Good shit man, good shit.
Search
Search results: 129 found, showing up to 50
Thank you for adding to the whole picture =] Much appreciated.Stealth_Bain wrote:
You'll find a link to the facts in the post straight after! have read quite a few books recently on the two different MBT's but nothing to hand! see the link tells you the lot. (could've cut and pasted the lot but seemed easier to do that so people can read it if they like) http://www.army-technology.com/projects … index.html
P.S. I read a comment that Americans don't like being called yanks, I don't like being called a brit!! we're British or Britons! (tit for tat, although I was very careful not be be offensive)
Please post facts and their sources =]Stealth_Bain wrote:
The challenger II is a close second to the M1A2, has better armour, and in my opinion looks and sounds sexier.
Is more modern and easier to get parts, the M1 needs much more maintenance and the Americans have issues with sourcing the engines (apparently the company who makes them went bust)
for example, replacing the engne in an M1 is 24hours, the challenger is more like 2 or 3!
For 60's technology the M1 is amazing, the best tank to ever exist and prob will never be beaten, they're now moving on to smaller faster vehicles that can be transported by air!
Luckily were all on the same side so its not really an issue which is better. Its th epoor soviet equipted chaps that need to worry!! I'd run from either.
You probably are right, I doubt the M1A2 is the most superior in terms complete equipment, but we have them on production rates and pricing.
The T-90 costs quite a bit more than the M1A2 and I'd imagine so would the Challenger II, though I know nothing about it.
Good point.
Just a tip, I don't, and probably others don't appreciate being called Yanks, it's somewhat offensive.Shopvac wrote:
Nice post Venom,
I didn't even know that Germany was still producing tanks post WWII. I'm glad they are. It seems that after WWI they've consistently been ahead of the engineering curve when it comes to tank development.
Us Yanks should also remember that we don't always get the whole story when it comes to our military. ie. Our tank armor was actually developed by the UK.
One last question though, am I right that Brittan uses a rifled main gun on the Challenger? If so, are the Brits the only country to use a rifled main gun on their tank?
+1 for the first person who can find me the answer.
The original designs (for the most part) were designed by Leonardo Da Vinci. What's your point?
The original M1 used a rifled gun.
I didn't see any evidence saying it's a better tank. Please post it =]venom6 wrote:
The following Tank pwns the M1A2 just you guys know its the #1 Tank in the world !
http://www.army-technology.com/projects … ank-14.jpg
See the following:
Yes its the Leopard II
Unless it was in the video, my sound is off =P
True, and I forgot to mention, just for those who don't know. A tank is not controller by only the driver. There's a whole crew inside thereCommandoRog wrote:
All that i can say is.
The weapon is only as good as the crew using it.
Sniper: Best M24 Worst SVD
SpecOps: Best SCAR L Worst AK-74U
Engineer: Best M11-87 Worst MP7
Assault: Best G3 Worst F2000
Medic: Best M-16 Worst L85A1
Support: Best MG36 Worst RPK-74
Anti Tank: Best MP5 Worst PP-19
=]
SpecOps: Best SCAR L Worst AK-74U
Engineer: Best M11-87 Worst MP7
Assault: Best G3 Worst F2000
Medic: Best M-16 Worst L85A1
Support: Best MG36 Worst RPK-74
Anti Tank: Best MP5 Worst PP-19
=]
Kthxbai.Longbow wrote:
We'll see if arabs will recieve T90 or its modificationsDarkObsidian wrote:
The M1A2 is a superior tank.
RDMC(2) wrote:
You come to me and say, don't post? Go fuck yourself, as far I can see your just bitching about the fact that the M1A2 isn't represented as it should be in the game, well who cares..pff..fuck face..telling me not to post, I can post what ever the fuck I want to post..DarkObsidian wrote:
Wow.RDMC(2) wrote:
And your point is?
Either you didn't read the article or you're just a fucking idiot. READ IT OR DON'T POST.
Read.DarkObsidian wrote:
I understand it's a game. The coding nerfing things in real life bothers me, but I can tolerate it. What I don't like however, is when someone judges a real life counterpart, from a game.
So here's the information I'd like to share with you all =]
Sure, you can post whatever you want, but it's better to let people think you to be stupid, than to post and remove all doubt.
Not necessarily in combat, but in training exercises it has.Longbow wrote:
T90 hadn't met Abrams in combat . So all those comparations are stupid ...
The M1A2 is a superior tank.
Wow.RDMC(2) wrote:
And your point is?
Either you didn't read the article or you're just a fucking idiot. READ IT OR DON'T POST.
No. Generally you don't have enough time from what I'm told.
It's also very rare that someone actually dies from a frag grenade, in real life of course.
