@MeOnStuff Yes, indeed! I responded partially in my next vlog, posted on June 23, and I will be responding to both you and @SwimFellow in detail in the vlog to be posted Sunday night.
I really appreciated your insightful and well thought out comments. You were especially right about one thing: I should have researched the topic more thoroughly before I addressed it, and I should have given references for my sources of knowledge. Therefore, I will try to provide both in my video Sunday.
I couldn't agree with you more. I took a few years of envi sci in high school, and just never bought the whole global warming thing. The proof is too sketchy. That said, I think humans have a huge impact on the environment and that it really couldn't hurt to try to reduce the amount of waste and unnatural chemicals we produce on a daily basis (although the world certainly isn't going to end if we keep it up). It's just the right thing to do. Love the videos, keep it up :)
7. Switching the city of Tokyo to nuclear or solar would cut down oil consumption by QUITE a bit. Hey, it might even save the poles.
8. The definition of saying "it's probably not there, so I don't care about it" is what our previous generations did.. And let's face it.. They screwed us over.. We have a lot of crap to do. So, why can't we be the generation that cares about SHIRT?
5. If we continue to release the amount of CO2 that we do (MORE than natural CO2, :P) we're going to create a giant hole in the atmosphere, killing millions with the intense radiation.
6. Why would scientists lie to us? The money part's great, but coal and oil, and the stuff that's contributing to global warming such as it, are still very inefficient compared to nuclear.
3.1.2 drowning millions and millions of people. 3.2 We don't know whether it has to do with global warming, but I'm guessing that's at least part of it.
4. Really want to take a chance on this one? Sure it might not exist, but plastic is bad for the environment, and so are greenhouse gases, and, you know.. The environment is REALLY important. Rainforests might have a cure for cancer..
1. It's scientifically proven by 99% of scientists.
2. ClimateGate was simply so controversial because scientists wanted to make people more aware of Global Warming, making it seem worse than it actually IS. And it's still pretty bd.
3. the ocean will no longer be able to harbor life by 2080 because 3.1. even if you sillily don't believe in global warming, we do know that the poles are melting, 3.1.1 drowning thousands of penguins and polar bears and whatnot.
So, basically, you seem to misunderstand the nature of science with relation to evidence rather than anecdotal experiences, you completely ignored any evidence that does not support your hypothesis, and you gave many sensational 'facts' without revealing your sources.
I know that discussion of climate science on the internet has a poor history, but this was a particularly bad example which I would say could damage other people's views towards climate change.
You say that you want the world to last for "hundreds" of years from now. Hundreds? Are you kidding? What right do we have to potentially ruin the habitability of the earth for people that will be alive in thousands or tens of thousands of years? Imagine that we are in a hypothetical world that has been warmed dramatically, and you find out that, say, the romans had the chance to prevent it, but didn't? What right would they have had to neglect the planet? [Cont...]
Noting would ever be published in any journal if it just showed that there has been a mean increase in temperature since, say, 1800. They would have to show that that the chance of the increase being down to natural variation is very small.
You say that we could "only" reduce warming by 1 degree Celsius. But this represents about a third of the total expected warming! That's a lot by anyone's standards, so we should aim to do that if at all possible. [Cont...]
You also seem to be unfamiliar with the concept of scientific evidence - particularly with relation to natural variation and hypothesis testing. Yes, pretty much everything in nature varies including CO2 levels and temperatures - but we have very powerful statistical tools to extract actual underlying trends from the mass of data we collect. That is the aim of a hypothesis test - to say "how likely is this that it is down to natural variation and chance?" [Cont...]
You are possibly right when you say that 95% of CO2 is released from organic matter decomposing. (Source?) But this is NOT a valid reason against the existence of climate change. What we are doing is dumping huge quantities of CO2 into the atmosphere in a very small space of time - many many times faster than the natural change that occurs. CO2 levels used to be many times higher than present in the past - but there was no life then, so no plants to extract it! [Cont...]
We know CO2 is a greenhouse gas. We have proven that its concentration is increasing, but again, you ignored this in your video.
You mentioned Climategate, which was to be expected. If you actually read about the results of the inquiries that happened because of Climategate, you'll find that not a single one of them actually found evidence of falsification of documents. You also generalized from the particular scientists in question there, to all "scientists" apparently lying. [Cont..]
The precision to which we can measure temperature changes has dramatically increased since the 80s, and the extraordinary advances in computing power has meant we are able to simulate the earth's atmosphere almost infinitely better, meaning that we can make vastly better predictions today than back in the 80s.
You did not mention once about global carbon dioxide levels which have been PROVEN beyond all doubt (for example, through ice cores), to have dramatically increased. [Cont...]
