TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
The hole in the ozone!
- Thread starter ChronoKiento
- Start date
Actually.............[b said:Quote[/b] (Spectabilis73 @ Oct. 14 2004,1:03)]uhhhh! Polar bears live in the northern latitudes
I'm kinda lost...
Dino you don't even know what UV rays are, they don't cause heat... even thealphawolf has to agree with me on THAT![b said:
And Wolf, many of the great scientists were creation scientists...
I have read in the book that UV rays are blocked by the Ozone layer.
Too much of these, adn you burn.
When you go red ont he beach, that is the result of a little UV rays.
Imagine waht a lot can do.
Yes, but these thigns are accosiated.
There is a hole int he Ozone layer.
Hot UV rays get through.
they melt the ice int he Arctic.
they warm up the Arctic ocean.
Penguins/Polar BVears loose their habitat.
There will be less cold loving plants and animals.
o.......... m.......... g..........[b said:Quote[/b] (Starman @ Oct. 14 2004,10:40)]Actually.............[b said:Quote[/b] (Spectabilis73 @ Oct. 14 2004,1:03)]uhhhh! Polar bears live in the northern latitudes
It would take a COMPLETE depletion of the ozone layer to let ANY UVC though. I would explain what makes Ozone, how UVC helps, and all that, but i'd be typing another 40 minutes...
And at any rate, the UV radiation isn't physical heat...
TheAlphaWolf is right; no credible science textbook invokes religious doctrine. There simply is no intersection between the two, and the potential for doctrine to undermine scientific data is simply too great for the two to co-exist in a textbook. Religion is about faith, and science is about data.
In any case, it's clear, Spec, that you are being exposed to a politically conservative set of information on the environment. While I'm sure that, overall, you're getting a (much) better education than if you were in the public schools here in California, you should be aware that you are not getting an objective viewpoint, and that you should do some of your own research into all sides of issues like this.
The US is the lone holdout on the Kyoto environment agreements, and is at odds with the rest of the world on global warming. Oh, and guess who economically gets hurt by new environmental regulations on greenhouse gasses? Energy companies! This explains the objections of the current administration.
However, there is distortion and uncertainty on both sides, as climatic changes do happen naturally, and it's hard to tell what is responsible for the current rapid upswing in temperatures. There are enough interest groups on both sides to make any individual bit of information suspect.
However, the world-wide consensus is that there is rapid warming due to our pollution. It's one of those areas where it's better to be safe than sorry, too. The stakes of being wrong about it are far worse if there IS global warming due to our pollution than if there isn't.
Capslock
In any case, it's clear, Spec, that you are being exposed to a politically conservative set of information on the environment. While I'm sure that, overall, you're getting a (much) better education than if you were in the public schools here in California, you should be aware that you are not getting an objective viewpoint, and that you should do some of your own research into all sides of issues like this.
The US is the lone holdout on the Kyoto environment agreements, and is at odds with the rest of the world on global warming. Oh, and guess who economically gets hurt by new environmental regulations on greenhouse gasses? Energy companies! This explains the objections of the current administration.
However, there is distortion and uncertainty on both sides, as climatic changes do happen naturally, and it's hard to tell what is responsible for the current rapid upswing in temperatures. There are enough interest groups on both sides to make any individual bit of information suspect.
However, the world-wide consensus is that there is rapid warming due to our pollution. It's one of those areas where it's better to be safe than sorry, too. The stakes of being wrong about it are far worse if there IS global warming due to our pollution than if there isn't.
Capslock
Wesley
God must have an interesting sense of humor
Is it just me, or is that whenever religion/evolution is brought up, Spec is always on the forefront? LOL We need more leaders that are that bold!
Spec, I would think you'd be used to that as many beatings as you take from people. LOL
Anyway, sorry, I just had to poke a little fun cause this topic is getting sorta heated. I've seen a lot about the "squirrel topic". I didn't read it, and I have a feeling it got locked.
