Haha, just because you believe in scientific facts, and not the media, you're suddenly a conspiracy theorist :) ? I think we should live responsibly and take good care of the earth, but maybe we should admit that the greenhouse theory is wrong (Or I mean, the greenhousegases makes the earth warmer, but it's very insignificant), and start focusing on other important things, like hunger in the third world...
No there ISNT such thing as glboal warming. Over history, the earth has become naturally coolar and warmer, e.g. The Ice Age(s). So we are most likely going through a warm patch in earths history. ON THE OTHER HAND im NOT saying that us burning fossil fuels and babies and what not ISNT contributing to the problem, im just saying that the US and Canadian government made shit loads of money on this global warming bs, and they probably dont plan on stopping anytime soon.
@TheCheaterFilms Actually the US government makes more money from denying global warming don't you think? Haven't you noticed the ties to the oil companies? If we address global warming properly then we won't be using much oil anymore and they'll make less money. There most definitely is such a thing as global warming, and it is definitely caused by mankind. Its a simple as this: 1) Carbon molecules absorb more heat than oxygen molecules, just as black absorbs more heat than white. (cont)...
@davyprendergast82 ....continued... 2) burning fossil fuels emits carbon into the atmosphere - carbon that was for thousands of years stored underground in the form of oil and didn't form part of the earth's atmosphere. 3) Human beings burn fossil fuels. You have 2 choices. Learn about and read about science and try to understand it, and form your opinions from that, or learn all about it from internet hysteria and the media. As scientists are qualified in this field it is an easy choice
Even IF it'd be that way, we still have to try to not let the earth warm up too much. How do we do this? Indeed, decrease the emitting of greenhouse gasses.
For example, yes this happened more often on earth. However, MANY animal types became exctinct because of this.
A real disaster is probably not happening while we are still alive (though in Africa people are already dying cause of climate change).
@TheCheaterFilms conspiracy theorist i see... do u know what chemistry is? do u know what these gases do to the environment? the suns rays hit earth, and these gases trap the heat that would have been given off by the earth, now there is heat in the atmosphere that shouldnt be there, now billions of tons of these gases are being released into the air every year, so much u can see it hover above cities, continue ur conspiracy theories and kill urself wen its december 2012 as well
@plumokin im not a conspiracy theorist. You make me sounds like that fag on the OLN channel who used to wrestle. Im not a conspiracy whatever, i just dont believe in shit that doesnt make sense to me, its called having an opinion. And 2012 is bullshit. The mayans ran out of writing tablets for a calendar, big woop.
@TheCheaterFilms ok i apologize, i was pissed off about something else and i took it out on this, i dont agree with you but ill respect ur opinion, plz disregard my comment, sry
Well Global Warming/Cooling is something that our world is going through for many many years, and i mean really MANY. So is Co2 the cause for all this? Maybe.
Is there any evidence man is to charge? Not a single!
And is it ok to tax Co2 emission. HELL NO, THAT´´S CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY!!!
@Noahshollow Well, actually there is some evidence, especially the ones that demonstrate that CO2 actually does cause warming. Is it our fault? Not so much evidence, still being debated. But the best course of action is still, as Dean says, to live more environmentally friendly. and CO2 taxes means less wasteful energy production.
@TheAtheologian "co2 taxes means less wasteful energy production" as simple as it sounds it´s also stupid. Since when dose taxing effect something to turn out good?
That is like saying, as the prices for cigarettes rise many smokers start to quit smoking.
Also since when energy production is wasteful?
The thing is, 0.0387% of our atmosphere is co2. 5% of this lil amount is caused by humans. If you want to tax someone--->>>Sun and Oceans! but wait they got no money?! well.......
@Noahshollow Like I made clear, my argument rests on the benefit of increasing cost of energy via CO2 taxation, as most energy is produced with CO2 release.
Now, if you don't think increasing the price of something, your example being cigarettes, decreases the amount of smokers, then you are basically without knowledge of basic economics. Increasing the price on cigarettes DOES cause smokers to quit. Not nearly as high numbers as hoped, but energy is not addictive, and we currently can cut back.
@TheAtheologian As our technology´s developing exponentially there´s no doubt we´re addictive to energy if you believe it or not.You might also see our body as a factory that produces energy and releasing co2.That is a pure natural procedure and yet it is also a addiction.
People that smoke would find a way to smoke,maybe they will plant their own seeds,maybe they decrease their amount of smoking cause it gets expensive.
Maybe technology will slowdown,but what will be affected?
@Noahshollow Consider this: In your house, how often do you turn off the lights when you leave a room? How many people have remotes that turn on their car so it is wam when they go to sit in it? If we can make this minor additional comfort costly, then people will not prioritize it.
Also, your now metaphorical cigarette comparison fits perfectly; if people get energy some other way then we are doing well. Then we support renewable energy.
@TheAtheologian You don´t really understand that you need money to research renewable energies. It´s no problem to plant some tobacco plants, but that is no researching renewable energies.
But let´s just end this discussion for now.
Maybe you´ll realise that it plain stupid to tax something and believe it would improve.
With more people in this world every day the co2 emission will rise, also we need more food, so what is the conclusion. More co2! It´s evolution! What is taxing?
@Noahshollow But the money.. That's the point. If using nonrenewable costs more there will be more investors for renewable.
Now I would accept being repeatedly called stupid, but this is just simple economic knowledge. Taxation increases demand for a substitute product (energy), with accordance to XED (cross elasticity of Demand).
And as I made clear: We are trying to increase renewable energy, more people breathing and eating has negligible effect.
HE CREATED A DEVICE THAT VAPORIZES GASOLINE BEFORE IT ENTERS THE ENGINE FOR COMBUSTION. HIS 351CI ENGINE WHICH NORMALLY GETS ABOUT 16MPG ON THE HWY GOT 100MPG INSTEAD USING THIS DEVICE.
IT BURNS CLEAN AND WILL MORE THAN QUADRUPLE OUR VEHICLE MPG'S!
PLEASE SPREAD THIS AROUND! ESPECIALLY TO PEOPLE IN POLITICAL OFFICE THAT ARE UNAWARE OF THIS POTENTIAL DISCOVERY!
WE HAVE THE END TO POLLUTION! WE JUST NEED TO GET THE WORD OUT!
Al Gore can get the most viberant color plactic globe, light it on fire and stick it up his rectum. I don't beleive but I care about my planet cause it's where... I Do it to the honeys.
Of course global warming is not caused by CO2. Most people don't understand the issue, and still take a side, THAT is the problem. Unless you deeply reasearch about it, don't take any side... plain and simple, like any other issue. Don't you trust experts on whether the plain your flying on is safe?
"We know what's right inside our head".... Nobody knows... we only think we know. You are mixing up THINKING / KNOWING / and FEELING.
Yes, it is fake. the increase of CO2 follows global warming, it isn't the cause.
