Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Global warming

2007-02-25T12:21:59Z

Jabberwocky:

Global warming is a controversial theory that claims that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) due to industrialization is causing temperatures to increase around the world, to the detriment of our environment. Al Gore, Vice President under President Clinton from 1992 to 2000, is a high profile advocate of this theory. Promoters of this theory, including many prominent scientists, call for international treaties, like one proposed in Kyoto, Japan, to limit carbon emissions using a combination of conservation and technological innovation.

The theory is widely accepted within the scientific community despite a lack of any conclusive evidence, though that is not to say there is no evidence at all.<ref>Myths of Global Warming[http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html]</ref><ref>No Evidence for Global Warming[http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed012298b.cfm]</ref> On February 2, 2007, an internatonal panel of hundreds of scientists and representatives of 113 governments issued a report concluding:
:The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice-mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that is not due to known natural causes alone."<ref>Borenstein, Seth (2007), "Warming 'Likely' Man-Made, Unstoppable." Associated Press, as published by Forbes[http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/02/02/ap3388409.html]</ref>

It should be noted that these scientists are motivated by a need for grant money in their field of climatology. Therefore, their work can not be considered unbiased, though no more than any scientist in any other field .<ref>FOX News: "On Global Warming: Follow the Money Indeed!" Feb 12, 2007[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,251458,00.html]</ref>. Also, these scientists are mostly liberal athiests, untroubled by the hubris that man can destroy the Earth which God gave him.<ref>Gloval Warming & Evolution[http://atheism.about.com/b/a/238739.htm]</ref>

There are some scientists among the critics of the theory that global warming is caused by human activity. For example, Dr. Fred Singer observed that "CO2 changes have lagged about 800 years behind the temperature changes. Global warming has produced more CO2, rather than more CO2 producing global warming."<ref>S. Fred Singer and Dennis T.
Avery, "Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years" (Rowman & Littlefield, 2007)</ref> Though, it must be said, that no scientist denies that CO2 has lagged behind temperature at certain times in Earth's history. They maintain this doesn't negate in any way CO2 influence on temperature. It merely means it wasnt a first cause of temperature increase at particular times in Earths distance history.."<ref>What the lag of CO2 behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming
[http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/co2-in-ice-cores/]<ref>

Some people claim that [[Liberal]]s would like to see the economy of America destroyed by forcing us to drive solar cars to work, and use geothermal energy to heat our homes. Global warming is merely a thinly-veiled liberal attempt to destroy capitalism, they claim. Others, on the other hand, rather than claim it's about destroying capitalism say that it's actually a money making scam on the part of investors who stand to reap significant profits if the economy switches to alternative energy sources. Such is the passion and paranoia surrounding this topic.

----

'''References:''' <references/>

Big Oil

2007-02-24T13:24:33Z

Jabberwocky: /* Environmentalism */

Big Oil is a term some use to describe the major petroleum companies such as ExxonMobil, ChevronTexxaco, British Petroleum and more. Democrats often attempt to position themselves against Big Oil despite accepting over $48,000,000 in donations from oil companies <ref>Industry Totals: Oil & Gas[http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.asp?Ind=E01]</ref>. Republicans embrace Big Oil because they know that the companies define the very essence of capitalism -- success at business<ref>ExxonMobil Reaps Record Profits[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7165877]</ref> while helping the American citizen. Without Big Oil, we would have no gasoline, heating oil or plastics.<ref>Pipeline Fact Sheet[http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/FactSheets/FSProductList.htm]</ref>

==Environmentalism==
Despite criticism from socialist liberals who wish to abolish the use of gasoline<ref>Activists Sue to Stop Petroleum Production[http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=14862]</ref><ref>Iceland to Stop Using Gasoline[http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1518556]</ref>, Big Oil has an exceptional environmental track record, often repairing mistakes quickly before they can become disasters.<ref>Oil Fields to Remain Open During Repairs[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5637231]</ref> Big Oil has also proven valuable in funding independant scientists<ref>Exxon funded group offers cash to critique climate study [http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/02/news/companies/exxon_science/]</ref> who are able to dispute the propaganda behind [[Global warming]] without worrying about losing their government or academic funding due to liberal reprisals. Though, it appears now even Big Oil is aknowledging the reality of man's effect on climate <ref>Shell aknowledges the reality of man's effect on climate[http://www.shell.com/home/Framework?siteId=envandsoc-en&FC2=/envandsoc-en/html/iwgen/key_issues_and_topics/global_environmental_issues/climate_change/zzz_lhn.html&FC3=/envandsoc-en/html/iwgen/key_issues_and_topics/global_environmental_issues/climate_change/dir_climate_change_12042006.html]</ref><ref>BP aknowledges the reality of man's effect on climate[http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9007616&contentId=7014482]</ref>

==References==
<div class="references-small" style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
<references/>
</div>

Big Oil

2007-02-24T13:15:11Z

Jabberwocky: /* Environmentalism */

Big Oil is a term some use to describe the major petroleum companies such as ExxonMobil, ChevronTexxaco, British Petroleum and more. Democrats often attempt to position themselves against Big Oil despite accepting over $48,000,000 in donations from oil companies <ref>Industry Totals: Oil & Gas[http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.asp?Ind=E01]</ref>. Republicans embrace Big Oil because they know that the companies define the very essence of capitalism -- success at business<ref>ExxonMobil Reaps Record Profits[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7165877]</ref> while helping the American citizen. Without Big Oil, we would have no gasoline, heating oil or plastics.<ref>Pipeline Fact Sheet[http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/FactSheets/FSProductList.htm]</ref>

