Global Warming Debate

[badmonkey]

When did I mention cars? Oh wait...I didn't.

I WIN!

So you agree that co2 emissions by cars isn't a problem.
Awesome.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Hey AlGore, not so fast Tubby

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1236090/Inconvenient-truth-Al-Gore-hes-caught-exaggerating-threat-global-warming--again.html?ITO=1490

[epo]

So you agree that co2 emissions by cars isn't a problem.
Awesome.

Nice logical fallacy by assumption.

[Dude!]

Nice logical fallacy by assumption.

badmonkey is a bit over
your intellectual pay grade
you should just be still
for a while

[SonOfSmeagol]

What's the cost of being wrong?

Say global warming is cyclical, the "disasters" that will occur are non-existent and that nothing much will change. life goes on.

What did we put all that money into? Reducing carbon emissions?

What's the easiest way of reducing carbon emissions? Normally, increasing efficiency of the system in question.

So we did all this, we made our industries more efficient, our homes more efficient, our cars more efficient and so on and so forth. Fortunately, it was never particularly necessary as we're hypothesizing.

Now consider our next problem that is currently happening: Reduced energy stores. Oil in particular -- nearly 3/4s of the oil burned in America is used on transportation. We have less oil available to us than ever before and what is left is more costly to bring to market.

Now we're stuck with a bunch of more efficient cars, more efficiently heated and cooled homes and most importantly more efficient industry.

So what's the downside in being wrong? A little less short term profit for a little more long term planning?

If I came to you in 2002 and said the price of a gallon of gas was going to double by 2005 and continue rising afterward and never really come down afterward. If you drove an <15mpg SUV during that time would you be more inclined to buy a more fuel efficient car?

We're dealing with the same issue now as the IEA has reported our oil reserves are rapidly diminishing and our production has reached a plateau, or even gone into decline.

The solution to both issues is one and the same.

Why is this even an issue? Even if we are wrong, we still come out ahead of other countries that refuse to act out of short term greed.

These are really good thoughts. Intellectually it all makes sense. It would be viable if all the industrial countries signed up to it. But, the reality is that we aren’t in a position, at this point, to reduce our competitiveness (by investing really heavily in efficiency and/or placing drastic controls on industry) in the near term for long-term gains. China is cranking out like one coal-fired plant every week or so. Maybe we should’ve spent like $500B of that stimulus on efficiency.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

How much CO2 was emitted into the air with all those Jets going to Copenhagen? If these douches were serious about this issue, they would have done everything by Webcast. Fuck Gotomeeting.com could have made a fortune

[GregoryJoseph]

Ol' Al Gore is at it again, lying to the Copenhagen "climate change summit," whatever that is.

(Dec. 15) -- It is an inconvenient time for Al Gore to be fudging numbers on global climate change.

With the specter of the "Climategate" e-mails hanging ominously over the Copenhagen climate change summit, the former vice president told a crowd there on Monday that one scientist had predicted the polar ice cap would have no summer ice in five to seven years.

"These figures are fresh. Some of the models suggest to Dr. Maslowski that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years," Gore told the audience.

But the scientist Gore quoted, Dr. Wieslaw Maslowski of the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif., told the Times of London that he never said such a thing.

FULL STORY HERE (http://www.sphere.com/world/article/al-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen/19281919?icid=main|main|dl1|link7|http%3A%2F%2Fwww .sphere.com%2Fworld%2Farticle%2Fal-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen%2F19281919)

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Ol' Al Gore is at it again, lying to the Copenhagen "climate change summit," whatever that is.



FULL STORY HERE (http://www.sphere.com/world/article/al-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen/19281919?icid=main|main|dl1|link7|http%3A%2F%2Fwww .sphere.com%2Fworld%2Farticle%2Fal-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen%2F19281919)

HERESY!!!! HERESY I TELL YOU!!!!!

[Syd]

These are really good thoughts. Intellectually it all makes sense. It would be viable if all the industrial countries signed up to it. But, the reality is that we aren’t in a position, at this point, to reduce our competitiveness (by investing really heavily in efficiency and/or placing drastic controls on industry) in the near term for long-term gains. China is cranking out like one coal-fired plant every week or so. Maybe we should’ve spent like $500B of that stimulus on efficiency.

And, like I said, the price of coal will be going up as well. Oil determines the price of energy and anything that uses fossil fuels in particular has exponentially increasing cost from rising oil prices. It takes a herculean effort to bring enough coal to keep a coal power plant running and most of that effort is through diesel burning trains or bunker fuel/diesel burning boats. In addition to the steel, etc necessary to build and maintain that infrastructure.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Ol' Al Gore is at it again, lying to the Copenhagen "climate change summit," whatever that is.



FULL STORY HERE (http://www.sphere.com/world/article/al-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen/19281919?icid=main|main|dl1|link7|http%3A%2F%2Fwww .sphere.com%2Fworld%2Farticle%2Fal-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen%2F19281919)

So Basically AlGore is the Jim Bakker of the environental movement

[west milly Tom]

So Basically AlGore is the Jim Bakker of the environental movement

Mark Levin has been sayng exactly that for some time now.


Please tell me you heard his poem. He is officially bat shit crazy. Similarly he said on the Daily Show "a mile down from the earth's crust its a million degrees."

[Knowledged_one]

Ol' Al Gore is at it again, lying to the Copenhagen "climate change summit," whatever that is.



FULL STORY HERE (http://www.sphere.com/world/article/al-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen/19281919?icid=main|main|dl1|link7|http%3A%2F%2Fwww .sphere.com%2Fworld%2Farticle%2Fal-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen%2F19281919)

Dont worry im sure Nancy Pelosi will be keen on prosecuting this guy for not remembering correctly much like she would rather prosecute the people who revealed the lies of these people rather then the ones who perpetrated the lies themself.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Mark Levin has been sayng exactly that for some time now.


Please tell me you heard his poem. He is officially bat shit crazy. Similarly he said on the Daily Show "a mile down from the earth's crust its a million degrees."

Now thats where he invented the internet :clap:


Gore is basically like the stockbrokers in Boiler Room pitching med patent stock

[SonOfSmeagol]

And, like I said, the price of coal will be going up as well. Oil determines the price of energy and anything that uses fossil fuels in particular has exponentially increasing cost from rising oil prices. It takes a herculean effort to bring enough coal to keep a coal power plant running and most of that effort is through diesel burning trains or bunker fuel/diesel burning boats. In addition to the steel, etc necessary to build and maintain that infrastructure.

I've heard that the Chinese are like 100 years behind us when it comes to safety in coal mines. And they have a lot of coal mines. The "price" of a worker's life is apparently less than the aggravation of worrying about it. So they got that goin' for 'em, which is nice.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Isn't it Ironic

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601130&sid=a5wStc0K6jhY

[GregoryJoseph]

Isn't it Ironic

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601130&sid=a5wStc0K6jhY

HAHAHAHAHA!


By the way, it's going down to 17 degrees tonight here...:surrender:

[WRESTLINGFAN]

I heard the latest is to give 3rd world dictators like Chavez, Morales and Mugabe Billions of dollars. Like all that cash is really going to climate change in those countries. I have a bridge to sell

[opie's twisted balls]

Isn't it Ironic

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601130&sid=a5wStc0K6jhY
I hope they all get frostbite on their nipples, clits and cock heads! Useless bureaucratic douche bags!


I heard the latest is to give 3rd world dictators like Chavez, Morales and Mugabe Billions of dollars. Like all that cash is really going to climate change in those countries. I have a bridge to sell
There was some hump from Uganda, Zambia or other shithole landlocked African country on the news yesterday whining about how the developed countries aren't giving enough to the poorer countries to combat global warming. At least this asshole was honest enough to admit its about the money.

[GregoryJoseph]

17 degrees outside right now.

AND IT'S NOT EVEN WINTER YET!