Of course the politics and companies made good use of this, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't care about your enviroment.
By the way, if you cut down the rainforest, it wouldn't change a thing related to oxygen. Most (more than 90%) of world's oxygen come from algues (spelling?) in the ocean.
ok so your argument is "brawndo has electrolytes" (idiocracy movie) . Nobody is for pollution or destroying the earth but we don't have to bend over and hand all our cash and industry to morons like al gore and the other greenies. The answer is YES it is fake and the solutions are stupidity.
@1965ace Global warming is a scientific fact.Discussing it is as dumb as discussing evolution.And if you don't like the solutions,tell us what we could do.
@schok51 The flat earth was a scientific fact at one time. You must be a genius with such clever debating skills. If I don't agree with the premise "you could fall off the earth at the edge" then why would I offer a solution to the stupid premise? The base of the argument is scale and the fact is we do produce CO2 and it does effect our world but at a scale so small and insignificant compared the massive hundreds of other variables that me telling you to stop breathing to save the world is ???
@1965ace Fact is science is actually able to detect the effect of human activities(CO2 productions,etc) on the naturally-happening global warming.Science wasn't able to determine the form of the earth in the middle age,but we've since gained enough scientific knowledge and comprehension of our world to determine the sphericity of the earth,as we are able to see a big difference between early global warming and the one happening right now,and to link that difference with human factors.
@schok51 No that is not the truth, it is propaganda. I saw last week a report that showed NASA used filters in their previous assessment of GW that was skewed towards warming just like all the data from the email conspiracy. Further evidence is a cooling trend that they are all admitting to and the icing on the cake is the name change to "climate change" . When they ignore weather patterns on the Sun it's not science its propaganda. The scientists that are promoting this are dependent on result
@1965ace I'll need a reference cause I don't tend to believe easily in conspiracy theories.Also,why would the whole scientific community create a non-existent problem that brings no profits to anyone?I don'T even want to know any conspiracy story.I'm the type of guy that believe in scientific facts when come to this kind of matter,so if the facts are "propaganda" like you say,too bad,but I'll need proofs as solid as the "propaganda".Also,all the scientist of the world can't lie all together.
I can quote Dean Leysen. He appears to be an adherent to the religion. "debate about whether or not global warming is real. The true answer is it doesn't really matter." This is a clear demonstration that global warming is not about facts, but rather about an ethics, and a faith based ethics. The ethics of religion say that it doesn't matter what the truth is, you should do it anyway because it is the right thing to do. I don't have a problem with that but u can't force others through government
@MrApplewine No what he say is that whatever the global warming(enhanced by human) is real or not,we know scientifically that anyway greenhouse gases emission and general pollution is no good for the environment,and that anyway renwable and non-polution ressources are just more interesting in long term.Stop trying to make it a religious thing.
@schok51 Whether or not global warming is a religious belief, which it is, there is a religion called environmentalism which exists and lots of people are part of it. Common themes are animism and mystical worship of the wild Earth. I agree pollution is bad, but we aren't talking about pollution when we talk about carbon dioxide since it isn't a pollutant. Thus, there will be no impact on pollution by focusing on carbon dioxide and real issues of pollution will be unaddressed.
@MrApplewine Wait ,what?Carbon dioxide is one of the main responsible of the greenhouse effect.It is one of the most produced polluant. Who are you to say otherwise?And also,global warming is not a "religion",and the fact is that environmentalism is not in itself a religion neither,it is a social movement/philosophy,although it can effectively,like anything, be a basis for a religion,taken along with other spiritual principles or whatsoever.
@schok51 Just google "environmentalism is a religion" and watch the top videos Ian Pilmer etc and read a few articles. It is a religion because it is based on a mystical metaphysics and a faith based epistemology. From a philosophical perspective what happen was recent generations rejected their parents religion, but embraced new mystical philosophies in their place. They were never exposed to any rational philosophies so they gravitated back to a new mystical ideology, aka a religion.
@MrApplewine Ok.You're not listening/reading what I say.Of course there can be a religious belief system based on the environmentalism philosophy(that state that we should live in a non-polluting lifeway).But Global warming is not a religious belief and environmentalism is not a religion,but a social movement./wiki/Environmentalist
@schok51 Environmentalism is a religion. But that is not the same as protecting the human environment. That is not what environmentalism is. Don't confuse environmental humanism with human environmentalism. Don't confuse protecting the environment of humans and protecting the "environment" from humans. Of course the latter isn't possible, since an environment must be of something. But environmentalism is somewhat of a misnomer since it the wild. Read about it, there is a religion by that name.
@MrApplewine Ok.When I make a research for the word "environmentalism" on google,all the links on the first page(wikipedia,encyclopedia britanica,merriam-webster,etc) describe environmentalism as a social/ethical movement advocating respect toward the environment and such related concepts,without mentionning any religions.
@MrApplewine Now,surely there's one that calls itself "environmentalism" and is based on similar principles,but the fact is dictionnary define environmentalism as a social/ethical movement first and foremost,not as a religion.
@schok51 That is because people haven't realized it is a religion yet. Especially those who are adherents to the religion. You don't have to realize something is a religion for it to be a religion.
@MrApplewine You're kidding right?There is criteria to call something a religion,and the classical definition of environmentalism as a social and ethical movement or philosophy does't obey these criteria.End of discussion for me.
@schok51 No, I'm not kidding. Environmentalism meets all of the requirements to be a religion. It has a mystical metaphysics and epistemology and is organized. The ethics are of course altruism, sacrifice, which is true of all religions, but not explicitly a requirement of a religion. All you have to do it do some reading that talks about why this is a religion. It is explained. It is a pagan religion, worshiping the wild untouched by man etc. animals
@MrApplewine Again,you're mixing things.You refuse to understand the argument that I made.I have more confidence in dictionnaries' definitions than in obscure opinion of some guys(whoever are they,official definition of a word is not discutable).Let's put it in another way:How would you call the social movement wich support the protection of ecosystems and natural resources?The actual term is environmentalism.
@schok51 The word you use is of no concern to me and irrelevant to debate. The mystical ideology exists and is most closely tied to that word. You can spend your own time investigating this. I'd like to setup a one stop website to explain the whole thing, but right now it is scattered. Unfortunately the religious left is radical (meaning of the root, from latin) and fundamentalist in that they cannot differentiate the fundimental difference between religion and non-religion, whichever the form.
@MrApplewine If you say so.I'll still continue to call someone that stand for the protection of the environment(so myself and pretty much every smart people) environmentalists.Also,using a word in a way different than the one it was originaly made for is called "abuse of language" or misnoming.
