"People would treat Earth differently if they saw it from space" – ESA astronaut

[1bad65]

And here it is folks, the first idiot to post. Congrats....

No, you are. Like you've been told, when you stoop to insults and name-calling it shows you have low intellect and no case to state.

If we continue down the path we are traveling, we will end human life on this planet or make it a miserable existence. The giant rock we call earth that is floating in space will be fine, but we won't.

Yea, yeah we've been hearing you guys' Chicken Little predictions for decades now, and you're always proved wrong. Some of the same people now telling us we face global warming were predicting a coming Ice Age in the 1970s. Wake up, read the data, and you'll see you've been played for a fool yet again due to your ignorance of the subject matter (in this case Science).

The scientific community has said this a million times, people who study this for a living, yet you dismiss it so easily. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

No, they have not. It's an ongoing debate. and in this debate it's your side whose been nailed altering and deleting data, and advocating using scare tactics to further it's agenda. While the other said has accepted the data and been able to show said data refuted the hypothesis your side made.

[Eff Pandas]

Your stupidity is mind blowing.

Oh & you're just a regular Neil DeGrasse Tyson over here.

Earth will be here, but it will look like Venus and guess what, that isn't helping anyone.

And neither is this momo bull**** "save the planet" slogan that misrepresents the problem to a bunch of stupid ass humans who could give a f#ck about "the planet" (which again is gonna be fine well past us being around). At least make it save the atmosphere or save the air or how about save f#cking us like I keep f#cking saying. Those are much more accurate slogans to the goal at hand.

[1bad65]

Another idiotic post.

Yes, you've done it yet again. I see calling people names seems to be your only method of debate. Pathetic, really.

We have the technology to ween ourselves off of fossil fuels, we just don't do it because there's too much money to be made and we don't care if we pollute the earth in the process.

False. People say we do, but that's not true in many cases. Plus it doesn't calculate what goes into making 'green' things. Maybe you should educate yourself on how things like lithium batteries and solar panels are manufactured, and the dangers to endangered bird species wind farms create, so you can speak from knowledge as opposed to ignorance.

Not everything is a simple as the Democrats tell you things are. Think deeper. They are looking out for themselves, not you, not the planet, not anyone but themselves. Don't be used, think instead.

[1bad65]

Bernie doesn't have a superpac. The man is doing it all on donations from the public. He's a beast like that and the only candidate who actually is talking about things that matter. Not deporting 12 million people and banning "Muslims".

You know, adult talk.

LMAO!!!

Having someone else pay for everything you want is hardly "adult talk".

And yes, obeying laws is part of being an adult. Our immigration laws are just that, laws. And as such they should be obeyed.

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

Oh & you're just a regular Neil DeGrasse Tyson over here.



And neither is this momo bull**** "save the planet" slogan that misrepresents the problem to a bunch of stupid ass humans who could give a f#ck about "the planet" (which again is gonna be fine well past us being around). At least make it save the atmosphere or save the air or how about save f#cking us like I keep f#cking saying. Those are much more accurate slogans to the goal at hand.

Yet there's millions that do care about the planet. So it's not fair to just dismiss it that way.

Because corporations and oil companies are in charge and have most of the power, doesn't mean we should keep quiet about it.

[D-MiZe]

Eff Pandas

We'll be fine in the end. Islam is the last religion to be assimilated into the 'modern' world and that won't take more than 100 years. Technology is taking over, we'll have humans in a century that are part bionic - shit we've got that happening now. Curiously, I wonder how religion and technology will get on. Is it the Quakers that refuse blood transfusions?

I think in a thousand years the majority of Earth is secular and balanced. The complexion of most humans will be similar and I hope space exploration is what bonds us together. We could really do with an alien invasion though, that would definitely speed up the bonding process.

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

No, you are. Like you've been told, when you stoop to insults and name-calling it shows you have low intellect and no case to state.



Yea, yeah we've been hearing you guys' Chicken Little predictions for decades now, and you're always proved wrong. Some of the same people now telling us we face global warming were predicting a coming Ice Age in the 1970s. Wake up, read the data, and you'll see you've been played for a fool yet again due to your ignorance of the subject matter (in this case Science).



No, they have not. It's an ongoing debate. and in this debate it's your side whose been nailed altering and deleting data, and advocating using scare tactics to further it's agenda. While the other said has accepted the data and been able to show said data refuted the hypothesis your side made.

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

Scientific Consensus on Global Warming

Scientific societies and scientists have released statements and studies showing the growing consensus on climate change science. A common objection to taking action to reduce our heat-trapping emissions has been uncertainty within the scientific community on whether or not global warming is happening and if it is caused by humans. However, there is now an overwhelming scientific consensus that global warming is indeed happening and humans are contributing to it. Below are links to documents and statements attesting to this consensus.

