Home | Community | Message Board


Edabea
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Kratom Powder for Sale, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Edibles   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Amazon Hemp, Portable Greenhouse

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria
    #1433599 - 04/06/03 04:09 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Although the following is essentially an article of a scientific nature, the subject has very great political implications...

--------------------

Middle Ages were warmer than today, say scientists
By Robert Matthews, Science Correspondent - The Spectator
(Filed: 06/04/2003)


Claims that man-made pollution is causing "unprecedented" global warming have been seriously undermined by new research which shows that the Earth was warmer during the Middle Ages.

From the outset of the global warming debate in the late 1980s, environmentalists have said that temperatures are rising higher and faster than ever before, leading some scientists to conclude that greenhouse gases from cars and power stations are causing these "record-breaking" global temperatures.

Last year, scientists working for the UK Climate Impacts Programme said that global temperatures were "the hottest since records began" and added: "We are pretty sure that climate change due to human activity is here and it's accelerating."

This announcement followed research published in 1998, when scientists at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia declared that the 1990s had been hotter than any other period for 1,000 years.

Such claims have now been sharply contradicted by the most comprehensive study yet of global temperature over the past 1,000 years. A review of more than 240 scientific studies has shown that today's temperatures are neither the warmest over the past millennium, nor are they producing the most extreme weather - in stark contrast to the claims of the environmentalists.

The review, carried out by a team from Harvard University, examined the findings of studies of so-called "temperature proxies" such as tree rings, ice cores and historical accounts which allow scientists to estimate temperatures prevailing at sites around the world.

The findings prove that the world experienced a Medieval Warm Period between the ninth and 14th centuries with global temperatures significantly higher even than today.

They also confirm claims that a Little Ice Age set in around 1300, during which the world cooled dramatically. Since 1900, the world has begun to warm up again - but has still to reach the balmy temperatures of the Middle Ages.

The timing of the end of the Little Ice Age is especially significant, as it implies that the records used by climate scientists date from a time when the Earth was relatively cold, thereby exaggerating the significance of today's temperature rise.

According to the researchers, the evidence confirms suspicions that today's "unprecedented" temperatures are simply the result of examining temperature change over too short a period of time.

The study, about to be published in the journal Energy and Environment, has been welcomed by sceptics of global warming, who say it puts the claims of environmentalists in proper context. Until now, suggestions that the Middle Ages were as warm as the 21st century had been largely anecdotal and were often challenged by believers in man-made global warming.

Dr Philip Stott, the professor emeritus of bio-geography at the University of London, told The Telegraph: "What has been forgotten in all the discussion about global warming is a proper sense of history."

According to Prof Stott, the evidence also undermines doom-laden predictions about the effect of higher global temperatures. "During the Medieval Warm Period, the world was warmer even than today, and history shows that it was a wonderful period of plenty for everyone."

In contrast, said Prof Stott, severe famines and economic collapse followed the onset of the Little Ice Age around 1300. He said: "When the temperature started to drop, harvests failed and England's vine industry died. It makes one wonder why there is so much fear of warmth."

The United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the official voice of global warming research, has conceded the possibility that today's "record-breaking" temperatures may be at least partly caused by the Earth recovering from a relatively cold period in recent history. While the evidence for entirely natural changes in the Earth's temperature continues to grow, its causes still remain mysterious.

Dr Simon Brown, the climate extremes research manager at the Meteorological Office at Bracknell, said that the present consensus among scientists on the IPCC was that the Medieval Warm Period could not be used to judge the significance of existing warming.

Dr Brown said: "The conclusion that 20th century warming is not unusual relies on the assertion that the Medieval Warm Period was a global phenomenon. This is not the conclusion of IPCC."

He added that there were also doubts about the reliability of temperature proxies such as tree rings: "They are not able to capture the recent warming of the last 50 years," he said.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineyelimS
bohem

Registered: 02/03/03
Posts: 717
Last seen: 11 years, 3 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1433609 - 04/06/03 04:14 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

that's nice, but it's still too damn polluted.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1433615 - 04/06/03 04:16 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

OMG!!!!!!!!

Al Gore was right!!!!!!!!!!!!

[runs screaming around the forum]

[crashes into sides of browser]




There, I feel better now.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhluck
Carpal Tunnel
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/11/99
Posts: 11,394
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 1 year, 5 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1434778 - 04/07/03 12:33 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Most people don't realize that "global warming" really doesn't mean "global warming". It should really be called "long term global climate change", or something like that.

Any decent scientist would tell you this: There is good evidence that this is ocurring, but there is still not enough data to prove anything.


--------------------
"I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson
http://phluck.is-after.us


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Phluck]
    #1434829 - 04/07/03 12:53 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

How about periodic global climate fluctuations? There is good evidence that this occurs, any honest scientist will admit it.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineEllis Dee
Archangel
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 13,104
Loc: Fire in the sky
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1434847 - 04/07/03 12:57 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Pollution is bad for the environment. Humans are consuming all the natural resources and fossil fuels and there will be none left. Global warming is causing climate changes. USA is satan. The only thing that can save us is total worldwide thermonuclear war.


--------------------
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do."-King Solomon

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineI_Fart_Blue
Stranger

Registered: 06/25/02
Posts: 3,495
Loc: SItting on the Group W Be...
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1434862 - 04/07/03 01:02 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

I read an article last fall some time concerning this subject, in which it mentioned that yes, global temperatures have historically been known to fluctuate, but that over the last century-century and a half, the rate at which temperatures have been rising are not congruent to temperature increases in the past. I'll hunt around for it, see what I can find.


--------------------
"A study of the history of opinion is a necessary preliminary to the emancipation of the mind. I do not know which makes a man more conservative-to know nothing but the present, or nothing but the past." -John Maynard Keynes


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1434886 - 04/07/03 01:11 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Pollution is bad for the environment.



I would tend to agree with that statement.  However, when yeast pollute their environment with waste products from their existence, it tends to help the creation of tasty beverages which have a concious altering effect. Not all pollution is bad. :wink:

Quote:

Humans are consuming all the natural resources and fossil fuels and there will be none left.



Humans do not consume all natural resources.  Even if they did, there is an inherent self correcting mechanism which will cause a change in human behavior.  It's call 'scarcity'.

Quote:

Global warming is causing climate changes.



Correction, 'Global warming is climate change.'

Quote:

USA is satan.



What ever happened to the socialist fantasy all the leftists want to raise our taxes for, 'USA is Santa?'

Quote:

The only thing that can save us is total worldwide thermonuclear war.



Perhaps your definition of 'save' is a l-i-t-t-l-e bit different than mine.   


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineEllis Dee
Archangel
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 13,104
Loc: Fire in the sky
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1434900 - 04/07/03 01:17 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Heh. I should've used the wink emoticon to show I was writing in jest. People get so crazed about the enviroment and sit in trees for a year at a time. On the other side are people that say pollution is fine and dandy and the world doesn't mind. Pollution is bad and IMO should be kept to a minimum.


--------------------
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do."-King Solomon

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1434918 - 04/07/03 01:21 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Pollution is bad and IMO should be kept to a minimum.