==Environmentalism==
Despite criticism from socialist liberals who wish to abolish the use of gasoline<ref>Activists Sue to Stop Petroleum Production[http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=14862]</ref><ref>Iceland to Stop Using Gasoline[http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1518556]</ref>, Big Oil has an exceptional environmental track record, often repairing mistakes quickly before they can become disasters.<ref>Oil Fields to Remain Open During Repairs[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5637231]</ref> Big Oil has also proven valuable in funding independant scientists<ref>Exxon funded group offers cash to critique climate study [http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/02/news/companies/exxon_science/]</ref> who are able to dispute the propaganda behind [[Global warming]] without worrying about losing their government or academic funding due to liberal reprisals. Though, it appears now even Big Oil is aknowledging the reality of man's effect on climate <ref>Shell aknowledges the reality of man's effect on climate[http://www.shell.com/home/Framework?siteId=envandsoc-en&FC2=/envandsoc-en/html/iwgen/key_issues_and_topics/global_environmental_issues/climate_change/zzz_lhn.html&FC3=/envandsoc-en/html/iwgen/key_issues_and_topics/global_environmental_issues/climate_change/dir_climate_change_12042006.html]</ref>

==References==
<div class="references-small" style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
<references/>
</div>

Global warming

2007-02-24T12:56:39Z

Jabberwocky:

Global warming is a controversial theory that claims that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) due to industrialization is causing temperatures to increase around the world, to the detriment of our environment. Al Gore, Vice President under President Clinton from 1992 to 2000, is a high profile advocate of this theory. Promoters of this theory, including many prominent scientists, call for international treaties, like one proposed in Kyoto, Japan, to limit carbon emissions using a combination of conservation and technological innovation.

The theory is widely accepted within the scientific community despite a lack of any conclusive evidence, though that is not to say there is no evidence at all.<ref>Myths of Global Warming[http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html]</ref><ref>No Evidence for Global Warming[http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed012298b.cfm]</ref> On February 2, 2007, an internatonal panel of hundreds of scientists and representatives of 113 governments issued a report concluding:
:The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice-mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that is not due to known natural causes alone."<ref>Borenstein, Seth (2007), "Warming 'Likely' Man-Made, Unstoppable." Associated Press, as published by Forbes[http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/02/02/ap3388409.html]</ref>

It should be noted that these scientists are motivated by a need for grant money in their field of climatology. Therefore, their work can not be considered unbiased, though no more than any scientist in any other field .<ref>FOX News: "On Global Warming: Follow the Money Indeed!" Feb 12, 2007[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,251458,00.html]</ref>. Also, these scientists are mostly liberal athiests, untroubled by the hubris that man can destroy the Earth which God gave him.<ref>Gloval Warming & Evolution[http://atheism.about.com/b/a/238739.htm]</ref>

There are some scientists among the critics of the theory that global warming is caused by human activity. For example, Dr. Fred Singer observed that "CO2 changes have lagged about 800 years behind the temperature changes. Global warming has produced more CO2, rather than more CO2 producing global warming."<ref>S. Fred Singer and Dennis T.
Avery, "Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years" (Rowman & Littlefield, 2007)</ref> Though, it must be said, that no scientist denies that C02 has lagged behind temperature at certain times in Earth's history. They maintain this doesn't negate in any way c02's influence on temperature. It merely means it wasnt a first cause of temperature increase at particular times in Earths distance history.

Some people claim that [[Liberal]]s would like to see the economy of America destroyed by forcing us to drive solar cars to work, and use geothermal energy to heat our homes. Global warming is merely a thinly-veiled liberal attempt to destroy capitalism, they claim. Others, on the other hand, rather than claim it's about destroying capitalism claim that it's actually a money making scam on the part of investors who stand to reap significant profits if the economy switches to alternative energy sources. Such is the passion and paranoia surrounding this topic.

----

'''References:''' <references/>

Adam

2007-02-22T13:03:48Z

Jabberwocky:

According to Genesis, Adam (Hebrew '''אָדָם''')was the first human being on the planet. The Lord made him out of his own image and loved him even after he disobeyed him. His wife was named [[Eve]].

Adam lived for 960 years. The Bible mentions that Adam and Eve had two children called Cain and Able. According to Jewish tradition they had 56 children, but this is not mentioned in the bible. Christians consider them to be the Mother and Father of the human race, and on that basis they would've had to have had a daughter for Cain or Able to marry so as to ensure that the human race was true to God's command to be fruitful and to muliply throughout the earth.

Adam

2007-02-22T06:10:22Z

Jabberwocky:

According to Genesis, Adam (Hebrew '''אָדָם''')was the first human being on the planet. The Lord made him out of his own image and loved him even after he disobeyed him. His wife was named [[Eve]].

Adam and Eve where father and mother to the human race. The bible mentions that they had two sons: Cain and Abel. In reality they had many more. Adam's children bred with each other. Since genetic gene pool was far more pure back then this was possible. Incest today is not possible because sin has since corrupted human DNA.

Adam lived into his 900's. Possible again because his DNA was closer to purity.