It's also very rare that someone actually dies from a frag grenade, in real life of course.
I understand it's a game. The coding nerfing things in real life bothers me, but I can tolerate it. What I don't like however, is when someone judges a real life counterpart, from a game.
So here's the information I'd like to share with you all =]
USMC M1A2 MBT(Main Battle Tank)'s features:
Armament:
M256 120 mm smoothbore gun which mainly fires the following types of ammunition:
M829 APFSDS (Armor-Piercing, Fin-Stabilized, Discarding Sabot) made of depleted uranium.
Said to destroy T-90's without special armor, in as little as one shot at approx 4000m.
M830 HEAT-MP-T, a multi-use round for armor, infantry, and low flying aircraft.
M1028 anti-infantry round, basically a giant shotgun shell up to 500m.
.50 M2 MG front of commander's hatch, can be fired with a 3X scope.
.30 M240C MG on loader's hatch.
.30 M240C mounted next to M256.
Armor:
Composite armor consisting of several layers of ceramic and steel.
Sometimes may have depleted uranium armoring.
Kevlar lined, to protect soldiers inside from fragmentation of material, should the armor fail.
Blowout panels specifically made to reduce damage in case of ammunition exploding prematurely.
24 inches of rolled homogeneous armor.
Goodies:
USMC tanks have MCDs (Missile Countermeasure Device) for use against anti-tank weaponry.
Thermal and night vision viewers for target detection.
2 8-barrel smoke grenade launchers.
Engine also has a smoke generator.
Can be armed with chaff.
Automated fire control computer with 95% accuracy.
Laser rangefinder.
Crosswind sensor.
Pendulum static cant sensor.
Ammunition type and temperature sensors.
T-90 Russian MBT features:
Armament:
2A46M 125 mm smoothbore gun that fires:
APFSDS, HEAT-FS, HE-FRAG, Fragmentation-FS, and the 9M119M Reflex anti-tank guided missile.
Armor:
Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armor.
Features:
Fact is, the M1A2 is a superior tank and the purpose of this article was to show just that.
Just remember guys, what you pwn with in game, it might not in real life.
If there's anything I missed, please tell me, and provide a source of information.
Thanks for your time, and enjoy =]
Source: http://www.Wikipedia.org/
EDIT: Added pretty pictures.
So here's the information I'd like to share with you all =]
USMC M1A2 MBT(Main Battle Tank)'s features:
Armament:
M256 120 mm smoothbore gun which mainly fires the following types of ammunition:
M829 APFSDS (Armor-Piercing, Fin-Stabilized, Discarding Sabot) made of depleted uranium.
Said to destroy T-90's without special armor, in as little as one shot at approx 4000m.
M830 HEAT-MP-T, a multi-use round for armor, infantry, and low flying aircraft.
M1028 anti-infantry round, basically a giant shotgun shell up to 500m.
.50 M2 MG front of commander's hatch, can be fired with a 3X scope.
.30 M240C MG on loader's hatch.
.30 M240C mounted next to M256.
Armor:
Composite armor consisting of several layers of ceramic and steel.
Sometimes may have depleted uranium armoring.
Kevlar lined, to protect soldiers inside from fragmentation of material, should the armor fail.
Blowout panels specifically made to reduce damage in case of ammunition exploding prematurely.
24 inches of rolled homogeneous armor.
Goodies:
USMC tanks have MCDs (Missile Countermeasure Device) for use against anti-tank weaponry.
Thermal and night vision viewers for target detection.
2 8-barrel smoke grenade launchers.
Engine also has a smoke generator.
Can be armed with chaff.
Automated fire control computer with 95% accuracy.
Laser rangefinder.
Crosswind sensor.
Pendulum static cant sensor.
Ammunition type and temperature sensors.
Chemical and biological warfare protection equipment.Wikipedia.org wrote:
1500 HP Honeywell AGT1500 gas turbine, and a 6 speed (4 forward, 2 reverse) Allison X-1100-3B Hydro-Kinetic Automatic transmission, giving it a governed top speed of 45 mph (72 km/h) on roads, 30 mph (48 km/h) cross-country.
With the engine governor removed, speeds of around 60 mph (100 km/h) are possible on an improved surface; however, damage to the drive train (especially to the tracks) and an increased risk of injuries to the crew can occur at speeds above 45 mph. The tank can be fueled with diesel fuel, kerosene, any grade of MOGAS (motor gasoline), or JP-4 or JP-8 jet fuel; the U.S. Army uses JP-8 jet fuel in order to simplify logistics.
T-90 Russian MBT features:
Armament:
2A46M 125 mm smoothbore gun that fires:
APFSDS, HEAT-FS, HE-FRAG, Fragmentation-FS, and the 9M119M Reflex anti-tank guided missile.