Unfortunately this damages corporate profit so I'm afraid we will simply have to put up with the rapidly melting polar ice caps.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Xlea321]
    #1434954 - 04/07/03 01:37 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Yes Alex, the sky IS falling.  Perhaps we can prop it up with some legislation?  I know, let's remove all profit motive from human endeavors.  We'll start with you, from now on you should accept no payment or any compensation for any work you do.  Don't be a hypocrite, everything you do from now on should be done gratis.  Lead by example, Ghandi did. :wink: 


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1434968 - 04/07/03 01:44 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

You can still make profit without destroying the planet.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineEllis Dee
Archangel
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 13,104
Loc: Fire in the sky
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Xlea321]
    #1434994 - 04/07/03 01:54 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Evolving, When I was in high school I worked for a photography company. We developed film, mostly 35mm. It was nice. One of the byproducts of our work was we produced a certain amount of slightly toxic waste. It contained a bit of mercury in it and a few other chemicals that you don't want to spill on you too much. We contracted with a company to dispose of it, but wehn we did heavy volume we produced a little too much for the metal waste holding tub thing to hold. It was somtimes my job to put the excess in a mop bucket, push it outside and dump it in the storm sewer. Heh. I always liked doing that for some reason. We made profit, but we would have made a little less if we had to get all the waste properly disposed of. I think this is the sort of thing Alex is trying to convey.


--------------------
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do."-King Solomon

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineDogomush
Barbless Aryan

Registered: 10/05/02
Posts: 1,286
Loc: The Canadian west coast
Last seen: 16 years, 2 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Xlea321]
    #1435011 - 04/07/03 02:06 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

yes.. I'm not an economist, BUT, if all companies and factories the world over agreed to minimize pollution, then wouldn't economies stay more or less the same, relatively? I mean, isn't that what economy is about? Rich relative to poor? I suppose there are some countries who would have to make far fewer changes than other countries because their industries are less reliant on churning out pollutants.. But is that really unfair? Isn't it just called good business sense? And if it's not, and is luck, then I'd point out that luck is part of business.

I'm opposed to "pollution" in general because of my perhaps arbitrarily decided principles, but I do believe that there are practical reasons not to churn out crap. Nobody would argue that cities smell good, for example. I think cars are murderous death machines and I find it weird that people accept deaths by car but freak about heroine overdoses. I also think it's hippocritical to ban smoking in so many places but allow cars to spew shit so close to the sidewalk.

But back to practical things.. The concept of global warming or actually, climate change, because I don't believe global warming is a complete description, makes sense to me. I mean, if you alter the make-up of the atmospheric gases, I'm afraid SOMETHING's going to happen. The holes in the ozone is an example. There's something we can't dispute. It's going to fucking suck when we all have to go outside in our special radiation suits on sunny days.

But maybe somebody well-versed in global economics could explain whether or not economies would be crippled by ratifying Kyoto.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineEllis Dee
Archangel
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 13,104
Loc: Fire in the sky
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Dogomush]
    #1435018 - 04/07/03 02:11 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

But maybe somebody well-versed in global economics could explain whether or not economies would be crippled by ratifying Kyoto.



Kyoto didn't apply to "developing nations". It only applied to us first world countries. It would have been very bad for US industry already struggeling against competitors in "developing" countries.


--------------------
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do."-King Solomon

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1435034 - 04/07/03 02:22 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

RG, I understand your point but from my experience I don't think this was quite the thing Alex was trying to convey. His usual rhetoric involves a vehement opposition to free enterprise and lacks the reasonableness of your interpretation.

I would like to see a little less hysteria and a little more rational thought on the matter. My opinion is that no one in his right mind wants to pollute or destroy the life giving properties of the earth. However, short sightedness and unsound thinking abound in human affairs. Many people latch onto the most dire environmental scenarios with a religious fervor that precludes all rational thought on the matter, they never stop to think that perhaps things aren't as they are scared into believing. A couple decades ago environmental pollution was said to be leading us to a new ice age and the environmentalists latched onto that scare with the same uncritical faith that it is exhibited by current crop of true believers who's shrill voices are heard in defense of the global warming 'theory.'

Now if you'll excuse me, this greedy capitalist is going to piss in his drinking water and shit in the crock pot full of food that his wife has prepared for tomorrow's supper...


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblecarbonhoots
old hand

Registered: 09/11/01
Posts: 1,351
Loc: BC Canada
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1435053 - 04/07/03 02:33 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

This temperature stuff is a little fuzzy. Why always the talk of temperature? I mean it has relevance but what about the hard analysis of the apmosphere?

The CO2 levels are rising. That is indisputable. We are somewhere around 370-390 ppm now, as opposed to 310 ppm 100 years ago.

Does that mean anything?


--------------------
  -I'd rather have a frontal lobotomy than a bottle in front of me

CANADIAN CENTER FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Dogomush]
    #1435061 - 04/07/03 02:38 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

The holes in the ozone is an example. There's something we can't dispute.



How is ozone created in the upper atmosphere?

What is the half life of ozone?

Taking the answers to the first two questions into consideration, what would one reasonably expect to happed to the ozone layer over certain parts of the globe at certain times of the year?

Can you name a major company who's patent expired on freon (but had replacement chemicals ready for market - with no market for them because freon was widely used and about to be produced by other companies without having to pay royalties) at about the same time the idea of a 'hole' in the ozone layer first became publicized?

Just some food for thought...


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinemntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1435063 - 04/07/03 02:39 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

"Many people latch onto the most dire environmental scenarios with a religious fervor that precludes all rational thought on the matter, they never stop to think that perhaps things aren't as they are scared into believing. "

I think the same applies to many of the topics in this forum.

coughconspiracycough


--------------------
Be all and you'll be to end all


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: carbonhoots]
    #1435072 - 04/07/03 02:46 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

The CO2 levels are rising. That is indisputable. We are somewhere around 370-390 ppm now, as opposed to 310 ppm 100 years ago.

Does that mean anything?



It's a good time to be a gardener? Increased crop yields? The CO2 levels 100 years ago were abnormally low by earth history standards, but they might be going back up to normal? I don't know. What are your scientifically verifiable conclusions? Is it possible that this might actually be a good thing?


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1435156 - 04/07/03 03:51 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

How about periodic global climate fluctuations? There is good evidence that this occurs, any honest scientist will admit it.

True, any honest astronomer will tell you that orbital dynamics play a role in long term climate change - especially the precession of the equinoxes, which has a 22,000 year cycle that has been linked to periodic ice ages. People think that the Earth's orbit is fixed, but the eccentricity, the degree and direction of tilt all have periodic cycles.

heres some info:
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/clisci100ka.html
you can find plenty more, just do a search for 'precession + climate'

Environmentalists are generally nice and sincere, but I don't think there exists a less informed group of people. Aren't these the same people who warned us in the seventies about the coming ice age?
"the sky is falling!!! the sky is falling!!!"

It might be, but not necessarily because of human activity. We are at the mercy of the Earth and Sun and orbital mechanics.



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1435286 - 04/07/03 05:21 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

It would be interesting to know who sponsored/funded this research.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1435289 - 04/07/03 05:23 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

We'll start with you, from now on you should accept no payment or any compensation for any work you do. Don't be a hypocrite, everything you do from now on should be done gratis. Lead by example, Ghandi did.




