PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Environmental Debates
     Global Warming

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
admin

|      |       Report Post



Administrator
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Is Global Warming a real problem  ? 

http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/GLOBAL_WARMING.HTM

(Edited by admin 10/8/2002 at 6:47 PM).
 


Posts: 31 | Posted: 11:13 AM on May 1, 2002 | IP
Xenjael

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

yes global warming is a problem, akthough we try to stop pulluting it is to late already, it is almost impossible for us to fix what we have started and if it come to the worst we may have to wear suits outside and out cities will be smaped with the excess water from the north and south, we may even have to move but no matter what happens we wills truggle to survive
 


Posts: 83 | Posted: 7:21 PM on September 2, 2002 | IP
Lost

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
0

Rate this post:

Well, DUH! it's a problem.

But the thing is, nobody seems to be doing anythin' about it...
 


Posts: 8 | Posted: 9:41 PM on September 7, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
0

Rate this post:

No.  Global warming is not a problem.  On one hand, global warming will kill us all via heat.  On the other, global warming will take too long.  Global warming will take approximately 2.3 billion years to complete the dreaded heat and suit persona.  However, by that time, not only will the sun have exploded causing earth to meltdown.  Since the sun is already starting its supernova stage, it is growing increasingly hot.  Global warming will only add to this problem, however, it will take so long for the temperatures to get deadly since we have a/c and cryogenic freezing.  Also by this time, our technological advancement will be so high that we will have the technology to visit planets such as mars, or the moon, and even colonize them with an artificial atmosphere.  We will also have electric powered cars, so pollution will have decreased majorly.  Factories would become agriplots, so again, pollution will be less. Pollution will be out of the problem.  Also, we will have a new and clean atmophere.  Through these basic facts, pollution and global warming will be an inferior problem in our society.  


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 09:09 AM on September 23, 2002 | IP
tsmith2771

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

God I hope you are right, but global warming at the rate we are going IS a problem


-------
"I have no interest in making blacks equal to whites, they are of a lesser quality and this I am sure of." -Abraham Lincoln
"You don't win a war by dying for your country, you win a war by making the other person die for theirs." -General George Patton
 


Posts: 372 | Posted: 11:53 AM on September 23, 2002 | IP
Xenjael

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

actuallt i just discovered some interesting news...the ozone hole is-healing or putting itself together again
 


Posts: 83 | Posted: 5:34 PM on September 23, 2002 | IP
tsmith2771

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I heard it was slowing down, but I didn't know it was already healing itself.


-------
"I have no interest in making blacks equal to whites, they are of a lesser quality and this I am sure of." -Abraham Lincoln
"You don't win a war by dying for your country, you win a war by making the other person die for theirs." -General George Patton
 


Posts: 372 | Posted: 2:42 PM on September 24, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Well, surprise.  Global warming shouldnt be a big issue until were on mars.  and it is healing itself  happy happy. :_)


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 4:19 PM on September 24, 2002 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

that's one study. another one statest that earth will be irreversably damaged and unrevocably headed toward uninhabititabilty by 2050.


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 5:53 PM on September 24, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

but since the ozone is healing, the time will be prolonged at a rapid rate.
its nice to see another debater online, too.


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 5:54 PM on September 24, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Global warming will kill us long before it burn uus to a crisp.  It only takes a few degrees to start melting at the north and south poles, coastal cities will go under, and the water will amke its way inland.  These same few degrees will start killing off the bottom of the food chain and make its way up to us.


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 12:43 AM on October 14, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

actually when i was in fligth school (college) we did advanced meteorology and other weird weather classes and i did my report on the hole in the ozone....the global warming due to the hole in our ozone is a theory only...The hole goes through natural cycles and slowly expands and contracts...this is what causes el nino (the warming of the pacific ocean that causes bad storms and the like throughout the world). The hole in the ozone layer is supposedly over the south pole. The south pole has no factories or any man made pollutants there. The gasses that are said to cause the hole in the ozone layer (ex. CFC) would have no way to reach the southpole bc the prevailing northerly winds caused by the coriolis effect of the earths rotational motion causes the winds in the southern hemisphere to blow north and easterly much like in the northern hemisphere notice that the jetstream always comes from the north west...This thus concludes why our pollution does not in fact cause the hole in the ozone layer....take note that the ozone has not been a hot topic since EL NINO came. enviromentalist did not want to state the hole is a natural cycle but it is true...this is no excuse to pollute though we still need to take precautions.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 03:06 AM on October 18, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Global warming is extremely dangerous.

Scientists now think it is very possible that an abrupt climate change will occur at some time in the future. Some think it is indeed quite probable.