Armor:
Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armor.
Features:
Wikipedia.org wrote:
The T-90 is equipped with the Shtora-1 countermeasures suite, produced by Electronintorg of Russia. This system includes infrared jammer, laser warning system with four laser warning receivers, grenade discharging system which produces an aerosol screen and a computerised control system. The laser warning system warns the tank's crew when the tank has been 'painted' by a weapon-guidance laser. The T-90's electro-optical jammer, the Shtora-1 EOCMDAS, jams the enemy’s semiautomatic command to line of sight (SACLOS) antitank guided missiles, laser rangefinders, and target designators.
Now, you're probably thinking "OMG YOU GLORIFIED THE M1A2!!!! THERE'S LOTS MORE INFO ON IT THAN THE T-90!!".Wikipedia.org wrote:
While the T-90 continues the Soviet tradition of strong and weight-efficient protection as an evolutionary follow-on to the T-72, it lacks the survivability features that are built in Western MBTs that will keep its crew alive after suffering penetration by enemy projectiles. For example, spare ammunition is stored in the main compartment, rather than separate compartments with blow-out panels. This caused many Soviet-designed tanks' ammo to detonate in a "catastrophic" kill after being penetrated, with legends of turrets being thrown 50 feet into the air.
In the Gulf War, this lack of survivability exacerbated the obsolescent protection of the Iraqi armor, which can be easily penetrated by modern Western ammunition. Russian tanks proved so vulnerable to almost any kind of anti-tank fire that some battles witnessed American or British units allowing Iraqi crews to bail from their vehicles and clear out, allowing destruction of the highly-flammable vehicles without unnecessary loss of life; though the low morale of the Iraqi Army at the time may also have played a significant role.
With its improved armor, the T-90 is relatively safe from attacks on the front, where its protection should stop most attacks from penetrating and exposing its survivability weaknesses. However, a side (or top) attack will likely turn the tank into a deathtrap.
Fact is, the M1A2 is a superior tank and the purpose of this article was to show just that.
Just remember guys, what you pwn with in game, it might not in real life.
If there's anything I missed, please tell me, and provide a source of information.
Thanks for your time, and enjoy =]
Source: http://www.Wikipedia.org/
EDIT: Added pretty pictures.
The point of a forum is for discussions, if you don't want to participate in said discussion, can you uh... hmm... uh.... FUCKING LEAVE?{XpLiCiTxX} wrote:
Do you people think before creating a new thread, honestly?
There needs to be some type of approval for all polls by a mod to lessen these shit posts.
Thanks, you're taking up good speaking time.
Haha, I loaded it up, started to play a map. CTD. Bad luck probably =P
Yea, congrats, you just insulted someone who called themself pathedic in the title. You win t3h c00ki3.The_Killer wrote:
ZOMG you killed someone in the top ten on my freinds server. No one cares
82.4 inches =]{XpLiCiTxX} wrote:
He wanted to let us know that his E-Penis grew 82 inches.
It's a joke, I'm just saying how weird how I was tickled to death I spawnraped him lol.Superslim wrote:
lol...Black Jesus has been killed over 51,000 times, what makes you so special???
Just curious???
Naw, you're an idiot. Tone down those hippie colors in your sig, you P90 wielding piece of shit.Ninja_Monkey wrote:
am i missing something here are you just an idiot?
Get a real gun. One with a barrel that isn't the size of your dick.
That was the joke, thanks Ted.GermanLegionaire wrote:
i guess he would gaped you ass all over the fields, if you weren't in the chopper...
Tanks do have a one shot kill area.KardiacKid wrote:
I just registered on this site and this subject caught my eye. I have seen times when I was suspicious of someone but realized there could be another explanation or blind luck but there was a game when the person had to be using a cheat. I was on Karkand as MEC and playing in a tank. This other player (can't recall the name) was consistently killing me with one-shot and at any distance with hsi tank. It happend about 5 times. I was trying to figure out how in the heck this happened. I later got on forums to read about one shot tank kills and learned how it is possible but this guy was doing it consistently and at long distances.
Another game I got into this squad and this guy in my squad asks me what kind of aimbot I am using. He said that he had some utility that showed I had recorded 9 head shots. I don't know anything about how to install an aimbot or this utility he was talking about. I was sniping earlier in the game so I may have had 9 head shots while sniping but I wasn't cheating.
So how do admins keep people from cheating ? Is it with this utility this guy was talking about ?
Proof : http://www.secretsofbattlefield.com/tankvstank.html Watch the video.
Check the kills. SI Black Jesus =Pstkhoplite wrote:
I dont get it
Carrier raped with a chopper.
This makes me feel special
It's plastic. I hate the G36 series.