@RoelandPita I wasn't joking, I am serious. Environmentalism is a religion. But my intention is not to insult by pointing that out. I don't have a problem with the religion as long as it isn't merged with the government and turned into a religious political ideology, like Islam. I don't have a problem with the religion of Islam. Recycling is a ritual practice of the environmentalism religion. This video explains how recycling is not based in science, but ritual tinyurl dot com slash 3ntcefh
@lostprophets0rok Protecting the environment of a human is not what environmentalism is. Environmentalism is not about the environment of something. It is animism the spiritual attribution to the wilderness, animals, plants, rocks, and the worshiping of the Earth itself through spiritual connection. It is the focusing of ones guilt through actions to devote oneself to the planet for the sake of the planet and the mystical and faith based practices of pursuing actions based on these emotions.
@MrApplewine Source?.Environmentalism is a philosophy and a social movement that promote a "green"(that respect environment,meaning the ecosystem) life-style(minipal footprint on the ecosystem).See the wikipedia article(or I guess most dictionaries).
@schok51 If you do google searches on environmentalism religion you will find it online. I can point you to one web site environmentalism dot comm . I have to apologize to some extent because that website is talking about the common practice of religious political environmentalism. I do not deny that there can be a purely religious environmentalism that is peaceful, when it is not merged with government or turned into political actions. The same can be said for Islam the religion.
@MrApplewine Sure there can be religions based on a social movement or philosophy,but environmentalism in itself isn't originally a religious movement.
Global warming is a religious belief that is part of the environmentalism religion. Not that there is anything wrong with that. It just can't be used as a basis for laws or government action. This video is very good in explaining how global warming is a religious belief. Recycling is also a religious practice that is part of the religion. It is similar to the rosary beads that catholics have or saying prayers. It's purpose is to show devotion to the planet, it is not based in science.
@staubin65 global warming or cooling IS natural, yes. but now with all the bullshit we produce, we warm up much faster than we eventually would. like this now, the planet will not be inhabitable anymore in a few centuries because of us, not because its natural. we CAN slow down the process but we won't
@frost12409 your right with that but usually when it melts there's condensation to compensate for extra mass it had gained while frozen....but since the atmosphere is closed and the water cycle it all ends up back in the oceans and lakes.
Green and clean technology is good for several reasons. Taxing carbon is ridiculous. All it does is make a few guys super rich, and everyone else a little poorer. And what actually changes? The rich guys can buy more private jets and make even more pollution for them to tax.
@stevefargher Your coment is irrelevant and has 0 use, telling someone his comment is stupid without even giving a decent explenation is plain retarded.
@Vleesball There has always been salt in the ocean so if your theory is correct there wouldnt be icecaps atall. Also the only reason when you add salt to water the ice melts is because the salt lowers the freezing point of water. Arctic conditions are cold enough to freeze this ice.
@Hobby331 Dude clouds work as a blanket on the Earth and although yes they keep out sunlight, they trap the heat and cause a blanket effect much like sitting in a bed with the covers on therefore NOT causing global cooling
During almost all of Earth's history there were no humans. None. Zip. Zilch. (Kinda like your ability to reason.)
If you want to return Earth to its human-free condition, then keep dumping CO2 into the atmosphere, because it's doubtful that humanity could survive a 6-10 ºC global temperature increase.
Which fossil-fueled talking points will you regurgitate next?
"How do you actually know that we have global warming?"
Thermometers, satellites, proxies ... etc. Even Roy Spencer said, "I don't argue with thermometers." Do you???
tiny. cc/BAo9g
And your clouds argument was considered a long time ago by professionals whose knowledge of the climate system dwarfs yours. Your logic is flawed because you haven't considered the whole picture. Clouds also increase the trapping of heat, and their net effect is NOT "global cooling."
It surprises me just how much people believe that our impact on "such a huge planet" is, without exception, negligible. Sometimes small changes cause a massive effect - and it's especially true in meteorology (ever heard of the butterfly effect?). There was a debate earlier if the ozone hole is caused by us or not. Now we know that it is. Hole in one layer of atmosphere the size of the N. America! So get over it people - we're a massive force on Earth! And could be causing the global warming.
@Navila1 Could you explain your rationale behind that argument? Green house gases are, as far as we know, not directly related to ozone formation or destruction. On the other hand, global warming should increase cloud formation rate - rising Earth's albedo and protecting us (at least partially) from UV light that passes through the ozone hole. In that sense, green house gases could lead not to "plugging up" the hole, but at least opening a could made "umbrella" underneath it. :)
@Nalfeindo "The primary greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone"... OZONE IS GREEN HOUSE GAS. I bet your brainwashing liberal media never told you ozone is green house gas.
@Navila1 Yep. And as I said - other green house gases are, as far as we know, not directly related to ozone formation or destruction. Upper tropospheric ozone is a green house gas, though one much weaker than CO2 (4 times weaker according to IPCC TAR). So ozone both protects and warms us up. What complicates the issue of getting our atmosphere properly balanced out - is that most molecule species have this "two sided blade" effect.
Oh, and where did you get the reference to liberal media from?
@Navila1 We = we. Human race. So far I've been referring only to well established theories, accepted by international scientific community, hence adding to the sum of all knowledge we, as a mankind, possess. Mind you, I have not mentioned even once any of controversial or disputed climate change theories. That's why I'm really surprised by your mentions of "liberal media" and "idiots on tv". I don't even watch tv.
@Nalfeindo Okay, now you are officially a jackass. You do not speak for the human race. You only speak for your limited, ignorant and noncomprehending mind. Secondly your so called "theories" come from liberal media and politics which aren't scientific theories at all just money and power grabs. Secondly, the whole global warming is fallacy to being with, they word warming is just a political buzz word with no basis whatsoever in science, in fact it is a scam.
Green house gases protect the planet from radiation and makes life possible on earth. The only thing that terrifies me is our green house gases not being replenishment and all life dying out and mass increases of cancer due to lack of protection from the sun.
Global warming is fake, is it just a natural cycle. We do not affect this even though we like to think so. Sacrificing economy on an illusion that we should use 'green' fuels is not beneficial for us.
The heat on Venus is over 900 degree's or more, I'm not a scientist but they consider Venus as having a massive "greenhouse effect" considering the temperature and CO2 levels make it impossible for even micro organisms to live.. As the heat rises on earth "global warming", I believe the conditions will become similar to our neighboring planet, Venus.
It is not that simple. If you have to react as the IPCC would have it, the global economy would collapse completely, 3rd world will remain in poverty, unemployment will rise immensely and, last but not least, the super-class will have their dream fulfilled about a new world order ruled by the few; one totalitarian world government.
The current level of atmospheric CO2 is higher than at any time in the past 15 million years.
tiny. cc/Tripati
When CO2 was last that high, "global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic, and [there was] very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland."
You should check out the book "Superfreakonomics." It's by these economist dudes that make a pretty convincing case that it doesn't matter since we can fix the whole problem with just a small change, not any huge movement to be more "green". Just thought it was interesting and passed it along.