This kind of abrupt climate change can warm or cool the Earth by 5 degrees C in a matter of years/decades. (which means more than 10deg C at the poles.. it would take 2.7 deg C to melt the Groenland glaciers, which would lead to a 20 feet sea level rise..).

With the greenhouse gases we have emitted so far, the Earth will warm for 100 years by about twice the warming we have seen so far.. it is maybe already to late to prevent it.

 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 11:30 AM on October 22, 2002 | IP
madbilly

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

scientist have also predicted that the poles would reverse in the year 2004. this was made in 1992. Did it happen NO,....scientist always make outlandish predictions in order to get more financial backing from support groups (hey they gotta eat). The poles that where supposed to reverse was supposed to cause catostophic eart quakes that would kill us all by braking apart the polar ice caps and they would float out to warmer areas and melt and all this crazy stuff...scientist are for the most part full of crap.


-------
my name is madbilly....what did you expect me to be happy when my name says Mad in it...
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 12:21 PM on October 22, 2002 | IP
madbilly

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

im sorry i mean not did it happen but will it happen...sorry it makes me look like an idiot thinking it is already 2004


-------
my name is madbilly....what did you expect me to be happy when my name says Mad in it...
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 12:22 PM on October 22, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Is that full of crap:
http://www.nicl-smo.sr.unh.edu/icwg/images/420Vostok.jpg


Quote from madbilly at 12:21 PM on October 22, 2002 :
scientist have also predicted that the poles would reverse in the year 2004. this was made in 1992. Did it happen NO,....scientist always make outlandish predictions in order to get more financial backing from support groups (hey they gotta eat). The poles that where supposed to reverse was supposed to cause catostophic eart quakes that would kill us all by braking apart the polar ice caps and they would float out to warmer areas and melt and all this crazy stuff...scientist are for the most part full of crap.




 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 2:29 PM on October 22, 2002 | IP
madbilly

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

yes bc it says the amount in the last 420,000 years....how do they know what it has been like in the last 420,000 years they werent there and no one recorded it.


-------
my name is madbilly....what did you expect me to be happy when my name says Mad in it...
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 3:33 PM on October 22, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You need to make some basic research on the subject I think..
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 5:13 PM on October 22, 2002 | IP
madbilly

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

no actually i already have and if you tread my post that is up a lttle further you will obviously see that i have


-------
my name is madbilly....what did you expect me to be happy when my name says Mad in it...
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 11:30 PM on October 22, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You don't beleive in ice core information? why?

Most scientists do, BTW.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 07:32 AM on October 23, 2002 | IP
madbilly

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

notice that you said most do believe...and if all dont then doesnt that mean there is some reason not to.


-------
my name is madbilly....what did you expect me to be happy when my name says Mad in it...
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 12:07 PM on October 23, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I said most because I don't know if they all do.

Personaly, I've not heard of scientists dismissing ice core datas.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 1:54 PM on October 23, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Global warming will only be a problem in 2.3 billion years, or, if humans are complete idiots and decide pollution is a good thing, by 2050.

No need to worry, we'll all be dead by both dates (probably)


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 7:19 PM on November 1, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Even if we stopped emitting greenhouse gases today, the Earth would continue its warming trend for 100 years, and would warm about twice as much as it has warmed so far.

The most optimistic GHG projection forsee an increase of emissions of about 50% in the next 25 years before a stabilization.

So it is very possible that the Earth becomes a source a carbon at some point, and emits GHG by itself. Whatever reduction we will do, it will be too late.

Stephen Hawking said in 2000 that he was very concerned about a runaway global warming caused by human activities.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 10:54 AM on November 3, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

dont be foolish, with all the new technology that is helping to purify the air, the ozone hole is already healing itself
-i am xenjael
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 07:10 AM on December 12, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The more general form of this question has bedeviled us for the better part of the last century: how do laymen (and policy makers) evaluate technical scientific problems? In the case of global warming, the relevant experts are mostly a small group of environmental and atmospheric scientists, and by now they pretty unanimously believe that global warming is real and that it is at least partly the result of human activity. So how do you argue with that? There are two possibilities:

On scientific grounds. Unfortunately, this is nearly impossible for a layman, and there are virtually no scientists left in the relevant disciplines who believe the opposite side anymore.

On non-scientific grounds. That is, the scientists are exaggerating or lying for some political reason.

The fact is that if all of them agree about global warming, it's most likely because global warming is real

But is the risk overblown? Does it matter if sea levels rise an inch per decade? Maybe, maybe not. But there are some serious — though hard to quantify — risks that counsel caution. The North Atlantic Conveyor, for example, is a part of the Gulf Stream that cycles warm water east to Europe and warms the continent. It is exquisitely sensitive to increased concentrations of freshwater caused by melting glaciers, and there is evidence that it can shut down quickly when a tipping point is reached, lowering temperatures in Europe enough to make Germany more like Siberia than Pennsylvania. And "quickly" means that it could happen over the course of a few years, not centuries.