It's accuracy is way unrealistic, it's FUCKING PLASTIC. The recoil is nasty, IRL.
Anyways, my opinion on the matter, I for one, can't use the G36E for shit, who knows why, I can use anything else, except the PKM.
I guess I was just blessed with talent with good weapons instead of cheap ones? *shrug*
It's accuracy is way unrealistic, it's FUCKING PLASTIC. The recoil is nasty, IRL.
Anyways, my opinion on the matter, I for one, can't use the G36E for shit, who knows why, I can use anything else, except the PKM.
I guess I was just blessed with talent with good weapons instead of cheap ones? *shrug*
Is it really that hard to type graphics instead of GFX?
They wait in groups at spawn points and there's usually 3 or 4 shooting along with a medic healing. It's devastating. Seriously, your life lasts milliseconds.joker8baller wrote:
lol. So spawn somewhere else and kill them. Don't complain cause you can't shoot things.DarkObsidian wrote:
God damnit. I just played in A[o]W's 24/7 Karkand server, and a group of clan members from another clan, R[o]W were in there.
All they did was spawnrape and n00b tube.
I came out with like 9 kills 17 deaths because I couldn't even live for 2 seconds.
FUCK R[o]W in their loose assholes.
I did, just letting out my e-anger upon you all. Maybe seeing if anyone has played with them and can relate.
God damnit. I just played in A[o]W's 24/7 Karkand server, and a group of clan members from another clan, R[o]W were in there.
All they did was spawnrape and n00b tube.
I came out with like 9 kills 17 deaths because I couldn't even live for 2 seconds.
FUCK R[o]W in their loose assholes.
All they did was spawnrape and n00b tube.
I came out with like 9 kills 17 deaths because I couldn't even live for 2 seconds.
FUCK R[o]W in their loose assholes.
Alright, thanks guys =]
Will/can you get your stats reset for playing on these servers?
Gene, remember when that M1A2 couldn't kill me? And I reported myself for mad haxing and teh intranetz police banz0red me?
I'll send them bottles of urine, daily, if they do.Hurricane wrote:
EA's going to screw you over.DarkObsidian wrote:
Alright, so I tried EF. All I found was n00bs and admins that didn't do shit about rules being broken.
I can barely find a server that has someone in it, or enough room.
Gay.
I'm going to demand satisfaction from EA =/
You should've sought second opinions; EF is wonderful but the lack of good servers is the problem.
Gay. Gay music, gay FPS, gay video.
Oh, and Trigger Happy is a big poopy doody head.
Oh, and Trigger Happy is a big poopy doody head.
Alright, so I tried EF. All I found was n00bs and admins that didn't do shit about rules being broken.
I can barely find a server that has someone in it, or enough room.
Gay.
I'm going to demand satisfaction from EA =/
I can barely find a server that has someone in it, or enough room.
Gay.
I'm going to demand satisfaction from EA =/
It's still downloading.Gooners wrote:
So you've bought... I suggest playing it and seeing for yourself...
Thanks for the replies guys, much appreciated
So they're worth the $9.99 each?Snake wrote:
EF is good - apart from the teamswitching hoes. Theres a few servers that are always populated still running it.
Check my thread at the top of this section.
AF is the same, a good few servers running it - without the teamswitching hoebags.
I, like an idiot, just bought it without looking at reviews.
Is it any good? I've heard the servers are kinda barren, is that true?
Anyways, what about AF?
Is it any good? I've heard the servers are kinda barren, is that true?
Anyways, what about AF?
Congrats on your badge bro. I can definitely relate, close calls for SF badges on Ghost Town =]
Can't you get your stats reset for playing HP servers?