Scientific Societies

American Meteorological Society: Climate Change: An Information Statement of the American Meteorological Society

"Indeed, strong observational evidence and results from modeling studies indicate that, at least over the last 50 years, human activities are a major contributor to climate change." (February 2007)
American Physical Society: Statement on Climate Change

"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now." (November 2007)
American Geophysical Union: Human Impacts on Climate

"The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century." (Adopted December 2003, Revised and Reaffirmed December 2007)
American Association for the Advancement of Science: AAAS Board Statement on Climate Change

"The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society." (December 2006)
Geological Society of America: Global Climate Change

"The Geological Society of America (GSA) supports the scientific conclusions that Earth’s climate is changing; the climate changes are due in part to human activities; and the probable consequences of the climate changes will be significant and blind to geopolitical boundaries." (October 2006)
American Chemical Society: Statement on Global Climate Change

"There is now general agreement among scientific experts that the recent warming trend is real (and particularly strong within the past 20 years), that most of the observed warming is likely due to increased atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, and that climate change could have serious adverse effects by the end of this century." (July 2004)
National Science Academies

U.S. National Academy of Sciences: Understanding and Responding to Climate Change

"The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere." (2005)
International academies: Joint science academies’ statement: Global response to climate change

"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring." (2005, 11 national academies of science)
International academies The Science of Climate Change

"Despite increasing consensus on the science underpinning predictions of global climate change, doubts have been expressed recently about the need to mitigate the risks posed by global climate change. We do not consider such doubts justified." (2001, 16 national academies of science)
Research

National Research Council of the National Academies, America’s Climate Choices

"Most of the recent warming can be attributed to fossil fuel burning and other human activities that release carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere." America's Climate Choices, Advancing the Science of Climate Change, 2010
U.S. Climate Change Research Program, Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States (2009)

"Global warming is unequivocal and primarily human-induced. Global temperature has increased over the past 50 years. This observed increase is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases."
Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change, Peter T. Doran and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman

"It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes."

Doran surveyed 10,257 Earth scientists. Thirty percent responded to the survey which asked: 1. When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant? and 2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?
Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change, Naomi Oreskes

"Oreskes analyzed 928 abstracts published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003 and listed in the ISI database with the keywords 'climate change.'... Of all the papers, 75 percent either explicitly or implicitly accepted the consensus view that global warming is happening and humans are contributing to it; 25 percent dealt with methods or ancient climates, taking no position on current anthropogenic [human-caused] climate change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position."
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, IPCC, 2007. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level”

“Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.”

IPCC defines "very likely" as greater than 90% probability of occurrence.
Sign-on Statements

The Importance of Science in Addressing Climate Change: Scientists’ letter to the U.S. Congress. Statement signed by 18 scientists.
"We want to assure you that the science is strong and that there is nothing abstract about the risks facing our Nation." (2011)
Climate Change and the Integrity of Science
Signed by 255 members of the National Academy of Sciences. "... For a problem as potentially catastrophic as climate change, taking no action poses a dangerous risk for our planet. ... The planet is warming due to increased concentrations of heat-trapping gases in our atmosphere. ...Most of the increase in the concentration of these gases over the last century is due to human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation." (2010)
U.S. Scientists and Economists' Call for Swift and Deep Cuts in Greenhouse Gas Emissions

"We call on our nation's leaders to swiftly establish and implement policies to bring about deep reductions in heat-trapping emissions. The strength of the science on climate change compels us to warn the nation about the growing risk of irreversible consequences as global average temperatures continue to increase over pre-industrial levels (i.e. prior to 1860). As temperatures rise further, the scope and severity of global warming impacts will continue to accelerate." (2008)
Increase Your Leadership on Global Warming: A Letter from California Scientists

"If emissions continue unabated, the serious consequences of a changing climate for California are likely to include a striking increase in extreme heat and heat-related mortality, significant reductions in Sierra snowpack with severe impacts on water supply, mounting challenges to agricultural production, and sea-level rise leading to more widespread erosion of California’s beaches and coastline." (2005)

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

I know, I know, you won't read it...bias link, bias sources and Jesus loves us all.

[Eff Pandas]

Yet there's millions that do care about the planet. So it's not fair to just dismiss it that way.

And there are billions of people on the planet so millions is a small percentage of the people needed to change things. Plus the people "running" things now are hipster momos who think "saving the planet" is some clever **** & are scared to say "you're in the jungle baby you're gonna die" if you don't change.

Because corporations and oil companies are in charge and have most of the power, doesn't mean we should keep quiet about it.

The people are in charge. The people are scared of their own power doe + the Kardashians new season is on TV + Taco Bell gots a new menu item. If someone would capture the publics imagination with how f#cked up things could be with this stuff things could change quick. No one has done that yet & this "save the planet" hipster plant some flowers sounding **** or this look at the earth from space f@ggotry won't do that let alone get the anti-global warming chicken hawks to see the upside of erroring on the side of caution with something that if you are wrong with your stance it could result in the end of life as we know it.

[D-MiZe]

Oh you done fucked it now, 1bad.

Cua is a man of science so you better respond accordingly. No bullshit about Jesus speaking to you in the bath or other Judaic space zombies.