Log in or Sign up

ocean conditions are changing due to Rapid Global Climate Shift

Discussion in 'All Things Boats & Boating' started by Boston, Jan 10, 2011.

Thread Status:: Not open for further replies.

Page 284 of 308

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 79
Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 100
Location: The Netherlands

J Feenstra Junior Member

ImaginaryNumber said: ↑

Huff Post | 'Greedy Lying ********' Takes On Climate Deniers, Big Oil
Click to expand...

political thread! Time to close down this thread,

btw did you know guns are responsible for the climate change?

J Feenstra, Mar 27, 2013

#4246

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,857
Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
Location: Control Group

hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

The gun debate has been settled since 1791 A.D.

hoytedow, Mar 27, 2013

#4247

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 79
Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 100
Location: The Netherlands

J Feenstra Junior Member

hoytedow said: ↑

The gun debate has been settled since 1791 A.D.
Click to expand...

That's what the commies want you to believe.....

J Feenstra, Mar 27, 2013

#4248

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,857
Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
Location: Control Group

hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

J Feenstra said: ↑

That's what the commies want you to believe.....
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

The 2nd Amendment was passed to insure that the citizen could defend against the militia of a tyrannical government by regulating its ability through an armed populace, not of subjects, but of free armed citizens. Boat! If you don't boat don't gripe!

hoytedow, Mar 27, 2013

#4249

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 348
Likes: 9, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 108
Location: South Africa

Alex.A Senior Member

Enough with the guns.... You guys know where that's going to go!
While googling around, I found an article saying that pot was responsible (at least partly) for climate change!
Americans are apparently growing $40 billion indoors?!!?
This takes a huge amount of electricity due to the powerful lights they use.
Some noonoo worked out that each joint "costs" 2 lb of co2.
And then they smoke it too......

Of course it's entertaining! The absurd always is.

Alex.A, Mar 27, 2013

#4250

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 436
Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
Location: USA

ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN | Quick-Change Planet: Do Global Climate Tipping Points Exist?

Is there a chance that human intervention—rising temperatures, massive land-use changes, biodiversity loss and so on—could “tip” the entire world into a new climatic state? And if so, does that change what we should do about it?…

This sort of connection is unlikely to exist, he says. Oceans and mountain ranges cut off different ecosystems from each other, and the response of a given region is likely to be strongly influenced by local circumstances. For example, burning trees in the Amazon can increase CO2 in the atmosphere and help raise temperatures worldwide, but the fate of similar rainforests in Malaysia probably depend more on what’s happening locally than by those global effects of Amazonian deforestation. Brook and colleagues looked at four major drivers of terrestrial ecosystem change: climate change, land-use change, habitat fragmentation and biodiversity loss; they found that truly global nonlinear responses basically won’t happen. Instead, global-scale transitions are likely to be smooth…

Tim Lenton, an expert on tipping points at the University of Exeter in England, says there is no convincing evidence of global shift yet, but he doesn’t rule out the possibility. “It’s not obvious how you can get a change in Siberia then causing a synchronized change in Canada or Alaska,” he says, referring to a commonly cited climate feedback loop of permafrost melting at northern latitudes. “That doesn’t seem likely. It’s more that different parts of the Arctic are going to reach the thawing threshold at the same time just because they’re getting to the same kind of temperature.” This is a fine distinction: Are we looking at multiple systems tipping as one, or just a coincidental amalgam of unconnected systems falling off a ledge at similar time points?…

And further, that non-connectivity is not necessarily a given. Barnosky argues that the fundamental assumption that systems around the world are not strongly connected is no longer true. “What used to be isolated parts of the Earth really are very connected now, and we’re the connectors,” he says…

A more accurate picture would not just let us prepare for rapid climate change, but might help us predict it as well. Marten Scheffer, of Wageningen University in the Netherlands, has done extensive work on ways we can see tipping points coming. On smaller scales, he says, a system can exhibit “critical slowing down”—a slowed ability to recover from perturbations—before jumping to the irreversible new state. Scheffer says, arguing for tipping points, that past global-scale, quick changes in climate appear to have exhibited a similar effect…
Click to expand...

ImaginaryNumber, Mar 28, 2013

#4251

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 436
Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
Location: USA

ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

ABC NEWS (AU) | Defence should reposition strategy towards climate change disasters: report

A new study from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute argues that the Australian Defence Force is unprepared for a changing climate and it needs to adapt its strategies to protect the nation and the region.