I hate you so much. You dumb, dumb motherfucker.Hurricane wrote:
YOU THINK JUST BECAUSE MY BROTHER IS GOOD IN JET THAT HE NEED PB BAN?????????? THATS A LOAD OF MALAKRAIRIRKRIKARIKARAIRKARAIRARKI I WILL SUE YOUR ASS OFF HEH EVER HEARD OF A LITTLE THING CALLED AMAERINCAN DISABLAIALITES ACT 4 OF 2 ????????? THATS RIGHT A**HAT YOU CAN BE DISMSINANITACGRATING AGAINST US JUST BECUS WE ARE HAVE THE SKILLZ> THATS ILLEGAL AND YUO WILL GET SUED AND GO TO JAIL BECAUSE OUR DAY IS A WA R HERO AND YOU THINK ITS FUNNY AND OR A JAKE TO MAKE FUN OF HIM JUST BECAUSE HE HAS A BIT OF BLACK FACE WHAT THE F*CK MAN WHAT KIND OF WORLD ANYWAY THIS IS THE DEAL YOU SHUT IT UP AND DEAL OR ELSE YOU GO TO JAIL WE HAVE CONNECTION WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO DEFEND US IN COURT YOU SEE ILL WIN AND BE RICTH OFF YOU BECUASE WE HAVE WAR HE DAD LOEV U MUCH RESPECK DAD YOU DONT DARE DISRESEPCT OUR DAD OR MY BROTHER WE WILL AND WIN SUE YOU YOU SEE DO YOU SEE I BET YOU DO THATS WHY THE CIA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL OF THIS OK WE LIVE IN A WORLD CONTROL BY THE GOVERNMENT AND WE HAVE CONNECTIONS WE HAVE ONNECINGS DO YOU UNDERSTAND WE WILL SUE YOU IF YOU DO WILL WIN BECAUSE WE ARE THE CIA WE CREATED THE CIA WE ARE THE CIA DONT YOU GET IT WE WILL WIN SO DONT YOU DARE DO ANYTHING IF YOU DO YOU WILL HAVE YOUR INTERNT REVOKED AND DESTORYED OK SO DONT WE DONT REALLY WANT TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF WINNING OK WE DONT WE DONT WE DONTLiamanddad wrote:
Hello Guys,
can I ask a question about hackers/hacking?
I have been playing BF2 (tag is liamanddad) for quite a while now. Last Saturday night a guy came on an Internode server called Vi$i0nZ PID 91100620. If you check out his stats you will be stunned and amazed..
He was killing infantry guys on the ground with a single bullet from a jet, he shot me with a missile from a jet whilst swimming 100m from the shore, 2 secs after I bailed at Wake Island. He was scoring 180 points a game. There was absolutely no doubt that he has some sort of AIM BOT, our whole team was asking for ADMIN to intervene as it was getting really pathetic what this guys was doing... You can't get a screen shot of these situations, again if you check his stats you will be stunned. How do ADMINS/servers catch these cheats?
Please advise me on what can be done to assist ADMINS if this happens again.
thanks
Liamanddad
There is a spellchecker, right next to the Submit button. I HATE YOU.
Probably a hitbox error. Remember in (I think) 1.2 when you would shoot rockets right through tanks with SRAW's and Eryx's?
Sick dude, fucking sick. I liked #1 more.
Map looks really small, carrier is really close. Planes would just rape the entire map, you'd be getting killed every 2 seconds. Looks very purdy though =] And very original
Nice bro. I added you on Xfire.
I could swear I've heard it before. That shit is sick, could you host it on like Megaupload.com and give me the link?Runitsyourmama wrote:
Custom beatDarkObsidian wrote:
Badass video, what song is that beat from?
Thanks for that, that was hilarious in a simple wayusmarine2007 wrote:
Because he was grounded.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Then why didnt you stop it.?Kukulcan wrote:
I've seen soldiers rape children and women....
First off, the validity of this video is nil.Kukulcan wrote:
I don't know if he's already know in america but i come to uncover this figure only some days ago , seeing these 2 videos :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0bo31VP5VI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_krcXnW … amp;search
These video have been made by the Sniper himself , with a custom rifle.... a digital camera attached to the rifle itself ( a israeli rifle indeed ).
You americans seem to have a real tough enemy in baghdad : this Juba is an Islamic Amry war hero , a sniper that operates in the urban warzone in baghdad. In these video he snipes many of your soldiers without hurting any civilian : i must give him credit for this.
I mean.... all the soldiers should act as him , kill the enemy and don't hurt the civilians. This guy is some SERIOUS sniper... those shoots are terrific.
The video is distributed by the Islamic Army in Iraq.. a warning to the american soldiers in baghdad. I should fear to go out there with this guy free , if i was an american.
I have other videos where there are soldiers from other nations with some american soldiers, but he doesn't hurt the other soldiers... he kills only the americans.
The great thing about Juba is that he manages to kill the soldier in the middle of many civilians.... he's a GREAT shot.. and he knows it as from this other video :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQbWLe6T … amp;search
That's him you know...
It's a composition of many sniper videos. One of which being the guy getting shot by the humvee (Yea, I know, narrows it down.). But he was a medic, and then they TRASHED that sniper, injuring him near death.
To be honest, your admiration of a supposed sniper that is some "hero" makes me think negatively of you.
Juba is a poop dick faggot, and so are his mother and father.
He's nothing special, he's shooting soldiers right in kevlar. Usually just leaves a nasty bruise complex and sometimes some broken ribs.
If you'd like though.. I could show you some videos of so called, soldiers for Allah, getting portions, and in some cases, their entire heads blown off.
Seems like you're suggesting that Mohammed Ali was of Muslim decent. While I have no clue if he was religiously Muslim, I do know he was not by blood.I do not and will not enter a argument on the war, why, etc etc
This Juba is a fanny.