Greed is the problem not profit.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblecarbonhoots
old hand

Registered: 09/11/01
Posts: 1,351
Loc: BC Canada
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1435294 - 04/07/03 05:33 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

It's a good time to be a gardener? Increased crop yields? The CO2 levels 100 years ago were abnormally low by earth history standards, but they might be going back up to normal? I don't know. What are your scientifically verifiable conclusions? Is it possible that this might actually be a good thing?







If it ain't broke don't fix it?

Shit, I suppose we might get lucky, and correct some imbalance that nature overlooked. But I don't think the odds on that are very good.

Besides, there's no end in sight. Is there? We're set to burn off all the recoverable oil in the planet. The same oil that took how many millions of years to form is to be burned off in a brief instant comparatively. Rapidly changing the atmosphere in the process. My gut feeling on this is that it's probably not a good thing.



--------------------
  -I'd rather have a frontal lobotomy than a bottle in front of me

CANADIAN CENTER FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: carbonhoots]
    #1435438 - 04/07/03 08:24 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

I suppose we might get lucky, and correct some imbalance that nature overlooked.




Well that would mean nature hadnt overlooked it and had in fact corrected it unless of course you are saying that humans arent a part of nature!


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1435715 - 04/07/03 11:47 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

RG, I understand your point but from my experience I don't think this was quite the thing Alex was trying to convey.

Then you should try not to confuse reality with personal prejudice. Rail Guns point is exactly what I was stating.

His usual rhetoric involves a vehement opposition to free enterprise and lacks the reasonableness of your interpretation.

What is unreasonable about the simple statement "You can make profit without destroying the planet"  :confused: Explain please. 


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Xlea321]
    #1435751 - 04/07/03 12:03 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

I've read that erupting volcanoes produce as much pollution as we do. or something.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Xlea321]
    #1435884 - 04/07/03 01:07 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

... you should try not to confuse reality with personal prejudice. Rail Guns point is exactly what I was stating.



My apologies, my perception of your way of thinking is based upon many readings of your statements in different threads.  I had no indication that your opinions had changed.

Quote:

What is unreasonable about the simple statement "You can make profit without destroying the planet"  :confused: Explain please.   



Nothing, I agree with that statement.  In my response to Rail_Gun I was referrring to your prior statement and my previous experiences encountering your rhetorical flourishes regarding the profit motive and business in general.  This has set the tone for my current perceptions of statements that you make.  Again, I apologize if I misread you, experiences color perception.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: carbonhoots]
    #1435911 - 04/07/03 01:23 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

If it ain't broke don't fix it?



Is it broke? I never said that people shouldn't reduce pollution, to me it is a given that they should. However, I take issue with pop science and knee jerk reactions to important issues. Policy based on bad science or erroneous conclusions can very well do more harm than good.

Quote:

Shit, I suppose we might get lucky, and correct some imbalance that nature overlooked. But I don't think the odds on that are very good.



You appear to assume that all consequences of human action are negative. I make no such assumptions. Many things humans do have what I would consider negative results, many things humans do have good results. I prefer not to jump to ill informed conclusions.

Quote:

Besides, there's no end in sight. Is there?



Yes there is. All activity of life forms that rely on finite resources or result in the destruction of said organisms environment are by nature self-limiting. Conditions of scarcity and pollution will force changes in human behavior, we have already seen this process begin and it will accelerate in the future. Humans should follow their capacity for rational thought to address these things, not give in to emotionalism and blind reaction to fears.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Edited by Evolving (04/07/03 01:27 PM)


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1436324 - 04/07/03 03:39 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Well done!

And as an American Native I am VERY protective of the environment.

And I still agree with you.

(Sorry about the silly picture)

Cheers,


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinediggitydankman
No longer aCannabisConnoisseur

Registered: 12/10/02
Posts: 479
Loc: Michgan
Last seen: 18 years, 19 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1436675 - 04/07/03 05:48 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

What the scientists do not tell anyone is that as the temperature on earth increases, the ozone layer recovers.


--------------------
"It's only wrong if you get caught.
If consequences dictate
my course of action
I should play GOD."

Maynard James Keenan, Tool


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 16 years, 4 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: diggitydankman]
    #1436688 - 04/07/03 05:55 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Bring back mc donalds styraphome containers!!!, the cardboard absorbs too much grease... :tongue:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblecarbonhoots
old hand

Registered: 09/11/01
Posts: 1,351
Loc: BC Canada
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1437534 - 04/07/03 10:54 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Pop science? Ill informed conclusions?

Your 'end in sight' is us being forced to adapt cuz there's no time left. Sounds like learning the hard way.

What's wrong with an ounce of prevention?



--------------------
  -I'd rather have a frontal lobotomy than a bottle in front of me

CANADIAN CENTER FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: carbonhoots]
    #1437676 - 04/07/03 11:38 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Can we please not confuse Global Warming with environmental or ecological pollution. Everyone wants clean air and water.

Glabal warming people say that greenhouse gases are responsible for climate change. The facts say otherwise.



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: carbonhoots]
    #1437891 - 04/08/03 01:02 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Pop science? Ill informed conclusions?



Do you have any verifiable facts on the matter? I posted an article that brought up some valid points.

Quote:

Your 'end in sight' is us being forced to adapt cuz there's no time left. Sounds like learning the hard way.



We are already learning and adapting. Pollution controls are MUCH greater than when I was a kid, there are CAFE standards for fuel efficiency. Additionally, scarcity or disruptions in the flow of crude have historically and consistently led to higher fuel prices at the gas pumps, this acts to discourage consumption. Homes are better insulated. Today's household appliances use a fraction of the energy of the machines they replaced. Electricity generating windmills have sprung up on desert landscapes, many in the area where I live have installed solar panels on their roofs (unheard of when I was a child). The advance of the information age has reduced the need for transportation in many areas of life, we CAN persuade others of this reality and adopt behaviors that reflect it as well. Change is happening, it will not be complete overnight, each one of us has a role to advance it through our individual actions and persuasive arguments with our fellow human beings. By you expressing your concerns and having this dialogue you are prompting others to investigate and think about the subject.

Quote:

What's wrong with an ounce of prevention?



Nothing, but it must be properly applied. Would you like your doctor to prescribe a regime of chemo therapy as an 'ounce of prevention' before he diagnoses your ailment? If you are uncertain of the causes, how do you know that your 'ounce of prevention' will even work? What are the various costs of any proposed 'ounce of prevention?' Will this prevention put people out of work, lead to great economic dislocation and hardship ultimately creating a backlash against your crusade without even address the root cause? If people can't feed or house their families because they've been put out of work by overzealous environmental regulations, do you think they'll give two shits about the environmental movement except as an enemy of their lives and freedom?


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1438000 - 04/08/03 01:44 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Additionally, scarcity or disruptions in the flow of crude have historically and consistently led to higher fuel prices at the gas pumps, this acts to discourage consumption

Do you have any evidence for this? There are millions more cars on the road now than there were 30 years ago.

The advance of the information age has reduced the need for transportation in many areas of life

See above point.