[sr71blackbird]

In case anyone is knowledgeable and interested, here is a recently documented undersea volcanic eruption. Scientists had a feeing there was eruptions taking place in this area, and so they sent down a submersible to the area and quickly captured these images. Notice the upward flowing bubbles streaming out of the molten lava. This is outgassing of pure flurocarbons and other so called green house gasses. This eruption and others of these types are actually going on a lot more frequently the world over and have been ongoing for billions of years. The cumulative effect of these outgassings is not only responsible for the vast majority of detectible gasses within our atmosphere, they are responsible FOR our atmosphere. The quantities of manmade greenhouse gasses vastly pales in comparison to these eruptions. Draw your own conclusions as to mans true effect on the planets climate.

VIDEO LINK (http://news.yahoo.com/video/us-15749625/science-first-video-of-submarine-lava-eruption-17192019)

[epo]

17 degrees outside right now.

AND IT'S NOT EVEN WINTER YET!

Shut up baby. Go shovel the snow.

[ToiletCrusher]

No snow for this Great Lakes boy!!!

[WRESTLINGFAN]

AlGORE The poet


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/12/al-gore-climate-change-global-warming-poem.html

[pennington]

I heard the latest is to give 3rd world dictators like Chavez, Morales and Mugabe Billions of dollars. Like all that cash is really going to climate change in those countries. I have a bridge to sell

Right. This has always been a redistribution of wealth scam, with the inevitable middlemen taking their cut. And this genius administration, through Hillary Clinton, pledges $100 billion a year of U.S. money and the delegates in Copenhagen are complaining it's not nearly enough.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Right. This has always been a redistribution of wealth scam, with the inevitable middlemen taking their cut. And this genius administration, through Hillary Clinton, pledges $100 billion a year of U.S. money and the delegates in Copenhagen are complaining it's not nearly enough.

Chavez, Castro and others will be spending that money on hookers and coke

[Serpico1103]

Chavez, Castro and others will be spending that money on hookers and coke

And that is different from our leaders how?

[GregoryJoseph]

Great.

Now there's evidence that electric cars may cause cancer... (http://www.thebigmoney.com/blogs/shifting-gears/2009/12/15/do-electric-cars-cause-cancer)

[Serpico1103]

Great.

Now there's evidence that electric cars may cause cancer... (http://www.thebigmoney.com/blogs/shifting-gears/2009/12/15/do-electric-cars-cause-cancer)

"This question has been bandied around the blogosphere, and answered as best as can be, given limited research, much of which is extrapolated from EMF studies of the fields generated by power lines, cell phones, household appliances, and so on."

So, electric cars cause as much cancer as your TV, toaster, phone, and computer. Good luck selling big business on that.
This is a Glenn Beck approach.
Do electric cars conspire to kill humans in 2020? Extrapolating from the data in the latest Terminator movie. YES.

[hanso]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RYvk1OtI0H0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RYvk1OtI0H0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Snoogans]

i dont know why, maybe the silly show, but ill listen to Bill Nye all day and for some reason what he says means more than what some other scientist says

[hanso]

I used to watch him also. I think he had his own show.

[TeeBone]

Initiate a google search on, 'Ice age' and you can gain access to hundreds, if not thousands of news stories from years past that quote countless scientists, climatologist and environmentalist. Collectively, they claim another Ice Age is coming and is on the way.
What the fuck has happened since then? Sorry to name call but who are the people pushing this mushy-headed, non-proven series of flawed study material that contradict logic and reason in this debate? Socialists!!!!
Ask yourself why the hell the only way in solving the myth of global warming is through socialist ideology...Wake the hell up! Its a money game designed to flip our world view on an issue that sadly does not exist. That coupled with the impending power-grab by those who push this should be a HUGE RED FLAG to any open-minded, honest and free thinking individual. Has it ever occurred to anyone that the glowing orb in the sky is the reason we are cold and hot? The ebb and flow of solar radiation, sun spots and the like have been outlined as an indicator of temperature fluctuation. Scientifically, logically and rationally this is far more plausible a reason for warming than the evil coal plant or the H2-road trip to Pollutionville.
I feel sorry for people that fall victim to believing that man alone is responsible for Global Warming. The science is fine...You are flawed !!! I will agree that more people produce more pollution,etc... but not at the catastrophic rate that is being outlined by the likes of Gorehttp://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Z7rNFuYgi0zGwM:http://www.danzfamily.com/archives/blogphotos/07/759-al-gore-fire.jpg, Boxerhttp://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:YZ7tdsK4T7gA6M:http://specfriggintacular.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/barbara-boxer.jpg, 'He who must not be named'http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:mP3f2dwwAqGYtM:http://images.theage.com.au/2009/04/03/450989/barack_obama_lead_gallery__583x400-420x0.jpg and the rest of the bunch pushing this drivel down our throats. We don't even have to discuss the humor in Mrs. Boxer's media driven televised discussion on the topic being cancelled due to the blizzard. I am not saying that having a blizzard is any reason to discount that the Earth may in fact be warming, but it is somewhat comical to me. C'mon, We are smarter than this........Maybe we aren't.
This will be picked apart by some pussy left-wing douche bag so go ahead, fire away. While doing so, just go ahead and go Fuck off somewhere too.

[hanso]

If wingers would focus on climate change. Rather than being perplexed with the global warming part of things.

Then they just might see the forest through the trees. And what is so bad about using renewable energy anyway? The way the right is so staunch against it/pro oil. You could say they are pro terrorist. Because big oil does fund their needs.

[Snoogans]

actually the temp on the earth going up is what will cause that ice age.

Temp goes up enough, enough freshwater melts into the ocean to fuck with the salinity, causing the north atlantic current to stop. That is the current that heats most of the top half of the planet. That stops, its gonna get REALLY cold


and its also what stirs up the atmosphere more, causeing our storms to be more severe

[epo]

If wingers would focus on climate change. Rather than being perplexed with the global warming part of things.

Then they just might see the forest through the trees. And what is so bad about using renewable energy anyway? The way the right is so staunch against it/pro oil. You could say they are pro terrorist. Because big oil does fund their needs.

They made a serious error in calling it "Global Warming". Global warming (or global cooling) is an output to the root cause of massively rising CO2 levels.

That's the core problem, CO2.

[epo]

The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686)

Policy-makers and the media, particularly in the United States, frequently assert that climate science is highly uncertain. Some have used this as an argument against adopting strong measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, while discussing a major U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report on the risks of climate change, then-EPA administrator Christine Whitman argued, "As [the report] went through review, there was less consensus on the science and conclusions on climate change" (1). Some corporations whose revenues might be adversely affected by controls on carbon dioxide emissions have also alleged major uncertainties in the science (2). Such statements suggest that there might be substantive disagreement in the scientific community about the reality of anthropogenic climate change. This is not the case.

Just a reminder for all of the non-believers on climate change from the scientific community....you are wrong. Let science take this one.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

The earth is 4.5 billion years old. Of course the climate is going to change. Nye is entitled to his opinion, but shutting off all debate and not allowing dissent/disagreement by climate experts who don't believe that man is causing this is unpatriotic.

[underdog]

this is unpatriotic.

Ew.

[Snoogans]

Ew.

this is america buddy, if you dont like spaghetti and meatballs then get the hell out

[WRESTLINGFAN]

The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686)



Just a reminder for all of the non-believers on climate change from the scientific community....you are wrong. Let science take this one.

http://www.iceagenow.com/Climatologists_Who_Disagree.htm

Will dissenters be charged with heresy?

[Snoogans]

http://www.iceagenow.com/Climatologists_Who_Disagree.htm

Will dissenters be charged with heresy?

again you know the planet warming is what causes the ice age right?

[keithy_19]

I'm all for the earth getting hotter and eventualy exploding. Fuck it. We've had a good run. Let's be the people who bring down the earth., We'll be forever remembered as those jackasses!

[underdog]

http://www.iceagenow.com/Climatologists_Who_Disagree.htm

Will dissenters be charged with heresy?

Stop being so unpatriotic.

[brettmojo]

actually the temp on the earth going up is what will cause that ice age.

Temp goes up enough, enough freshwater melts into the ocean to fuck with the salinity, causing the north atlantic current to stop. That is the current that heats most of the top half of the planet. That stops, its gonna get REALLY cold


and its also what stirs up the atmosphere more, causeing our storms to be more severe
I have on good authority that this all will take place the day before three days from now.