The report says the ADF will face new challenges such as an increased requirement for domestic disaster response and the likely spread of infectious diseases…

MICHAEL BRISSENDEN: The special report titled Heavy Weather, Climate and the Australian Defence Force makes the case that Australia and the region is already feeling the effects of climate change and the Australian Defence Force is already stretched to the limit in its capacity to deal with it…

ANTHONY BERGIN: Every Christmas now almost by rotation we're seeing the military deployed to floods or bushfires in Australia. The ADF of course have been heavily involved in deploying to regional disasters…
Click to expand...

ImaginaryNumber, Mar 28, 2013

#4252

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 436
Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
Location: USA

ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

ABC NEWS (AU) | Investors warned to put climate change on the books

The Investor Group on Climate Change, which says it represents Australian and New Zealand investment with combined funds of $900 billion, has released a series of reports showing climate change is already posing new risks for investors.

The reports were conducted by the Australian National University and cover the mining, construction and energy sectors…

NATHAN FABIAN: Australian investors have a lot of capital exposed to assets that might be impacted by climate events. Of course they also own a lot of emissions intensive industry in Australia.

Our investments are kind of on this see-saw. We're going to be affected by either physical events of climate change or by high emissions levels and policies to restrict them…

SIMON LAUDER: So what should investment companies and super funds be doing with this information? Should they be pressuring these industries to prepare more for climate change?

NATHAN FABIAN: We think the industries understand the issues quite well. What they're not getting is a clear enough signal from their investors that they should be allocating their money towards dealing with it…
Click to expand...

ImaginaryNumber, Mar 28, 2013

#4253

Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 30
Likes: 7, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 92
Location: Somewhere in Germany

micah719 Plotting Dreamer

http://www.blacklistednews.com/Eco-...st_Killing_Polar_Bears/24998/0/38/38/Y/M.html

The world of global warming alarmists is increasingly resembling a madhouse, with conservationists falling over each other trying to salvage the last shreds of credibility. Very funny. What makes the situation hilarious, is the fact many eco-zealots inadvertently put out increasingly panicking publications that look more like satires than studies.

As the Daily Caller reported on in February of this year, a new foe has been appointed to “accelerate” global warming: earthworms.Yes, you’ve heard it right. Earthworms. Besides the fact that there is no global warming, and therefore the very premise is faulty, earthworms are now joining the growing list of evildoers who get the blame for global warming. The report states:
Click to expand...

(see link. ed)

It’s clear we are witnessing the tragic falling apart of the eco-asylum, with all the patients running to and fro with buckets of water trying to put out the fire that has already consumed the house.
Click to expand...

Psalms 139:9-10 If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me.

micah719, Mar 28, 2013

#4254

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 436
Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
Location: USA

ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

micah719 said: ↑

...As the Daily Caller reported on in February of this year, a new foe has been appointed to “accelerate” global warming: earthworms.Yes, you’ve heard it right. Earthworms. Besides the fact that there is no global warming, and therefore the very premise is faulty, earthworms are now joining the growing list of evildoers who get the blame for global warming. The report states:
Click to expand...

THE RAW STORY | Climate change models predict remarkably accurate results

The debate around the accuracy of climate modelling and forecasting has been especially intense recently, due to suggestions that forecasts have exaggerated the warming observed so far – and therefore also the level warming that can be expected in the future. But the new research casts serious doubts on these claims, and should give a boost to confidence in scientific predictions of climate change.

The paper, published on Wednesday in the journal Nature Geoscience, explores the performance of a climate forecast based on data up to 1996 by comparing it with the actual temperatures observed since. The results show that scientists accurately predicted the warming experienced in the past decade, relative to the decade to 1996, to within a few hundredths of a degree.

The forecast, published in 1999 by Myles Allen and colleagues at Oxford University, was one of the first to combine complex computer simulations of the climate system with adjustments based on historical observations to produce both a most likely global mean warming and a range of uncertainty. It predicted that the decade ending in December 2012 would be a quarter of degree warmer than the decade ending in August 1996 – and this proved almost precisely correct…
Click to expand...

see also BoatDesigns.net | The Guardian | Global worming: how worms are accelerating climate change

ImaginaryNumber, Mar 28, 2013

#4255

Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 30
Likes: 7, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 92
Location: Somewhere in Germany

micah719 Plotting Dreamer

http://green-agenda.com/globalrevolution.html

“The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these
dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through
changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then, is humanity itself."
- Club of Rome
Click to expand...