All activity of life forms that rely on finite resources or result in the destruction of said organisms environment are by nature self-limiting

So your policy is to keep on destroying the amazon rainforest until scarcity of trees prevents us from chopping anymore down? That's certainly a novel approach to conservation.

I think most of us would prefer carbonhoots philosophy - don't chop it down in the first place.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblez@z.com
Libertarian
Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 2,876
Loc: ATL
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Xlea321]
    #1438010 - 04/08/03 01:48 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Do you have any evidence for this? There are millions more cars on the road now than there were 30 years ago.




Take Econ101. It is simple supply and demand. People will drive less as the price of driving goes up.


--------------------
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: z@z.com]
    #1438031 - 04/08/03 01:56 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Well i'd do a bit more reading about the subject first.

Gas is 3 to 4 times more expensive in the UK than the US and the car ownership is still increasing every year. So even if gas prices in america triple to something appoaching the price in the UK car ownership will keep increasing.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblez@z.com
Libertarian
Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 2,876
Loc: ATL
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Xlea321]
    #1438034 - 04/08/03 01:57 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Car ownership or gas consumption per car is going up. You can own a car and not drive much. Hell, I do it.


--------------------
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Xlea321]
    #1438165 - 04/08/03 03:11 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Additionally, scarcity or disruptions in the flow of crude have historically and consistently led to higher fuel prices at the gas pumps, this acts to discourage consumption

Do you have any evidence for this? There are millions more cars on the road now than there were 30 years ago.



The oil embargo of 1973. This nearly destroyed the American automotive industry as people started buying more fuel efficient cars from the Japanese. At that time American made cars consumed more fuel on average than they do today.

Quote:

The advance of the information age has reduced the need for transportation in many areas of life

See above point.



One word, TELECOMMUTING. My wife and I both work from home. I work for clients all over the United States. My wife has done work for companies all over the United States, The Netherlands and Belgium. The nearest grocery store is 10 miles away, we have one car that is driven once a week to do shopping. The key phrase here is "has reduced the need for transportation." Unfortunately, many people lack the imagination to realize this and have entered the Information Age with an Industrial Age mentality.

Quote:

All activity of life forms that rely on finite resources or result in the destruction of said organisms environment are by nature self-limiting

So your policy is to keep on destroying the amazon rainforest until scarcity of trees prevents us from chopping anymore down? That's certainly a novel approach to conservation.



Did I state this? NO. In typical fashion you are unable to grasp the point which I have explicitly laid out and attempt to derail the topic by going off on a tangent. Hint #1: look at the topic of this thread. Hint #2: pay attention. Hint #3: keep an open mind.

Quote:

I think most of us...



Wow, speculation and an appeal to popularity.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Edited by Evolving (04/08/03 11:37 AM)


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblecarbonhoots
old hand

Registered: 09/11/01
Posts: 1,351
Loc: BC Canada
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1438384 - 04/08/03 06:30 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Do you have any verifiable facts on the matter? I posted an article that brought up some valid points.




Of course, it's all a theory.

I'm not willing to bet that this rapid atmospheric change is nature rebalancing itself using us as unconcious vessels to deliver it.

All that stuff about windwills springing up on desert lanscapes is well and good, but the rates of CO2 emissions continue to accelerate despite this. Rapidly changing the conposition of the atmosphere should be of concern, what with the lack of verifiable facts and all.





--------------------
  -I'd rather have a frontal lobotomy than a bottle in front of me

CANADIAN CENTER FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1438415 - 04/08/03 07:07 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Your very proud of yourself arent you?


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: GazzBut]
    #1438670 - 04/08/03 10:31 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Aren't you?


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1438972 - 04/08/03 12:57 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

This nearly destroyed the American automotive industry as people started buying more fuel efficient cars from the Japanese.

So you think this implies they'll stop using cars if gas prices increase? Could you explain how the two follow?

While you're at it address the fact that gas prices in the UK are 3-4 times higher than the US and car ownership and use is still increasing.

Did I state this?

I was just applying your scarcity theory to other areas of conservation. So you only apply it to certain areas? Do you think the free market can be trusted with the amazon rain forest for example?

Certainly a novel theory. Keep polluting untill we run out of things to pollute with. Why not simply destroy all animal and plant life on earth? That would enable corporations to pollute without fear of damaging anything and profits would skyrocket.



--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: ]
    #1439786 - 04/08/03 05:22 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

sometimes yes...but then I do or say something inane!  :grin: 


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: GazzBut]
    #1440073 - 04/08/03 07:05 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

We'll there's something we have in common!  :grin:

Nice to see you back posting btw.

Cheers,


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 17 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1440192 - 04/08/03 07:42 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Evolving writes:
My opinion is that no one in his right mind wants to pollute or destroy the life giving properties of the earth. However, short sightedness and unsound thinking abound in human affairs. Many people latch onto the most dire environmental scenarios with a religious fervor that precludes all rational thought on the matter, they never stop to think that perhaps things aren't as they are scared into believing.

Maybe so, Evolving. But so are there people who justify dumping wastes (as in RG's example, which sadly is a mild one) by latching onto the most UN-dire environmental scenerios--e.g. "Yeah, yeah, the sky is falling." It's a very convenient complacence, no? Still others, in my opinion, don't give a rat's ass what they do to the environment, if they think it won't come back to haunt them.

If you think about the improvements that have come over the past decades in the U.S. regarding cleaning up our air, land, and waters, you can't help but credit the work of environmentalists. Yes, even some of these radical environmentalist groups. This is the case in any polemic issue, from feminism to gun control--the radicals play a role.

By the way, to go back to an arguement you and Alex had a while back about the improvements to the environmental situation in the U.S., I felt you were both partly correct--U.S. environmental regulations have improved greatly and many industries have shown a willingness to comply; however others have packed up and moved to other less stringent nations, such as Mexico.

I think this kind of race-to-the-bottom profit method is bad news for everyone. But that's for another thread. (And a topic you've shown to know more about.)

peaz
hongomon


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 17 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: hongomon]
    #1440262 - 04/08/03 08:07 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Oh, and one more thing: (I hate responding to my own post, dammit)

I have a strong feeling that whatever new resources become available, whatever new fuel source we develop, and however efficient our recycling becomes, we will always be taxing the environment. We'll always be struggling to keep our rivers and oceans clean, we'll always be fighting over access to recourses, and so on.

Why? Two reasons. The first is obvious. There's too damn many of us and there's more all the time and we seem for some reason inable to sufficiently confront the problem of overpopulation; and second, the concept of individual self-restraint is a vague concept, even one worhty of scorn. It's as if it goes against the sacrosanct concept of individual liberty.

Well, we've been doing a fine job of establishing the concept of individual liberty in its respectful place over the past few centuries, but somehow the notion of responsibility to the whole, to society, hasn't enjoyed the same progress. And I don't think that the socialist/communist doctrine I've learned about has it all figured out either, but I do believe that somehow the two--individual freedom and group responsibility have to co-exist, almost in a religious way, or we're always be in a mess.

hongomon


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: hongomon]
    #1441607 - 04/09/03 03:35 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Great posts hongomon!

Cheers,


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: hongomon]
    #1442142 - 04/09/03 09:25 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Spot on - a synthesis of communist and capatalist ideals? Sounds goroovy to me!


