Place to put my Nonsense Thread.
- Thread starter lurkeraspect84
- Start date
If Harris is the prize give me Joe.
This study found that between 1982-2016, global tree canopy cover increased by 865,000 square miles. In the U.S. alone, it increased by about 15%. In other countries, upwards of 35%. Anything you want to compare to a hypothetical primitive past is wildly useless and irrelevant because there obviously isn't any baseline data.
And this study finds that the alleged sinking island of Tuvalu in the Pacific is actually growing. They used data from 1971-2014 and found that the island actually increased in total land area by 2.9%, even though sea levels in the country rose twice the global average. "The study findings may seem counter-intuitive, given that (the) sea level has been rising in the region over the past half century, but the dominant mode of change over that time on Tuvalu has been expansion, not erosion."
And, there is a thing called dikes. The Dutch have been very resourceful with that for a long time. That is a viable alternative. Just think it's funny how people freak out about the ice caps melting. I mean, sure, it's probably melting in some areas - and growing in other areas, depending on the season. But, when the water levels have remained at 99.99% intact, you can easily extrapolate that the net loss on ice caps is freakishly minimal.
I've always been curious about why some liberals are worried about rising sea levels when they flock to cities in the coast, the areas most likely to be effected by climate change. Not convinced that many believe it as much as they claim.
being a numbers guy and a stats guy, I really like your post. you back up everything with proof.
You still bash Trump on the regular. Buckle up, bitch.
Imagine being triggered by someone who hasn’t been president for six months.
I see liberal women (women used very flexibly, here) all the time with a bio that says something about Trump. "If you voted for Trump, don't bother"
Can't imagine being that sensitive and weak.
Can't imagine being that sensitive and weak.
Thanks. Numbers is basically my first language. It's much more convincing, to me at least, to use data with a solid sample size than to use anecdotal evidence.
He got real snippy after I said he reminded me of Trump and the bible. It's definitely the soft spot on his noggin.
Some post off the hip and it's just a perception/opinion. Nothing to back it up. I get it, we're all passionate, but it's hard to argue stats.
*meant toquote @dukedevilz
*meant toquote @dukedevilz
Like I said, conservation efforts have counteracted deforestation over the last few decades. You cited a stat agreeing with what I said, which was agreeing with the gist of what you originally said. The ‘ever before’ part was just inaccurate is all. Before conservation efforts, forests were shrinking. Tangentially, rainforest - unlike regular woodland - can’t be planted and regrown as easily/quickly.
Accounting for seasonality, the ice caps, overall, are shrinking. This has implications beyond sea level rise (temperature, storms, ecosystems, etc.) Sea level rise does and has eroded coastline. Dikes are great. Everybody loves dikes. They’re a good way to treat a symptom. Why not also try to treat the cause? Evidence strongly points to the cause being humans, not a natural cycle of Earth.
I get all of my news from @dukedevilz. The most trusted news source on Rivals since 2002.
I'm not making any basketball futures bets until @dukedevilz posts his preseason rankings.
Clean air and being good stewards for the planet should be the focus. The whole, "humans are the cause" is nothing more than propaganda and a big money grab.
Wouldn’t it make sense to not want to date somebody with wildly different life views than yourself?
Do you go to gay pride PETA rallies to pick up women?
How is scientific data ‘propaganda’? Humans influence the environment and contribute to climate change that would not occur in the absence of humans; at least, not at the observed rate.
‘Pollute less’ isn’t propaganda.
How do you isolate the human variable and determine what percentage of the rise in temperature is due to natural cycles and what percentage is due to human activity?
Thanks!
I actually did reasonably well with my top 50 from last fall. If you look at my preseason rankings and KenPom's - and compare it to the final KenPom rankings, I actually hit the mark better than he did. I was closer on 23; he was closer on 21; we tied on 6. And I had a smaller miss average. I think he's much better at getting depth than I am, though. He did much better in the bottom half of the top 50 than I did.
No.. my first thought when making a dating profile isn’t “You know, should really let them know first thing that Donald Trump rustles the **** out of me”
I get it. Maybe they have had bad experiences with the kind of guys who vote for Trump. No harm in letting those guys know to spend their efforts elsewhere. Maybe they want a nice, handsome, not at all short accountant to pile drive them at night.
Yea I totally get it, on both sides. Again, just not sure I would put it first thing on my dating profile.
She probably likes to peg and knows she needs a lib for that
It only says something about the person who does. That they are a miserable c.unt. policy differences can be discussed and left to agree to disagree. But when people (the left mostly) get so emotionally distraught over an individual, particularly in politics, as if the individual representing their side is some sort of saint you know you are dealing with a crazy person. So maybe it's best that those losers go ahead and let you know.
Not even about that for me. I don’t need my wife lecturing me about stupid lib shit whenever she pleases.
I got a wife that comes to see Bill Burr live with me instead of one that would get triggered by how much he shits on feminism. I couldn’t imagine how miserable life would be with an oft offended hag.
Yeah. In today's world I couldn't imagine being with someone from the other aisle. Different times.
It's an impossible question, really. Scientists don't know how much human activity is responsible anymore than they know the origins of life, even though some may not be shy to give a convoluted answer.
Here's a much more reasonable discussion about climate change.
Similar threads