[TeeBone]

I'm all for the earth getting hotter and eventualy exploding. Fuck it. We've had a good run. Let's be the people who bring down the earth., We'll be forever remembered as those jackasses!

...But if it explodes, who will be left to remember it?

with that said, I agree that we are working on borrowed time. I still can't believe we have made it as far as we have----as a species.

[epo]

http://www.iceagenow.com/Climatologists_Who_Disagree.htm

Will dissenters be charged with heresy?

again you know the planet warming is what causes the ice age right?

Its hilarious that an asian stoner understands science better than WrestlingFan.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Most of us don't want religion forced on us. So its hypocrtical to force your beliefs in manmade global warming, climate change or whatever the word du jour is. If you want to drive smart cars, use those new lightbulbs and green your house go ahead no ones stpping you. Don't tell me what kind of car to drive or lightbulb to use. You people who think the debate is over and wont even listen to climatoligists, and other scientists who dont believe in this theory are no better than the religious nuts

[WRESTLINGFAN]

again you know the planet warming is what causes the ice age right?

Again, the earth is billions of years old. Youre saying theres no climate cycles?

[underdog]

Again, the earth is billions of years old. Youre saying theres no climate cycles?

Stop being so unpatriotic.

And I think what he's saying is that we're contributing to a climate cycle.

[badmonkey]

Stop being so unpatriotic.

And I think what he's saying is that we're contributing to a climate cycle.

Yes, in much the same way that pissing in the ocean contributes to changes in ocean temperature and depth.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Yes, in much the same way that pissing in the ocean contributes to changes in ocean temperature and depth.

Or when a volcano spews carbon monoxide or other chemicals into the air. Maybe Boxuhhh , Shooma, Waxman and others want to limit the size of eruptions.

[TeeBone]

Most of us don't want religion forced on us. So its hypocrtical to force your beliefs in manmade global warming, climate change or whatever the word du jour is. If you want to drive smart cars, use those new lightbulbs and green your house go ahead no ones stpping you. Don't tell me what kind of car to drive or lightbulb to use. You people who think the debate is over and wont even listen to climatoligists, and other scientists who dont believe in this theory are no better than the religious nuts

http://www.indonesiamatters.com/images-2/hit-nail.jpg

[keithy_19]

Yes, in much the same way that pissing in the ocean contributes to changes in ocean temperature and depth.

Thank you for doing your part to ruin mother eath, jackass.

[badmonkey]

Thank you for doing your part to ruin mother eath, jackass.

Like nobody pisses outside in Jersey :)

[WRESTLINGFAN]

AlGore is the Fred Phelps of this movement

[keithy_19]

Like nobody pisses outside in Jersey :)

We have designated holes that help cool the planet. The technology is rather new and yes, there are some flaws, but god we're trying.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

We have designated holes that help cool the planet. The technology is rather new and yes, there are some flaws, but god we're trying.



Christie is already making some improvements :thumbup:

[underdog]

Yes, in much the same way that pissing in the ocean contributes to changes in ocean temperature and depth.

Do you honestly think that humans have in no way contributed negatively to the environment in the last 100 years or so? I'm seriously asking.

Do you also honestly think that it's not worth it for us to at least attempt to slow our negative impact on the environment, if you believe it exists?

[badmonkey]

Do you honestly think that humans have in no way contributed negatively to the environment in the last 100 years or so? I'm seriously asking.

Do you also honestly think that it's not worth it for us to at least attempt to slow our negative impact on the environment, if you believe it exists?

Interesting way to phrase the questions. Yes, in the last 100 years or so, humans have contributed negatively to the environment. Enough for a global destruction? No.

We should do what we can individually to reduce our individual impact on the environment. Cap and Trade isn't gonna fix anything. It's only going to allow big polluters to buy the rights to pollute elsewhere. You do understand the "trade" part right? I'm seriously asking.

You're not gonna easily find somebody that honestly believes we should actively pursue trashing the shit out of the planet. I'd be a lot more interested if there were solutions being proposed that actually made sense instead of alarmist rhetoric about the end of the world.

[Dude!]

i throw empty mcdonalds
bags and cups out of my
car window
just to infuriate the underdogs
of the world

[opie's twisted balls]

Most of us don't want religion forced on us. So its hypocrtical to force your beliefs in manmade global warming, climate change or whatever the word du jour is. If you want to drive smart cars, use those new lightbulbs and green your house go ahead no ones stpping you. Don't tell me what kind of car to drive or lightbulb to use. You people who think the debate is over and wont even listen to climatoligists, and other scientists who dont believe in this theory are no better than the religious nuts
I think I love you.

Like nobody pisses outside in Jersey :)
From my experience no you don't piss outside. Jerseyites just find the nearest corner and take a leak.

Do you honestly think that humans have in no way contributed negatively to the environment in the last 100 years or so? I'm seriously asking.

Do you also honestly think that it's not worth it for us to at least attempt to slow our negative impact on the environment, if you believe it exists?
I honestly think that the net impact from mankind in the past 100 years has been positive. Rivers and lakes are cleaner, there's far more regulatory oversight, much more public awareness to rrr, industry has been forced to behave more responsibly, there are more energy alternatives.

As for reducing impact to the environment thats where people like Al Gore, David Suzuki, etc. and groups like the IPCC shit the bed. Unless you're a raving lunatic of course you want clean air, water, thriving and diverse species but thats more about conservationism then environmentalism. The reality is there are >6.6 billion people on our little orb and to feed, cloth, educate, employee as many of us as possible there's got to be industry and with industry there are going to be trade offs with our host. We take land in one spot to build houses, offices, factories but also work to reclaim land that may have been previously used and return it to its natural state. We do what we reasonably can to keep our impact to a minimum and be good temporary stewards. What we don't do is fall into the cult of global warming and blindly follow the preaching of some bloated half wit from Tennessee who's message is at best disingenuous and at worst a nice cover for a massive fraud.

[epo]

I honestly think that the net impact from mankind in the past 100 years has been positive.

Huh? That's just pure crazy talk.

[Dude!]

Huh? That's just pure crazy talk.

yes, things were so much better
when life expectancy was 38 years

[epo]

yes, things were so much better
when life expectancy was 38 years

Mankind has only served mankind and not the planet & species that share the planet with us.

[Dude!]

Mankind has only served mankind and not the planet & species that share the planet with us.

more acres of forest
in N. America now
than when the Pilgrims landed

[epo]

more acres of forest
in N. America now
than when the Pilgrims landed

You honestly can't be this stupid that you want to play some crazy "numbers" game with me, proving that humans aren't kind to the planet?

[keithy_19]

You're not gonna easily find somebody that honestly believes we should actively pursue trashing the shit out of the planet. I'd be a lot more interested if there were solutions being proposed that actually made sense instead of alarmist rhetoric about the end of the world.

:bye:

[Chigworthy]

Mankind has only served mankind and not the planet & species that share the planet with us.

But not this generation. We're different, maaaaaan.

[underdog]

Interesting way to phrase the questions. Yes, in the last 100 years or so, humans have contributed negatively to the environment. Enough for a global destruction? No.

We should do what we can individually to reduce our individual impact on the environment. Cap and Trade isn't gonna fix anything. It's only going to allow big polluters to buy the rights to pollute elsewhere. You do understand the "trade" part right? I'm seriously asking.

You're not gonna easily find somebody that honestly believes we should actively pursue trashing the shit out of the planet. I'd be a lot more interested if there were solutions being proposed that actually made sense instead of alarmist rhetoric about the end of the world.

I wasn't trying to ask leading questions or anything. I was just trying to figure out where you stood. That's all. I wasn't asking if what people are proposing is the solution.

I honestly think that the net impact from mankind in the past 100 years has been positive. Rivers and lakes are cleaner, there's far more regulatory oversight, much more public awareness to rrr, industry has been forced to behave more responsibly, there are more energy alternatives.

That's just crazy.

In the last 100 years, we've destroyed lakes and rivers. We're now starting to clean them up from our destruction.

