| Home | Community | Message Board |
|
You are not signed in. Sign In New Account | Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery » |
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.
|
| Shop: |
| |||||||
|
Human Being ![]() Registered: 10/03/04 Posts: 7,894 Loc: Here & Now |
| ||||||
Quote: You're right...global warming is no longer a scientific debate. Nope, no more scientific research and analysis or anything like that. . I do see what you are getting at, and it's definitely true that there are a lot of politics involved in the climate change discussion, however, that does not by any means invalidate the science that we're talking about here. It means that we need to exercise our critical capacities, not blindly dismiss data and conclusions on the basis that the topic at hand involves politics.
-------------------- "What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?" "Belief is a beautiful armor But makes for the heaviest sword" - John Mayer Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin. "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln
| |||||||
|
Live to party,work to affordit. Registered: 10/03/04 Posts: 8,978 Loc: South Texas Last seen: 13 years, 1 month |
| ||||||
|
OMG you jumped off the bandwagon!
Good Job! Now are you going to continue to support the Democratic Party who are always pushing to create Tax Increases with this global warming hysteria..... The Climate Tax Bill was almost the largest tax increase in American history "The Climate Tax Bill would not have resulted in any “action” whatsoever. The bill, often touted as an "insurance policy" against global warming, would instead have been all economic pain for no climate gain. " "Just a few days after the embarrassing defeat of the Climate Bill, the Democrats were at it again. As the price of gas at the pump continued to climb, Democrats were proposing yet another energy tax as part of their “solution” to our energy challenges. The Democrats’ “no” energy bill would increase taxes by $17 billion for America’s oil and gas producers and increase government bureaucracy. Their bill does nothing to increase access to America’s extensive oil and natural gas reserves, does nothing for the promotion of nuclear energy, does nothing to increase refinery capacity, does nothing for electricity generation or transmission, and does nothing for the utilization of clean coal. They are attempting to ignore the basic concepts of supply and demand." http://epw.senate.gov/public/ind -------------------- America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure" We have "reckless fiscal policies" America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better Barack Obama
| |||||||
|
I watch Fox News ![]() Registered: 03/23/06 Posts: 2,946 |
| ||||||
|
Its amazing how many people around the world were suckered by this hoax. If you want to know what it might be like in couple years go to http://www.youtube.com and use the keywords Soylent Green and North Korea and look at those videos.
-------------------- http://www.theamericanright.com/ http://www.cnbc.com/id/15838446 http://www.climatedepot.com
| |||||||
|
Registered: 01/24/08 Posts: 5,784 Loc: The North Last seen: 10 years, 6 months |
| ||||||
|
isn't it funny how right wing nuts who don't believe in climate change dodge arguments and bitch about taxes nonstop so as to avoid considering the fact that they have no point.
First off I don't pretend to know what's really in this energy bill (unlike you guys) but energy tax reforms have worked successfully in Europe and have transformed some of their countries into environmental technology leaders. But I guess you Americans scoff at economic success anyway. More to the point madtown, what has convinced you there is no evidince to support anthropogenic climate change? Are you just realizing that Climate Change denial is too difficult to defend so your going for the sleeker new "It's not us though" aproach. We know there is a shit load of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere because of human intervention and we know that these gasses cause warming by deflecting infaread radiation in all directions and keeping it from leaving the earth. How is this not translating to anthropogenic climate change to you? -------------------- "Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?" "The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything." - Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now. Conquer's Club
| |||||||
|
Comrade Registered: 01/10/08 Posts: 8,993 Last seen: 1 year, 8 months |
| ||||||
|
.