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: hongomon]
    #1442387 - 04/09/03 11:22 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

hongomon writes:

There's too damn many of us and there's more all the time and we seem for some reason inable to sufficiently confront the problem of overpopulation;

Yes. Circumstances in the developing nations need to improve to the point where it no longer is necessary to have a dozen children in the hopes that two might make it to adulthood.

Well, we've been doing a fine job of establishing the concept of individual liberty in its respectful place over the past few centuries, but somehow the notion of responsibility to the whole, to society, hasn't enjoyed the same progress.

The principle of individual liberty, consistently practiced, results in a responsibility to society.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: GazzBut]
    #1442398 - 04/09/03 11:26 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

GazzBut writes:

Spot on - a synthesis of communist and capatalist ideals? Sounds goroovy to me!

Impossible on the face of it. There can be no compromise between universal individual liberty and universal self-sacrifice. As soon as individual rights are violated as standard government policy, it is no longer Capitalism, it is the same "interventionist" system we see in all "free" nations today.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 17 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Phred]
    #1443622 - 04/09/03 05:43 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Pinky:
Yes. Circumstances in the developing nations need to improve to the point where it no longer is necessary to have a dozen children in the hopes that two might make it to adulthood.

You don't think circumstances already have? If it were still necessary to have a dozen children in the hopes that two might make to adulthood, then the population of such countries wouldn't be skyrocketing. Old ideas die hard?

Pinky:
The principle of individual liberty, consistently practiced , results in a responsibility to society.

I'd love for you to expand on this. I'm skeptical, but as I've just written, I'd like to see the two coexist.

hongomon


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 17 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: GazzBut]
    #1443643 - 04/09/03 05:50 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

I agree, Gazz. Pinky may be right about these two -isms never coexisting--but maybe you've hit on the nature of the polarization that's been going on. The Coms stress social responsibility and the Caps stress individual freedom. Obviously it's not that clear-cut, but I get that impression sometimes.

hongomon


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Phred]
    #1443683 - 04/09/03 06:05 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Well done!


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 17 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Phred]
    #1447391 - 04/10/03 06:24 PM (18 years, 30 days ago)

Dang, Pinky, I was really hoping to hear what exactly you meant by "consistently practiced" individual liberty equating social responsibility. Is this kind of like that comment you once made that "no capitalist would knowingly shit in his own nest"?


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: hongomon]
    #1452539 - 04/12/03 03:11 PM (18 years, 28 days ago)

hongomon writes:

You don't think circumstances already have? If it were still necessary to have a dozen children in the hopes that two might make to adulthood, then the population of such countries wouldn't be skyrocketing. Old ideas die hard?

Apparently in some developing countries, old ideas do indeed die hard. What strategies do you suggest we in the developed nations adopt to persuade those in the developing nations to cut their birth rate?

I'd love for you to expand on this.

Sure. I'll do that as soon as you provide me your definition of "responsibility to society". I would hate to expend energy addressing the wrong point, and from our past encounters I am all too aware that you define things differently than I do.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 17 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Phred]
    #1452744 - 04/12/03 04:31 PM (18 years, 28 days ago)

PInky writes:
Apparently in some developing countries, old ideas do indeed die hard. What strategies do you suggest we in the developed nations adopt to persuade those in the developing nations to cut their birth rate?

You must be aware of the complexity of your question. I can't help but wonder--are you stating it to suggest that if I can't come up with a solution, I should keep quiet? If not, forgive me for assuming, seriously. Especially because it is a good question, and one I've been thinking of throwing out here for a while.

Remember, though, that the "old ideas die hard" response of mine was to your (IMO dumb) statement that people, in this day and age, need to have twelve kids in order to get two to adulthood. And remember that that statement of yours was to my simple objective observation that the population was going to continue to climb.

As for what I mean by "social responsibilty", I could expand on it, and we'd probably discover similarities as well as differences. In fact, the topic might be a nice thread to relieve us from all this war bullshit. But you're the one who said, " The principle of individual liberty, consistently practiced, results in a responsibility to society ." You've used the term, so I'll be glad to go by your definition for now.

hongomon


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 17 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Phred]
    #1452756 - 04/12/03 04:38 PM (18 years, 28 days ago)

regarding population:

for now, here's an article you might appreciate:

phil harvey


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: hongomon]
    #1453801 - 04/13/03 12:05 AM (18 years, 28 days ago)

hongomon writes:

I can't help but wonder--are you stating it to suggest that if I can't come up with a solution, I should keep quiet?

Not at all. I am genuinely curious as to what actions you feel the developed nations should take to address the problem.

Remember, though, that the "old ideas die hard" response of mine was to your (IMO dumb) statement that people, in this day and age, need to have twelve kids in order to get two to adulthood.

Not quite correct. I stated that people in developing countries in this day and age... etc. etc. Do you deny that in some developing countries a family may have more children die before the age of five than children who make it to sexual maturity? If so, I can steer you to some humanitarian websites working in Africa who provide statistics about this kind of thing. More to the point (as you noted with your "old ideas die hard" comment), the people in these countries who keep having more children are not always those who have read the latest infant mortality surveys for their region and are willing to trust the statisticians when they tell them they need less children. Many cannot read at all. Their personal experience and that of almost all their neighbors can be summed up in the phrase "children die".

But you're the one who said, " The principle of individual liberty, consistently practiced, results in a responsibility to society ." You've used the term, so I'll be glad to go by your definition for now.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! I didn't introduce the term, you did. You made an undetailed general claim:

"we've been doing a fine job of establishing the concept of individual liberty in its respectful place over the past few centuries, but somehow the notion of responsibility to the whole, to society, hasn't enjoyed the same progress."

I made a mental note that you had provided no supporting evidence for your claim that the notion of responsibility to society hasn't enjoyed the same progress, but let it slide and instead responded with an equally general, undetailed claim that there is a direct connection between the spread of individual liberty and increased responsibility to society. Since both our claims were so general and unsupported, I felt it unnecessary to ask at that point for your working definition of "the whole" or "society". Why bother? It took maybe fifteen seconds to compose and type my comment.

But if you want me to expand on it, I want your definition of "responsibility to the whole, to society", or at least, of "society". This isn't a dodge -- I'll do the work. I just don't want to have you cut it off at the knees two lines into the explanation because my guess at what your definition may be turns out to be inaccurate.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: hongomon]
    #1453812 - 04/13/03 12:15 AM (18 years, 28 days ago)

Interesting article, and you're right -- I do appreciate it. Now there's a philanthropist who is doing more for the problem of overpopulation with his freely given donations than probably six times the equivalent amount of money seized through taxes -- with large chunks of that seized money being absorbed at every level of bureaucracy between the taxpayer and the ultimate recipient in Africa.

I love reading stories like that. One could accurately state that his individual liberty directly results in a responsibility to the whole.

Of course those here who believe in an American secret plan for world domination will probably say that this guy is a pawn to American interests whose real mission is to lower the number of Africans in the world through cutting their birthrate, so that the US will have an easier time invading and subjugating them a few years down the road -- but, hey! You can't please 'em all.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 17 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Phred]
    #1454861 - 04/13/03 05:18 PM (18 years, 27 days ago)

PInky writes:
Not at all. I am genuinely curious as to what actions you feel the developed nations should take to address the problem.