[underdog]

i throw empty mcdonalds
bags and cups out of my
car window
just to infuriate the underdogs
of the world

By "the underdogs", you mean the people who really don't give a shit about the environment, right?

[Chigworthy]

In the last 100 years, we've destroyed lakes and rivers. We're now starting to clean them up from our destruction.

So you admit that in the last 100 years, we've cleaned up lakes and rivers.

[epo]

So you admit that in the last 100 years, we've cleaned up lakes and rivers.

Only because that socialist Jimmy Carter ruined America with that horrible Superfund in 1980.

GIT R DONE!

[Recyclerz]

Hay-suess kristo, where to start.

OK let's start looking for some common ground. I'm going to agree with OTB that in some areas the environment is much better off now than in the past. In the US the rivers and lakes are generally cleaner than they were 40 years ago (if not 100) and for certain types of pollutants the air quality is also better now. The point I would make, however, is that these improvements are not the result of some magic quality of laissez faire economics but through the imposition of (mostly) sensible government restrictions on the ability to emit pollution at zero cost. When each of the new environmental laws were being considered, industry screamed that it would be the death knell of the economy. Turns out it wasn't. Once the regulations were in placed and (importantly) were enforced business found innovative ways to comply and generally saved money in the long run by wasting fewer resources. (I worked in this field for most of my adult life.)

It seems to me the argument of carbon emissions regulations is only different in scale from the earlier experience. Since the effects are global rather than local there has to be a global agreement that everybody has to cut back and that cheating cannot be rewarded. So, unlike some of the fringe groups on the Left calling for an end to industrialized society,the vast majority of those of us who are concerned about the effects on the climate by uncontrolled carbon emissions are calling for sensible, enforceable regulations that slowly raise the cost of emitting carbon from zero to allow less polluting technologies (natural gas and nuclear) to become an intermediate solution and to allow sustainable forms of energy to get the economies of scale necessary to provide the energy we need to support our lifestyles.

(con't in another long-winded post.) :flush:

[Recyclerz]

It seems to me that the nay-saying crew on here allow themselves to fall into certain groups ie:

Al Gore is an asshole so climate change is bullshit. &
It's snowing out so climate change is bullshit.
These aren't serious arguments (although I imagine they're fun to make) so let's move on.

One piece of an argument in support is challenged so the whole theory is bullshit.
Generally, this approach is made in the same "junk science" fashion that plaintiffs lawyers like to use in class action suits - take one piece of the case and twist it enough so that it seems unlikely to people not familiar in the field and hope to bring the entire thesis down. Creationists also try this all the time. I'm not saying that scientists who argue that climate change is at least partly antropogenic shouldn't be challenged to prove their case - they absolutely should. What I am saying is that making a fuss about badly worded e-mails about charts that were poorly dumbed down in one lab does not disprove climate change. It does mean that those scientists should have there work closely challenged by qualified peers not by highly-paid rabble rousers in the media.

Mankind doesn't possess the ability to meaningfully affect global climate.
First off I say that this is a little disloyal to our species. I say we do have the ability to fuck things up pretty well if we so choose. But mostly my argument goes like this.


Modern civilization is dependent on climate staying within a relatively narrow band to be successful (eg. agriculture, access to enough fresh water, etc.)
There are natural swings in the global climate that periodically make life difficult (eg. droughts, ice ages, etc.)
Carbon emissions have the potential to change global climate, at least at the margins
The combination of natural climate change together with anthropogenic factors at the margins have the potential to reach a tipping point that could (even temporarily) take the global climate out of the range necessary to support current human activities
This would be a bad thing for millions if not billions of people


The hour is late and I have an arc to build in the morning so I'll let you folks discuss or ignore these blatherings as you see fit.

[Serpico1103]

more acres of forest
in N. America now
than when the Pilgrims landed
http://fia.fs.fed.us/library/briefings-summaries-overviews/docs/ForestFactsMetric.pdf
"It is estimated that—at the beginning of European settlement—
in 1630 the area of forest land that would become
the United States was 423 million hectares or about 46
percent of the total land area. By 1907, the area of forest
land had declined to an estimated 307 million hectares or
34 percent of the total land area. Forest area has been relatively
stable since 1907. In 1997, 302 million hectares—
or 33 percent of the total land area of the United States—
was in forest land. Today’s forest land area amounts to
about 70 percent of the area that was forested in 1630."

I didn't find a source for North America. But, American forests have declined. Those damn pilgrims.

[Chigworthy]

http://fia.fs.fed.us/library/briefings-summaries-overviews/docs/ForestFactsMetric.pdf
"It is estimated that—at the beginning of European settlement—
in 1630 the area of forest land that would become
the United States was 423 million hectares or about 46
percent of the total land area. By 1907, the area of forest
land had declined to an estimated 307 million hectares or
34 percent of the total land area. Forest area has been relatively
stable since 1907. In 1997, 302 million hectares—
or 33 percent of the total land area of the United States—
was in forest land. Today’s forest land area amounts to
about 70 percent of the area that was forested in 1630."

I didn't find a source for North America. But, American forests have declined. Those damn pilgrims.

70%=Passing Grade.

[StanUpshaw]

And of course, numbers of trees only counts for the carbon cycle. It doesn't take into consideration the destruction of the old-growth ecosystems.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Oldgrowth3.jpg

[Chigworthy]

And of course, numbers of trees only counts for the carbon cycle. It doesn't take into consideration the destruction of the old-growth ecosystems.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Oldgrowth3.jpg

So what, we devirginized this bitch. She was asking for it, wearing all those old-growth trees.

[Dude!]

And of course, numbers of trees only counts for the carbon cycle. It doesn't take into consideration the destruction of the old-growth ecosystems.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Oldgrowth3.jpg

what the hell does "virgin" mean?
that no one has ever set foot in it?
those maps are nonsense

they show no forest in the UP of MI
i have been there
and let me assure you
it is nothing but forest

[Snoogans]

what the hell does "virgin" mean?
that no one has ever set foot in it?
those maps are nonsense

they show no forest in the UP of MI
i have been there
and let me assure you
it is nothing but forest

because you jerkoff thats what it means. Really old forest. Essentially we destroyed 90% of it and all forest now we regrew

[Dude!]

Essentially we destroyed 90% of it and all forest now we regrew

a 'regrown' tree
puts out oxygen just like
an old tree

100% of the people
living in america in 1850
are gone now

but guess what...
they've all been replaced
with other people

you people are so silly

[Serpico1103]

more acres of forest
in N. America now
than when the Pilgrims landed

Can you support that?

[Snoogans]

a 'regrown' tree
puts out oxygen just like
an old tree

100% of the people
living in america in 1850
are gone now

but guess what...
they've all been replaced
with other people

you people are so silly

are you really that dense? first of all we didnt regrow all of it, we are still off like 30%. But what you dont realize is in the couple hundred years in between we ruined alot of habitats and large parts of the ecosystem. We introduce animals to places they shouldnt be and that ruins eco systems. The problem is alot bigger than no problem just because you have woods near your house you moron.

We have plenty of woods in mahwah, and alot of the ground they grow out of is so polluted that everything in there is dying. That shit all makes a difference.

And part of the problem is the amount of people. Yea climate has gone through cycles but remember how many LESS people lived on the planet then. You can say because the climate did this when there was 3 million people, its gonna be the same with 6 billion. We definately are wasting this place.

The planet will never go away, but at some point we are gonna push it far enough that it decides its time to shake us off of it

[Chigworthy]

because you jerkoff

That has nothing to do with deforestation.

[Snoogans]

That has nothing to do with deforestation.

excuse me

because, you jerkoff, is how it shoulda read

[StanUpshaw]

what the hell does "virgin" mean?
that no one has ever set foot in it?
those maps are nonsense

they show no forest in the UP of MI
i have been there
and let me assure you
it is nothing but forest

http://forest.mtu.edu/kidscorner/ecosystems/special_up.html

"Today, the Upper Peninsula of Michigan is heavily forested and filled with wildlife of all kinds. To most people, it looks natural and pristine, but it hasn't always been like this. In fact, the forests that you see today are second and third generations that have regrown over the last century."