I'm homeschooler, what luck, I know homschoolers on the world wide web, that aren't just my close aquatances(sp)
I was gonna say somethin about the topic, but then I forgot what I wanted to say, and since I've already typed all of the stuff above, that's all you'll get. Oh how heated these topics are! Isn't it great!
[b said:
Spec, I would think you'd be used to that as many beatings as you take from people. LOL
Anyway, sorry, I just had to poke a little fun cause this topic is getting sorta heated. I've seen a lot about the "squirrel topic". I didn't read it, and I have a feeling it got locked.
[b said:
I'm homeschooler, what luck, I know homschoolers on the world wide web, that aren't just my close aquatances(sp)
I was gonna say somethin about the topic, but then I forgot what I wanted to say, and since I've already typed all of the stuff above, that's all you'll get. Oh how heated these topics are! Isn't it great!
But what I really wonder about, is what would have happened to this thread if i had just taken out the one sentence with God in it? Would everyone have said the same thing? Or would TheAlphaWolf said "Oh wow you're right" and the topic would just sink down into oblivion?[b said:
Just 'cause a textbook has God in it here and there, doesn't make it a crumby book in which all data in there is false/faulty...
"In any case, it's clear, Spec, that you are being exposed to a politically conservative set of information on the environment."
Maybe that's why I asked for some links to articles from OTHER viewpoints?
Wesley,
Yea I don't know how long I can take these beatings... I mean come on, cant TheAlphaWolf tone it down a little bit?
Plus the AIM messages I've gotten from people (bout 6 people) make me just want to drop the topic and not look at it again... People screamin and yellin at me just because I have a religion? Come on!!!! Makes me wonder why I participate in online groups... That's always how it happens.
G
Guest
Guest
I was homeschooled as well but we didn't use a curriculum because most of them were religous and highly one sided especially in areas such as science. So I taught myself and I ended up with a more well rounded education because of it. I had to learn to research everything on my own and look at all the data available. I quickly learned that just looking at the information from ONE book can get you in trouble quick. The more sources and the more variety the better informed you'll be.
But Spec being slammed on AOL because he's religous bothers me. I know many people who rant and rave that they are sick of religion being shoved down their throats but they insist on shoving their anti-religion opinions down others throats just as hard. Seems so hypocritical..
That said I agree with Capslock that a science book that preaches religion would loose much of it's credibility. The two just shouldn't be mixed.
But Spec being slammed on AOL because he's religous bothers me. I know many people who rant and rave that they are sick of religion being shoved down their throats but they insist on shoving their anti-religion opinions down others throats just as hard. Seems so hypocritical..
That said I agree with Capslock that a science book that preaches religion would loose much of it's credibility. The two just shouldn't be mixed.
yes, but it's GLOBAL warming. not antartica warming.[b said:
sure I do...[b said:
UV rays cause sunburn!
MEEE?[b said:
I basically debunked every "fact" you said and you say I'M the one ignoring facts
I need a drink
(LOL... juice... I don't even like alcohol... nor allowed to drink it)
and HA! I knew you went to a religious school!!!
UV IS light!!! you just can't feel it (we don't see ALL light)[b said:
eehh... says who?[b said:
and yet YOU don't give US anything but a religious textbook
Who said i was screaming? you were the one with capslock on and words <span style='font-size:17pt;line-height:100%'>THIS BIG</span>But what you said to me was nothin compared to what others said to me this morning.
"It would take a COMPLETE depletion of the ozone layer to let ANY UVC though.
eehh... says who?"
Says who? Uh, ME. It doesn't take much ozone to block out UVC. And if you knew the cycle of how ozone was made, I think you'd agree...
"It would take a COMPLETE depletion of the ozone layer to let ANY UVC though.
eehh... says who?"