-------------------- . Edited by AnonymousRabbit (05/19/22 01:10 AM)
| |||||||
|
Sun-Beams out of Cucumbers Registered: 03/06/03 Posts: 21,289 Loc: The Ocean of Notions Last seen: 9 days, 18 hours |
| ||||||
Quote: You have no idea what you're talking about vis a vis my views. I'm not right-wing and I've never been a denier of climate change. Anyone here could tell you that from reading my posts in the past. Until about a year ago, I was a vocal supporter of greenhouse gas control and an avid believer in man-made global warming. However, unlike many, I am able to change my views and don't have a dogmatic attachment to any one particular argument. To me, the evidence doesn't seem that strong. As I've said five times in this thread alone, there have been billions upon billions of years of climate change on Earth, with literally thousands of shifts between hot and cold. THOUSANDS, over BILLIONS of YEARS. Not little half a degree Fahrenheit rise, but swings of hundreds of degrees, with no input from man whatsoever. But now, the temperature rises less than a degree and it MUST BE BECAUSE OF PEOPLE? Why do you expect to live on the Earth in the only time in the planets history that the temperature remains static? Do you consider yourself that important? I'm not saying pollution is great. I live in the city, I hate smog. But is it not true that the amount of water vapor, also a potent greenhouse gas, that enters the atmosphere every day from natural process' is greater than that put out my man? I'm a geologist, and the amounts of nasty chemicals and steam put out by any volcanic eruption is staggering. And volcanoes erupt every single day. Again, I'm not claiming the Earth is not warming. It appears to me that it is. But I firmly believe this to be part of a natural cycle, as has ALWAYS BEEN THE CASE. Always. 100% of the time. Except for now? Pretty big exception. -------------------- After one comes, through contact with it's administrators, no longer to cherish greatly the law as a remedy in abuses, then the bottle becomes a sovereign means of direct action. If you cannot throw it at least you can always drink out of it. - Ernest Hemingway If it is life that you feel you are missing I can tell you where to find it. In the law courts, in business, in government. There is nothing occurring in the streets. Nothing but a dumbshow composed of the helpless and the impotent. -Cormac MacCarthy He who learns must suffer. And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God. - Aeschylus
| |||||||
|
Comrade Registered: 01/10/08 Posts: 8,993 Last seen: 1 year, 8 months |
| ||||||
|
.
-------------------- . Edited by AnonymousRabbit (05/19/22 01:10 AM)
| |||||||
|
Sun-Beams out of Cucumbers Registered: 03/06/03 Posts: 21,289 Loc: The Ocean of Notions Last seen: 9 days, 18 hours |
| ||||||
|
I'm on my way to work and don't have time to make a lengthy response.
But volcanic eruptions cooling the earth. That is a new one by me. And Milankovich Cycles are the only way the Earth has warmed in the past? That is a ridiculous oversimplification. The fact is, the reasons the Earth has warmed or cooled in the past are nowhere near known well. My professor, Dr. Margaret Frasier does quite a bit of work in this subject and would tell you the exact same thing. To pretend like it is a cut-and-dry simplicity of a regular cycle with no other inputs is crazy. -------------------- After one comes, through contact with it's administrators, no longer to cherish greatly the law as a remedy in abuses, then the bottle becomes a sovereign means of direct action. If you cannot throw it at least you can always drink out of it. - Ernest Hemingway If it is life that you feel you are missing I can tell you where to find it. In the law courts, in business, in government. There is nothing occurring in the streets. Nothing but a dumbshow composed of the helpless and the impotent. -Cormac MacCarthy He who learns must suffer. And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God. - Aeschylus
| |||||||
|
Error: divide byzero Registered: 04/27/01 Posts: 23,480 Loc: Caribbean Last seen: 3 months, 8 days |
| ||||||
|
> The fact is, the reasons the Earth has warmed or cooled in the past are nowhere near known well.
Completely agree with you on this! -------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
| |||||||
|
Live to party,work to affordit. Registered: 10/03/04 Posts: 8,978 Loc: South Texas Last seen: 13 years, 1 month |
| ||||||
Quote: My gut feeling is that it has something to do with the SUN. -------------------- America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure" We have "reckless fiscal policies" America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better Barack Obama
| |||||||
|
Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 4 months |
| ||||||
|
Last chance, folks. Next post in this thread dealing with the science of climate change as opposed to public policy on climate change sends this thread to Science and Technology.