Will it ever happen? Nobody knows for sure, but it is a catastrophic enough possibility that it seems prudent to take it seriously. Unless, of course, you've decided that scientific opinion is simply a vast lefty conspiracy. That's what creationists think about the entire community of biologists, it's what tobacco companies thought about cancer researchers, and increasingly it's what conservatives think of atmospheric scientists.




 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 12:29 AM on January 17, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Exactly!

The american academy of sciences realized a report recently that puts the emphasis on the probability of abrupt climate changes. They say that 24 times in the last 100 000 years, abrupt climate changes have occured..


 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 9:33 PM on January 20, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
+1

Rate this post:

Did you enviro-idiots ever realize that one volcano puts out more carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide than all of mankind's polution since the dawn of the industrial revolution. Also, just one forest fire in a midwestern state negates all the emissions controls on all the cars for a year? The earth naturally cycles from hot to cold. Why did the last Ice age come about and disapear?
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 06:49 AM on January 29, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

AHAH...

The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is the highest since 20 million years..

Looks like you know sweet f**k all about the subject MY FRIEND!!
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 1:51 PM on January 30, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

first of all the world has only been around for about 8000 and second of all if you look at the patterns in the earth cycle it does go from hot to cold and thirdly the whole global warming thin is a bunch of crap started by environmentalists to make idiots scared into doing enviromental crap
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 11:59 AM on March 7, 2003 | IP
StormCrow

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Wow guest, can you show me some statistics on the Carbon Dioxide levels of the earch around 1million BC? I'd love to get some numbers on that.


-------
"The Way of the Warrior is the two-fold path of pen and sword. Even if a man possess no natural inclination he may be a warrior by sticking assidously to both divisions of the Way."

-Shinmen Musashi
 


Posts: 112 | Posted: 02:13 AM on May 14, 2003 | IP
Dragoon1

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

http://www.fathersforlife.org/REA/warming.htm
http://www.john-daly.com/deadisle/index.htm
http://www.envirotruth.org/cbc_bias.cfm
http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/

Pay particular attention to the tidemark article at Dead Island. It shows bad research and science on the part of those who would say that the mean sea level is rising, as it was thier only source of data proving thier case.
The Canadian Kyoto trial aired by the CBC shows some methods the media uses to distort the truth.
All these links are intended to do is to show that there are many scientists out there that don't believe in the global warming theories. In fact, I have heard it said that scientists who subscribe to the global warming theories are simply a vocal minority. Also that liberals tend to ascribe to the philosophy that "the ends justify the means". If they have to lie to win thier case, they don't mind doing so, since they really believe in thier cause.
Something that all scientists who scream about global warming neglect are the effects of the sun on our climate. The sun works on a cycle of 11 years. It goes from what is called solar minimum to solar maximum and then back to solar minimum in those years. At solar maximum we receive a lot more energy from the sun than we do at solar minimum. Right now we are coming down from a solar maximum. There is another cycle that involves the positioning of the center of our sun in relation to the central point of mass of the solar system. This is important because it affects our distance from the sun, also affecting the amount of energy we receive. (There is more to it than that, but that's the basics of it.) There is a climatologist who has used these and other solar influences on our climate to predict specific floods and temporary climate changes. The point is that if one neglects the sun, they are ignoring by some estimates 95% and other estimates 99% of what affects our climate. We as human beings don't have nearly the effect on our planet that environmentalist scientist would have us believe.

I strongly advise those who have never doubted that global warming is an issue, to begin listening to news and science with a more critical ear. Delve into the details and learn to understand what is being talked about. Honestly, there is a steep learning curve, but if you stop and look up each and every term you aren't familiar with, eventually the only differences between you and the scientists will be that they are paid and have equipment, and you don't. You will be able to tell them what is flawed with thier reasoning. What they are talking about and doing isn't complex beyond the understanding of the average person. You just have to learn the terms they use.
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 4:19 PM on July 17, 2003 | IP
Suburban600

|       |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Interesting thread.

I'm having trouble understanding the downside to helping to curb the possibility of Global Warming.  

It seems that less pollution, more forests and less urbanization would be viewed as good by most folks.

Personally I would prefer to demonstrate the positive aspects of improving or maintaining the environment with the hope that my individual efforts will have a positive impact on the environment and that others would follow my lead.  

Perhaps the larger question is what role should the government play in fighting the widely accepted but still debated theory of Global Warming.

