Page 4 of 4 < 1 2 3 4
Topic Options
#144106 - 02/09/06 08:04 PM Re: The Environment and Satanism [Re: uncleherpe]
Poetaster Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 01/20/06
Posts: 2333
Loc: East Coast, USA.
Quote:

global warming figures are usually ground temperature, not atmoshperic.




Either way you slice it, "ground" and "atmospheric" temperatures are increasing - I was taught that an increase in temperature infers heat (warming).

Also, consider this: Earth is not heated by internal energy sources, but rather from an external heat source - the Sun. Therefor, any increase in temperature on the surface is due in part because of the increasing temperatures in the atmosphere. This is not a tall stretch of logic my friend.

But, just in case, I'll provide you with some figures.

"A Remote Sensing Systems study, spearheaded by Frank Wentz, that re-analyzed 25 years worth of satellite temperature data. Using 1979-2002 numbers measuring the atmosphere from the surface up to the stratosphere, Wentz' team found that the temperature trend is an increase of 0.115 degrees centigrade per decade. This contrasts with data from the NASA team, led by climatologist John Christy from the University of Alabama, indicating that the same portion of the atmosphere is warming at a rate of 0.032 degrees centigrade per decade."**

"Christy notes that if one were to consider just the lower troposphere (the part of the atmosphere closest to the earth's surface) Wentz' temperature trend would be about 0.15 degrees centigrade per decade, in contrast to Christy's trend of .074 degrees centigrade per decade. The disparity in the two figures arises from the differing ways the two teams handle errors in the data sets, Christy says. He believes both methods are scientifically defensible in a statistical sense. However, Christy contends that a long-running series of weather-balloon measurements strongly and independently confirms his temperature trends."**

** Quote taken from a New York Times article entitled; ""New View of Data Supports Human Link to Global Warming,"


Quote:

If you look at the temperature of the air then there isnt really much of a average temperature change going on at all.




The data proves that this statement is erroneous.

Quote:

The changes in ground temperature are not suprising, with the amount of things like concrete and ashpault (which conduct and hold heat much better than regular dirt) the increase after 1970 makes sense.




A statement issued in refute to this very argument - called "Urban Heat Island" - by Stephen Schneider, a professor of geosciences at Stanford University reads as follows: "If you eliminate large cities or correct for them, it does not change the answer more than 10 percent. The urban heat island has been completely and thoroughly put to bed, it's been analyzed and reanalyzed."

The percentage is so low, that differences in temperature flunctuations are negligable on a global scale. Since the confirmed rise in global temperatures is a fact, this argument holds no weight and has since been abandoned by the scientific community.

Again, you are separating atmosphere from ground temperatures, however, as can be shown both are increasing - so the point is moot.

Quote:

the two figures of the temperature in the air and the temperature of the earth do not match up at all, so I am not convicned of global warming.




The percentages are different, however, the percentages all show increase - warming - therefor the point is again, moot.

Quote:

I think the people in favor of global warming have much more to gain as well.




Sounds a bit paranoid. What do 'they' have to gain?

And what do those against Global Warming have to lose?
_________________________
"People who harbor strong convictions without evidence belong at the margins of our societies, not in our halls of power. The only thing we should respect in a person’s faith is his desire for a better life in this world; we need never have respected his certainty that one awaits him in the next."

- Sam Harris





Top
#144107 - 02/10/06 08:56 PM Re: Any recommendations? [Re: pitzi_83]
Old_Pig Offline


Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3968
Loc: The Deep South
The Satanic Bible
The Satanic Witch
The Satanic Rituals
The Devil's Notebook
Satan Speaks
by Anton LaVey

Secret Life of a Satanist (Anton LaVey's biography)
by Blanche Barton

Those are the six books I was talking about.
_________________________
You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.
Robert A. Heinlein


Top
#144108 - 02/10/06 11:12 PM Re: The Environment and Satanism [Re: Poetaster]
uncleherpe Offline


Registered: 03/22/05
Posts: 499
actually the atmospheric temperatures do not seem to have any relation to the amount of greenhouse gasses in the air, and that is the whole theory that global warming is based upon. the things I have read do not show a relevant increase over the past 20 years when the concentration has been the highest, many of the more dramatic climate changes have occurred when there were less greenhouse gases. Im growing rather bored of this. ive seen both sides and I made my choice. Please research the other side of the argument and see what ya think.

what is parinoid about examining possible motovations behind actions? Its sensible.


Please. go to junk science. read. enjoy.


Edited by uncleherpe (02/10/06 11:17 PM)
_________________________
One stupid post too many.

Top
#144109 - 02/11/06 12:09 AM Re: The Environment and Satanism [Re: Lithslithus]
Nemo Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 12497
Loc: Point Nemo s48:52:31:748, w123...
Satanism is pragmatic.