Why the fuck do the muslims look upto him and treat him as a hero. He snipes from a van, with holes cut out, with the inside of the van lined in pillows to soften the sound. What a sly thing to do. He's just like his ex leader, why don't you go and hide down a hole because thats a cowardly thing to do aswell. Oh too late, you were caught. I hope they treat you like a fucking sly pig in prision as thats all you are Juba. I look forward to seeing the abuse pictures released on the net.
Fuck me he hasn't even got a proper name Juba, ffs. Shame this war isnt in a jungle or Disney could make a film of this fearless warrior. "Juba in the Jungle".
If the young muslims want to look up to a hero, don't pick a chicken pick a lion. Hey I'll even help you. Mohhamed Ali. The greatest warrior of all time. Just a shame I can't spell his name correctly.
He was African American, and he was by far, NOT the best boxer. Which seems to be the point you're trying to stretch.
Only one person can have it as a time.
Badass video, what song is that beat from?
Alright =] I assume commander doesn't count?De_Jappe wrote:
Indeed, you have to get ONE time more than 100 points with that army.DarkObsidian wrote:
Wait... so the BR is actually the points earned? Not how many times you've beaten your top score? So to get a BR of 100, you have to get 100 points?
Haha, according to your logic, he proved you wrong.B.Schuss wrote:
hm, I wonder what President Bush will say when he sees his silly fellow countrymen stab his back in a public forum.
Even he ain't stupid enough to deny global warming and the greenhouse effect, as outlined in the latest State of the Union adress.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/artic … l_warming/
I never thought I'd say that one day, but:
Bush>you
I make lamb sacrifices so Bush can continue his crusade for oil. Careful, your country is next! I have a voodoo skull that tells me so.ELITE-UK wrote:
americans eh...pffft! fools, so many fools.
i bet george bush said to you all, theres no such thing as global warming, and you all believed him because how else can you guys not think this is a problem!!!
George Bush also comes to my doorstep every Thursday and briefs me on my political standing.
That was ridiculous and not at all evidential. Only post what needs to be put up, not extra bullshit.Vilham wrote:
cheekyninja06 wrote:
http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=64 wrote:
A survey of state climatologists by Citizens for a Sound Economy found that there is little support for the global warming hypothesis. When asked if they agreed with the statement by President Clinton, "The overwhelming balance of evidence and scientific opinion is that it is no longer a theory but now a fact, that global warming is for real. There is ample evidence that human activities are already disrupting the global climate." 36 percent agreed, while 58 percent disagreed.
Asked whether "recent global warming is largely a natural phenomenon," 44 percent said yes while 17 percent said no. Nine out of ten surveyed agreed that "scientific evidence indicates variations in global temperature are likely to be naturally-occurring and cyclical over very long periods of time." Eighty-nine percent of the climatologists agreed that "current science is unable to isolate and measure variations in global temperatures caused only by man-made factors," and 61 percent said that the historical data do not indicate "that fluctuations in global temperatures are attributable to human influences such as burning fossil fuels." http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=64
S. Fred Singer wrote:
The ambiguous phrase "the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate" has been (mis)interpreted by policymakers to mean that a major global warming catastrophe will soon be upon us;
"the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate" being the conclusion of the IPCC in their 1995 report.
wikipedia wrote:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … umbers.png
This figure summarizes the 400 years of regular sunspot number observations. Since ~1749, continuous monthly averages of sunspot activity have been available and are shown here as reported by the Solar Influences Data Analysis Center, World Data Center for the Sunspot Index, at the Royal Observatory of Belgium. These figure are based on an average of measurements from many different observatories around the world. Prior to 1749, sporadic observations of sunspots are available. These were compiled and placed on consistent monthly framework by Hoyt & Schatten (1998a, 1998b).
The most prominent feature of this graph is the ~11 year solar magnetic cycle which is associated with the natural waxing and waning of solar activity.
On longer time scales, the sun has shown considerable variability, including the long Maunder Minimum when almost no sunspots were observed, the less severe Dalton Minimum, and increased sunspot activity during the last fifty years, known as the Modern Maximum. The causes for these variations are not well understood, but because sunspots and associated faculae affect the brightness of the sun, solar luminosity is lower during periods of low sunspot activity. It is widely believed that the low solar activity during the Maunder Minimum and earlier periods may be among the principle causes of the Little Ice Age. Similarly, the Modern Maximum is partly responsible for global warming, especially the temperature increases between 1900 and 1950 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sunspot_Numbers.png
if you look at the solar activity chart, you can see that yes it does vary and yes it does effect global temperature. One of the most obvious correlations is between the "maunder minimum" and the "little ice age"
Little Ice Age From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia wrote:
The Little Ice Age (LIA) was a period of cooling lasting approximately from the 14th to the mid-19th centuries (some say from 13th to 17th), although there is no generally agreed start or end date: some confine the period to 1550-1850.
ooh that fits pretty perfectly with the maunder minimum. notice how the solar activity was low and the global temperature was low? well i was thinking see how the solar activity is higher now, well i thought maybe that would mean a higher temp ATM? I mean it is at least logical.
