Years ago, I took this photo on my seattle vacation.
I had no idea I would capture more than just a part of the skyline, and I couldn’t even figure out WHAT EXACTLY I photographed.
You’ve opened my eyes - Thank you so much!
-Markus
Connect with other Pastafarians
Propaganda Buttons
Add these buttons to your site:
RSS Feeds
Support the Cause
The Church is funded entirely by your purchases of FSM merchandise. Thank you for your support.
Purchase the Gospel
An elaborate spoof on Intelligent Design, The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is neither too elaborate nor too spoofy to succeed in nailing the fallacies of ID. It's even wackier than Jonathan Swift's suggestion that the Irish eat their children as a way to keep them from being a burden, and it may offend just as many people, but Henderson, described elsewhere as a 25-year-old "out-of-work physics major," puts satire to the same serious use that Swift did. Oh, yes, it is very funny. -- Scientific American
@Black Stash
“That is not science”
Well, if you’re speaking from a scientific point of view then you would know that the usual arbiter in science is what articles say in peer-reviewed journals that are indexed by the major scientific data bases. Not what CEI etc care to put on their websites. I can look up the articles that show the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere to be between ~180-350 ppm untill the 19th century and then rising rapidly, now approaching (or have maybe already surpassed) 500 ppm. That is in contradiction to your statements, so one of us must be wrong. So let’s be more professional about it then. I can look up the scientific literature to support my statements and give you the references if you like. Care to give us your sources of info?
@Black Stash
Your follow-up post wasn’t up yet when I posted my reply. You wrote
.
“Did I mention that my wife is an engineer and we run almost 80 - 85% off the grid on solar and wind power? That my daughter is a biologist and has an enormous garden out back which we use for the majority of our food. That I began and have maintained the biggest recycle program our town has ever seen.”
.
Excellent, I applaud your efforts to help preserve our environment.
I secound DPG’s applauding.
“Sixteen men on a dead man’s chest,
Ah yo ho yo ho ad a bottle of rum,
drink and the devil, take it down, with the rest.
Ah yo ho yo ho and a bottle of rum
Hahahaha (takes swig)
Global warming? Hmm. Sounds serious. :)
If he climatologists had reliable data prior to 50 years ago, I would have a better feeling that the guys who have trouble predicting the weather tomorrow.
Does anyone know how many much the population has increased over the last say 50 years? All those additional 98.6s running around, may have a part to play.
I understand that the temperature, on average, is increasing. All I am trying to say it that the mechanism/cause is not as clear. Could it be man influencing a natural process?
We can all agree that when pirates roamed the oceans freely the global temperature was lower.
So, break out the cutlasses, raise the sails, break out the ale, and free the strippers!
Glad to hear that you can look shit up…keep doing it. Keep looking, keep asking, keep getting involved. IMHO Pollution and environment abuse is the most important issue of our day, so learn as much as you can then do something about the problem. But also, be proactive, talk the talk, but walk the walk. Now more than ever it is absolutely vital that we do our part to try and save our precious world.
.
Don’t just feel all smug because you were able to give an old guy a shot or two on a web site, I sure showed him where he can stick his logic. Whenever possible walk or ride your bike. Buy an electric car or hybred if you need one. Make your house and yard as energy efficient as possible. Go to the government and demand changes or start in your town and push, push and push some more. People will listen and jump on the bank wagon. But long term motivation is the killer.
.
Dress like a Pirate to fix Global Warming - take it from me, it will work. The more pirates we have in the world, the better! Eat pasta, make friends with a midget, climb a mountain and maybe, just maybe, the FSM will show himself in all His noodley beauty and touch you with a, sauce covered, warm and inviting noodley appendage. RAmen
@One-eyed Wonderkin
“Does anyone know how many much the population has increased over the last say 50 years? All those additional 98.6s running around, may have a part to play.”
.
See wikipedia, it has more than doubled:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
One way to help the environment is not to have kidds. Or to per couple at maximum.
.
“I understand that the temperature, on average, is increasing. All I am trying to say it that the mechanism/cause is not as clear. Could it be man influencing a natural process?”
.
I didn’t go there against Black Stash. I know too little about it to raise a sharp voice about it. I was just saying that his (her) statements about CO2 rise following a temperature rise are not what has been happening for the last 200 years. I’ll see if he comes up with anything more convincing than the journal papers that lead me to conclude he was wrong.
@DutchPastaGuy
I didn’t go there against Black Stash. I know too little about it to raise a sharp voice about it. I was just saying that his (her) statements about CO2 rise following a temperature rise are not what has been happening for the last 200 years.
.
Thank you Al Gore!
@DPG - I hear you.
@Black Stash
“Glad to hear that you can look shit up…keep doing it. Keep looking, keep asking, keep getting involved.”
.
Actually the ball is in your corner to show where you got the idea from that man-made CO2 emissions are so small as to be hardly detectable. And that a CO2 concentration rise follows a temperature rise instead of causing it. I don’t have my references at hand but can look them up and post them here. I’d like to know where you got your ideas from.
.