Not a single reference for any of the claims made in the video, and not a single look at any of the evidence that does show global warming.
You state that most of the carbon dioxide released each year is done so by plants. Do you have a source for this 'fact'? You ignore the fact that plants also take in carbon dioxide in order to photosynthesise.
Your claim about the 1980's thought that the temperature was decreasing (again, source?) is irrelevant. [Cont...]
what if your not human at all? MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! *evil, crazed smile* also, your sister is acting like she's high. (no offense.... just thought it was funny...) and, WHAT!!! YOU GOT A DISLIKE?? AHHH!! NOOO!!! *passes out b/c my sugar high wore off*
Good video. Great video. Wonderful video. Seriously. Anyway, I'm going to simply say I don't do anything to intentionally contribute to the dirtiness of the Earth. And global warming is just history repeating itself. Nothing really insightful from me this time. But yeah!
I believe in global warming to a degree. I try to do what I can to protect the Earth. I recycle (just turned in my recyclables today actually), use reusable bags, and most of the other stuff like that. I'm definitely not one of those people that will chain themselves to a tree to save it. I somewhere in the middle of that, and not caring at all.
@xLG7526x I think that your position is a good one. Essentially, do all you can to "save the earth," but don't go overboard, and don't demean others for their practices.
Mandark died his hair blond
SlapstickCoyote 1 week ago
HURRY KILL IT BEFORE IT LAYS ITS EGGS
gonzomyass 1 month ago
There is a big difference between saving the nature and taxing co2 emissions,
0.038% of our Atmosphere is Co2.
That is like....... Nothing!!!
Look it up. ;)
Noahshollow 2 months ago
Trust that Nerd!!!
Noahshollow 2 months ago
You sound like fred, No offence.
MrEmoCrayon 4 months ago
@Wacastervids I'm a stupid idiot. You did.
SwimFellow 7 months ago
Underwear. LOL! Love to see vloggers take a risk - going topless = nice touch, Neil!
mourning2dancing 8 months ago
@mourning2dancing Glad you liked it? You're the last person I would think would like to see me topless... LOL
wacastervids 8 months ago
@wacastervids So... care to reply to any criticisms of your video?
MeOnStuff 8 months ago
@MeOnStuff Yes, indeed! I responded partially in my next vlog, posted on June 23, and I will be responding to both you and @SwimFellow in detail in the vlog to be posted Sunday night.
I really appreciated your insightful and well thought out comments. You were especially right about one thing: I should have researched the topic more thoroughly before I addressed it, and I should have given references for my sources of knowledge. Therefore, I will try to provide both in my video Sunday.
wacastervids 8 months ago
@wacastervids Lol.. You didn't quite make the response. Just wanted to remind you to do it. :P
:)
SwimFellow 7 months ago
@wacastervids Well, actually... You SORT OF did. Please respond to teh comments.
SwimFellow 7 months ago
I couldn't agree with you more. I took a few years of envi sci in high school, and just never bought the whole global warming thing. The proof is too sketchy. That said, I think humans have a huge impact on the environment and that it really couldn't hurt to try to reduce the amount of waste and unnatural chemicals we produce on a daily basis (although the world certainly isn't going to end if we keep it up). It's just the right thing to do. Love the videos, keep it up :)
UK323 8 months ago
[cont]
7. Switching the city of Tokyo to nuclear or solar would cut down oil consumption by QUITE a bit. Hey, it might even save the poles.
8. The definition of saying "it's probably not there, so I don't care about it" is what our previous generations did.. And let's face it.. They screwed us over.. We have a lot of crap to do. So, why can't we be the generation that cares about SHIRT?
Anyway.. Yeah..... Please discuss.. Sometime.
- Taken directly from my post in Your Pants
SwimFellow 8 months ago
[cont]
5. If we continue to release the amount of CO2 that we do (MORE than natural CO2, :P) we're going to create a giant hole in the atmosphere, killing millions with the intense radiation.
6. Why would scientists lie to us? The money part's great, but coal and oil, and the stuff that's contributing to global warming such as it, are still very inefficient compared to nuclear.
SwimFellow 8 months ago
[cont]
3.1.2 drowning millions and millions of people. 3.2 We don't know whether it has to do with global warming, but I'm guessing that's at least part of it.
4. Really want to take a chance on this one? Sure it might not exist, but plastic is bad for the environment, and so are greenhouse gases, and, you know.. The environment is REALLY important. Rainforests might have a cure for cancer..
SwimFellow 8 months ago
1. It's scientifically proven by 99% of scientists.
2. ClimateGate was simply so controversial because scientists wanted to make people more aware of Global Warming, making it seem worse than it actually IS. And it's still pretty bd.
