Evidence for God from Science

Reactionary wrote:See?! Some of the chemicals probably entered through the ventilation, windows or whatever you keep open in the plane while flying!

You may be right! That particular plane had a ventilation opening at the base of the vertical stabilizer (the tail fin). I'm so accustomed to the poisonous chemicals in chemtrails that they don't affect me anymore!

FL

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:You may be right! That particular plane had a ventilation opening at the base of the vertical stabilizer (the tail fin). I'm so accustomed to the poisonous chemicals in chemtrails that they don't affect me anymore!

Or maybe, you have a vaccine, an antidote, or something else that makes you immune to the "poisons".

Reactionary wrote: Or maybe, you have a vaccine, an antidote, or something else that makes you immune to the "poisons".

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! who told you the secret???

Anonymous

I thought I'd bring back this discussion on chemtrails/contrails.

I was wondering...are ghosts a manifestation of chemtrails at ground level?

FL

Chemtrails are legumous bogeyman exhaust.

I thought the trails following jets was condensation forming from the heat of the exhaust, what evidence is there that there's ominous chemicals in them? The trails you see in the sky aren't pollution coming from the jet, its water vapor thats already in the atmosphere. Unless...thats what the powers that be WANT me to think.

If there were chemicals in them, are the airline companies just a-okay with some government agent coming by and saying "we need to significantly alter the architecture of your jets so they spew chemicals, don't worry about it"? Or are Delta and US Airways the evil masterminds behind the whole thing?

Does anyone remember that dihydrogen monoxide hoax? (Off-topic, sorry.)

Combustion of jet fuel does produce water vapor. But contrails also predate the usage of jet engines. An account in The Big E of the WW2 air battle, the "Marianas Turkey Shoot", describes contrails being formed from the wingtips of USN F6F Hellcats during tight maneuvers at high altitude. F6Fs were prop-engine fighters.

PeteSinCA wrote:Combustion of jet fuel does produce water vapor. But contrails also predate the usage of jet engines. An account in The Big E of the WW2 air battle, the "Marianas Turkey Shoot", describes contrails being formed from the wingtips of USN F6F Hellcats during tight maneuvers at high altitude. F6Fs were prop-engine fighters.

Just blame it on climate change and all is well or blame it of all the cows, horses, pigs and all the gaseous methane vapor they release... Be sure to include the squirrels as they are all in rebellion against the greedy capitalist west and won't stop until the Western World stops creating climate change...

Wow, that would make a great Hollywood movie!

Question though - since I can remember and look through the findings on ancient climate trapped in the frozen Ice in glaciers - when has climate never changed?

Oh those cows are at it again!!!


-
-
-

B. W. wrote:Question though - since I can remember and look through the findings on ancient climate trapped in the frozen Ice in glaciers - when has climate never changed?

The climate always changes, I think it is the increased rate of change that is the worry.

It's the both the rate of increase and how much higher the average temperature of the planet is than "where it should be" given it's past patterns. This increase correlates very well with the rising amount of greenhouse gases that have been introduced since the industrial revolution.

Plus the interaction between the sun's infrared rays and molecules of greenhouse gases is well understood, carbon dioxide is only one of the mildest of them (though it's the most plentiful). Long story short, mankind's influence on climate change is not a hoax, and the common rebuttals against it are basically always founded on ignorance.

Seraph wrote:It's the both the rate of increase and how much higher the average temperature of the planet is than "where it should be" given it's past patterns. This increase correlates very well with the rising amount of greenhouse gases that have been introduced since the industrial revolution.

Plus the interaction between the sun's infrared rays and molecules of greenhouse gases is well understood, carbon dioxide is only one of the mildest of them (though it's the most plentiful). Long story short, mankind's influence on climate change is not a hoax, and the common rebuttals against it are basically always founded on ignorance.

So anyone who studies climate change and comes to the conclusion that mankind doesn't have any significant impact on the changing climate of the earth, doesn't really know what they're talking about?

Got it!

Seraph, did you say your real name is Al Gore?

If they're being intellectually honest, kinda yeah. Sorry. Even the GodandScience page on climate change expresses this idea.

Whenever I hear someone say that humanity doesn't have effect on the climate, it's always something like "well then why's it colder this year than it was last year?" or something along those lines. The scientific consensus is overwhelmingly in favor that humanity does have an impact. Skeptics usually seem to be relying on personal opinion or "original research".

Or it's a republican politician, who SURELY wouldn't be influenced by a wealthy company whose best interests conflict with reducing emissions. No sir.

Strange sounds lately?

A Squirrel burp...

Isn't that strange enough?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pmz7Vw7IRI[/youtube]

Seraph wrote:Long story short, mankind's influence on climate change is not a hoax, and the common rebuttals against it are basically always founded on ignorance.

I don't travel much in Global-Warming Skeptics circles, so I had to nose around a bit to find some names of a few notable G-W Skeptics:

S. Fred Singer

Patrick J. Michaels

Joe Bastardi (I hope this doesn't trigger a foul language filter)

The "always founded on ignorance" line doesn't really work with them, as you'll see if you check their bios. Now as for Al Gore, the face and mouth of Global Warming advocacy:

Al Gore

He has a BA from Harvard, no major noted in the article. After serving in Vietnam, he attended, but did not graduate from, Vanderbilt University Divinity School and Vanderbilt University School of Law. A Harvard BA is nothing to sneer at, but "founded on ignorance" seems a better fit for Mr. Gore than for Singer, Michaels and Bastardi.

Of course, you could take refuge in the well-poisoning argument that G-W Skeptics who do have the relevant education backgrounds have been bought off by some Warmistas' enviro-bogeyman, but as you can see, that argument may not be well received.

Personally, I have an AS degree from De Vry, so I have no credentials. But over the past 4 or 5 decades I've seen enough wackiness - at least one has an ongoing huge human death toll - from the enviros to be reflexively skeptical of their every cause-of-the-year (or -decade).