I see some old video of urs Dean... well its ur other character ogfurious.... he said "Fuck global warming...I change the climate..." hahaha its funny
we already know that global warming is happening. its been proven. we just arent sure why. it most probably is humans, but there are other theories. theories that explain why ALL the planets are warming up, not just earth
@Luke7878 Um there is about 50 or more years of research that back climate change and that recognize human activity as the main cause. Yes warming is suppose to happen at this time but not at this rate! I mean whether climate change is happening or not is not even a debate, people are debating whether humans are causing it... which we are for all the crap we put in the atmosphere and changes in land use.
I think most people worry about putting the power into the hands of the gov't's and by extension the polluters. That's why they fight the system and of course many of them don't accept that we humans are big enough to damage the planet - BULLSHIT.
I'm more into a simple way of thinking. I don't want much. The way we are supposed to react looks like a measure to prevent guilt. It says nothing about the greed that will keep overpowering our environment.
Humans are selfish.
stevenmtaylor21 1 day ago
ok how the fuck did u know about the can on my desk
kokoroyer 4 days ago
Global warming is fake because global means worldwide and it's fucking cold outside.
kokoroyer 4 days ago
Haha, just because you believe in scientific facts, and not the media, you're suddenly a conspiracy theorist :) ? I think we should live responsibly and take good care of the earth, but maybe we should admit that the greenhouse theory is wrong (Or I mean, the greenhousegases makes the earth warmer, but it's very insignificant), and start focusing on other important things, like hunger in the third world...
etglasstortvand 4 weeks ago
your dead right keep up the great clips
paintboy83 1 month ago in playlist More videos from DeanLeysen
lmao "i say try em all to make sure" lol
Alex35J 1 month ago
What? How did you know there was a Soda can on my desk?!!
ASwiftHippie 1 month ago
How did you know I had soda cans on my desk!
kaflin 1 month ago
The media is becoming more exaggerative everyday and nowadays people think the worst of things.
TheCheaterFilms 1 month ago
No there ISNT such thing as glboal warming. Over history, the earth has become naturally coolar and warmer, e.g. The Ice Age(s). So we are most likely going through a warm patch in earths history. ON THE OTHER HAND im NOT saying that us burning fossil fuels and babies and what not ISNT contributing to the problem, im just saying that the US and Canadian government made shit loads of money on this global warming bs, and they probably dont plan on stopping anytime soon.
TheCheaterFilms 1 month ago
@TheCheaterFilms Actually the US government makes more money from denying global warming don't you think? Haven't you noticed the ties to the oil companies? If we address global warming properly then we won't be using much oil anymore and they'll make less money. There most definitely is such a thing as global warming, and it is definitely caused by mankind. Its a simple as this: 1) Carbon molecules absorb more heat than oxygen molecules, just as black absorbs more heat than white. (cont)...
davyprendergast82 1 month ago
@davyprendergast82 ....continued... 2) burning fossil fuels emits carbon into the atmosphere - carbon that was for thousands of years stored underground in the form of oil and didn't form part of the earth's atmosphere. 3) Human beings burn fossil fuels. You have 2 choices. Learn about and read about science and try to understand it, and form your opinions from that, or learn all about it from internet hysteria and the media. As scientists are qualified in this field it is an easy choice
davyprendergast82 1 month ago
@TheCheaterFilms did you even hear what he said in the video?
Even IF it'd be that way, we still have to try to not let the earth warm up too much. How do we do this? Indeed, decrease the emitting of greenhouse gasses.
For example, yes this happened more often on earth. However, MANY animal types became exctinct because of this.
A real disaster is probably not happening while we are still alive (though in Africa people are already dying cause of climate change).
Thunterise 1 month ago
@TheCheaterFilms conspiracy theorist i see... do u know what chemistry is? do u know what these gases do to the environment? the suns rays hit earth, and these gases trap the heat that would have been given off by the earth, now there is heat in the atmosphere that shouldnt be there, now billions of tons of these gases are being released into the air every year, so much u can see it hover above cities, continue ur conspiracy theories and kill urself wen its december 2012 as well
plumokin 1 month ago
@plumokin im not a conspiracy theorist. You make me sounds like that fag on the OLN channel who used to wrestle. Im not a conspiracy whatever, i just dont believe in shit that doesnt make sense to me, its called having an opinion. And 2012 is bullshit. The mayans ran out of writing tablets for a calendar, big woop.
TheCheaterFilms 1 month ago
@TheCheaterFilms ok i apologize, i was pissed off about something else and i took it out on this, i dont agree with you but ill respect ur opinion, plz disregard my comment, sry
plumokin 1 month ago
@plumokin no problem. its all good.
TheCheaterFilms 1 month ago
Who actually subscribed to Dean?
xjFIRST 1 month ago
hoho
TomteFront 1 month ago
"need subscribe for food" haha
ParshallProductions 1 month ago
Honda FCX clarity runs on hydrogen and releases H20 (water), and hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe so it will never run out.
WhatThePresidentSays 1 month ago 3
@WhatThePresidentSays yes, but note that we can't go wherever in the universe...
sinachiniforoosh 1 week ago
@WhatThePresidentSays Butttt it's highly explosive :D so everyone be dying in them car crashes
azarah6969 1 day ago
Well Global Warming/Cooling is something that our world is going through for many many years, and i mean really MANY. So is Co2 the cause for all this? Maybe.
Is there any evidence man is to charge? Not a single!
And is it ok to tax Co2 emission. HELL NO, THAT´´S CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY!!!
Noahshollow 2 months ago
@Noahshollow Well, actually there is some evidence, especially the ones that demonstrate that CO2 actually does cause warming. Is it our fault? Not so much evidence, still being debated. But the best course of action is still, as Dean says, to live more environmentally friendly. and CO2 taxes means less wasteful energy production.
TheAtheologian 2 months ago
@TheAtheologian "co2 taxes means less wasteful energy production" as simple as it sounds it´s also stupid. Since when dose taxing effect something to turn out good?
That is like saying, as the prices for cigarettes rise many smokers start to quit smoking.
Also since when energy production is wasteful?
The thing is, 0.0387% of our atmosphere is co2. 5% of this lil amount is caused by humans. If you want to tax someone--->>>Sun and Oceans! but wait they got no money?! well.......
Noahshollow 2 months ago
@Noahshollow Like I made clear, my argument rests on the benefit of increasing cost of energy via CO2 taxation, as most energy is produced with CO2 release.
Now, if you don't think increasing the price of something, your example being cigarettes, decreases the amount of smokers, then you are basically without knowledge of basic economics. Increasing the price on cigarettes DOES cause smokers to quit. Not nearly as high numbers as hoped, but energy is not addictive, and we currently can cut back.
TheAtheologian 2 months ago
@TheAtheologian As our technology´s developing exponentially there´s no doubt we´re addictive to energy if you believe it or not.You might also see our body as a factory that produces energy and releasing co2.That is a pure natural procedure and yet it is also a addiction.