Phred
| |||||||
![]() Registered: 06/23/07 Posts: 7,953 Last seen: 1 year, 11 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Could you explain this better? I am curious to know why our temperature is not 99.999% determined by the sun (I'm assuming there's a small amount of heat produced by the fissile decomposition of various things in the earth's core) I used to joke about polititans would tax the very air we could breathe if they could get away with it. http://www.carbontax.org/ And now, Joseph Gobbels would be proud. http://www.prisonplanet.com/arti Quote: You know what I find annoying about this? We've already got the technology and infastructure in place that we could move from oil to water, or electricity through so many ways. If people want, you just need to do a little research, procure some resources and you can make your own power. You can be independant if you want it. This is not about saving the planet, this is about taxing people even more and making a world government via stealth. And if a world government (like the European Union was for decades, it was brought in by stealth, and has been gradually taking control of all it's subject nations laws) is brought in by stealth, then it is not by the people, for the people. Tackling pollution is something I am very keen on, and I am pleased when I see innovations in dealing with actual pollutants like mercury, spent uranium, fluoride, and nitrate runoff. CO2 is not a pollutant. Carbon Dixoide, Oxygen, Water and Sunlight are the four basic elements of life on this planet. I love the spin on this article here: Quote: Another way of saying this is: Plants need less irrigation with higher CO2 levels, increasing yeilds in low water areas. --------------------
| |||||||
|
Comrade Registered: 01/10/08 Posts: 8,993 Last seen: 1 year, 8 months |
| ||||||
|
.
-------------------- . Edited by AnonymousRabbit (05/19/22 01:10 AM)
| |||||||
|
Comrade Registered: 01/10/08 Posts: 8,993 Last seen: 1 year, 8 months |
| ||||||
|
.
-------------------- . Edited by AnonymousRabbit (05/19/22 01:10 AM)
| |||||||
|
Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 4 months |
| ||||||
This thread was moved from Political Discussion.Reason: And away we go.
| |||||||
![]() Registered: 06/23/07 Posts: 7,953 Last seen: 1 year, 11 months |
| ||||||
|
When amoral, secretive societies want to fund a world government via carbon tax, the issue is no longer scientific, it's political.
But nevermind someone's inabillity to see that. It doesn't matter what forum it's disscussed in. And the talk is not important either. I didn't need to see the science (but it helped) to tell that this was a usurpation of the enviromental protection movement. I just read what the council on foriegn relations said about it. Now, the reason question people should ask is that our unelected leaders world wide have decided to tax us for things that produce CO2, which is hard to circumvent, but not impossible. The question people should be asking is how to make this tax fall flat on it's face and be unenforceable. People can do small scale power production, get a steam turbine and burn wood, or if you're feeling up to it, make a water cracker to drive a steam turbine. Can't put a tax on a system that has water as the end result, until they decide to tax water as well, as water vapour is the most significant greenhouse gas. --------------------
Edited by Visionary Tools (06/19/08 12:08 PM)
| |||||||
|
Comrade Registered: 01/10/08 Posts: 8,993 Last seen: 1 year, 8 months |
| ||||||
|
.
-------------------- . Edited by AnonymousRabbit (05/19/22 01:10 AM)
| |||||||
|
I watch Fox News ![]() Registered: 03/23/06 Posts: 2,946 |
| ||||||
|
-------------------- http://www.theamericanright.com/ http://www.cnbc.com/id/15838446 http://www.climatedepot.com
| |||||||
|
I watch Fox News ![]() Registered: 03/23/06 Posts: 2,946 |
| ||||||
|
August 31, 2007
Um... no: "Global warming – who pays and when?" - "The economics of climate change is driving what kind of pact nations may be willing to make." (The Christian Science Monitor) The only real question is which leader will have the courage and honesty to stand against the stampeding herd and admit we don't have a known climate catastrophe looming, don't really know what the global temperature is, what it should be or how to knowingly and predictably adjust it even if we decided good reason existed to attempt to do so? So, who will put their hand up? Who will lead mankind away from the abyss? "George Monbiot: zero emissions by 2030" - "Many people in the global warming movement have lost their minds. For example, we have seen that Al Gore and James Hansen predict 82-feet rise in the sea level. There's a huge competition between these folks. George Monbiot wants to promote his new book so he doesn't want to stay behind. Instead, he wants to remain the number 1 "moonbat" as people outside his movement call him. What can he do to achieve this non-trivial goal and beat his tough competition?" (The Reference Frame) "Deferred Forecasts Of Global Warming - An Example Of The Misuse of Science" - "A blatant example of masking an untested hypothesis as a scientific paper has been published in Science. The paper is “Improved Surface Temperature Prediction for the Coming Decade from a Global Climate Model” Doug M. Smith, Stephen Cusack, Andrew W. Colman, Chris K. Folland, Glen R. Harris, and James M. Murphy (10 August 2007) Science 317 (5839), 796. [DOI: 10.1126/science.1139540]." (Climate Science) http://www.junkscience.com/aug07 -------------------- http://www.theamericanright.com/ http://www.cnbc.com/id/15838446 http://www.climatedepot.com
| |||||||
|
Man of Science Registered: 03/15/05 Posts: 1,974 Loc: Hogtown |
| ||||||
|
The IPCC is probably the most visible (and rather obvious) propaganda outlet of this generation. Amongst all the fraudulent hockey-stick graphs, and irrational pre-supposition that CO2 actually DRIVES climate (heat flux), you find cute little appeals to emotion. A human-denigrating one, specifically. They force us to look upon ourselves as the consuming meat we are, and the damage brought about by such, and they exploit it. And why not? The same ones pimping the whole idea (fancy-pants artsies or politicians) MAKE A LIVING exciting the emotions of the masses. OH NOES!!! All those poor polar bears and our EVUL SUVs and EVUL AMERIKA SHEEPLES.
