SweetBabyCheezits

Joined

• started 92 topics
• posted 2,496 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by SweetBabyCheezits

• 
  90

  Impact of climate change may be underestimated - Article worth reading

  by cantleave in

  1. social
  2. current

  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-26/scientists-may-have-underestimated-climate-change/3913288.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  (in thousands of CO 2 metric tonnes)

  
• 
  90

  Impact of climate change may be underestimated - Article worth reading

  by cantleave in

  1. social
  2. current

  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-26/scientists-may-have-underestimated-climate-change/3913288.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  MP: I cant help but wonder if yor business interests have led you to believe the hype for personal benefit. Do yo believe because its good business?

  Let me clarify my understanding: I accept the scientific consensus that human actions have caused observable changes to the global climate and that it would be best to educate ourselves, readjust our thinking NOW, as a nation, and take steps to move to cleaner energy sources. I also think we should strive to waste less and recycle more.

  Personally, I'd like for my great-grandkids not to suffer for our willful ignorance.
  
  As for business interests go, the company I work for lost the executive who brought in those PAC injection projects. Regardless, that was a very tiny sliver of the pie. Our company generates far more revenue installing control systems that are indifferent to the clean energy initiative in coal-fired power plants and in the pulp/paper industry. So if you're looking at what I stand to lose financially, the lion's share of our work means I should be very much biased AGAINST any environmental law that could hurt our customer base. (In fact, almost all of my coworkers lean far right and consider all talk of environmental consciousness to be liberal agenda. These people sport bumperstickers that say, "Against logging? Try using plastic toilet paper."

  MP: You have completely ignored the fact that volcanos spew out other gases that affect the environment.

  Not ignored, I've just focused on the gas that is most relevant to this discussion - CO2. But if it makes you feel better, I've also "completely ignored" the vast quantities of other gases produced by humans that affect the environment as well. I isolated CO2 as an example, since it typically comprises more of the volcanic gases than all the others. H2O consistently makes up more than 60% of volcanic gas emissions. Following that, you have CO2, which typically makes up 10-40%. Then you have sulfur. Finally a host of trace gases that account for the rest. (H. Sigurdsson et al., 2000, Encyclopedia of Volcanoes)

  MP: Volcanos spew out vast amounts of sulfur etc, to think that only carbon affects the weather and environment is shallow.

  Shallow... nice. First of all, to address the CO2 specifically is relevant to the topic at hand, which is anthropogenic global warming. C02 is a greenhouse gas. Sulfur is not. So CO2 typically comprises more of the volcanic gases than all the other gases combined, not counting water vapor. We are addressing the potentially long-term effects that man's actions are having on the planet. The greenhouse effect is tied to CO2 not sulfur.

  MP: Take a look at this year and the previous, Europe had record winters, and we in the southern hemisphere didnt have a summer at all. There were almost no days in the mid 30's C, when in past years we would always have 30s in January. Does that really sound like global warming ?

  I'm curious, do you accept evolution as a well-supported scientific theory? If so, how did you ever get past the "well where are all the crocoducks" argument?
• 
  90

  Impact of climate change may be underestimated - Article worth reading

  by cantleave in

  1. social
  2. current

  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-26/scientists-may-have-underestimated-climate-change/3913288.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  MP: Strange wiki says 30B and your scientist says 35B tonnes of CO..... your quotes are off by almost 15% from my source in wiki.

  "My scientist" says... haha... The information I shared: Friedlingstein et al. projected that humans would be responsible for producing 35B tonnes of CO2 (FTR, CO is carbon monoxide) in 2010. The actual estimate of C02 produced in 2010, according to the same Wiki entry, is shown to be 33.5B tonnes worldwide. [EDIT: I've pasted a screenshot a couple of posts below.]

  Of course, you showed us the 2008 statistics instead of 2010 (also shown in that Wiki entry), no doubt for the lower amounts. I'd say a projection of 35 with a final estimate coming in at 33.5 is pretty damn good but perhaps you can get closer when you make next year's projections for CO2 output.

  ...while he says 130M to 440M tonnes from volcanos. Theres quite a difference between 0.13 to 0.44 by a factor of 3.5...

  So now you're complaining about the accuracy of the estimated range of emissions for something as varying as volcanoes? Is there a point to that comment or are you just saying you're better at math than these scientists?

  "The published estimates of the global CO2 emission rate for all degassing subaerial (on land) and submarine volcanoes lie in a range from 0.13 gigaton to 0.44 gigaton per year (Gerlach, 1991; Varekamp et al., 1992; Allard, 1992; Sano and Williams, 1996; Marty and Tolstikhin, 1998). The preferred global estimates of the authors of these studies range from about 0.15 to 0.26 gigaton per year."
• 
  90

  Impact of climate change may be underestimated - Article worth reading

  by cantleave in

  1. social
  2. current

  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-26/scientists-may-have-underestimated-climate-change/3913288.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  MP: The projects that you mention the gov spending money are token. Government is often involved in many token nonsense projects to justify some operation, but in the end its always about money, case in point Speed Cameras.

  Speed cameras are irrelevant to climate change debate and the example is nothing more than a straw man. I've no doubt that many politicians in our goverment are greedy, corrupt, and stupid but let's please focus on the point of debate. I gave an example that refutes your [rather fallacious] claim "If there really was a problem then it stands to reason the gov should spend some of the $ on fixing the pollution problems, but they dont change a single thing."

  I gave you a "single thing" - a specific situation in which I personally saw environmental regulations affecting one of our customers. You dismissed the example as a "token project". I feel like I'm trying to reason with a JW. I give you evidence, you dismiss it. Where exactly is the line between token projects and legit projects? Do you wave all of it off in ignorance or do you investigate? What environmental regulations would meet your qualifications? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/27/us/new-rules-will-limit-greenhouse-gas-emissions.html

  Either way, your initial line of reasoning was no less fallacious: "If there really was a problem then it stands to reason the gov should spend some of the $ on fixing the pollution problems, but they dont change a single thing."
  