(from "The First Global Revolution", pp.104-105 by Alexander King, founder of the Club of Rome and Bertrand Schneider, secretary of the Club of Rome. ed)

The environmental movement has been described as the largest and most influential social phenomenon in modern history. From relative obscurity just a few decades ago it has spawned thousands of organisations and claims millions of committed activists. Reading the newspaper today it is hard to imagine a time when global warming, resource depletion, environmental catastrophes and 'saving the planet' were barely mentioned. They now rank among the top priorities on the social, political and economic global agenda.

Environmental awareness is considered to be the mark of any good honest decent citizen. Multi-national companies compete fiercely to promote their environmental credentials and 'out-green' each other. The threat of impending ecological disasters is uniting the world through a plethora of international treaties and conventions. But where did this phenomenon come from, how did it rise to such prominence, and more importantly, where is it going?
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong...I believe we are accountable for our stewardship of this earth. This does not require genocide, which is what the watermelons (green outside, red inside) are aiming at. I'm a Christian and believe The Bible, which states that this world is not going to drown; it will burn on account of the sins of man, a Divine judgement. Such as telling lies and robbing and murdering people. But, The Creator has promised He will make all things new, and this time without any blight, and even rescue some from their justly earned penalty, of which I'm one.

If you have a mind for real science, which does not violate laws of logic and morality, that explains many puzzling phenomena and makes predictions that actually come true without needing regular rehashing like the AGW chicken little's, read the following link. If you disagree with Dr Brown's conclusions, he is most keen for a debate, though nobody ever takes him up. Much easier to obfuscate and bluster than deal with verifiable facts, much easier to resort to emotions than sober reason and healthy scientific inquiry. Now, I'm going to go back to nutting out a nice boat so I can somewhat escape the lunacy and the thieves that wish me poor and dead on account of their evil and selfish religion - environmentalism.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/

Psalms 139:9-10 If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me.

micah719, Mar 28, 2013

#4256

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,857
Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
Location: Control Group

hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

Danke für diesen Link: http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/

hoytedow, Mar 28, 2013

#4257

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 436
Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
Location: USA

ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

micah719 said: ↑

If you have a mind for real science, which does not violate laws of logic and morality, that explains many puzzling phenomena and makes predictions that actually come true without needing regular rehashing like the AGW chicken little's, read the following link. If you disagree with Dr Brown's conclusions, he is most keen for a debate, though nobody ever takes him up. Much easier to obfuscate and bluster than deal with verifiable facts, much easier to resort to emotions than sober reason and healthy scientific inquiry. Now, I'm going to go back to nutting out a nice boat so I can somewhat escape the lunacy and the thieves that wish me poor and dead on account of their evil and selfish religion - environmentalism.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/
Click to expand...

WIKIPEDIA | Walt Brown (creationist)

Walter T. Brown (Aug 1937) is an American engineer and young earth creationist, who is the director of his own ministry called the Center for Scientific Creation. According to his self-published book, Brown has a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a B.S. from West Point and he served as an officer in the US military until he retired in 1980.[1] The Skeptic's Dictionary considers him to be one of the leaders of the creation science movement.[2] He currently lives in Phoenix, Arizona.

Biography

Since retiring from the military in 1980, Brown has been the director of the Center for Scientific Creation and has worked full-time in research, writing, and speaking on origins theory.[1] In 1998, Brown was appointed to a committee reviewing Arizona's state science standards. However, evolution was retained in the Arizona state science standards after a final decision in August 1998.[3][4]

Claims and criticism

In Brown's In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood he suggests evidence against evolution and for creation science and flood geology (including hydroplates). It is divided into three sections, the first of which explores discoveries made by scientists that Brown says do not fit the theory of evolution.[5] The second section outlines various alternate explanations to geological and astronomical subjects such as the mid-oceanic ridge and comets, which Brown asserts modern science cannot explain. The final section presents a variety of other questions encountered in the creation-evolution controversy.