Bring us ever closer to a scientific dictatorship. The ever present Human Will to Order is at work here. Sustainability will need to be forced upon us. I don't buy the climate change crisis garbage. The climate has always been changing. There have been periods in earth's history when [CO2] was greater. Ice shelfs breaking and floating away could very well be signs of ice growth (mass increases, and surface supporting area remains mostly constant, hence, greater stress, hence breakage). All climate and weather has ONE driving force, which is the sun. Without heat flux, there can be no convection, so no winds, no ocean currents. [For some reason, the image won't show up, so here's the link.] To all you CO2 fear-mongers out there, have you bothered to look at the spectral absorption of CO2 compared to H2O? Water, specifically it's vapor-liquid equilibrium, forms the primary basis for our atmospheric conditions. There is roughly 8x10^22 moles of water on earth. There is roughly 6.8x10^16 moles of carbon dioxide. That's a difference of 6 orders of magnitude . See those carbon dioxide bands at about 2 um? That's not thermal radiation, thats just near IR, red-shifted out of visible. Water clearly dwarfs CO2 in absorption. all across the spectrum. Well, that's my big bad science. Take note it's not time-dependent either. Fuckin' here, and now. CO2 has fuck-all to do with climate. Even if you were to increase the concentration of CO2 tenfold, it's still insignificant in our little cuvette that is Earth, in that massive spectrometer that is the solar system. Also, it's nice to see Fred using his dictatorial powers once again. At first I was cross, as I consider the science inseparable from the politics: the issue of Climate Change is an exciting study in the effectiveness of propaganda. However, moving it to a new audience outside of the political forum opens it up to a new audience with new ideas, many of which are not actually their own, but ones which came from a screen. The location of the thread won't take away the political excitement. Edited by Minstrel (06/19/08 04:21 PM)
| |||||||
| |||||||
| Shop: |
|
| Similar Threads | Poster | Views | Replies | Last post | ||
![]() |
Scientist publishes "escape route" from global warming | 1,908 | 14 | 08/03/06 11:51 AM by Viveka | ||
![]() |
Global Warming??? ( |
3,237 | 24 | 02/01/05 09:35 PM by crazyman | ||
![]() |
More global warming rhetoric | 3,535 | 16 | 10/31/08 11:33 PM by lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl | ||
![]() |
combatting global warming through extracting Co2 from the atmosphere | 2,910 | 17 | 01/05/07 08:44 AM by makaveli8x8 | ||
![]() |
Global Warming here in the north east.. | 1,254 | 15 | 01/08/07 08:17 AM by Vvellum | ||
![]() |
Global Warming May Have Caused Extinction | 490 | 0 | 01/20/05 06:13 PM by Worf | ||
![]() |
Global Warming Video | 700 | 11 | 05/02/06 11:14 AM by Viveka | ||
![]() |
Plants May Contribute Up to 1/3 of a Greenhouse Gas, Globally | 948 | 7 | 01/13/06 09:45 AM by Notell |
| Extra information | ||
| You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled Moderator: trendal, automan, Northerner 6,295 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum. [ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ] | ||


. I do see what you are getting at, and it's definitely true that there are a lot of politics involved in the climate change discussion, however, that does not by any means invalidate the science that we're talking about here. It means that we need to exercise our critical capacities, not blindly dismiss data and conclusions on the basis that the topic at hand involves politics.


This thread was moved from Political Discussion.