Says who? Uh, ME. It doesn't take much ozone to block out UVC. And if you knew the cycle of how ozone was made, I think you'd agree...
ok.. true, I did say one thing ONCE and after you had been screaming (all caps, with multiple exclamation points) and saying I was ignoring you when I asked you if you could just wait a second. how many times did you call ME names?[b said:
and yes, I did use all caps. but I didn't write big. and that was only after I told you without using all caps and you still didn't understand. you started the yelling and the name calling. I only began so that I could stop it.
says you? PPTTFF... give me sites. not religious textbooks.[b said:
and I DO know how ozone is made. UV breaks O2, and each O molecule bonds with a O2 molecule to make O3. it's in that NASA site I gave you (did you even read it?)
Finch
Whats it to ya?
Clint
Stay chooned in for more!
Wesley
God must have an interesting sense of humor
I'm gonna act sorta like a moderater here and say that both sides are right in some areas and wrong in others. I have seen that science has proven... many times. Science CANNOT prove ANYTHING. Ask any TRUE scientist and they will tell you that.
On the contrary, science has everything in the world to do with it. That is why it exists; to learn about the world around us. There two major theories, creationism and evolution. Without a faith neither one is a credible theory. Creaton uses it faith that something created everything, and that everything that happens happens quite quickly catastrophism. Evolution has says that everything took millions of years to evolve from a single living cell that randomly appeared. It is the matter of what you are lead to believe. If religion/faith were removed from science, creationism AND evolution would thus become dicredible(wow that took a long time to type that word). It think I have everything. Both faiths/religions have their strong points and weak points.
[b said:
[b said:
On the contrary, science has everything in the world to do with it. That is why it exists; to learn about the world around us. There two major theories, creationism and evolution. Without a faith neither one is a credible theory. Creaton uses it faith that something created everything, and that everything that happens happens quite quickly catastrophism. Evolution has says that everything took millions of years to evolve from a single living cell that randomly appeared. It is the matter of what you are lead to believe. If religion/faith were removed from science, creationism AND evolution would thus become dicredible(wow that took a long time to type that word). It think I have everything. Both faiths/religions have their strong points and weak points.
ummm... what do you mean by that?[b said:
evolution IS credible not because of faith, but because there's proof.
there's no way all the fossil species and today's species could have ever shared the world at the same time.... and you can see that mutations do exist, you can see natural selection is going on, etc...
Finch
Whats it to ya?
I dont understand why religeon and sience clash.
In early midevil times, the church was one of the biggest suporters of science and installed complex timekeeping and physic macines in their cathedreals. They funded Astronimers and biologists. Since the bible and god was the truth, they reasoned, how could finding out more of the truth be wrong? It was about galaleio's time that the curch reversed its position.
In early midevil times, the church was one of the biggest suporters of science and installed complex timekeeping and physic macines in their cathedreals. They funded Astronimers and biologists. Since the bible and god was the truth, they reasoned, how could finding out more of the truth be wrong? It was about galaleio's time that the curch reversed its position.
well... religion and science clash because religion isn't scientific. now, do we all agree on that?
science is about proof. If you want to have a religion or something, ok, that's fine.... but there's no scientific proof of any religion. you can prove things (like floods or something) that the bible or koran or something says, but you can't prove that there is a god or that he went around telling people to write down things.
If you start believing something that can't possibly be proven, or that HAS been proven, that's not science.
I could also say why I don't believe in any religion... but that would be going too far wouldn't it? if you want me to talk about that, PM me. I don't want people saying I offended them because I was saying why I don't have a religion.
science is about proof. If you want to have a religion or something, ok, that's fine.... but there's no scientific proof of any religion. you can prove things (like floods or something) that the bible or koran or something says, but you can't prove that there is a god or that he went around telling people to write down things.
If you start believing something that can't possibly be proven, or that HAS been proven, that's not science.
I could also say why I don't believe in any religion... but that would be going too far wouldn't it? if you want me to talk about that, PM me. I don't want people saying I offended them because I was saying why I don't have a religion.