“Don’t just feel all smug because you were able to give an old guy a shot or two on a web site, I sure showed him where he can stick his logic. ”
.
I don’t think I did that. I was just saying that some of your statements are very wrong (ok, I called them bull crap, I admit that was not necessary). And having your heart in the right place is good, but being well-intentioned alone doesn’t make a person right. So again: what is the foundation of those earlier statements?
.
“Whenever possible walk or ride your bike. Buy an electric car or hybred if you need one.”
.
I always ride my bike (or public transport for long distance) to get from A to B as I don’t have a car or even a drivers license.
.
“Make your house and yard as energy efficient as possible.”
.
Done.
Just thinking out loud and does not support either view, if you have an article that is reviewed by 4 other people under a similar agenda, the article has been “peer reviewed” but not necessarily critically reviewed.
@One-eyed Wonderkin
“Just thinking out loud and does not support either view, if you have an article that is reviewed by 4 other people under a similar agenda, the article has been “peer reviewed” but not necessarily critically reviewed.”
.
True, the peer-review process definately isn’t perfect. But the reviewers don’t select papers themselves. The editor of the magazine usually chooses referees for a paper. I know, you could argue that a biased editor selects those referees he know agree with his/her agenda. Still, it’s at least some form of nonsense filter.
@DPG - You are correct. At least there is a process for the review of the papers.
Black Stash,
I know that a lot of people have been arguing with you and you have probably heard enough from the others about how wrong your information is. I would just like to get a few things straight. First of all, you seem to be under the impression that I believe that CO2 is a pollutant. I don’t know where you got that idea. Perhaps my wording was off, but I believe that I said “Us burning fossil fuels emits CO2 (along with many air pollutants which aren’t very good for us anyway).” I am sorry for the misconception, but, no, CO2 is not an air pollutant. The other pollutants are substances such as NOx, which can later react with H2O to produce nitric acid. However, you seem little interested in the science of acid depostition and I don’t wish to bore you. Also, you have mentioned again and again my need to do real research. Perhaps I misread. In any case, I believe it is I who have actually pursued studies in this area whereas you have just been making unsupported claims (I don’t find the internet a very credible source). Also, if you doubt that humans are playing any real role in global warming, then I suggest that you at least try to cut your emissions because of the simple fact that CO2 is not always the only substance produced in fossil fuel combustion. NOx, as I said earlier, and SO2 are created in this way. If you wish me to clarify the dangers of these two substances, ask and I will answer.
Oh, and One-eyed Wonderkin, I commend you on a wonderful point. Global human population is at a dangerously high level. That is probably a worse problem than global warming because it is one of the causes, as I believe you said.
This is a good discussion and everyone is working at staying civil about a real hot-button issue! I think what everyone can agree on is that humanity is in fact destroying the planet and that has got to stop. The mechanisms by which we are doing that are what everyone is debating… but the truth is that we need to treat the planet with more respect.
A big RAmen to that, Rowdiest!
RAmen to that, Wench Beth.
@ WB - Thanks! :))
@ SE - Thanks! :))
Wench Nikkiee: Hi to you too and thanks for your comments. Yes it has been a while, not that I am ignoring FSM or anything, as I do keep an eye on here. However, the occasional few times I feel the need to make a comment about something, the rest of you have usually more than covered any points I feel may be needed. Thus as I am usually pretty busy and when free have a myriad other sites I keep track of I tend to leave it to the rest of you to keep the odd fundie in line, :) though they seem quite rare nowadays.
However, on this subject (GW) there is a lot of rubbish posted by people who either haven’t done the research/reading themselves or haven’t understood it. This question with regards to CO2 is such an issue, with people not understanding that it is not the total atmospheric CO2 that is the problem, (well it is but not in the way they think, i.e. they always quote the total with respect to what appears a small amount per annum introduced by humans and appear to ask why is the apparently small amount that we introduce such a problem when the total is so much) but the real issue is the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere. E.g. since the industrial revolution atmospheric percentage of has roughly doubled and it is this doubling that is the worry when it comes to GW.
I could go on, but I would probably be writing for ever to try and cover and refute the many points that those who say that we are not the cause of global warming bring up. Such as the common but mistaken claim that volcanoes annually introduce more CO2 into the atmosphere than man, which with the very, very occasional exception is wrong. However, the site in the link I gave in my OP covers all the points likely brought up by those who deny that we are the main cause as well as having plenty of links to peer reviewed research awaiting any who care to do the research/reading for themselves. Which is what I advise anyone with a genuine interest in GW to do, where they can then see for themselves what the science actually says.
RAmen
Apologies, I made a mistake in my hurry, lesson to self, again :), always check what you type. The increase in atmospheric CO2 since the start of the industrial revolution is not double but about 35%, i.e. up from approx 280ppm to 390ppm. Though the increase I quoted is only of relevance to the accuracy of my post rather than the actual contribution it has made toward GW according to the science.
Another site which covers many of the points brought up about GW by those who refute that humans are responsible in in neat list, though it quite is a long read, is;
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462
which has plenty of links to original articles.
Photoshop.