SEPP - Science & Environmental Policy Project wrote:
Is the climate stable or is it changing?
The climate is never just "average"; it changes all the time, from season to season, year to year, and over the millennia. And that includes not only temperature, but rain, snow, droughts, storms, and every conceivable feature of the weather. So watch out when you read about the "hottest year", "longest drought", or "biggest hurricane".
But are there long-term climate trends? Is it getting warmer or is it getting colder?
The correct answer is: Yes. It all depends on the time scale you choose. The global climate has warmed over the last 100 years, but not appreciably over the last 50 years. And it is colder now than it was 1000 years ago. And did you know that over the last 50 years the frequency of hurricanes has been dropping?
Are human activities influencing climate?
Yes, of course. The rise of agriculture and the growth of cities have changed the local climate significantly. With rising populations and rising industrial activity there have also been some worldwide changes: Temperature extremes have softened, the stratosphere is cooling, the frequency of hurricanes has been diminishing--all of these are thought to be human influences on the atmosphere. But this does not mean that there will be a catastrophic or even a substantial warming of the climate in the next century.
But isn't there climate warming already because of the increased burning of fossil fuels--oil, gas, and coal--that creates more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?
True, carbon dioxide (CO2) levels are rising, but the climate seems not to be warming. It did warm greatly between 1880 and 1940--long before CO2 increased significantly. But since 1940, weather satellites, tree ring data, and corrected thermometer readings all agree that climate has not warmed--even though CO2 levels rose.
And why hasn't climate warmed, when theory clearly expects this to happen?
The answer must be that even our best current models of the atmosphere are incomplete and leave out important features. Only in the last few years have modelers started to include ocean currents, atmospheric aerosol particles and dust into climate models. Most now suspect that clouds are the reason why models and observations do not agree.
So, would a global warming be good or bad?
Probably both, but warming is definitely better than cooling. It is certainly better for agriculture and therefore for basic human existence. All historical evidence shows that during the warm periods of the Middle Ages people were better off than during the hard times of the "Little Ice Age" (1650-1850) when crops failed and people starved.
When it comes to it, what can we do about climate warming?
We can do little about the climate itself, but we could try to stop the increase of atmospheric CO2. Even that task is daunting; it requires that we cut emissions--worldwide--by 60 to 80 percent. In effect, this means cutting energy consumption by comparable amounts--including all transportation, heating, air conditioning, and electricity use. It would have an enormous negative impact on people's welfare--particularly for the poor and those in developing countries.
http://www.sepp.org/
So the models don't agree with the observations. Why do they think this is? because of clouds. hmm lets see what the IPCC say about the inclusion of clouds in their models?
IPCC wrote:
there are particular uncertainties associated with clouds and their interaction with radiation and aerosols.
wow they sound confident. Oh no wait they say something else on the matter:
IPCC (again) wrote:
Clouds and humidity remain sources of significant uncertainty but there have been incremental improvements in simulations of these quantities
But they also state that water vapor is "The main greenhouse gas," yet there is a significant lack of knowledge on water vapor, in fact it is not even represented on most models...how can they predict the global temperature without taking into account "The main greenhouse gas, water vapor."
IPCC wrote:
Confidence in the ability of models to project future climates is increased by the ability of several models to reproduce the warming trend in 20th century surface air temperature when driven by radiative forcing due to increasing greenhouse gases and sulphate aerosols. However, only idealized scenarios of only sulphate aerosols have been used.
so they get the right results if they use "idealized scenarios" e.g. if you leave a rabbit on a typewriter for long enough, eventually it will right Alice in wonderland. Doesn't mean that rabbits love to write Alice in wonderland, although this could be a logical conclusion, you could also conclude that it was one clever rabbit. however if you didn't put the rabbit on the typewriter and put it in the middle of the woods, i.e. how it really is, i don't think it would write Alice in wonderland.
Really now, who is it who lacks knowledge in physics?Vilham wrote:
Lol, your lack of physics knowledge is amazing, space is filled with mostly NOTHING, You will find that NOTHING does not absorb heat. Until you guys have read http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=31479&p=13 thread i am going to stop responding.DarkObsidian wrote:
Let's all sacrifice ourselves to Ra too, kay?klassekock wrote:
You claim that there has been changes in the climate in the past. Yes, I can accept that. But when you say that what is happening today also are normal changes I think you should use some common sense.