Then let me repeat my apologies.

PInky:
Do you deny that in some developing countries a family may have more children die before the age of five than children who make it to sexual maturity? If so, I can steer you to some humanitarian websites working in Africa who provide statistics about this kind of thing. More to the point (as you noted with your "old ideas die hard" comment), the people in these countries who keep having more children are not always those who have read the latest infant mortality surveys for their region and are willing to trust the statisticians when they tell them they need less children. Many cannot read at all. Their personal experience and that of almost all their neighbors can be summed up in the phrase "children die".

Fair enough--I see where you're coming from.  I still don't, however, see this belief as the primary factor.  If anything, that old idea which dies hard is found innately in all humans and is known as libido: we're all as horny as the next; the real difference in population growth being where there is wide use of birth control and where there is not.  (I admit the libido threory is my own speculation, akin to the theory that our love of fatty foods comes from way back when they were harder to come by.) 

One large factor I see (and my travels in South America have bolstered this) is the Catholic Church's staunch position against birth control.  You once mentioned that in the Dominican Rebublic making babies was the national passtime; I have a feeling that the Catholic Church plays some role in that.  Like I said, people are horny, and if condoms are tabboo in the eyes of the La Virgin, well....

There is also a good chance that rather than posterity in that biological sense that all creatures desire, these parents are interested in creating a work force.  Granted, in a lot of developing countries this is a pretty hard reason to argue against.  Unfortunately, it's especially hard to argue when the parents, working full-time, are still below the poverty level.  But that takes us to another topic--the tendency of industry owners, using their god-given right of individual liberty, to move their factories into places such as war-torn (insert country here) and "entice" abjectly poor people to work in their factories.  And often to move it again a few years later when a cheaper spot of labor force opens up somewhere else.  What do you think about that?

Europe and the U.S. both went through a phase where a family's kids had to chip in to some degree, so let's not assume that I'm making a sweeping statement about the evils of child labor.  But nor do I think that it's perfectly fine in every case we see around the world.  But this brings us back to that tired discussion we had a while back about child labor.  I have to say I put a lot of time into that, only to hear you mention to someone else that much of your position with me was "tongue in cheek".  Well, I don't know what that meant exactly, but like you, I value my energy and don't feel like wasting it.  :grin:

But all the postulations on how to help control population fall short in the absence of one thing (besides toppling the Catholic Church): education.  As you said of these developing countries, " Many cannot read at all.   The education factor is also a prime factor of the U.S.'s own population problem.  Now I'm not going to claim that I think that the burden falls entirely on the U.S. and other developed nations to improve education in third-world countries, but shouldn't some of it?  I've been thinking a lot lately about the notion of a single world power (e.g. the long, four-part paper that Silversoul7 posted a while back was pretty good), and if it is a fact that the world is better off with a superpower that behaves with a global interest, shouldn't population be one of its concerns?  And doesn't education play a role in that?

My time is up (I'm at a public library, but I'll be trying to continue this soon.)

hongomon

(edited for typos)


Edited by hongomon (04/13/03 06:07 PM)


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: hongomon]
    #1454988 - 04/13/03 06:12 PM (18 years, 27 days ago)

hongomon writes:

If anything, that old idea which dies hard is found innately in all humans and is known as libido: we're all as horny as the next; the real difference in population growth being where there is wide use of birth control and where there is not.

I won't argue with that.

One large factor I see (and my travels in South America have bolstered this) is the Catholic Church's staunch position against birth control. You once mentioned that in the Dominican Rebublic making babies was the national passtime; I have a feeling that the Catholic Church plays some role in that. Like I said, people are horny, and if condoms are tabboo in the eyes of the La Virgin, well....

Again, you'll get no argument from me. As an atheist, I have been convinced for decades that the benefits of organized religion are outweighed by its drawbacks. The Catholic Church's absurd stance on birth control is just one of the more visible negative effects of religions on humanity in general.

But that takes us to another topic--the tendency of industry owners, using their god-given right of individual liberty, to move their factories into places such as war-torn (insert country here) and "entice" abjectly poor people to work in their factories. And often to move it again a few years later when a cheaper spot of labor force opens up somewhere else. What do you think about that?

You have read my thoughts on this issue several times in the past. In brief, I think the more options people are presented in how to make a living, the better off they are. As a longtime resident of a developing nation, I have ample experience with foreign investment and how the people of that nation benefit from it.

But this brings us back to that tired discussion we had a while back about child labor. I have to say I put a lot of time into that, only to hear you mention to someone else that much of your position with me was "tongue in cheek". Well, I don't know what that meant exactly, but like you, I value my energy and don't feel like wasting it.

I suggest you re-read those posts of mine. A very small percentage of what I said was "tongue-in-cheek". The vast majority of it addressed seriously your issues, and the rest merely pointed out (humorously) that to affluent westerners, the thought of children of 14 years or so working to help support their families is practically an abomination, whereas to the actual people involved (children included), it has been a natural part of their history since time immemorial. If you hadn't gotten so pious about it, I would have let it go a lot earlier.

Now I'm not going to claim that I think that the burden falls on the U.S. and other developed nations to improve education in third-world countries, but shouldn't some of it?

Why?

Also note that huge amounts of foreign aid money is directly spent on educational facilities, and that private groups expend vast amounts of time and money on helping educate the children of developing nations. I have met personally dozens (probably closer to a hundred by now) of teachers who choose to come here and teach in pretty tough conditions for barely a living wage for a year or three, then move on.

I've been thinking a lot lately about the notion of a single world power (e.g. the long, four-part paper that Silversoul7 posted a while back was pretty good)...

Yeah, that was pretty good, wasn't it? I was impressed.

... and if it is a fact that the world is better off with a superpower that behaves with a global interest, shouldn't population be one of its concerns? And doesn't education play a role in that?

Well, you do realize that there are very few posters here who believe there can ever be such a thing as a superpower capable of behaving with a global interest, but let's presume for the sake of argument that such an entity exists, or may one day exists. In that case ---

--- your question is not easy to answer definitively. Most countries get pretty prickly at the implication that they are incapable of properly educating their own populace, and bridle at what they see as the "patronizing" offers of any superpower to improve on their efforts. They also (particularly the more religious ones) see "foreign style education" as a threat to their national identities and heritages, and (to be more cynical) a threat to their control over the populace.

This near-irreconcilable clash of perceived interests has most often historically resulted in the "solution" of just handing the money over to the governments in question and hoping that at least some of it might actually eventually be spent on decent education.

What's the answer? Not sure yet. But I can tell you that unless the nation in question is led by a government with the honesty, and more importantly, the political will to commit to a real improvement in the education of its people, throwing money at that government is the worst thing to do.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 17 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Phred]
    #1455070 - 04/13/03 06:48 PM (18 years, 27 days ago)

Pinky, I really enjoyed your reply. Unfortunately, I'm once again at a public library, and this one allows even less time per user, so I can't continue my response to the rest of your previous article, let alone address this one.