[Dude!]

http://forest.mtu.edu/kidscorner/ecosystems/special_up.html

"Today, the Upper Peninsula of Michigan is heavily forested and filled with wildlife of all kinds. To most people, it looks natural and pristine, but it hasn't always been like this. In fact, the forests that you see today are second and third generations that have regrown over the last century."

exactly
and why is that a problem?

[Snoogans]

exactly
and why is that a problem?

because of all the damage done to the eco ssytem over the couple hundred years there was no forest for animals to live in. And for the soil, and for habitats. You realize that people arent the only things here right?

[StanUpshaw]

exactly
and why is that a problem?

It's not old growth, you fucking moron.

Here's a book that might be at your level of comprehension:
http://books.google.com/books?id=hV7--z-l8JEC&printsec=frontcover&dq=old+growth&as_brr=3&cd=4

[Snoogans]

The ecosystems of the U.P. are different from what would be here if the environment had not been disturbed humans





hmmm

[WRESTLINGFAN]

That has nothing to do with deforestation.

I wonder what he thinks

http://www.djfl.de/entertainment/stars/d/deforest_kelley/deforest_kelley.jpg

[Jujubees2]

I wonder what he thinks

http://www.djfl.de/entertainment/stars/d/deforest_kelley/deforest_kelley.jpg

Dammit WRESTLINGFAN he's a doctor, not an engineer!

[Serpico1103]

more acres of forest
in N. America now
than when the Pilgrims landed

Can't find the Rush or Hannity clip where they told you that?

[StanUpshaw]

I think we actually have a Penn & Teller Bullshit episode to blame for that.

I have an intense love/hate relationship with that show.

[Dude!]

you guys should stop using
toilet paper

you are the problem

[StanUpshaw]

I'd rather be a hypocrite than a denialist.

[Serpico1103]

I think we actually have a Penn & Teller Bullshit episode to blame for that.

I have an intense love/hate relationship with that show.

The only thing I can find is that there are more trees per forest acre now than before. But, that might because they are younger smaller trees.
The only facts on the "internets" is about the loss of forest acreage.

[Snoogans]

The only thing I can find is that there are more trees per forest acre now than before. But, that might because they are younger smaller trees.
The only facts on the "internets" is about the loss of forest acreage.

and if you take how many more per ache and add how many less acres, we are still down on trees

[Dude!]

i have rare aerial photographs
of north america in 1620

i bought them on eBay
and they are in a safe-deposit box

they prove what i said

[Serpico1103]

i have rare aerial photographs
of north america in 1620

i bought them on eBay
and they are in a safe-deposit box

they prove what i said

I believe that "aerial photos from 1620" are the only proof for your statement.
LordDude, is become a great board character.

[Dude!]

I believe that "aerial photos from 1620" are the only proof for your statement.
LordDude, is become a great board character.

despite the hideous pic
you use an an avatar
i know from your opinions
and writing style that you are
a chick

so, you're the
board character, missy

[Snoogans]

dude you are crazy
why do you keep fighting it
just go away now

[Dude!]

just go away now

dude, no way i'm going away
i'd miss laughing at your
hypochondriac posts too much

[StanUpshaw]

are we all just
writing in
haikus now?

[Snoogans]

mine was an actual haiku by the rules of it though. You people are just slackin

[Serpico1103]

despite the hideous pic
you use an an avatar
i know from your opinions
and writing style that you are
a chick
so, you're the
board character, missy

What do you mean "despite" the pic?
I am a rather handsome woman.

And it's "Mrs."

So,
find
any facts
to back
up your
assertion
or willing
to admit
you are wrong
about forest
acreage?

[badmonkey]

World may not be warming, say scientists (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7026317.ece)
“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC
The IPCC faces similar criticisms from Ross McKitrick, professor of economics at the University of Guelph, Canada, who was invited by the panel to review its last report.

The experience turned him into a strong critic and he has since published a research paper questioning its methods.

“We concluded, with overwhelming statistical significance, that the IPCC’s climate data are contaminated with surface effects from industrialisation and data quality problems. These add up to a large warming bias,” he said.

[StanUpshaw]

World may not be warming, say scientists (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7026317.ece)

The article goes on to say, "His study, which has not been peer reviewed, is illustrated with photographs of weather stations in locations where their readings are distorted by heat-generating equipment."

and

"It’s not just temperature rises that tell us the world is warming,” [Kevin Trenberth] said. “We also have physical changes like the fact that sea levels have risen around five inches since 1972, the Arctic icecap has declined by 40% and snow cover in the northern hemisphere has declined.”

and

Dr Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at the Met Office, said: “This new set of data confirms the trend towards rising global temperatures and suggest that, if anything, the world is warming even more quickly than we had thought.”

So perhaps we should read more than just the headline in the future.

[Serpico1103]

I appreciate the fact that some of the same people felt we needed a "preemptive" strike against Iraq. But, they don't want to act on the environment until we have proof that we changed it significantly. Or, proof that they will accept.

[badmonkey]

The article goes on to say, "His study, which has not been peer reviewed, is illustrated with photographs of weather stations in locations where their readings are distorted by heat-generating equipment."

and

"It’s not just temperature rises that tell us the world is warming,” [Kevin Trenberth] said. “We also have physical changes like the fact that sea levels have risen around five inches since 1972, the Arctic icecap has declined by 40% and snow cover in the northern hemisphere has declined.”

and

Dr Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at the Met Office, said: “This new set of data confirms the trend towards rising global temperatures and suggest that, if anything, the world is warming even more quickly than we had thought.”

So perhaps we should read more than just the headline in the future.

I did read more than just the headline. The first scientist I quoted worked on the original IPCC report.
“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC

Here's another one for you:

Professor Phil Jones (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html?ITO=1490)
Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

[Serpico1103]

Or this very the article:
“It’s not just temperature rises that tell us the world is warming,” he said. “We also have physical changes like the fact that sea levels have risen around five inches since 1972, the Arctic icecap has declined by 40% and snow cover in the northern hemisphere has declined.”

Dr Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at the Met Office, said: “This new set of data confirms the trend towards rising global temperatures and suggest that, if anything, the world is warming even more quickly than we had thought.”

How much is Exxon paying you? They seem to pay everyone on your side of the argument.

[badmonkey]

Or this very the article:
“It’s not just temperature rises that tell us the world is warming,” he said. “We also have physical changes like the fact that sea levels have risen around five inches since 1972, the Arctic icecap has declined by 40% and snow cover in the northern hemisphere has declined.”

Dr Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at the Met Office, said: “This new set of data confirms the trend towards rising global temperatures and suggest that, if anything, the world is warming even more quickly than we had thought.”

How much is Exxon paying you? They seem to pay everyone on your side of the argument.

I've got 3 ft of declining snow cover in my yard.

ahh... follow the money... BBC Pension Funds Linked to Climate Policy (http://climateresearchnews.com/2010/02/bbc-pension-funds-linked-to-climate-policy/)

[StanUpshaw]

Here's another one for you:

Professor Phil Jones (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html?ITO=1490)

Another one where they quote-mined a dramatic headline?

The section you quoted, for example, goes on to say,

"He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no ‘statistically significant’ warming, although he argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend."

and earlier says, "But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises were predominantly man-made."

You're either refusing to read the articles or being completely dishonest in your academic rigor.

[epo]

ahh... follow the money... BBC Pension Funds Linked to Climate Policy (http://climateresearchnews.com/2010/02/bbc-pension-funds-linked-to-climate-policy/)

What pension fund or 401K doesn't have some money in companies that would benefit from climate change/and the technology related to it.

If I really wanted to follow the money, I'd chase down the professors/scientists who think that climate change isn't happening.

[badmonkey]

Another one where they quote-mined a dramatic headline?

The section you quoted, for example, goes on to say,

"He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no ‘statistically significant’ warming, although he argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend."

and earlier says, "But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises were predominantly man-made."

You're either refusing to read the articles or being completely dishonest in your academic rigor.