Did they have cars in the 1700? Hell no!
Today we use so much fossile fuel that there is no way the earth can cope with the pollution. You will see in 50years that the environmentalists were correct, but by then it may be to late.
So don't you agree that it would be wise to stay on the safe side and try to reduce the pollution?
Think about it. They say the Earth is mimicking a green house, correct?
Greenhouses are usually sealed entirely. The Earth has openings on the top (and I think) the bottom polar caps.
The can escape? Heat rises man, it'll be pulled towards outer space and the energy will be neutralized.
Well if you know anything about energy, it fills voids =]
Which space is definitely, it has no energy(for the most part).
Let me start by saying there is no such thing as "cold" it's only the lack of heat (energy), therefore, when you add heat to something that has negative energy, it, you guessed it! Consumes the energy.
Sure, it's not scientifically written, but it's so knuckle heads can understand it.
Fit the bill?
No, with that kind of logic, we'll give the Chinese H2's!And with that kind of logic we might as well give all the chinese a car of their own!
How can you contradict the fact that pollution is bad for our planet and that we should change our ways?
Fine, fuck you, I'm telling the teacher.Vilham wrote:
Calling someone ignorant, naive or a fool, is not name calling it is stating an opinion about someone without being offensive. Saying "silly little children" is. I think you are infact being a hypocrite. You are the one name calling.
I still see no further argument from you on the topic, are you burnt out?
Let's all sacrifice ourselves to Ra too, kay?klassekock wrote:
You claim that there has been changes in the climate in the past. Yes, I can accept that. But when you say that what is happening today also are normal changes I think you should use some common sense.
Did they have cars in the 1700? Hell no!
Today we use so much fossile fuel that there is no way the earth can cope with the pollution. You will see in 50years that the environmentalists were correct, but by then it may be to late.
So don't you agree that it would be wise to stay on the safe side and try to reduce the pollution?
Think about it. They say the Earth is mimicking a green house, correct?
Greenhouses are usually sealed entirely. The Earth has openings on the top (and I think) the bottom polar caps.
The can escape? Heat rises man, it'll be pulled towards outer space and the energy will be neutralized.
First off, check the source. NOT ME.Vilham wrote:
lol i love the first sentence. "anti-Americanism" just goes to prove your a paranoid ignorant naive fool.
"Satellite data taken over the past 25 years indicate no surface or atmospheric warming. If anything there has been a very slight cooling, on the order of 0.01 degree Centigrade." Complete and utter lie. How about you actually watch the video posted in this then l2stfu.
Second, yea, I think it's definitely possible that the Global Warming theory is anti-American.
Ya'll busta's are just jealous cuz' we hustle harder than ya'll.
America is THE World Super Power. I can see how it'd be hard to accept but knowing that my country could destroy other countries and send the world into an infertile state makes me feel all warm inside.
Oh, and damn ozone screwing dinosaurs.
You're a bitch, you know that?ELITE-UK wrote:
yeah but we aint sposed to be warming up, the climate temperature was stable until the industrial revolution, a coincidence? NO! ever since we started pumping out carbon we have been steadily warming our planet and you guys think all of the carbon and other polutants are NOT causing the climate to change, fuck sake you arrogant people, you have gotta wake up and realise we are fucking in 30-50 years unless pollution stops.Chappy556 wrote:
there was a mini ice age in the 1700's...i bet all of our factories and SUV's caused that one
the world was pretty warm 2 million years ago...damn ozone screwing dinosaurs
once again, prove to me that global warming actually exists beyond "i know its there, just feel how warm it is in winter" and you'll have me on your side
another reason why americans (most) deny global warming is happening is...the USA is responsible for 25% of global emmisions, so that means you guys have to make sacrifices to your lives in order to help save our planet, BUT you guys seem to be so arrogant and intent of living your lives polluting this world to expense of the planet is just fucking selfish, and its about time you fuck faces decided to change your goddam attitudes!
We could be getting closer to the sun. The Earth's orbital pattern, much like the Earth, is not round.
Wait, you're telling me this when other parts of the world aren't even using unleaded fuel? Psssch, yea, j00 need to stfu n00b.
You're getting all huffy and puffy about your facts you don't even understand. Pumping out carbon?
Okay, let me explain this.
Everything is made of matter.
Matter never leaves the Earth (with the exception of space travel).
Everything breaks down, most is made of carbon (if not all, can't remember). So all we really are doing is just scattering matter.
Just to make sure your tiny mind can comprehend, that means that you have a cupcake, if you smash that cupcake in a box, you still have all the cupcake in there, it's just in smaller pieces spread out.
Fucking dinosaurs.