This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
jamiemartin721 Reading 03 Jan 18 4.18pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
What we do know is that Neanderthals were here in lesser numbers and now only represent around 2 and 4% of European genes. There is no evidence to suggest that they were inferior in any way to Homo sapiens. In fact some evidence points to greater abilities. I don't think there is any conjecture that the only human hominid remaining is homo sapiens - which consists of all the assorted skin tones and genetic pools. Comparing black and asian migration to the competition between two different species. Also there is no conjecture that Homo Neaderthal consisted of a number of different tribal groups, cultures and 'racial types'. They weren't inferior to Homo Sapians, as far as I could tell, other than they seemed to have become extinct (likely due to a combination of events, not just Homo Sapian migration - Likely a natural disaster that also led to homo sapians expanding northwards from, ironically, Africa into Europe).
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 03 Jan 18 4.30pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
I don't think there is any conjecture that the only human hominid remaining is homo sapiens - which consists of all the assorted skin tones and genetic pools. Comparing black and asian migration to the competition between two different species. They weren't inferior to Homo Sapians, as far as I could tell, other than they seemed to have become extinct (likely due to a combination of events, not just Homo Sapian migration). What is significant is that despite being potentially more able than Homo Sapiens, they seem to have been overwhelmed by sheer numbers. We are all the same species and presumably of similar ability and 90% of the population will be non European. What is hard to understand about that significance of the comparison? Unless you are deliberately avoiding it.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Ray in Houston Houston 03 Jan 18 5.57pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
You are thinking short term and with limited information.
2017 joined the parade of recent years that was one of the hottest ever. What we are experiencing are all weather events projected by climatologists as being what happens when we warm the climate by a degree or two overall. As we warm the oceans and melt the icecaps - which reflect sunlight and keep the climate cooler - we will accelerate warming and exaggerate the occurrences of anomalous severe weather events. I am looking long term. You aren't even looking out the window.
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Ray in Houston Houston 03 Jan 18 6.00pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
I'd suggest that population is a far bigger problem. With that comes the demand for resources and the waste products that come with it.
It's science. You can read it in a book or on the internet. But you have to take your head out of your arse first.
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 03 Jan 18 7.51pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
2017 joined the parade of recent years that was one of the hottest ever. What we are experiencing are all weather events projected by climatologists as being what happens when we warm the climate by a degree or two overall. As we warm the oceans and melt the icecaps - which reflect sunlight and keep the climate cooler - we will accelerate warming and exaggerate the occurrences of anomalous severe weather events. I am looking long term. You aren't even looking out the window. You talk about weather phenomenon like they have never happened before, when in fact, records only go back a few hundred years.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Ray in Houston Houston 03 Jan 18 8.06pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
You talk about weather phenomenon like they have never happened before, when in fact, records only go back a few hundred years.
You clearly have no understanding of what climate is about at all.
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 03 Jan 18 8.20pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
You clearly have no understanding of what climate is about at all. No, they don't. Core samples go back millennia and that data has been shown to be suspect due to the splicing of methods used to produce the results. It also shows that Carbon Dioxide and Methane levels have gone up and down on a regular basis.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Ray in Houston Houston 03 Jan 18 8.38pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
No, they don't. Core samples go back millennia and that data has been shown to be suspect due to the splicing of methods used to produce the results. It also shows that Carbon Dioxide and Methane levels have gone up and down on a regular basis. Suspect by who? Again, I'm going with the 97% of scientists who agree that the Earth is warming, it's bad, and we're causing it. Also, fluctuations in greenhouse gasses in the past have occurred over eons. We took it from 280ppm to over 400ppm in a century. This is not normal and the nicest thing I can call it is irresponsible to try and further such denial nonsense.
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 03 Jan 18 8.42pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
Suspect by who? Again, I'm going with the 97% of scientists who agree that the Earth is warming, it's bad, and we're causing it. Also, fluctuations in greenhouse gasses in the past have occurred over eons. We took it from 280ppm to over 400ppm in a century. This is not normal and the nicest thing I can call it is irresponsible to try and further such denial nonsense. It's what happens when a lot of mainstream media either give more weight to what 3% are saying or have to give equal balance to both sides of the argument. Expect the Galileo was laughed at response soon.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 03 Jan 18 8.46pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
Suspect by who? Again, I'm going with the 97% of scientists who agree that the Earth is warming, it's bad, and we're causing it. Also, fluctuations in greenhouse gasses in the past have occurred over eons. We took it from 280ppm to over 400ppm in a century. This is not normal and the nicest thing I can call it is irresponsible to try and further such denial nonsense. No, they have occurred over tens of thousands of years. The scientific community does not tolerate naysayers. It never has. It is not wise to speak out against the consensus if you want to preserve your reputation. I have seen good arguments for man made global warming but the evidence is nowhere near as cut and dried as some like yourelf claim.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Ray in Houston Houston 03 Jan 18 8.52pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
No, they have occurred over tens of thousands of years. The scientific community does not tolerate naysayers. It never has. It is not wise to speak out against the consensus if you want to preserve your reputation. I have seen good arguments for man made global warming but the evidence is nowhere near as cut and dried as some like yourelf claim.
But because scientists don't all agree exactly on the same conclusions, people like you try to claim there isn't consensus. Meanwhile, in the real world, the vast majority of peer-reviewed studies agree on the base findings that we're warming up the climate at an alarming rate and it's a very bad thing to do so.
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 03 Jan 18 8.54pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
No, they have occurred over tens of thousands of years. The scientific community does not tolerate naysayers. It never has. It is not wise to speak out against the consensus if you want to preserve your reputation. I have seen good arguments for man made global warming but the evidence is nowhere near as cut and dried as some like yourelf claim. Attachment: IgsXOXGPxfT3O.gif (4,349.09Kb)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.