You missed the part where he's been accused of scientific fraud and I want to be the first to welcome you to rf.net Mr. Gore.

[badmonkey]

What pension fund or 401K doesn't have some money in companies that would benefit from climate change/and the technology related to it.

If I really wanted to follow the money, I'd chase down the professors/scientists who think that climate change isn't happening.

yeah, the deniers must be persecuted for their heresy!

[StanUpshaw]

You missed the part where he's been accused of scientific fraud and I want to be the first to welcome you to rf.net Mr. Gore.

When going gets tough, the tough claim conspiracy.

[Snoogans]

What pension fund or 401K doesn't have some money in companies that would benefit from climate change/and the technology related to it.

If I really wanted to follow the money, I'd chase down the professors/scientists who think that climate change isn't happening.

epo dont be silly. it snowed the other day, so its obviously impossible that the overall temp of the planet is gettin warmer

[Serpico1103]

http://www.exxposeexxon.com/facts/gwdeniers.html
The plan, made public by The New York Times in 1998 (see clip at right), and retold recently by the Union of Concerned Scientists, employed the same strategy and some of the same personnel as the tobacco industry. The memo laid out a plan to "identify, recruit and train" a small team of unknown scientists and declared that: "Victory will be achieved when uncertainties in climate science become part of the conventional wisdom" for "average citizens" and "the media." Until now, the plan was successful.

Seems like the actions of people secure in the knowledge that they are right.

But, you win. I need to go outside and burn some tires.

[Dude!]

But, you win. I need to go outside and burn some tires.

burn down some trees too
we need to get back
to 1620 levels

[Serpico1103]

burn down some trees too
we need to get back
to 1620 levels

Salesmen must love you.
"I heard something on the radio, so it must be true. Sure, I could research it, but why bother."

[epo]

yeah, the deniers must be persecuted for their heresy!

Or their direct cash grabs.

Newsweek: The Truth About Denial (http://www.newsweek.com/id/32482)

A conservative think tank long funded by ExxonMobil, she told Boxer, had offered scientists $10,000 to write articles undercutting the new report and the computer-based climate models it is based on.

Like you said badmonkey, follow the money....

[epo]

epo dont be silly. it snowed the other day, so its obviously impossible that the overall temp of the planet is gettin warmer

Its honestly like arguing math with a 4 year old:

2+2=4
No it doesn't, its 5
Huh?

This is science, its not politics. This is not a fucking game, its the future of the planet and our species.

[badmonkey]

Its honestly like arguing math with a 4 year old:

2+2=4
No it doesn't, its 5
Huh?

This is science, its not politics. This is not a fucking game, its the future of the planet and our species.

It's religion

[epo]

These registered CO2 levels at Antartica aren't disputable, they are fact. This isn't religion, this isn't up for "interpretation"...rather its something that should open all of our eyes.

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/graphics/lawdome.gif

I can't way for the global warming deniers to give me their "smart answers" about that.

[badmonkey]

What's all the white space between the smudges and 2000 on your graph?

[badmonkey]

http://montaraventures.com/pix/piratestats.jpg

This should open all of our eyes.

[epo]

http://montaraventures.com/pix/piratestats.jpg

This should open all of our eyes.

I see you are a serious man who actually can carry on an intellectual conversation.

[StanUpshaw]

nevermind

[Serpico1103]

http://montaraventures.com/pix/piratestats.jpg

This should open all of our eyes.

There are only 17 pirates left? Causing all that trouble, wow.

But, thanks for the proving the point about what "deniers" call science.

[badmonkey]

I see you are a serious man who actually can carry on an intellectual conversation.

Since when has there ever been an intellectual conversation here about global warming or politics in general? You don't want a conversation, you want me to agree with you or shut up.

[epo]

Since when has there ever been an intellectual conversation here about global warming or politics in general? You don't want a conversation, you want me to agree with you or shut up.

Nice use of an Ad Hominen fallacy. I enjoyed it very much.

[badmonkey]

Nice use of an Ad Hominen fallacy. I enjoyed it very much.

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/photos/uncategorized/2009/02/05/zombies_in_texas_oh_yeah.jpg

[epo]

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/photos/uncategorized/2009/02/05/zombies_in_texas_oh_yeah.jpg

Thats more of an Argument from Adverse Consequence. Kind of boring really.

[Serpico1103]

Thats more of an Argument from Adverse Consequence. Kind of boring really.

Odd, since I always expect an intelligent debate from someone on the right.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

For the alarmists.


http://www.ocregister.com/articles/-234092--.html

[Dude!]

For the alarmists.


http://www.ocregister.com/articles/-234092--.html

the 'alarmists' are a sad lot
there are quite a few on this site

Lenin called them 'useful idiots'

[WRESTLINGFAN]

the 'alarmists' are a sad lot
there are quite a few on this site

Lenin called them 'useful idiots'

Global warming does exist. If that wasn't the case there would be 15 inches of new snow on the ground instead of 2-4:clap:

[Chigworthy]

I'd chase down the professors/scientists who think that climate change isn't happening.

It would be a long chase, finding a scientist that believed that the climate had been exactly the same for any interval of time. Plus, if you did actually find one, it wouldn't bolster your argument at all. I'd suggest chasing down scientists that don't believe that mankind has a significant hand in causing global warming.

One of the problems with the new kind of amateur environmentalist, i.e. the ones who think that decreasing their "carbon footprint" will stop the earth from warming up, is that one area of a whole problem is focused on and possibly exaggerated. While the degree that mankind has influenced the overall temperature of the planet is still in dispute, there are environmental issues that are inarguably tied to our industrial age, such as acid rain. The presence of acid rain is not in dispute, and neither is the belief that manmade emissions have directly increased it significantly. The detrimental effects of it are also well-documented, by our own government:
http://www.epa.gov/acidrain/what/index.html

What happens if the scientific community comes to an agreement that global warming is not significantly caused by mankind? These environmental problems that are undisputed get swept away as well, and the general public becomes disinterested in them, kind of like a "cry wolf" reaction.

The green movement is big business, and it preys on our emotional state. The average citizen is too lazy to look into things for themselves, and while rushing through the supermarket to get home for American Idol, they will see something like a disposable bottle of water with the fact that it now uses 30% less plastic and think that by buying that, they are helping the environment. Rather than being inconvenienced by having occasionally rinse a stainless water bottle that they fill at home with filtered tap water (the same thing that is in the plastic bottle), they will continue the wasteful practice of buying bottled water, thinking that they are ok because of the lesser amount of plastic being used.

This is the same general public that will applaud when they see a news piece of a group of volunteers "rescuing" oily birds from an oil spill. This is from a SF Chronicle article (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/11/03/BAPB1AEJJL.DTL&tsp=1) last year following an oil spill in the SF bay:

On Tuesday, Fish and Game officials said the number of dead birds stood at 18.

Another 32 birds are being cleaned or are recuperating at a rescue center, department spokeswoman Carol Singleton said.

About 140 contract employees with O'Brien's Group walked the beaches in hazardous material suits Tuesday, along with dozens of trained volunteers, looking for oiled birds and animals.

Lt. Rob Roberts of the Department of Fish and Game said unseasonably warm weather along the West Coast recently may have prevented more bird deaths. Fewer birds from up north have migrated to the Bay Area than normal, he said, and so fewer were endangered by the spill.

140 employees plus dozens of volunteers working to rescue 32 birds, while 18 had already died. This feel good story sells papers, but it also harms the public. Rather than using the oil spill as an excellent opportunity to explain how marine food pyramids work, and how sensitive marine food chains are to pollution, we are told about almost 200 lunatics "rescuing" 32 inconsequential birds and mourning 18 dead ones. This contributes to the belief that if the birds are rescued, all is well. Scientifically, those 32+18 birds that were effected by the spill are meaningless, as they are likely mid-level consumers such as sea-gulls, with a few top-level carnivores such as pelicans. Why does this matter? Because the general public still has no idea of how the spill effected the phytoplankton, which can be decimated by pollution such as an oil spill and in an inverted marine food pyramid, phytoplankton are the basis of the food chain for all of the organisms in it. If that bottom-level producer is destroyed, the entire ecology suffers drastically.