But I do want to respond with the little time I do have left to one comment. You mentioned in reference to the "race to the bottom" method of industry movement (you may take issue with the term, I dunno) was somehow good in providing more options to the population of a developing nation. I disagree. I believe there should be some regulation in that regard. I have an article from the New Leader (a magazine I'm sure you hate) by Gus Tyler (who you may also dislike) that discusses this problem. Since I can't find it on-line, I'm thinking of typing in at least some of the parts I think are pertienent. Of course, this won't happen now, as I have been given a two-minute warning.



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePsilocybeingzz
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/15/02
Posts: 14,463
Loc: International waters
Last seen: 8 years, 5 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: hongomon]
    #1455199 - 04/13/03 07:55 PM (18 years, 27 days ago)

Quote:

  we seem for some reason inable to sufficiently confront the problem of overpopulation;




well , overpopulation is not the problem YET

Overconsumption is , poor countries dont use the same ammounts of food , water , chemicals , etc etc etc etc

the developed nations are the ones causing this horrible rape of the earth , however , large populations of people in the poor countries are pushing closer and closer to this
"western lifestyle"
and when they reach our "standard of living" (even thought I dont thinkl you have to destroy the earth to live a "good life" , thats what we are doing currently)
when they catch up
WELL ........
then we have serious problems
for example if eveyonein the world  lived like the average american
we would need 4 MORE PLANETS !!!!! just for food , water fuel, trees, etc etc etc

one last thing the easy thing that could be dont RIGHT NOW for the earth is legalizing hemp which would solve MANY of our problems I would go on and preach the hemps greatness but

I feel that might be preaching to the converted  :grin: 


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 17 days
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Phred]
    #1458447 - 04/14/03 10:48 PM (18 years, 26 days ago)

Okay, I'm back.

Pinky writes:
Whoa, whoa, whoa! I didn't introduce the term, you did. You made an undetailed general claim:
"we've been doing a fine job of establishing the concept of individual liberty in its respectful place over the past few centuries, but somehow the notion of responsibility to the whole, to society, hasn't enjoyed the same progress."
I made a mental note that you had provided no supporting evidence for your claim that the notion of responsibility to society hasn't enjoyed the same progress, but let it slide and instead responded with an equally general, undetailed claim that there is a direct connection between the spread of individual liberty and increased responsibility to society. Since both our claims were so general and unsupported, I felt it unnecessary to ask at that point for your working definition of "the whole" or "society". Why bother? It took maybe fifteen seconds to compose and type my comment.

You know, this part of our discourse reminds me of being in the third grade. Which isn't a bad thing, since I enjoyed the third grade. So let's ignore the fact that it really doesn't matter that you didn't introduce the term, I did (since you seemed perfectly comfortable using it in your claim); let's also pretend that responding to a vague statement with another vague statement is a valid form of discussion; and let's forget that I said I was perfectly willing to accept your definition of "responsibility to society", just so that I could hear how it is that individual liberty, when consistently practiced, leads to a responsibilty to society. (EVEN if the definition of "responsibility to society" is one I don't particulary accept, I'd love to hear how this is anything but illogical.)

So let's use the Phil Harvey example. While it certainly doesn't cover all the bases, at least this is an example of social responsibiltiy we can agree on. You mentioned in your response to that post that "One could accurately state that his individual liberty directly results in a responsibility to the whole."

Why? His individual liberty could have just as easily led him to keep evey cent he earned. In fact, philanthropists like Harvey are the exception. So I'm still trying to understand what you mean when you claim that properly implemented individual liberty will naturally lead to more social responsibility, as in the kind of social responsibility exhibited by Harvey.

A while back I posted an article about how Oprah Winfrey just made it into the billionaire club (link) My point was that there seems to be a lot more interest in who makes a lot of money than who gives a lot away, a fact I find disturbing. Notice the part in bold about a Swiss billionaire who gave it all away! Burried!

If your still dissatisfied with my lack of a comprehensive definition of "society", well, maybe I'll try harder next time. At the moment I'm reeling from a bout with tequila I never should have entered. Damn agave plant should never have been invented.

hongomon


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1518060 - 05/03/03 08:20 PM (18 years, 7 days ago)

More data

A lot of technicalities, but the basic summary is that the Global Warming team have been cooking the books not just of the historical data, but of the most current data as well. Satellite measurements from 1979 onwards show the computer model they rely on contradicts what the actual measurements show.

So what is the reaction of the Global Warmers? Discredit the data, rather than adjust the model. "The theory can't be wrong, it just can't be. This is the largest supercomputer in the world we got here, telling us what's gonna happen."

Whatever the Global Warmers are basing their predictions on (precognition? divine revelation? time travellers from the future?), it certainly isn't empirical evidence.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinejimsuzo
I am the Eggman

Registered: 08/14/02
Posts: 269
Loc: Land of the not-so-free
Last seen: 11 years, 5 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1518125 - 05/03/03 08:51 PM (18 years, 7 days ago)

Speaking as someone with a masters degree in geology, I can assure you that there's no doubt the Earth has been warmer in the geological past. In the upper Cretaceous in fact (roughly 60-100 million years ago), the rate of volcanic outgassing (eruptions) was incredibly high. Tmeperatures and and global sea level, and probably CO2 concentrations were higher than presently observed. A shallow sea covered much of the western US on the eastern side of what is now the Rocky Mountains. Yes, there have also been many short-duration climatic fluctuations and mini-ice ages on top it all, as companies like Exxon love to point out. The problem is this: NEVER, EVER in the last 4.6 billion years (the age of the Earth) has there been vast deforestation superimposed on top of one of these climatic events. That, my friends is the kicker. Whether or not there's conlcusive evidence for the evil 'Greenhouse Effect' at the present is irrelavant to most rational scientisits such as myself. CO2 concentations are up (maybe not as high as in the past), but Deforestation is WAY UP. I think most everyone know that trees absorb Co2. It's trouble folks, Big Trouble and by the time the money-hungry politicians and big oil companies get their 'conclusive proof', it's gonna be too late. One of my favorite analogies is that the Earth will be a skillet on an electric stove that has gotten too hot. What do you do? - turn the stove off. Does that prevent your food from burning? Nah, it still crispy fries because it takes a while for that old electric burner to cool down. Too little too late.

It's time to act now, people. See what you personally can do to help control global warming at the link below.

http://www.canadachallenge.org/


--------------------
There are roughly nine galaxies for every person alive on the planet today. Each of these galaxies has a billion suns, give or take the odd hundred million


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: jimsuzo]
    #1518560 - 05/04/03 01:15 AM (18 years, 7 days ago)

Quote:

Speaking as someone with a masters degree in geology



Does this make you an expert on all the unknown forces at work during the history of the climate of the earth?

Quote:

I can assure you that there's no doubt the Earth has been warmer in the geological past.



This is widely accepted.

Quote:

The problem is this: NEVER, EVER in the last 4.6 billion years (the age of the Earth) has there been vast deforestation superimposed on top of one of these climatic events.



The problem is that you really don't know this. Are you really that arrogant to think that you have an accurate picture of the entire history of the earth? Tell me, can you predict the weather accurately from one week to the next? How about for the next year? You REALLY don't know. Have you read Pinky's link?