People that smoke would find a way to smoke,maybe they will plant their own seeds,maybe they decrease their amount of smoking cause it gets expensive.
Maybe technology will slowdown,but what will be affected?
Noahshollow 2 months ago
@Noahshollow Consider this: In your house, how often do you turn off the lights when you leave a room? How many people have remotes that turn on their car so it is wam when they go to sit in it? If we can make this minor additional comfort costly, then people will not prioritize it.
Also, your now metaphorical cigarette comparison fits perfectly; if people get energy some other way then we are doing well. Then we support renewable energy.
Also, breathing =/= technological advances.
TheAtheologian 2 months ago
@TheAtheologian You don´t really understand that you need money to research renewable energies. It´s no problem to plant some tobacco plants, but that is no researching renewable energies.
But let´s just end this discussion for now.
Maybe you´ll realise that it plain stupid to tax something and believe it would improve.
With more people in this world every day the co2 emission will rise, also we need more food, so what is the conclusion. More co2! It´s evolution! What is taxing?
Noahshollow 2 months ago
@Noahshollow But the money.. That's the point. If using nonrenewable costs more there will be more investors for renewable.
Now I would accept being repeatedly called stupid, but this is just simple economic knowledge. Taxation increases demand for a substitute product (energy), with accordance to XED (cross elasticity of Demand).
And as I made clear: We are trying to increase renewable energy, more people breathing and eating has negligible effect.
TheAtheologian 2 months ago
stfu you google ads whore.
mp3talon 2 months ago
Dean, do you live right next door to me or somethin?
Because i have a can of soda on my desk.
MINDFUCK
red999125 3 months ago
EVERYONE PLEASE GOOGLE, "Tom Ogle".
HE CREATED A DEVICE THAT VAPORIZES GASOLINE BEFORE IT ENTERS THE ENGINE FOR COMBUSTION. HIS 351CI ENGINE WHICH NORMALLY GETS ABOUT 16MPG ON THE HWY GOT 100MPG INSTEAD USING THIS DEVICE.
IT BURNS CLEAN AND WILL MORE THAN QUADRUPLE OUR VEHICLE MPG'S!
PLEASE SPREAD THIS AROUND! ESPECIALLY TO PEOPLE IN POLITICAL OFFICE THAT ARE UNAWARE OF THIS POTENTIAL DISCOVERY!
WE HAVE THE END TO POLLUTION! WE JUST NEED TO GET THE WORD OUT!
Sixdouble5321 4 months ago 9
@Sixdouble5321 Damn. That's a pretty sick conspiracy theory.
Teknolaizz 4 months ago in playlist Flere videoer fra DeanLeysen
@Sixdouble5321 could have had that years ago. oil companies wont let it happen.
7255202 3 months ago
@7255202....if enough people got word of this and it hit a major news company then it could get legs.
Contact your Rep also. If they are so serious about green energy then here is a godsend that they should demand from automakers.
Sixdouble5321 3 months ago
@Sixdouble5321 Cool story bro :)
metalheadk93 4 weeks ago
O my god how did he know I had a soda can on my computer table..... im doing all three this guys a wizard
Papya1000 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Al Gore can get the most viberant color plactic globe, light it on fire and stick it up his rectum. I don't beleive but I care about my planet cause it's where... I Do it to the honeys.
IblewuponyourfaceIII 4 months ago
Comment removed
IblewuponyourfaceIII 4 months ago
Comment removed
IblewuponyourfaceIII 4 months ago
jokes on you my soda is in a bottle!!
DarstOmega 4 months ago
acuttly i though you are going to talk about the theory that supernova dust cover part of the sun so sometimes it warmer/colder
RedBricksWall 4 months ago
I don't drink soda.
ThatCrazyBloke 4 months ago
Wrong, I have about 20 on my desk, BUT I do recycle them!
jake23211 4 months ago
CO2 causing global warming is a scam.
Mohowkmrt 4 months ago
"It doesn't really matter"? Is that a joke?
Of course global warming is not caused by CO2. Most people don't understand the issue, and still take a side, THAT is the problem. Unless you deeply reasearch about it, don't take any side... plain and simple, like any other issue. Don't you trust experts on whether the plain your flying on is safe?
"We know what's right inside our head".... Nobody knows... we only think we know. You are mixing up THINKING / KNOWING / and FEELING.
veim2406 5 months ago
Because it worked . . .
absoluteterror93 5 months ago
Is that subscribe in the back ground a subliminal message?
absoluteterror93 5 months ago
GLOBAL WARMING IS FAKE CALL ME STUPID AL GORE OR WHAT EVER YOUR FUCKIN NAME IS.
jermancrusader 5 months ago
Yes, it is fake. the increase of CO2 follows global warming, it isn't the cause.
Of course the politics and companies made good use of this, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't care about your enviroment.
By the way, if you cut down the rainforest, it wouldn't change a thing related to oxygen. Most (more than 90%) of world's oxygen come from algues (spelling?) in the ocean.
MaartenCanters 6 months ago
fuck global warming, I CHANGE THE CLIMATE
GenoSkill 6 months ago
ok so your argument is "brawndo has electrolytes" (idiocracy movie) . Nobody is for pollution or destroying the earth but we don't have to bend over and hand all our cash and industry to morons like al gore and the other greenies. The answer is YES it is fake and the solutions are stupidity.
1965ace 7 months ago
@1965ace Global warming is a scientific fact.Discussing it is as dumb as discussing evolution.And if you don't like the solutions,tell us what we could do.
schok51 6 months ago
@schok51 The flat earth was a scientific fact at one time. You must be a genius with such clever debating skills. If I don't agree with the premise "you could fall off the earth at the edge" then why would I offer a solution to the stupid premise? The base of the argument is scale and the fact is we do produce CO2 and it does effect our world but at a scale so small and insignificant compared the massive hundreds of other variables that me telling you to stop breathing to save the world is ???
1965ace 6 months ago
@1965ace Fact is science is actually able to detect the effect of human activities(CO2 productions,etc) on the naturally-happening global warming.Science wasn't able to determine the form of the earth in the middle age,but we've since gained enough scientific knowledge and comprehension of our world to determine the sphericity of the earth,as we are able to see a big difference between early global warming and the one happening right now,and to link that difference with human factors.
schok51 6 months ago
@schok51 No that is not the truth, it is propaganda. I saw last week a report that showed NASA used filters in their previous assessment of GW that was skewed towards warming just like all the data from the email conspiracy. Further evidence is a cooling trend that they are all admitting to and the icing on the cake is the name change to "climate change" . When they ignore weather patterns on the Sun it's not science its propaganda. The scientists that are promoting this are dependent on result
1965ace 6 months ago
@1965ace I'll need a reference cause I don't tend to believe easily in conspiracy theories.Also,why would the whole scientific community create a non-existent problem that brings no profits to anyone?I don'T even want to know any conspiracy story.I'm the type of guy that believe in scientific facts when come to this kind of matter,so if the facts are "propaganda" like you say,too bad,but I'll need proofs as solid as the "propaganda".Also,all the scientist of the world can't lie all together.
schok51 6 months ago
@schok51 Check your inbox I'll address your fair questions there.
