Supporting the Reality of Global Warming and Kicking Creationists in the Ass - What Could be Better?
Budikka666
explaining why "climategate' - which apparently has zero traction
outside of the conspiracy-theory bound USA - is a non-starter, but
what I found much more absorbing what this paragraph:
"Decreased drought sensitivity is an expected response for plants
exposed to high levels of carbon dioxide. All along the underside of a
plant's leaves are little holes called "stomata." These holes can open
and close. A tree must open its stomata to take in carbon dioxide for
photosynthesis. Unfortunately, plants lose water out of their open
stomata. Plants growing in air that has lots of carbon dioxide can
reduce the amount of time their stomata are open, thus making them
lose less water and become less susceptible to drought."
So what kind of intelligent design is that, exactly, whereby taking in
a vital nutrition component insures that they lose another vital
component?
Dumb-Ass Design is what leaps to mind.
Time for Chickenshit "I'll be Bauck" to RUN AWAY from this by posting
another of his irrelevant and unsupported bullshit diatribes, so I can
expose his cowardly ass again. Go ahead, "I'll be balked' - I'm
waiting on kicking your stupid ass.
Budikka
ilbe...@gmail.com
I dont know how many times youve been told this, but, its been a
tremendous amount : The way the creation is now, is NOT how it was
originally after the Creator made it. So please stop making a
strawman arguement . Instead, realize the fantasy of everything 'just
happening by natural causes' is about as silly as it gets .... lest
you think your garage door opener arrived by chance which is far far
far less complex than the Cosmos . Come to terms with your pride of
not wanting God to exist and start warming up to him. It wont be long
before you stand before him and you need him on your side . The
alternative is to hear him say :'Depart from me for i never knew you
nor did you want to know me' .
haiku jones
> On Dec 18, 1:20 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > PZ Myers posts some correspondence between two climatologists
> > explaining why "climategate' - which apparently has zero traction
> > outside of the conspiracy-theory bound USA - is a non-starter, but
> > what I found much more absorbing what this paragraph:
> > "Decreased drought sensitivity is an expected response for plants
> > exposed to high levels of carbon dioxide. All along the underside of a
> > plant's leaves are little holes called "stomata." These holes can open
> > and close. A tree must open its stomata to take in carbon dioxide for
> > photosynthesis. Unfortunately, plants lose water out of their open
> > stomata. Plants growing in air that has lots of carbon dioxide can
> > reduce the amount of time their stomata are open, thus making them
> > lose less water and become less susceptible to drought."
>
> > So what kind of intelligent design is that, exactly, whereby taking in
> > a vital nutrition component insures that they lose another vital
> > component?
>
> > Dumb-Ass Design is what leaps to mind.
>
> > Time for Chickenshit "I'll be Bauck" to RUN AWAY from this by posting
> > another of his irrelevant and unsupported bullshit diatribes, so I can
> > expose his cowardly ass again. Go ahead, "I'll be balked' - I'm
> > waiting on kicking your stupid ass.
>
> > Budikka
>
> I dont know how many times youve been told this,
I don't know how many times you've been asked this,
but has top biologist Francis Crick convinced you
that the origin of humans on Earth was due to
Space Aliens?
Haiku Jones
archie dux
Let me see if I understand your argument: before
the Fall, plants did not have stomata, which
they now use to take in carbon dioxide and water
and oxygen, but when Eve tasted of the fruit,
and Adam after her, then <POOF!> -- suddenly
stomata appeared, dotting the surfaces of all
the leaves in all the plants in the Garden?
Archie
Ralph
Dave, if god will take you with him it will be worth it to hear those words.
Ken
in another attempt at his typical path of Avoidism
>
> I dont know how many times youve been told this, but....