  So your gauge of whether or not mankind faces a real problem is based on whether scientifically-illiterate politicians are making it a priority or not?
• 
  57

  Do demons really exist?

  by Inisc in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i mean, is there really any scientific evidence to support their existence?.

  is it used as a scare tactic of thewts?.

  and i suppose if one doesn't believe in god, a belief in satan and demons and angels for that matter would be contradictory... im not sure what i believe now but would love to hear everyone's thoughts..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  My dad (JW) used to recount a demon experience after he "naively" exchanged literature with someone of another religion. He claimed that he laid down on his bed to take a nap that afternoon and was at some point attacked by a demon. (He felt a distinct weight on his chest.) It scared him enought that he immediately ran out side and destroyed the infested literature.
  
  Years later, it occurred to me that Satan's minion was a poor strategist. He could've let my dad read the pamphlet and succumb to false religion but instead he chose to harrass him which, in turn, closed that potential window. Not the brightest move if Satan's goal is to mislead JWs.

  OR it could be that, since dad's experience sounds like every other account of sleep paralysis, it was just that, and that his ignorance of a natural explanation allowed his bias to fill that void with a supernatural explanation.

  Ignorance is the soil in which belief in miracles demons grow. (adapted from Robert Ingersoll quote)
• 
  57

  Do demons really exist?

  by Inisc in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i mean, is there really any scientific evidence to support their existence?.

  is it used as a scare tactic of thewts?.

  and i suppose if one doesn't believe in god, a belief in satan and demons and angels for that matter would be contradictory... im not sure what i believe now but would love to hear everyone's thoughts..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  Demons, ghosts, and the like require the same thing from you as does god: faith.

  If you lack it, they seem to ignore you. They are especially shy around skeptics.

  Funny how that works, huh?
• 
  778

  IS GOD REAL? HOW DO YOU KNOW?

  by still thinking in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is an honest question on my part.

  someone on this board asked me 'how do you know' a while ago and i really struggled with it.

  in fact, it was a turning point for me.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  Hang on, I'm jumping the gun.... TEC, you're saying that not every book in the canon specifically claims to be inspired, therefore you don't believe all 66 qualify as being of divine origin? Which ones do qualify? How do you determine which pieces were directed by god himself?
• 
  778

  IS GOD REAL? HOW DO YOU KNOW?

  by still thinking in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is an honest question on my part.

  someone on this board asked me 'how do you know' a while ago and i really struggled with it.

  in fact, it was a turning point for me.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  So we have....

  TEC: No, the man making the claim about it [inspiration] did not write the books within it.

  ...and then....

  TEC: Paul never claimed that any of his letters were inspired. (some parts of them from God, yes...

  Revelation does claim inspiration.

  So do many of the books of prophets, as they were 'in spirit' and wrote what they saw while so.

  Which is it?
• 
  778

  IS GOD REAL? HOW DO YOU KNOW?

  by still thinking in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is an honest question on my part.

  someone on this board asked me 'how do you know' a while ago and i really struggled with it.

  in fact, it was a turning point for me.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  2 Timothy 3:16,17 - All Scripture is inspired by God

  • Revelation 19:9 - These are true words of God.
  • Isaiah 1:2 - The Lord has spoken.
  • Jeremiah 10:1,2 - Hear the word which the Lord speaks. Thus says the Lord...
  • Ezekiel 1:3 - The word of the Lord came expressly.
  • Hosea 1:1,2 - The word of the Lord that came ... the Lord began to speak by Hosea, the Lord said...
  • Jonah 1:1 - The word of the Lord came to Jonah.
  • Micah 1:1 - The word of the Lord that came to Micah.
  • Zech. 1:1 - The word of the Lord came to Zechariah.
  • 1 Corinthians 14:37 - The things I write are commands of Lord.
  • Ephesians 3:3-5 - The things Paul wrote were made known to him by revelation. Formerly these things were not known but have now beenrevealed by the Spirit to apostles & prophets.
  • 1 Thessalonians 4:15 - We say by the word of the Lord.
  • 1 Timothy 4:1 - The Spirit expressly says.
  • Matthew 1:22 - A quotation was spoken by the Lord through the prophet.
  • Matthew 2:15 - Another passage was spoken by the Lord through the prophet.
  • Acts 1:16 - The Spirit spoke by the mouth of David.
  • Acts 28:25 - The Holy Spirit spoke by Isaiah ... prophet.
  • Hebrews 1:1,2 - God spoke in times past to the fathers by prophets. But now He has spoken to us by His Son.
  • Matthew 15:4 - Jesus Himself confirmed that Scriptures were from God. He quoted the Law revealed through Moses and said it was what Godcommanded.
  • Matthew 22:29-32 - He said the Scriptures were spoken by God.
  • Luke 10:16 - He also confirmed the inspiration of the New Testament for He told the apostles who wrote it: He who hears you, hears Me; he who rejects you rejects Me and rejects Him who sent Me
  • John 16:13 - He promised the men who penned the New Testament that the Spirit would guide them into all truth

  Borrowed from gospelgateway.com...
• 
  778

  IS GOD REAL? HOW DO YOU KNOW?

  by still thinking in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is an honest question on my part.

  someone on this board asked me 'how do you know' a while ago and i really struggled with it.

  in fact, it was a turning point for me.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  You think this is odd because you think the book claims to be inspired. (all or nothing) It makes no such claim. Men have made that claim about it.

  (EDIT) Yes, the same men who wrote the book[s]. (added S)