1965ace 6 months ago
Comment removed
Sonyoooo3 7 months ago
Make a video (OGFurious style)
"Gangsta Eco Tips"
1.Download your porn. so you wont search and wait to load every time, everyday.
2. Turn off car while having sex, just open up the windows so people can see who you bangin
3.Recycle, Let yo bitch handle that
4.Conserve water, make a no clothes policy in your house to save laundry water
5.Sex in day sleep in night, save electricity
6.Use a knife not gun, knifing someone is more badass. cause guns release Co2
WhatThePresidentSays 7 months ago 55
TL;DW.
Yes.
Cheisu7 7 months ago
Comment removed
Cheisu7 7 months ago
I can quote Dean Leysen. He appears to be an adherent to the religion. "debate about whether or not global warming is real. The true answer is it doesn't really matter." This is a clear demonstration that global warming is not about facts, but rather about an ethics, and a faith based ethics. The ethics of religion say that it doesn't matter what the truth is, you should do it anyway because it is the right thing to do. I don't have a problem with that but u can't force others through government
MrApplewine 7 months ago
@MrApplewine No what he say is that whatever the global warming(enhanced by human) is real or not,we know scientifically that anyway greenhouse gases emission and general pollution is no good for the environment,and that anyway renwable and non-polution ressources are just more interesting in long term.Stop trying to make it a religious thing.
schok51 7 months ago
@schok51 Whether or not global warming is a religious belief, which it is, there is a religion called environmentalism which exists and lots of people are part of it. Common themes are animism and mystical worship of the wild Earth. I agree pollution is bad, but we aren't talking about pollution when we talk about carbon dioxide since it isn't a pollutant. Thus, there will be no impact on pollution by focusing on carbon dioxide and real issues of pollution will be unaddressed.
MrApplewine 7 months ago
@MrApplewine Wait ,what?Carbon dioxide is one of the main responsible of the greenhouse effect.It is one of the most produced polluant. Who are you to say otherwise?And also,global warming is not a "religion",and the fact is that environmentalism is not in itself a religion neither,it is a social movement/philosophy,although it can effectively,like anything, be a basis for a religion,taken along with other spiritual principles or whatsoever.
schok51 7 months ago
@schok51 Just google "environmentalism is a religion" and watch the top videos Ian Pilmer etc and read a few articles. It is a religion because it is based on a mystical metaphysics and a faith based epistemology. From a philosophical perspective what happen was recent generations rejected their parents religion, but embraced new mystical philosophies in their place. They were never exposed to any rational philosophies so they gravitated back to a new mystical ideology, aka a religion.
MrApplewine 7 months ago
@MrApplewine Ok.You're not listening/reading what I say.Of course there can be a religious belief system based on the environmentalism philosophy(that state that we should live in a non-polluting lifeway).But Global warming is not a religious belief and environmentalism is not a religion,but a social movement./wiki/Environmentalist
schok51 7 months ago
@schok51 Environmentalism is a religion. But that is not the same as protecting the human environment. That is not what environmentalism is. Don't confuse environmental humanism with human environmentalism. Don't confuse protecting the environment of humans and protecting the "environment" from humans. Of course the latter isn't possible, since an environment must be of something. But environmentalism is somewhat of a misnomer since it the wild. Read about it, there is a religion by that name.
MrApplewine 7 months ago
@MrApplewine Ok.When I make a research for the word "environmentalism" on google,all the links on the first page(wikipedia,encyclopedia britanica,merriam-webster,etc) describe environmentalism as a social/ethical movement advocating respect toward the environment and such related concepts,without mentionning any religions.
schok51 6 months ago
@MrApplewine Now,surely there's one that calls itself "environmentalism" and is based on similar principles,but the fact is dictionnary define environmentalism as a social/ethical movement first and foremost,not as a religion.
schok51 6 months ago
@schok51 That is because people haven't realized it is a religion yet. Especially those who are adherents to the religion. You don't have to realize something is a religion for it to be a religion.
MrApplewine 6 months ago
@MrApplewine You're kidding right?There is criteria to call something a religion,and the classical definition of environmentalism as a social and ethical movement or philosophy does't obey these criteria.End of discussion for me.
schok51 6 months ago
@schok51 No, I'm not kidding. Environmentalism meets all of the requirements to be a religion. It has a mystical metaphysics and epistemology and is organized. The ethics are of course altruism, sacrifice, which is true of all religions, but not explicitly a requirement of a religion. All you have to do it do some reading that talks about why this is a religion. It is explained. It is a pagan religion, worshiping the wild untouched by man etc. animals
MrApplewine 6 months ago
@MrApplewine Again,you're mixing things.You refuse to understand the argument that I made.I have more confidence in dictionnaries' definitions than in obscure opinion of some guys(whoever are they,official definition of a word is not discutable).Let's put it in another way:How would you call the social movement wich support the protection of ecosystems and natural resources?The actual term is environmentalism.
schok51 6 months ago
@schok51 The word you use is of no concern to me and irrelevant to debate. The mystical ideology exists and is most closely tied to that word. You can spend your own time investigating this. I'd like to setup a one stop website to explain the whole thing, but right now it is scattered. Unfortunately the religious left is radical (meaning of the root, from latin) and fundamentalist in that they cannot differentiate the fundimental difference between religion and non-religion, whichever the form.
MrApplewine 6 months ago
@MrApplewine If you say so.I'll still continue to call someone that stand for the protection of the environment(so myself and pretty much every smart people) environmentalists.Also,using a word in a way different than the one it was originaly made for is called "abuse of language" or misnoming.
schok51 6 months ago
imma sucker for the accent
aliceandmrbobspoofs 7 months ago
The box actually says "Need *Subscribe* for food" trolololol!!
HernandoCastano 7 months ago
Did anyone else see that box that said "Subscribe for food" behind him?
HernandoCastano 7 months ago
@RoelandPita I wasn't joking, I am serious. Environmentalism is a religion. But my intention is not to insult by pointing that out. I don't have a problem with the religion as long as it isn't merged with the government and turned into a religious political ideology, like Islam. I don't have a problem with the religion of Islam. Recycling is a ritual practice of the environmentalism religion. This video explains how recycling is not based in science, but ritual tinyurl dot com slash 3ntcefh
MrApplewine 7 months ago
@MrApplewine Caring for the environment isn't religion if that's what you're saying...
lostprophets0rok 7 months ago
@lostprophets0rok Protecting the environment of a human is not what environmentalism is. Environmentalism is not about the environment of something. It is animism the spiritual attribution to the wilderness, animals, plants, rocks, and the worshiping of the Earth itself through spiritual connection. It is the focusing of ones guilt through actions to devote oneself to the planet for the sake of the planet and the mystical and faith based practices of pursuing actions based on these emotions.