In 1989, the Creation/Evolution journal of the National Center for Science Education published a critique of Brown's theory. Jim Lippard, graduate student of philosophy begins with a criticism focusing primarily on fossil evidence of human evolution.[6] Brown addressed several of Lippard's points in his response,[7] and three further articles were printed: Lippard,[8] Brown,[9] and ending with Lippard, where he asserts that Brown made serious errors, including using "mistaken claims about what others have written."[10] The series of articles does not discuss Brown's Hydroplate Theory, apart from Brown's claim that Lippard "dismisses or ignores the bulk of the book and specifically addresses only a very small fraction of its substance."[9]

Philosopher Robert T. Pennock describes Brown's position as being typical, other than the unique feature of his hydroplates hypothesis, of young-earth creationists in desiring to explain all major terrestrial features in terms of a catastrophic Biblical flood.[11]

TalkOrigins reports that Walt Brown has had contentious relations with other creationist organizations.[12][13] Answers in Genesis has a standing offer to Brown to publish some of his material in their journals[14] but Brown has declined.[13] The old earth creationist organization Answers in Creation has published material rebutting Brown's hydroplate theory.[15] The Christian American Scientific Affiliation website features a debunking of Brown's video "God's Power and Scriptures Authority" by Steven H. Schimmrich of Kutztown University.[16]

Brown also has repeatedly claimed that no "evolutionist" will engage in a written debate with him,[17] but has been accused of discouraging or avoiding such debates.[13][18][19] An abortive attempt at such a debate was held in 1989 and 1990 in the pages of Creation/Evolution, the National Center for Science Education journal, before Brown refused to continue.[10] Joe Meert of Gondwana Research, a journal promoting research related to the origin and evolution of continents, had a supposed signed contract for such a debate with Walter Brown in 2000. It has been said Brown disputed the terms of the signed contract and it did not take place.[20] Brown has mentioned on his website that the actual reason for the debate not taking place was that the debater wanted to add religion and since Dr. Brown is not a theologian, he wanted the debate to be strictly science.[21] According to Georgia State University biology professor Fred K. Parrish, who was "tricked" into an April 1985 public debate with Brown, Brown debates around the U.S. and has a set of preconditions (such as Brown speaks first, the debate moderator sits on his side, etc.).[22]

Books

Self-published by Brown (as the Center for Scientific Creation):

In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood, Center for Scientific Creation (7th edn ISBN 1-878026-08-9).
Click to expand...

ImaginaryNumber, Mar 28, 2013

#4258

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 436
Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
Location: USA

ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

micah719 said: ↑

If you have a mind for real science, which does not violate laws of logic and morality, that explains many puzzling phenomena and makes predictions that actually come true without needing regular rehashing like the AGW chicken little's, read the following link. If you disagree with Dr Brown's conclusions, he is most keen for a debate, though nobody ever takes him up. Much easier to obfuscate and bluster than deal with verifiable facts, much easier to resort to emotions than sober reason and healthy scientific inquiry. Now, I'm going to go back to nutting out a nice boat so I can somewhat escape the lunacy and the thieves that wish me poor and dead on account of their evil and selfish religion - environmentalism.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/
Click to expand...

Walt Brown's Pseudochallenge

Date Signed Contract sent: November 6, 2000 (second time)
Number of days Walt has refused to debate: 4+ years first attempt.

Update 3/26/2006: Attention Supporters of Walt Brown
This website is paid for through my own personal funds. Much has been made about a follow-up letter between Matt Foster and Walt Brown. People are claiming that Matt Foster did not approve of my posting the letter. This is patently false. Express consent was given to post the following letter regarding the 'debate':

Dr. Meert & Dr. Brown/Peggy:
I have written with some thoughts on the debate feud chronicled at Dr. Meert's site, and to an extent at Dr. Brown's site, CreationScience.com. (This email also keeps the promise I made Peggy that I would respond to Dr. Brown's position in submissions to both sides. Also, as a courtesy to Dr. Meert, I have attached the PDF file that Peggy sent me earlier today.)

As a lawyer who negotiates, writes, and litigates contracts for a living, I believe that neither Dr. Meert nor Dr. Brown has read the debate agreement exactly right. However, on the whole, Dr. Meert's reading seems much closer to correct (i.e., his misreading is minor), and Dr. Brown's reading -- particularly on the "modification" clause near the end -- seems (at best) hyper-technical and (at worst) materially and even deliberately wrong.