Your repeating the exact same worthless mindless pointless fundy BS
will NEVER make it true, asshole
Quote the Raven1: "Seriously, I've been on Usenet for 13 years, and
you have to
be the dumbest, most ignorant person I've run across in that time"
TimK
"Budikka666" <budi...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:d27000ba-fe4f-406f...@u7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> PZ Myers posts some correspondence between two climatologists
> explaining why "climategate' - which apparently has zero traction
> outside of the conspiracy-theory bound USA - is a non-starter, but
> what I found much more absorbing what this paragraph:
> "Decreased drought sensitivity is an expected response for plants
> exposed to high levels of carbon dioxide. All along the underside of a
> plant's leaves are little holes called "stomata." These holes can open
> and close. A tree must open its stomata to take in carbon dioxide for
> photosynthesis. Unfortunately, plants lose water out of their open
> stomata. Plants growing in air that has lots of carbon dioxide can
> reduce the amount of time their stomata are open, thus making them
> lose less water and become less susceptible to drought."
I don't know that I buy this. Plants close their stomata to avoid water
loss, typically opening them at night to avoid excessive desiccation.
However, loss of water in this way is how they pull nutrients from the roots
up into the leaves. If they are open less they might not move enough water
to get the necessary micronutrients. Just guessing here, I have no cites.
I am aware of some research that was taking place at KSC measuring
transpiration in enriched CO2 atmospheres (they literally built enclosures
around the scrub vegetation) but I've not seen it published yet.
Budikka666
The challenge I offered you in this thread:
http://tinyurl.com/nubnxr
on May 11th 2009, only to see you RUN AWAY.
Unmet challenge #2
Provide *positive*, *scientific* evidence *for* a creation. Not Bible
quotes. Not quotes from creationists or atheists or evolutionists.
Not divine revelation. Not juvenile unsupported ignorant assertions.
Not chants of 'no it isn't!'. Not counter challenges when you haven't
even met ours, but *positive*, *scientific* evidence *for* a creation.
Unmet challenge #3
Provide evidence that shows how DNA is the work of a creator. Show us
this evidence and explain how it demonstrates a creator.
Unmet challenge #4
Support claims that bacteria have never arisen from anything other
than bacteria/life has never arisen from anything but life.
Unmet challenge #5
Provide evidence in support of the creationist claim that information
cannot be added to a genome.
Unmet challenge #6
Define scientifically what the "genetic boundaries" are: specifically
what the mechanism is which (according to creationist claims) prevents
one species from evolving into another species over time.
Unmet Challenge #7
Provide your scientific evidence (as opposed to your LYING,
unsupported bullshit, which has been refuted repeatedly) to support
your creationist claim that life cannot arise from organic chemistry,
when scientists have repeatedly demonstrated that the truth is quite
to the contrary
Unmet Challenge #8
Prove that there's a god out there waiting to judge me when I die.
Otherwise you and your creationist fundie ilk are nothing but pathetic
LIARS and FRAUDS.
Unmet Challenge #9
Prove that we have a soul. Demonstrate scientifically where it is and
what its purpose is.
Unmet Challenge #10
Prove that this fictional Jesus isn't fictional and that he literally
died and that he came back to life and went to Heaven.
Here's a list of the strongest advocates of creation on Usenet WHO
HAVE FLED one or more of these challenges:
Chicken Adman
Chicken Andrew
Chicken Brother Ted
Chicken Codebreaker
Chicken Curtjester1
Chicken Duke
Chicken Gabriel
Chicken I'll Be Bauck
Chicken Pastor Dave
Let's face it, NOT A SINGLE creationist on Usenet has been able to
find the guts to face these challenges. This fictional god of theirs
has deserted every one of these liars and frauds That's what a sad,
pathetic and vacuous bunch of lousy, low-life scum they are.
Case closed. End of story. End of You.
Budikka
Uncle Vic
wrote:
> I dont know how many times youve been told this, but, its been a
> tremendous amount : The way the creation is now, is NOT how it was
> originally after the Creator made it.
Ah, so you admit evolution is a valid concept. That's a good start. Now
all you need to do is dismiss this god thingy and see the whole picture as
it really is.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Christians are like Slinkys. They're boring, but they'll put a smile on
your face when you push them down the stairs.