MrApplewine 7 months ago
@MrApplewine Source?.Environmentalism is a philosophy and a social movement that promote a "green"(that respect environment,meaning the ecosystem) life-style(minipal footprint on the ecosystem).See the wikipedia article(or I guess most dictionaries).
schok51 7 months ago
@schok51 If you do google searches on environmentalism religion you will find it online. I can point you to one web site environmentalism dot comm . I have to apologize to some extent because that website is talking about the common practice of religious political environmentalism. I do not deny that there can be a purely religious environmentalism that is peaceful, when it is not merged with government or turned into political actions. The same can be said for Islam the religion.
MrApplewine 7 months ago
@MrApplewine Sure there can be religions based on a social movement or philosophy,but environmentalism in itself isn't originally a religious movement.
schok51 7 months ago
i want to see my kids growing :P
xdirt3 7 months ago
@Desertphile Water freezes differently than most substances and has lots of pores. Same reason it floats and cracks containers.
Dude below you: Most of the ice is above sea level silly
hat1324 8 months ago
Global warming is a religious belief that is part of the environmentalism religion. Not that there is anything wrong with that. It just can't be used as a basis for laws or government action. This video is very good in explaining how global warming is a religious belief. Recycling is also a religious practice that is part of the religion. It is similar to the rosary beads that catholics have or saying prayers. It's purpose is to show devotion to the planet, it is not based in science.
MrApplewine 8 months ago
You can't stop global warming or cooling! It's natural!
staubin65 8 months ago
@staubin65 global warming or cooling IS natural, yes. but now with all the bullshit we produce, we warm up much faster than we eventually would. like this now, the planet will not be inhabitable anymore in a few centuries because of us, not because its natural. we CAN slow down the process but we won't
xXxNeaeraxXx 6 months ago
what if you have diabeties type 1 and eat so bad you would get type 2 wich is the only one caused from bad eating, but you already have type 1?
mike0rr 8 months ago
OMG how'd you know I had a soda can on my desk.... Psychic!
xXYeahandXx 8 months ago 23
@desertphile don't spread ignorance...heat speeds up molecules making it hard for them to grow larger....
kingofgrooveness 8 months ago
@frost12409 your right with that but usually when it melts there's condensation to compensate for extra mass it had gained while frozen....but since the atmosphere is closed and the water cycle it all ends up back in the oceans and lakes.
kingofgrooveness 8 months ago
WHAT THE FUCK U ACT LIKE COMPLETE NORMAL PERSON AND I CAN UNDERSTAND YOU BETTER !! WTF ... hmmmmm
BeBeAyumiReturns 8 months ago
Green and clean technology is good for several reasons. Taxing carbon is ridiculous. All it does is make a few guys super rich, and everyone else a little poorer. And what actually changes? The rich guys can buy more private jets and make even more pollution for them to tax.
Zoonofski 8 months ago
" Is Global Warming Fake?"
Yes, just as much as gravity is fake.
Desertphile 8 months ago
Wait? Since ice makes water expand won't "global warming" make the ice melt thus making our waters actually lower than it was before not higher?
Frost12409 8 months ago
@Frost12409 ; Heat makes water expand, silly.
Desertphile 8 months ago
HOW THE HELL DID YOU KNOW I HAD A SODA CAN ON MY DESK!!??
r3sking 8 months ago
Global warming isnt a myth, the myth is that we are doing it.
The sun is doing everything.
Only reason ice caps melt is cause of the salt in the water.
Go fill two buckets of ice and trow in one of them water with salt and the other one without salt..
You will see what i 'm talking about then.
Vleesball 8 months ago
@Vleesball The ammount of stupidity in this amazes me.
stevefargher 8 months ago
@stevefargher Your coment is irrelevant and has 0 use, telling someone his comment is stupid without even giving a decent explenation is plain retarded.
Vleesball 8 months ago
@Vleesball There has always been salt in the ocean so if your theory is correct there wouldnt be icecaps atall. Also the only reason when you add salt to water the ice melts is because the salt lowers the freezing point of water. Arctic conditions are cold enough to freeze this ice.
stevefargher 8 months ago
@stevefargher there wasnt this much salt in the sea as in the past,
my theory is still valid.
Vleesball 8 months ago
@Vleesball It still wouldnt affect the icecaps. Clueless idiot is clueless.
stevefargher 8 months ago
@Hobby331 Dude clouds work as a blanket on the Earth and although yes they keep out sunlight, they trap the heat and cause a blanket effect much like sitting in a bed with the covers on therefore NOT causing global cooling
magicwithlyricz 9 months ago
subliminal messaging... lol neways... PLEASE ANSWER... is it true that if u dont use it u lose it?
TheLNIZZLE 9 months ago
Favorited =)
TitanNV28Coral 9 months ago
it's annoying when people ask you to subscribe or like a video, but when dean does it isn't, it's more like funny
(dean - not even once?)
thebrokengnome 9 months ago
Comment removed
Hobby331 9 months ago
@Hobby331
During almost all of Earth's history there were no humans. None. Zip. Zilch. (Kinda like your ability to reason.)
If you want to return Earth to its human-free condition, then keep dumping CO2 into the atmosphere, because it's doubtful that humanity could survive a 6-10 ºC global temperature increase.
Which fossil-fueled talking points will you regurgitate next?
substanti8 9 months ago
Comment removed
Hobby331 9 months ago
@Hobby331
"How do you actually know that we have global warming?"
Thermometers, satellites, proxies ... etc. Even Roy Spencer said, "I don't argue with thermometers." Do you???
tiny. cc/BAo9g
And your clouds argument was considered a long time ago by professionals whose knowledge of the climate system dwarfs yours. Your logic is flawed because you haven't considered the whole picture. Clouds also increase the trapping of heat, and their net effect is NOT "global cooling."
substanti8 9 months ago 2
Comment removed
Hobby331 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
global warming is fake
TheAaron1924 9 months ago
The reason it matters is because we need to know how much of a priority our national and local governments need to put towards environmentalism.
the1janitor 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Who the hell thinks, the global warming is fake???
NicoSchrenk 9 months ago
I liked the video in order to save the planet! F*** YEAH!
lolfailism 9 months ago
It surprises me just how much people believe that our impact on "such a huge planet" is, without exception, negligible. Sometimes small changes cause a massive effect - and it's especially true in meteorology (ever heard of the butterfly effect?). There was a debate earlier if the ozone hole is caused by us or not. Now we know that it is. Hole in one layer of atmosphere the size of the N. America! So get over it people - we're a massive force on Earth! And could be causing the global warming.
Nalfeindo 9 months ago
@Nalfeindo ReaLLY!? We created an ozone hole? WOW, we better figure out how to make a crap load of green houses gases to plug up that hole.