Dr. Brown argues that the "modification" clause applies only to "procedures," and that Dr. Meert's proposal does not deal with "procedures" -- meaning, in a nutshell, that r. Meert has not truly agreed to Dr. Brown's terms for debate. That, to use lawyer speak, is hogwash. While the modification clause does refer to "procedures," the term is not self-defining, nor is it defined in the agreement -- so what exactly the word means or includes must be determined in view of the entire document. When read as part of the agreement as a whole (and consistent with reported court decisions), "procedures" seems clearly to embrace all acts and powers of the editor listed in paragraph 8 -- including the power to "[m]ake whatever rulings will help accomplish paragraph 2 above." In other words, the editor has contractual authority to decide anything -- whether concerning submission lengths, formats, content, or anything else within the debate relationship -- if it makes the debate better or more helpful to its audience. If "procedures" does not include such items, then what exactly does the word mean? The agreement gives no clue. Against this backdrop -- and using common sense -- Dr. Meert's proposal seems easily to fall within the scope of "procedures" as the term is used in the modification clause.

On a related point, I disagree with Dr. Brown's claim that Dr. Meert has made inclusion of religion a mandatory condition of participation in the debate. To the contrary, Dr. Meert says at http://gondwanaresearch.com/hp/walt_brown.htm that he "will abide by the independent judges [sic] ruling (even if it goes against me) and will debate Walt in writing or in public at any time.")

More important, perhaps, is a different but related principle: Even if Dr. Brown's reading of "procedures" is correct, that does not free him from the separate obligation to proceed with selection of an editor under paragraph 5 -- after which Dr. Meert's proposed modification would be submitted to and decided by that editor. Stated differently, once Dr. Meert signed the contract (with or without a proposal attached), Dr. Brown had no choice but to proceed with selection of an editor -- which editor would then have sole power to decide whether Dr. Meert's proposal is proper or should be rejected. To be blunt, nothing in the agreement gives Dr. Brown any power either (a) to decide that Dr. Meert's proposal does not concern "procedures," and therefore does not fall within the modification clause, or (b) then to do nothing based on that determination, and thus kill the debate before it begins. By refusing to act in any way on Dr. Meert's agreement, Dr. Brown is effectively serving as judge and jury, as well as advocate -- which, of course, makes the "debate" inherently unfair as well as impossible. If Dr. Brown will pounce on "procedures" to avoid appointment of the editor in this case, what word will provide his next exit?

I am not an evolutionist -- to the contrary, I am a Bible-believing, creationist Christian who has attended and enjoyed Dr. Brown's seminar, and who teaches a Bible class every week at my church. In addition, however, I am a Vanderbilt-educated, naturally skeptical lawyer who wants creation science claims to be backed up by evidence, is embarassed by faulty logic and argument, and cringes whenever a creation science proponent appears to avoid instead of welcome direct engagement with an opponent. In this instance, Dr. Brown has disappointed me, because his misinterpretation and/or hyper-elevation of the term "procedures" looks like evasion. Of course, I might be entirely wrong, and I would welcome correction.

Many thanks for the opportunity to give my thoughts. Please use them however you wish.

Matthew Foster

McMains Foster & Morse, P.C.
9000 Guaranty Building
20 North Meridian Street
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
Telephone (317) 638-7100
Telecopier (317) 638-7171
Click to expand...

edit:
...and a lot more squabbling from the above website I initially included but then removed. :idea:

ImaginaryNumber, Mar 28, 2013

#4259
Advertisement:

<SCRIPT LANGUAGE=JavaScript></SCRIPT><NOSCRIPT><A HREF="https://www.boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/ads/ads.pl?zone=allforum;banner=NonSSI;page=01" TARGET=top><IMG SRC="https://www.boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/ads/ads.pl?zone=allforum;page=01" WIDTH=728 HEIGHT=90 ALT=Advertisement BORDER=0></A></NOSCRIPT>

Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,738
Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2078
Location: California

troy2000 Senior Member

micah719 said: ↑

http://green-agenda.com/globalrevolution.html

(from "The First Global Revolution", pp.104-105 by Alexander King, founder of the Club of Rome and Bertrand Schneider, secretary of the Club of Rome. ed)

Don't get me wrong...I believe we are accountable for our stewardship of this earth. This does not require genocide, which is what the watermelons (green outside, red inside) are aiming at. I'm a Christian and believe The Bible, which states that this world is not going to drown; it will burn on account of the sins of man, a Divine judgement. Such as telling lies and robbing and murdering people. But, The Creator has promised He will make all things new, and this time without any blight, and even rescue some from their justly earned penalty, of which I'm one.