Biotechnology will almost certainly solve all (yes, all) of the so-called "environmental problems" even before molecular nanotechnology does.

However most of these "problems" are actually political propaganda rather than real, so even there that leaves little that must be attended to.

However from a purely Satanic perspective if I do not personally have control over the issues then it is a waste of my time to be concerned.

So I am therefore not concerned at all both short term and long term.

Environmentalism is just another religion.

It is not my religion.

Now I shall enjoy some brandy.

Top
#144110 - 02/11/06 08:39 AM Re: The Environment and Satanism [Re: uncleherpe]
Poetaster Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 01/20/06
Posts: 2333
Loc: East Coast, USA.
Quote:

actually the atmospheric temperatures do not seem to have any relation to the amount of greenhouse gasses in the air, and that is the whole theory that global warming is based upon.




It would appear that you don't know what a greenhouse gas is.

Definition: "Many chemical compounds found in the Earth’s atmosphere act as “greenhouse gases.” These gases allow sunlight to enter the atmosphere freely. When sunlight strikes the Earth’s surface, some of it is reflected back towards space as infrared radiation (heat). Greenhouse gases absorb this infrared radiation and trap the heat in the atmosphere."

I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion you did, but hopefully this clears it up for you.

Provided the definition of a greenhouse gas, I'm sure a reasonable guy like you can spot the fallacy of your statement.

Quote:

the things I have read do not show a relevant increase over the past 20 years when the concentration has been the highest, many of the more dramatic climate changes have occurred when there were less greenhouse gases.




False.

According to the National Academy of Sciences, the Earth's surface temperature has risen by about 1 degree Fahrenheit in the past century, with accelerated warming during the past two decades.

A statement issued during a Washington D.C. press release reads as follows:

"Despite differences in temperature data, strong evidence exists to show that the warming of the Earth's surface is "undoubtedly real," and that surface temperatures in the past two decades have risen at a rate substantially greater than average for the past 100 years, says a new report by the National Research Council of the National Academies."

Either way you slice it, the past two decades have seen the most dramatic change - not the other way around.

Quote:

what is parinoid about examining possible motovations behind actions? Its sensible.




Indeed it is sensible - until you start disregarding pertinent information; because it might not agree with your formulated opinion.
_________________________
"People who harbor strong convictions without evidence belong at the margins of our societies, not in our halls of power. The only thing we should respect in a person’s faith is his desire for a better life in this world; we need never have respected his certainty that one awaits him in the next."

- Sam Harris





Top
#144111 - 02/11/06 03:07 PM Re: The Environment and Satanism [Re: Poetaster]
Quercuss Offline


Registered: 08/14/05
Posts: 47
Loc: Vermont, USA
Like many, I like a clean environment. I don't like to see trash blowing around (walking around?) on city streets any more than I do in the woods. I love a hike in the forest and a visit to Boston.

Humans have been around for only a blink of the Earth's eye. In this time we have changed much. Often without knowing ahead of time the actual consequences of our actions, even if we did try to minimize effect. Its trial and error.

The climate is warming. Its happened many times before. Remember? The dinosaurs lived during one of these warmer times. We may be and probably are having some effect on this. Its been colder too. Let's hope another ice age is a ways off.

The ice caps at the poles are melting affecting the way polar bears hunt and the warmer temperatures have allowed fungus deadly to amphibians to spread to areas where we humans have not known it to exist.

So, basically the best we and the herdlings can all do is live cleaner, clean up what's all ready dirty (I remember as a kid being able to drink tap water and I'm only 33), pick out a nice smelling sun screen and a snazzy pair of sun glasses and start going to the gym. 'Cause fat people don't look good in swim trunks.

I'm gonna miss those frogs and polar bears, but then again...I really hate shoveling snow.

------------------

On another note...

People say things like, "I'm a city boy. I've no need for 'Nature'", and "We must take care of "Nature".

"Nature" is not something separate and different from somewhere else. It is everywhere we go. We build houses to hide from the elements, yes. But, just because the fields have been paved over and a city built atop them offering the illusion of safety from "Nature" doesn't mean a thing. That city still sits smack dab in the middle of "Nature". It offers little safety from "Nature". A good tornado or flood can really ruin an urbanite's day.

Many wild animals adapt nicely and some even flourish in urban settings and I've never seen a storm steer clear of a major metropolitain area (Storm: "Oh...can't rain over there. Its a city! Shh! *sneaks away*). Remember that when you've had a rat or racoon in your garbage and the next time an awesome thunder storm rolls through.

Humans are no more special or amazing than anything else, we only think we are. If we are so great, how come all the animals, that don't know us, run from us?! Silly, noisy, dirty monkeys.

Top
Page 4 of 4 < 1 2 3 4


Forum Stats
12018 Members
73 Forums
43828 Topics
405224 Posts

Max Online: 197 @ 10/04/11 06:49 AM
Advertisements