Now if you're concerned about deforestation, I suggest that you make an effort to stop funding the World bank and various foreign 'development' schemes which underwrite this activity. They are encouraging irrational land use through our tax dollars.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: jimsuzo]
    #1518691 - 05/04/03 02:45 AM (18 years, 7 days ago)

NEVER, EVER in the last 4.6 billion years (the age of the Earth) has there been vast deforestation superimposed on top of one of these climatic events

Excellent point jim.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinejimsuzo
I am the Eggman

Registered: 08/14/02
Posts: 269
Loc: Land of the not-so-free
Last seen: 11 years, 5 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1518935 - 05/04/03 05:44 AM (18 years, 7 days ago)

Quote:

Does this make you an expert on all the unknown forces at work during the history of the climate of the earth?


No, but certainly I'm much more of an expert than your average shroomer. Do you know what a Milankovitch cycle is, how frequently they occurred during the Pleistocene, and what their impact on global climatic change is? What about axial precession?

Quote:

This is widely accepted.


no shit. i was simply agreeing with the initial post so that everyone knows I accept that current temperatures and Co2 concentrations alone are NOT the critical issues. Rather, it is the fact that the deforestation is superimposed upon these factors.

Quote:

Are you really that arrogant to think that you have an accurate picture of the entire history of the earth?


no. Why are you putting words into my mouth and why are you assuming I'm being arrogant by participating in a reasonable discussion? I'm just using common sense in assuming that T-Rex and his buds weren't running around with chainsaws hacking down primary rainforest.

Quote:

Now if you're concerned about deforestation, I suggest that you make an effort to stop funding the World bank and various foreign 'development' schemes which underwrite this activity.


Your suggestion makes perfect sense. I'm trying to do my part by investing in socially responsible funds. May I suggest you and other shroomers try to do your part to control your household CO2 emissions by looking at the link I provided in my previous post.


--------------------
There are roughly nine galaxies for every person alive on the planet today. Each of these galaxies has a billion suns, give or take the odd hundred million


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: jimsuzo]
    #1518962 - 05/04/03 06:54 AM (18 years, 6 days ago)

Do you know what a Milankovitch cycle is, how frequently they occurred during the Pleistocene, and what their impact on global climatic change is? What about axial precession?

He doesn't yet, but after a 2 minute google search he soon will!!

And then he'll start "debating" you... :smile:


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineJameZTheNewbie
The Mahatma OfZalu

Registered: 05/24/02
Posts: 736
Loc: pass the gates of hell 2 ...
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: GazzBut]
    #1519011 - 05/04/03 08:19 AM (18 years, 6 days ago)

the outer atmosphere is being bombarded with "good"radiation fromt he sun in the past few years acording to the history channel...meaning the atmosphere is fixing the holes on its own


--------------------
Mice have feelings


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: jimsuzo]
    #1519108 - 05/04/03 11:04 AM (18 years, 6 days ago)

Quote:

Do you know what a Milankovitch cycle is, how frequently they occurred during the Pleistocene, and what their impact on global climatic change is? What about axial precession?



I know of these things, which makes the discussion of the unproven theory of human CO2 production as the cause of global warming a debatable topic. I am not a champion of creating great economic disruption, loss of jobs and extreme hardship for millions of humans by instituting public policies based on questionable science.

Quote:

Quote:


Are you really that arrogant to think that you have an accurate picture of the entire history of the earth?



no. Why are you putting words into my mouth and why are you assuming I'm being arrogant by participating in a reasonable discussion? I'm just using common sense in assuming that T-Rex and his buds weren't running around with chainsaws hacking down primary rainforest.



I was responding to this statement which conveys a belief that you know the history of the earth without a doubt, "NEVER, EVER in the last 4.6 billion years (the age of the Earth) has there been vast deforestation superimposed on top of one of these climatic events." Your confidence in the knowledge of the unknown is amazing, I apologize for the use of the word arrogant, perhaps presumptuous would be a better term but I am at a loss to find a word which may not offend. Couldn't meteors or comets crashing into the earth cause vast deforestation? Couldn't massive volcanic activity wipe out forests? Couldn't one of these climatic events result in deforestation? Couldn't some other biological agent (non-human) have wiped out forests in the past? The records are far from clear and our knowledge is far from complete.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinejimsuzo
I am the Eggman

Registered: 08/14/02
Posts: 269
Loc: Land of the not-so-free
Last seen: 11 years, 5 months
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: Evolving]
    #1519956 - 05/04/03 07:23 PM (18 years, 6 days ago)

Quote:

Couldn't meteors or comets crashing into the earth cause vast deforestation? Couldn't massive volcanic activity wipe out forests? Couldn't one of these climatic events result in deforestation?




Yes. I should have said vast and incessant deforestation in which case your natural events do not qualify as potential causes. The events you mention event are indeed possible cause of deforestation, but our understanding of geological history is that they are relatively infrequent occurrences after which nature has had an opportunity to rebuild itself. The theorized comet/meteor impact responsible for wiping out the dinosaurs that occurred at the close of the Cretaceous roughly 60 million years ago is typical. There is no question many trees were wiped out, but eventually nature recovered. Likewise, while CO2 emission due to volcanic outgassing shot sky-high during the Cretaceous, it eventually subsided and things returned to normal. Unfortunately, man's presence on earth won't allow the forests to recover and current US policy isn't helping the situation sufficiently with respect to CO2 emission. Not to worry too much tho, I figure the human species doesn't have much longer to screw things up here. We'll either annihilate ourselves, smother ourselves in our own waste, or consume all of the natural resources required for our survival. After that - hey, nature can take over and the planet will recover. The world will truly be a better place once our consumption and war-loving species is history.


--------------------
There are roughly nine galaxies for every person alive on the planet today. Each of these galaxies has a billion suns, give or take the odd hundred million


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Global Warming, Facts Challenge Hysteria [Re: jimsuzo]
    #1520329 - 05/04/03 10:07 PM (18 years, 6 days ago)

Quote:

The world will truly be a better place once our consumption and war-loving species is history.



So we should trash it as quickly as possible so it can start recovering sooner.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Kratom Powder for Sale, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Edibles   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Amazon Hemp, Portable Greenhouse

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Good article on global warming.
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
luvdemshrooms 4,311 86 06/10/03 06:56 AM
by Innvertigo
* A look at global warming.
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
luvdemshrooms 12,607 119 02/27/04 03:07 AM
by EchoVortex
* More fantasies about global warming carbonhoots 920 17 11/01/03 04:44 PM
by d33p
* Global Warming?
( 1 2 all )
luvdemshrooms 2,148 37 07/18/03 08:49 PM
by Innvertigo
* Blair must tackle global warming Xlea321 438 1 05/28/04 12:30 PM
by phi1618
* Global Elite-Conspiracy
( 1 2 3 4 all )
TrueBrode 4,957 62 01/17/04 05:53 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* Corporate Globalization Fact Sheet Psilocybeingzz 931 7 11/07/03 12:30 PM
by z@z.com
* "The Threat of Global Terrorism" - Tony Blair
( 1 2 all )
Phred 2,717 20 03/14/04 02:45 PM
by silversoul7

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,296 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
MRCA Tyroler Gluckspilze
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2021 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.058 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 12 queries.