If you have a mind for real science, which does not violate laws of logic and morality, that explains many puzzling phenomena and makes predictions that actually come true without needing regular rehashing like the AGW chicken little's, read the following link. If you disagree with Dr Brown's conclusions, he is most keen for a debate, though nobody ever takes him up. Much easier to obfuscate and bluster than deal with verifiable facts, much easier to resort to emotions than sober reason and healthy scientific inquiry. Now, I'm going to go back to nutting out a nice boat so I can somewhat escape the lunacy and the thieves that wish me poor and dead on account of their evil and selfish religion - environmentalism.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/
Click to expand...

1. You seem to be saying, "don't worry about it; God's going to finish destroying the world anyway, then he's going to fix it." Personally, I think God helps those who help themselves. I'm reminded of the preacher who was in a flood, and a boat came by to take him out of his flooding church. He told them, "I'm not worried; God will save me."

To shorten the story, he eventually winds up drowning after waving off two more would-be rescue attempts. He reproachfully says to God, "Lord, how could you let me drown? I was sure you would save me." And God replies, "what do you want from me? I sent three boats, didn't I?"

2. 97% of scientists worldwide must not have a mind for 'real' science according to you, because they believe AGW is real.

3. I didn't bother with your 'creation science' link, although I'm not surprised by the fact that you dragged it into the debate. Creation science is a contradiction in terms, and I've dealt with enough people who don't understand the difference between faith and science. In fact, I used to know an idiot who told me, "God puts fossils in the ground to test our faith."

Nothing more fun than believing in a God who asks, "who you gonna believe? Me, or your lying eyes?"

add: And nothing is more typical of both creationists and climate change deniers than claiming evolution/environmentalism/climatology/insert scientific discipline here is just another religion.....

Don't let the urgent displace the important...

troy2000, Mar 28, 2013

#4260

1 person likes this.

(You must log in or sign up to reply here.)

Page 284 of 308

< Missing tourists in a dinghy | Attracting New Boaters....the Youth >

Loading...

Similar Threads

Design of an Autonomous Surface Craft for Oceanographic Survey

sun, Dec 27, 2023, in forum: All Things Boats & Boating

Replies:

0

Views:

787

sun

Dec 27, 2023
"live in the ocean" meme suffers setback

Squidly-Diddly, Oct 1, 2022, in forum: All Things Boats & Boating

Replies:

7

Views:

1,068

fallguy

Oct 3, 2022
Volvo Ocean Race - John Fisher

JosephT, Mar 29, 2018, in forum: All Things Boats & Boating

Replies:

11

Views:

1,824

Angélique

Mar 31, 2018
Real Ocean News

hoytedow, Jan 15, 2018, in forum: All Things Boats & Boating

Replies:

147

Views:

16,264

hoytedow

Jul 23, 2020
Ocean News

ImaginaryNumber, Oct 8, 2015, in forum: All Things Boats & Boating

Replies:

3,965

Views:

306,189

Boat Design Net Moderator

Jul 26, 2020
Man rescued from floating bubble (tries to go across ocean to Bermuda 1000 miles)

Waterwitch, Oct 5, 2014, in forum: All Things Boats & Boating

Replies:

44

Views:

6,195

Rurudyne

Oct 30, 2014
Cement/Concrete Saves Vessel Mid Ocean

Milehog, Jul 4, 2014, in forum: All Things Boats & Boating

Replies:

1

Views:

3,804

hoytedow

Jul 4, 2014
Is the ocean broken?

daiquiri, Oct 24, 2013, in forum: All Things Boats & Boating

Replies:

2,748

Views:

128,133

Boat Design Net Moderator

Jan 29, 2022
Kids facing the Oceans Plastic Cleanup Problem

rwatson, Sep 24, 2013, in forum: All Things Boats & Boating

Replies:

0

Views:

2,061

rwatson

Sep 24, 2013
Free ride across the pacific ocean

BPL, Apr 6, 2013, in forum: All Things Boats & Boating

Replies:

0

Views:

2,330

BPL

Apr 6, 2013

Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.

Thread Status:: Not open for further replies.