racism and shun ideals like support for the middle class.

To top it off, when Reagan brought in the Religious Right they realized that coming out strongly against education meant they could build a base of people who literally didn't know any better on issues.

Hence Al Gore is "bad" because he's a "college educated elitist".

Now you've got dickheads like this douchebag claiming that scientists are secretly shoveling snow off of glaciers under the cover of darkness not because there's any evidence to support it, but rather because its the OPPOSITE of what educated people believe.

The Conservative anti-education contrarianism means they will be wrong on every issue forever.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#62 Dec 23, 2013
DarwinPaul wrote:
least 85 million people to as many as 140 million people killed by the atheist system known as communism.
How many abortions, 45 million?, in the US alone by the atheistic eugenics program congered by the radical arch atheist E Margaret Sanger, E for EVIL.
All atheists by their very nature are evil. Even if they don't know it. After all, how does a rabid dog know if its rabid?
Atheism, more evil than even Islamism. That's some evil boy I'm here to tell ya, yes sir re, you betcha!
So you would rather live in Saudi Arabia than in Sweden?

Nutter.
Ben

Pulborough, UK

#63 Dec 26, 2013
What do you make of this?

http://aryan-race.com

Please tell me your opinion

“Shoot for the stars”

Level 5

Since: Dec 10

Planet Earth

#64 Dec 26, 2013
suncore wrote:
Atheism and the theory of evolution.
A dinosaur to a chicken to a dolphin to a turtle to a tiger to a bear to a giraffe to an elephant......to a monkey to a hippo to a bear to a kangaroo to a lion, to a porky pine, to a meercat to a dog to a whale......to a Mexican walking fish back out of the water to a mouse to a possum to a crocodile.....to a duck to a baboon to a zebra.....to a sheep to a donkey to a Racoon...to a Emu a penguin to a seal....back to a gorilla, a bunch of monkeys again...
and finally to humans.
The family tree.....Makes perfect sense.
You can't debate what you don't understand. Start with just the ancestors of H. sapiens, over the last couple of million years:

Sahelanthropus tchadensis
Orrorin tugenensis
Ardipithecus ramidus
Australopithecus anamensis
Australopithecus afarensis
Kenyanthropus platyops
Australopithecus africanus
Australopithecus garhi
Australopithecus sediba
Australopithecus aethiopicus
Australopithecus robustus
Australopithecus boisei
Homo habilis
Homo georgicus
Homo erectus
Homo ergaster
Homo antecessor
Homo heidelbergensis
Homo neanderthalensis
Homo floresiensis
Homo sapiens sapiens

When you consider that life on earth started over 400 MILLION years ago, that's a lot of ancestors. You're deliberately making a straw man mockery of scientific research that spans 170 years and has been confirmed by well over a million graduate students in several dozen disciplines, from physical anthropology to genomics to radiometrics.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 10 min dirtclod 20,575
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 11 min Paul Porter1 171,730
Beware of Kamikaze Snakes. They Are Evolving in... 14 min Paul Porter1 18
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 27 min Paul Porter1 142,570
News Pope Francis Affirms Evolution and Big Bang Theory 8 hr Paul Porter1 266
Science Suggests That A Quantum Creation Force ... (Jun '14) 8 hr Paul Porter1 33
News Intelligent design 9 hr GTID62 2
More from around the web