Global warming may have 'devastating' effects on rice: study
Farm workers tend to rice in a plantation in Myanmar, one of the countries that consumes the most rice and could be at risk for devastating effects from global warming As carbon dioxide rises due to the burning of fossil fuels, rice will lose some of its protein and vitamin content, putting millions of people at risk of malnutrition, scientists warned on Wednesday. The change could be particularly dire in southeast Asia where rice is a major part of the daily diet, said the report in the journal Science Advances.
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Richmond News.
#1 May 25, 2018
Grade school science says that CO2 is plant food unless you are a Globull peddler then it is devastatingly horrible. The dangerous new religion. Anti fossil fuel horoscopic soothsaying predictions of doom by the church of modern alchemy.(Attempting to transform harmless plant food CO2 into a horrible man killer substance) The question is why do people tenaciously cling to what is so easily proven false. And try to shove it down other people’s throats.(Answer: Money & power. Cost of energy/politically correct funding whore income/political power) Politically correct funding whore NASA said in Oct. 2016 MEGA DROUGHT LASTING DECADES IN SW USA 99%CERTAIN. 3 months later REAL SCIENCE said MEGA FLOODS, MAJOR DAMAGE AND MILLIONS FLEEING.......Idiot politically correct soothsayers....Peddlers of man made globull warming belong in jail for financial fraud, or mental wards
#2 May 27, 2018
Why is it always the religious nuts who like to characterise AGW as a religion?
Believing the world was created 6000 years ago by your imaginary friend who put the coal there for you to burn and is going to end the world when he feels like it so you don't have to worry about the environment is religion.
Believing the evidence from physics and geology that putting CO2 into the atmosphere is going to change the climate is science.
#3 May 27, 2018
Because, you said it yourself, Pres. Spanky ...when speaking of christianity OR climatology;
-both disciplines are based on a 'belief' in a higher authority to tell us what we are to 'believe'.
-both disciplines are based on a 'belief' that Mankind will be consumed by unnatural catastrophies (extreme weather) and terrible plagues (note: the afforementioned study).
-both 'believe' that Mankind is ultimately responsible for this self-inflicted wrath of nature.
-both 'believe' we must all contribute a part of our income to support the experts who tell us they know the way to salvage this mess in which we find ourselves (salvation).
-both 'believers' feel compelled to spread the message that we are living in the end times.
Anyway, Pres. Spank, these examples go on and on. You get there drift ...in both cases, it's about "believing"!
"Believing" in the prophacies/predictions of a higher authority -be they the minister in your tabernacle or the guest speaker at your annual IPCC climate summit.
So, yes, A/OACDDCGW aka "AGW" is a religion ...but one need not be a "religious nut" to recognize this fact.
#4 May 27, 2018
"there" = the
Since: Aug 15
#5 May 29, 2018
All religions are based on some initial circular argument (otherwise known as an argument of faith). From this initial argument, extension arguments are made from it. The other word for the circular argument is 'faith'.
The circular argument by itself is not a fallacy. Only failure to recognize one is a fallacy. This is what a fundamentalist does.
The Church of Global Warming is a religion. It's initial circular argument is that the Earth is warming. Since it's not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth, and no time period is specified between two measurements to describe any kind of change, the very meaning of 'global warming' is meaningless. It's a buzzword. So is 'climate change'.
From this initial circular argument, extensions are attached, such as the 'greenhouse effect' arguments, the 'coming disaster' arguments, etc.
The Church of Global Warming is a religion. It is a fundamentalist style religion. It denies science and mathematics. Specifically, it denies the laws of thermodynamics (especially the 2nd law), and the Stefan-Boltzmann law. It denies statistical mathematics, and with it, probability mathematics and even random number mathematics.
Like any fundamentalist religion, it spends most of its time insulting any Outsider or any other religion, usually treating them as 'lost' sheep or as the 'devil himself'.
Q.E.D. Here is a prime example of attacking Christianity instead of addressing the question of whether the Earth is warming or not.
There is no science here. The Church of Global Warming denies science.
CO2 has no capability to warm the Earth. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. There is no such thing as 'greenhouse effect' other than as an extended argument from the Church of Global Warming.
Their argument generally follows one of two forms, which I call the Magick Blanket argument and the Magick Bouncing Photon argument. Both arguments violate physics.
Science isn't 'evidence'. Science has no theories about meaningless buzzwords. The Church of Global Warming has so far been unable to define 'global warming' or 'climate change' without using circular definitions. The entire religion is based on a void argument.
Add your comments below
|Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10)||2 hr||Into The Night||41,300|
|Global Warming Standup Comedy (Apr '07)||5 hr||Into The Night||5,676|
|Scientists blame global warming for Antarctica ... (Mar '08)||5 hr||hojo||130|
|Gov. 'Moonbeam' says California to launch clima...||8 hr||liberals are mental||6|
|Global Cooling (Apr '15)||Thu||hojo||2,646|
|Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08)||Thu||Hilloryfartedthepoo||64,972|
|Extreme weather like Hurricane Florence shows w...||Sep 19||Solarman||1|
Find what you want!
Search Global Warming Forum Now
Copyright © 2018 Topix LLC