Navila1 9 months ago
@Navila1 Could you explain your rationale behind that argument? Green house gases are, as far as we know, not directly related to ozone formation or destruction. On the other hand, global warming should increase cloud formation rate - rising Earth's albedo and protecting us (at least partially) from UV light that passes through the ozone hole. In that sense, green house gases could lead not to "plugging up" the hole, but at least opening a could made "umbrella" underneath it. :)
Nalfeindo 9 months ago
@Nalfeindo "The primary greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone"... OZONE IS GREEN HOUSE GAS. I bet your brainwashing liberal media never told you ozone is green house gas.
Navila1 5 months ago
@Navila1 Yep. And as I said - other green house gases are, as far as we know, not directly related to ozone formation or destruction. Upper tropospheric ozone is a green house gas, though one much weaker than CO2 (4 times weaker according to IPCC TAR). So ozone both protects and warms us up. What complicates the issue of getting our atmosphere properly balanced out - is that most molecule species have this "two sided blade" effect.
Oh, and where did you get the reference to liberal media from?
Nalfeindo 5 months ago
@Nalfeindo You keep saying as far as "we". Who that hell is "we" clearly it isn't anyone of knowledge so that only leaves you and idiots on tv.
Navila1 5 months ago
@Navila1 We = we. Human race. So far I've been referring only to well established theories, accepted by international scientific community, hence adding to the sum of all knowledge we, as a mankind, possess. Mind you, I have not mentioned even once any of controversial or disputed climate change theories. That's why I'm really surprised by your mentions of "liberal media" and "idiots on tv". I don't even watch tv.
Nalfeindo 5 months ago
@Nalfeindo Okay, now you are officially a jackass. You do not speak for the human race. You only speak for your limited, ignorant and noncomprehending mind. Secondly your so called "theories" come from liberal media and politics which aren't scientific theories at all just money and power grabs. Secondly, the whole global warming is fallacy to being with, they word warming is just a political buzz word with no basis whatsoever in science, in fact it is a scam.
Navila1 5 months ago
Green house gases protect the planet from radiation and makes life possible on earth. The only thing that terrifies me is our green house gases not being replenishment and all life dying out and mass increases of cancer due to lack of protection from the sun.
Navila1 9 months ago
i dont have a soda can.... would a beer can still count???
TheLostRebel69 9 months ago
Global warming is fake, is it just a natural cycle. We do not affect this even though we like to think so. Sacrificing economy on an illusion that we should use 'green' fuels is not beneficial for us.
buzzeven 9 months ago
WHO GIVES A FUCK :)!
Nathooo11 9 months ago
annoyingly true
wooyeahyeah 9 months ago
The heat on Venus is over 900 degree's or more, I'm not a scientist but they consider Venus as having a massive "greenhouse effect" considering the temperature and CO2 levels make it impossible for even micro organisms to live.. As the heat rises on earth "global warming", I believe the conditions will become similar to our neighboring planet, Venus.
69thugin420 9 months ago
It is not that simple. If you have to react as the IPCC would have it, the global economy would collapse completely, 3rd world will remain in poverty, unemployment will rise immensely and, last but not least, the super-class will have their dream fulfilled about a new world order ruled by the few; one totalitarian world government.
Lukan27 9 months ago
i love how he doesnt just say subscribe and like he makes it more ... (enter word here) something..
XxF4KEandG4YxX 9 months ago
I LOVE DEAN LEYSEN!~ i managed to get my dream girl bcoz i told her about your videos!! and that goes to OGfurious too~ haha god bless you
bandnikc2 9 months ago
you could start right now by turning off one of those computers :)
skyke12 9 months ago 92
@skyke12 haha, touché! <3
DeanLeysen 9 months ago 69
@DeanLeysen
The current level of atmospheric CO2 is higher than at any time in the past 15 million years.
tiny. cc/Tripati
When CO2 was last that high, "global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic, and [there was] very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland."
substanti8 9 months ago 3
@DeanLeysen hahaha vive les français :P
MohamedAmiNeRm 7 months ago
GAAAH I CANNOT POST
slowzen 9 months ago
Dude. your accent is fucking hilarious
Greenmamba666 9 months ago
You should check out the book "Superfreakonomics." It's by these economist dudes that make a pretty convincing case that it doesn't matter since we can fix the whole problem with just a small change, not any huge movement to be more "green". Just thought it was interesting and passed it along.
rsanek 9 months ago
i had a soda!! you
toy741life 9 months ago
wa wa in the butt wa wa
toy741life 9 months ago
You are my guru.
iamkini 9 months ago
HOW DID YOU KNOW I HAD A SODA!?
NONStopGamingGamer 9 months ago
@NONStopGamingGamer i had 1 too!
toy741life 9 months ago
are you a scientist or something like that?
SvangurKlaufi 9 months ago
I see some old video of urs Dean... well its ur other character ogfurious.... he said "Fuck global warming...I change the climate..." hahaha its funny
amzkie25 9 months ago
GUYS I SAVED A KITTEN
BuchwaldxD 9 months ago
haha youre endings rock!
JoelEngberg 9 months ago
i miss your gangsta accent..
Cardister 9 months ago
@Cardister well watch his furous vids then
1wwegirl2 9 months ago
You should be a professor lol
nouveaufanatic 9 months ago
we already know that global warming is happening. its been proven. we just arent sure why. it most probably is humans, but there are other theories. theories that explain why ALL the planets are warming up, not just earth
blueshift314 9 months ago
@blueshift314 There is no proof its happening.
Luke7878 9 months ago
@Luke7878 Um there is about 50 or more years of research that back climate change and that recognize human activity as the main cause. Yes warming is suppose to happen at this time but not at this rate! I mean whether climate change is happening or not is not even a debate, people are debating whether humans are causing it... which we are for all the crap we put in the atmosphere and changes in land use.
Rebearaniva 9 months ago
@blueshift314 yes there is. just b/c your head is in the sand doesnt mean there isnt anything else out there
blueshift314 9 months ago
OSAMA IS DEAD!
thechildrenzplace 9 months ago
og furious points at the temperture gauge and said fuck global warming
skateboarder0102 9 months ago
I totally just looked at my soda can :|
SleepingDragon1st 9 months ago
I know he's going to BOO-YAH each video. And I still jump each time.
Spencerrwallace 9 months ago
I think most people worry about putting the power into the hands of the gov't's and by extension the polluters. That's why they fight the system and of course many of them don't accept that we humans are big enough to damage the planet - BULLSHIT.
I'm more into a simple way of thinking. I don't want much. The way we are supposed to react looks like a measure to prevent guilt. It says nothing about the greed that will keep overpowering our environment.
.. and you don't miss what you never had.
Logicbeatslies 9 months ago
I don't have a soda can on my desk, but i DO have four waterbottles. so I shall recycle them.
ShadowPrintFilms 9 months ago