I know that some of what I wrote here may seem unrelated to the argument of whether or not we have contributed greatly to global warming or not, but I do believe that our species has had a detrimental effect on our environment, but as shown here in posts from both sides, emotions have clouded the issue. There is no way to argue that being conservative in our consumer habits is a bad thing, but encouraging the majority of people to do that is a delicate thing, and banking everything on "global warming" could cause a backlash if it is soundly refuted.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

the 'alarmists' are a sad lot
there are quite a few on this site

Lenin called them 'useful idiots'

Keep religion out of our lives. Stay out of our bedrooms. My body is a temple. But when lectured to on lightbulbs, toilet bulbs, what to drive they follow their political masters like lemmings

[Snoogans]

Global warming does exist. If that wasn't the case there would be 15 inches of new snow on the ground instead of 2-4:clap:

oh you fuckin simpletons.
You really think a couple snow storms prove your point?
Climate change, "global warming", causes the major weather too. Regardless of the planet warming, places will still get cold enough to snow. So that right there is a stupid arguement. But number 2, because we are shaking up the planet so much, things get more severe. Hurricans have been more severe, weather in general. That includes winter storms too.

If we werent fuckin with things so much, there wouldnt be so much energy in the atmosphere to unleash a few feet of snow at a time.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

oh you fuckin simpletons.
You really think a couple snow storms prove your point?
Climate change, "global warming", causes the major weather too. Regardless of the planet warming, places will still get cold enough to snow. So that right there is a stupid arguement. But number 2, because we are shaking up the planet so much, things get more severe. Hurricans have been more severe, weather in general. That includes winter storms too.

If we werent fuckin with things so much, there wouldnt be so much energy in the atmosphere to unleash a few feet of snow at a time.

Oh you rabid alarmists, when presented with different opinions, facts etc, you are ready to excommunicate anyone who disagrees with your quasi religion, youre no better than the wackos at WBC

[Snoogans]

Oh you rabid alarmists, when presented with different opinions, facts etc, you are ready to excommunicate anyone who disagrees with your quasi religion

with my quasi religion? I just come with scientific facts my man, and if you can really act like people dont have an effect on the planet you are insane

[WRESTLINGFAN]

with my quasi religion? I just come with scientific facts my man, and if you can really act like people dont have an effect on the planet you are insane

There have been articles, studies etc by people who are a lot smarter than all of us in this area, but you dismiss them as if they don't know what they are talking about. Even Phil Jones admits that the data is flawed.

I suggest you get rid of your car, dont turn on the air conditioning , never fly again etc. if you believe in this cause

[Snoogans]

There have been articles, studies etc by people who are a lot smarter than all of us in this area, but you dismiss them as if they don't know what they are talking about. Even Phil Jones admits that the data is flawed.

I suggest you get rid of your car, dont turn on the air conditioning , never fly again etc. if you believe in this cause

there are also articles and studies the other way by people smarter and you dismiss them. See the point idiot? Thats why its a debate.

And when have I dismissed anything in here? I havent even commented on most of these links, you must be confusing me with someone else. I have only presented agreed to scientific facts. Most of what I have said is agreed by people on both sides. Its what is causing those facts that people cant agree on.

but in general anyone would have to be a moron to act like people dont have some effect on this planet and what goes on on the surface.

I love how you are taking the angle of tryin to attack people on the other side and make them seem unreasonable so you can win. you dont have to be right, you just have to make the other person seem wrong. Thats the biggest problem

MOST of the time this debate comes up, the side for us fuckin up the planet tries to prove they are right, while the side sayin we arent fuckin up anything tries to make the other side look wrong, not that they are right.

Nobody is dismissing the possibility that we dont have as much impact as we think we do. Thats definately possible. What we dismiss is how and what you people use to argue against climate change. Just because we had a few snow storms in what amounts to like 2% of the world over a week, that has nothing to do with climate change. like bill nye said, sometimes it rains in the desert. That doesnt mean its all of a sudden not a desert.

Thats what pisses people off about the non climate change people, and makes them stop listening. Not that we are invalidating science. Its that we are invalidating the morons who dont make any real points

[TripleSkeet]

oh you fuckin simpletons.
You really think a couple snow storms prove your point?
Climate change, "global warming", causes the major weather too. Regardless of the planet warming, places will still get cold enough to snow. So that right there is a stupid arguement. But number 2, because we are shaking up the planet so much, things get more severe. Hurricans have been more severe, weather in general. That includes winter storms too.

If we werent fuckin with things so much, there wouldnt be so much energy in the atmosphere to unleash a few feet of snow at a time.

Thank you. At least somebody knows what the fuck they are talking about. I cant believe there are still people out there that think global warming means no more cold weather.

[TripleSkeet]

Oh, and anyone that thinks that 6 billion people have zero effect on the planet or environment in general is fucking retarded. Period. Thats not even up for debate.

[Chigworthy]

Oh, and anyone that thinks that 6 billion people have zero effect on the planet or environment in general is fucking retarded. Period. Thats not even up for debate.

There's no science backing that up.

[TripleSkeet]

There's no science backing that up.

Its common fucking sense dude. We use up every natural resource we can get our hands on. We cut down forests, dump our trash in the oceans and rivers, bury it under the ground, fill the air with smoke and pollution, etc. People are like locusts, the only difference is people actually have the ability to replace what they take, now all they need is the incentive to actually do it. To just act like we have no effect at all is just walking around with blinders on.

If I let 3 dogs live in my yard they have an effect on the environment back there. You are talking 6 billion people.

[Chigworthy]

Its common fucking sense dude. We use up every natural resource we can get our hands on. We cut down forests, dump our trash in the oceans and rivers, bury it under the ground, fill the air with smoke and pollution, etc. People are like locusts, the only difference is people actually have the ability to replace what they take, now all they need is the incentive to actually do it. To just act like we have no effect at all is just walking around with blinders on.

If I let 3 dogs live in my yard they have an effect on the environment back there. You are talking 6 billion people.

This still does not scientifically prove that anyone that thinks that 6 billion people have zero effect on the planet or environment in general is fucking retarded.

[Snoogans]

This still does not scientifically prove that anyone that thinks that 6 billion people have zero effect on the planet or environment in general is fucking retarded.

how long do you think its gonna take him to realize you are fuckin with him?

[Chigworthy]

how long do you think its gonna take him to realize you are fuckin with him?

As long as it takes for the emotions to subside.

[StanUpshaw]

Nevertheless, we still can't go around making arguments based on "common fucking sense."

[Snoogans]

Nevertheless, we still can't go around making arguments based on "common fucking sense."

depends who you are arguing with. you would win almost every one on this board with that method

[WRESTLINGFAN]

The earth is constantly going thru weather cycles, im not denying that. What I am saying is that nature is more powerful than any human or factory, and I believe there is overpopulation in some parts of the world, mainly third world countries, I can not fathom why dirt poor people continue to have children, thats one of the most immoral things anyone can do

[Snoogans]

The earth is constantly going thru weather cycles, im not denying that. What I am saying is that nature is more powerful than any human or factory, and I believe there is overpopulation in some parts of the world, mainly third world countries, I can not fathom why dirt poor people continue to have children, thats one of the most immoral things anyone can do

thats true, absolutely. And nature is stronger and ive already said, at some point earth will shake us off and move on. The point is there is very strong evidence to support we are speeding up that process of nature finally saying fuck these people and gettin rid of us, through massive weather events most likely. Weather events that will happen regardless, true, but maybe not as soon as we will make them. Thats the problem.

[StanUpshaw]

Can we also stop referring to nature as a sentient being?

[TripleSkeet]

As long as it takes for the emotions to subside.

I dont get emotional, I just like to curse.

[Snoogans]

I dont get emotional, I just like to curse.

and boo injured people

[TripleSkeet]

and boo injured people

I thought we cheer the injured people? Im confused.