It seems that for many fully accepting and taking action necessary to curb Global Warming is something best left to government or corporations.  Am I correct?  

I ask those who might believe that only the government can make a difference to evaluate what they are doing personally to make certain the theory of Global Warming is never proven?

Hopefully those actions are more than just buying a Prius or changing to Florescent bulbs.

In my efforts to market carbon offsets I have found, that to date, there is little if any interest in investing in forests that sequester carbon.  So, I am unclear as to what really drives vocal Global Warming proponents.

I do agree that government probably has a role to play similar to the space exploration or the efforts during the Great Depression.  However, what actions are individuals or groups taking...not protests or petitions but actions?

There is probably activity that is just not obvious.  If not here are some ideas.

Buy local...you minimize transportation costs.  Examples?  Buy produce from you local farmer, buy lumber from a local sawmill, by locally manufactured goods.

Telecomute...you'll improve your quality of life and eliminate expeditures on gas.  Save about $6000 per year for owning a car.

Move close to public transportation and use it.

Buy some land and plant some trees preserve land from Urban Sprawl.

Do all of the common sense things, yes buy a hybrid car, if you need a car, change those light bulbs, insulate, reduce air travel, vacation near home.

Many of us enjoy our conveniences.  Most of us can't do all of the things listed below.  I can't either.  But by changing our buying habits incrementally we can force industry and government to change.  Don't let anyone tell you that you can't make a difference.  

If you don't believe in Global Warming then keep supporting strip malls, Hummers, and urbanization.  I think you'll be forced to change eventually if only because you're environment will change around you...for the better.

So what is the downside to believing in theory of Global Warming and working to improve the environment?










-------
Suburban600
Buy Land, Plant Trees, Enjoy Life
www.oldtramroadfarm.com
 


Posts: 2 | Posted: 2:19 PM on July 16, 2006 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The areas that would be most effected by it if it were a major problem, would be areas that we shouldn't be living in in the first place. It is m belief that we should not build cities below sea level. We humans seem to have this tendency to live in the most dangerous places possible.

The Crime rate in Philadelphia, or New York City are a much bigger and pressing problem than "Global Warming".


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 9:32 PM on September 17, 2007 | IP
Scottd

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I do projection models and you really have to Blind to nto see it.

FIrst, it won't take millions of years, nor hundreds. The speed of the changes in the past 20 years are alarming.

No this isn't natural changes nor have our ice caps in the northern poles ever decreased in mass the way they have now. Do you really understand the mean temp changes in those regions? We have lost hundreds of miles of ice. It going to continue and not stop.

Models are showign the previous data from last year is already outdated, and the ttemp cahnges is actually more then 30% higher then previous ones.

 Adverage temps in NE US states have increased steady due to the nice thick layer we have above us. Now we may be enjoyign these long bursts of 60's in mid winter with a few cold days, but it is a steady change. 5 degrees mean change can result in 40 degree perids of change.

Regardless of the greed of some politicians and companies, it is a fact, it is real, it is happening. 50 years from now, the changes will be enough to cause global issues.

We are talkign increased and steady draught. Loss of viable food production areas, as well as famine. It is serious.

We can slow it, but not stop it. We will ahve increased storms. We will have increased flooding. Changing it now can allow the earth to heal itself.

Now I ahve a NAtive American background and this has been said to many many times.

" Mother earth will change faces many times. Man has caused her pain and to suffer, but we may not be her children later on."


Added:

 As far as the Ozone layer. Healing itself is not correct, nor is it our main issue. THe decrease has reversed some in one area, increased in others.

 THe emmissions we produce are the issue. It is the thick layer in our atmosphere that causes global warming, not the thinning of the layer that blocks UV radiation. The suns rays still penetrate, but heat doesn't reflect back into space as it should.

The major changes are clear, and the link to emissions we produce and the higher increases is also clear.

Now in 50 years the earth can still be lived on but not as we enjoy it today. THere will be changes in severe weather (which is already happening outside norms in history). Yeh we can maybe avoid a natural ice age, but the trade of may not be so good.

 THe earth does have a potential to heal itself. However it has a potential to whipe us off the face of the earth and start fresh. The reversal will take alot longer then the tiem the fast changes (due to industry) have taken.


(Edited by Scottd 1/16/2008 at 10:20 PM).


-------
You state the bible condems Gay love. But the also also allows slavery and states woman serve their husband and are less then them, but you do not obey that? It is clear the bible has been rewritten by man, and the word of god is lost.
 


Posts: 16 | Posted: 10:08 PM on January 16, 2008 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Do you know if the ice caps have always been there?


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 01:22 AM on March 30, 2008 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.