3. the ocean will no longer be able to harbor life by 2080 because 3.1. even if you sillily don't believe in global warming, we do know that the poles are melting, 3.1.1 drowning thousands of penguins and polar bears and whatnot.
SwimFellow 8 months ago
[Cont...]
So, basically, you seem to misunderstand the nature of science with relation to evidence rather than anecdotal experiences, you completely ignored any evidence that does not support your hypothesis, and you gave many sensational 'facts' without revealing your sources.
I know that discussion of climate science on the internet has a poor history, but this was a particularly bad example which I would say could damage other people's views towards climate change.
MeOnStuff 8 months ago
[Cont...]
You say that you want the world to last for "hundreds" of years from now. Hundreds? Are you kidding? What right do we have to potentially ruin the habitability of the earth for people that will be alive in thousands or tens of thousands of years? Imagine that we are in a hypothetical world that has been warmed dramatically, and you find out that, say, the romans had the chance to prevent it, but didn't? What right would they have had to neglect the planet? [Cont...]
MeOnStuff 8 months ago
[Cont...]
Noting would ever be published in any journal if it just showed that there has been a mean increase in temperature since, say, 1800. They would have to show that that the chance of the increase being down to natural variation is very small.
You say that we could "only" reduce warming by 1 degree Celsius. But this represents about a third of the total expected warming! That's a lot by anyone's standards, so we should aim to do that if at all possible. [Cont...]
MeOnStuff 8 months ago
[Cont...]
You also seem to be unfamiliar with the concept of scientific evidence - particularly with relation to natural variation and hypothesis testing. Yes, pretty much everything in nature varies including CO2 levels and temperatures - but we have very powerful statistical tools to extract actual underlying trends from the mass of data we collect. That is the aim of a hypothesis test - to say "how likely is this that it is down to natural variation and chance?" [Cont...]
MeOnStuff 8 months ago
[Cont...]
You are possibly right when you say that 95% of CO2 is released from organic matter decomposing. (Source?) But this is NOT a valid reason against the existence of climate change. What we are doing is dumping huge quantities of CO2 into the atmosphere in a very small space of time - many many times faster than the natural change that occurs. CO2 levels used to be many times higher than present in the past - but there was no life then, so no plants to extract it! [Cont...]
MeOnStuff 8 months ago
[Cont...]
We know CO2 is a greenhouse gas. We have proven that its concentration is increasing, but again, you ignored this in your video.
You mentioned Climategate, which was to be expected. If you actually read about the results of the inquiries that happened because of Climategate, you'll find that not a single one of them actually found evidence of falsification of documents. You also generalized from the particular scientists in question there, to all "scientists" apparently lying. [Cont..]
MeOnStuff 8 months ago
[Cont...]
The precision to which we can measure temperature changes has dramatically increased since the 80s, and the extraordinary advances in computing power has meant we are able to simulate the earth's atmosphere almost infinitely better, meaning that we can make vastly better predictions today than back in the 80s.
You did not mention once about global carbon dioxide levels which have been PROVEN beyond all doubt (for example, through ice cores), to have dramatically increased. [Cont...]
MeOnStuff 8 months ago
Wow. Confirmation bias, much?
Not a single reference for any of the claims made in the video, and not a single look at any of the evidence that does show global warming.
You state that most of the carbon dioxide released each year is done so by plants. Do you have a source for this 'fact'? You ignore the fact that plants also take in carbon dioxide in order to photosynthesise.
Your claim about the 1980's thought that the temperature was decreasing (again, source?) is irrelevant. [Cont...]
MeOnStuff 8 months ago
what if your not human at all? MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! *evil, crazed smile* also, your sister is acting like she's high. (no offense.... just thought it was funny...) and, WHAT!!! YOU GOT A DISLIKE?? AHHH!! NOOO!!! *passes out b/c my sugar high wore off*
vampiress49 8 months ago
DERP!
chugaboy 8 months ago
Good video. Great video. Wonderful video. Seriously. Anyway, I'm going to simply say I don't do anything to intentionally contribute to the dirtiness of the Earth. And global warming is just history repeating itself. Nothing really insightful from me this time. But yeah!
DoesBoKnow 8 months ago
I believe in global warming to a degree. I try to do what I can to protect the Earth. I recycle (just turned in my recyclables today actually), use reusable bags, and most of the other stuff like that. I'm definitely not one of those people that will chain themselves to a tree to save it. I somewhere in the middle of that, and not caring at all.
xLG7526x 8 months ago
@xLG7526x I think that your position is a good one. Essentially, do all you can to "save the earth," but don't go overboard, and don't demean others for their practices.
wacastervids 8 months ago
i like underwear. its helpful XD
zzufiwik 8 months ago
@zzufiwik LOL!
wacastervids 8 months ago