- Messages
- 53,747
- Reaction score
- 7,944
- # of dives
- 500 - 999
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
My mask is silicon, did you really say snorkel? fins are rubber, and you got me on the rest, except that is not the issue I was trying to convey. It is what we do with them when we are done with them that matters. Plastic bags need to be banned etc. Read up on how our garbage has changed over the last 50 years and what it is mostly comprised of today. Feel free to read the link in my signature too.
Q 1. :When compared with pre‐1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?”
Q 2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?”
Again, this is something that doesn't or at least shouldn't need thinking about.
While I agree with your thought, not so your logic. You insure against natural threats too.To all the people on this thread who say they don't think man is having an effect on this planet, I would ask them one question.
Do you insure your house, your car, your life?
To all the people on this thread who say they don't think man is having an effect on this planet, I would ask them one question.
Do you insure your house, your car, your life?
I think this explains it:
So, humankind can do nothing that can counter the active work of God in the environment. If we do something he doesn't like, he does something to counter it.
That's great news. It means we can't possibly do anything wrong, because He will correct it when we do. Everything that happens is God's will. I guess that means that if I shoot my neighbor, it must also be God's will, since He would have stepped in to prevent it if it weren't. Logically, then, I should not be prosecuted, since I am acting as an instrument of God.
Yes the bank requires it. What's your point?
God gave us free will so anything we do is "his will" by extention. God doesn't step in here God sees but waits, the meeting will come soon enough for God.
GW is Gods "will" too.
Global warming remains an issue of widespread political debate, sometimes split along party political lines, especially in the United States. Many of the largely settled scientific issues, such as the human responsibility for global warming, remain the subject of politically motivated attempts to downplay, dismiss or deny them – a phenomenon widely known as climate change denial. The sources of funding for those involved with climate science – both supporting and opposing mainstream scientific positions – have been questioned by both sides. There are debates about the best policy responses to the science, their cost-effectiveness and their urgency. Climate scientists, especially in the US, have reported official and oil-industry pressure to censor or suppress their work and hide scientific data, with directives not to discuss the subject in public communications. Legal cases regarding global warming, its effects, and measures to reduce it, have reached American courts. The energy lobby, oil industry advocates and free market think tanks have often been accused of overtly or covertly supporting efforts to undermine or discredit the scientific consensus on global warming.
The scientific opinion on climate change is that the Earth's climate system is unequivocally warming, and it is more than 90% certain that humans are causing it through activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels.[1][2][3][4] This scientific consensus is expressed in synthesis reports, scientific bodies of national or international standing, and surveys of opinion among climate scientists. Individual scientists, universities, and laboratories contribute to the overall scientific opinion via their peer-reviewed publications, and the areas of collective agreement and relative certainty are summarised in these high level reports and surveys.
<snip>
No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion; the last was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, which in 2007 updated its 1999 statement rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate with its current non-committal position.[10][11] Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions. There are also groups of individuals outside national or international organizations that have expressed their dissenting opinions and counterarguments in venues such as public petitions.