[Zorro]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703630404575053781465774008.html

Meanwhile, one of the scientists at the center of the climategate fiasco has called into question other issues that the climate lobby has claimed are indisputable. Phil Jones, who stepped down as head of the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit amid the climate email scandal, told the BBC that the world may well have been warmer during medieval times than it is now.


I am not a disbeliver of Global Warming and I think good stewardship of natural resources is an obligation of man kind, but I can't help but think that eugenics are any number of disproven theories were once accepted fact. Science should always be viewed with a sceptical eye.

[StanUpshaw]

Eugenics has been disproved? It's not a theory, it's a categorization of medical (and political) practices.

[underdog]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703630404575053781465774008.html



I am not a disbeliver of Global Warming and I think good stewardship of natural resources is an obligation of man kind, but I can't help but think that eugenics are any number of disproven theories were once accepted fact. Science should always be viewed with a sceptical eye.

I put all my faith into dianetics.

[Dude!]

I put all my faith into dianetics.

you should put your faith
in diuretics instead

[Serpico1103]

It is tough to think you are in an actual debate with someone when they say "look at all the snow", "it's cold today", "last year was warmer."

Maybe it shows how narrow minded we all are. "If my town has more snow, I guess the whole globe is cold today."

Global warming (which is actually climate change) will cause a shift in weather patterns. So, some places will be hotter than usual, while others will be colder than usual. Also, it does not need to be a dramatic change. Our eco-system is very fragile a small change can cause dramatic results.

How about this one, "How can we change the world that much?" We shattered some atoms which had quite an impact on the world.

[Syd]

More importantly, global warming is a matter of a few degrees centigrade. It's not something noticeable, especially considering the most devastation occurs where people do not live. By the time people start noticing it in populated areas, they'll be too busy wondering why the price of food has skyrocketed and why there are permanent water rationing.

[Chigworthy]

Global warming (which is actually climate change)

To be fair, it seems like the term "climate change" started coming about when the studies about global warming were mishandled. The best way to market a product when the public loses interest is to re-image it.

[Serpico1103]

To be fair, it seems like the term "climate change" started coming about when the studies about global warming were mishandled. The best way to market a product when the public loses interest is to re-image it.

Sad. I guess you are calling the public, "rubes" (something I would never do to my fellow citizens) that need to be sold an idea. Instead of sparking their own intellectual curiosity.

As long as I can remember, the scientists fought the "global warming" term. But, it came out first and stuck. Unfortunately, scientists don't have Fox News doing their marketing- Keep it short, keep it simple, explain the whole subject in the headline.

[StanUpshaw]

The IPCC has been the IPCC since it was founded in 1988.

[Chigworthy]

Sad. I guess you are calling the public, "rubes" (something I would never do to my fellow citizens) that need to be sold an idea. Instead of sparking their own intellectual curiosity.

As long as I can remember, the scientists fought the "global warming" term. But, it came out first and stuck. Unfortunately, scientists don't have Fox News doing their marketing- Keep it short, keep it simple, explain the whole subject in the headline.

If you don't think that the driving force behind research and coverage of global warming, climate change, being green, etc., is money, then you have more faith in the public's intellectual curiosity than I do. The environmental problems that we have are not being covered properly or accurately by either side of the global warming argument. I wrote a lengthy post earlier describing some of the problems with the general public's false perception of environmentalism, things that I learned from a real environmentalist that lives far "greener" than anyone posting in this thread.

[StanUpshaw]

If you don't think that the driving force behind research and coverage of global warming, climate change, being green, etc., is money, then you have more faith in the public's intellectual curiosity than I do. The environmental problems that we have are not being covered properly or accurately by either side of the global warming argument. I wrote a lengthy post earlier describing some of the problems with the general public's false perception of environmentalism, things that I learned from a real environmentalist that lives far "greener" than anyone posting in this thread.

I'm in agreement with most of your post (as well as your previous one), the only exception is that you seem to be conflating the scientific endeavors with the popular culture movement.

Obviously more exposure means more money, and more money means more research, but the research was being done (and the same conclusions were being reached) long before celebs were buying Priuses and carbon offsets.

The cynicism regarding the public and popular media is well deserved, but I think including the science in your scorn is unfair.

[Serpico1103]

140 employees plus dozens of volunteers working to rescue 32 birds, while 18 had already died. This feel good story sells papers, but it also harms the public. Rather than using the oil spill as an excellent opportunity to explain how marine food pyramids work, and how sensitive marine food chains are to pollution, we are told about almost 200 lunatics "rescuing" 32 inconsequential birds and mourning 18 dead ones. This contributes to the belief that if the birds are rescued, all is well. Scientifically, those 32+18 birds that were effected by the spill are meaningless, as they are likely mid-level consumers such as sea-gulls, with a few top-level carnivores such as pelicans. Why does this matter? Because the general public still has no idea of how the spill effected the phytoplankton, which can be decimated by pollution such as an oil spill and in an inverted marine food pyramid, phytoplankton are the basis of the food chain for all of the organisms in it. If that bottom-level producer is destroyed, the entire ecology suffers drastically.


This can be said about any news story on any topic. It is true, but not unique to the environmental issue.

[Serpico1103]

140 employees plus dozens of volunteers working to rescue 32 birds, while 18 had already died. This feel good story sells papers, but it also harms the public. Rather than using the oil spill as an excellent opportunity to explain how marine food pyramids work, and how sensitive marine food chains are to pollution, we are told about almost 200 lunatics "rescuing" 32 inconsequential birds and mourning 18 dead ones. This contributes to the belief that if the birds are rescued, all is well. Scientifically, those 32+18 birds that were effected by the spill are meaningless, as they are likely mid-level consumers such as sea-gulls, with a few top-level carnivores such as pelicans. Why does this matter? Because the general public still has no idea of how the spill effected the phytoplankton, which can be decimated by pollution such as an oil spill and in an inverted marine food pyramid, phytoplankton are the basis of the food chain for all of the organisms in it. If that bottom-level producer is destroyed, the entire ecology suffers drastically.


This is how the media covers any story. Superficially, without getting people too nervous.
Any media story on any topic is really just a long headline with no substance. Events are never given context. Ever story should start and end in that little 5 minute clip.

[Chigworthy]

I'm in agreement with most of your post (as well as your previous one), the only exception is that you seem to be conflating the scientific endeavors with the popular culture movement.

Obviously more exposure means more money, and more money means more research, but the research was being done (and the same conclusions were being reached) long before celebs were buying Priuses and carbon offsets.

The cynicism regarding the public and popular media is well deserved, but I think including the science in your scorn is unfair.

I never included the science in my scorn. My scorn is solely reserved for what we do with the science.

This is how the media covers any story. Superficially, without getting people too nervous.
Any media story on any topic is really just a long headline with no substance. Events are never given context. Ever story should start and end in that little 5 minute clip.

I disagree with how you feel the media covers stories. In my opinion, they sensationalize it and play up on the fear factors, and throw in some knee-jerk emotional string-pulling. I was using the example of how the oil-spill story was covered to illustrate how, in the interest of selling the product (news) to the public, the truth is molded to create a more appealing story. The vapid masses will always watch with wide-eyes a feel-good piece about "rescuing" cute birds because that is what our media diet consists of, and let's be honest, we are a lazy people that would rather get our information from the first source that presents itself the loudest. Much like our dietary habits, when a nice bowl of organic plant matter with a tiny portion of animal protein would be the healthier choice but most people are going to take the easy processed route, the majority of media consumers are not going to read a piece about the disastrous effect that pollution has on diatomaceous phytoplankton, the keystone of a marine food pyramid.

[Chigworthy]

I never included the science in my scorn. My scorn is solely reserved for what we do with the science.



I disagree with how you feel the media covers stories. In my opinion, they sensationalize it and play up on the fear factors, and throw in some knee-jerk emotional string-pulling. I was using the example of how the oil-spill story was covered to illustrate how, in the interest of selling the product (news) to the public, the truth is molded to create a more appealing story. The vapid masses will always watch with wide-eyes a feel-good piece about "rescuing" cute birds because that is what our media diet consists of, and let's be honest, we are a lazy people that would rather get our information from the first source that presents itself the loudest. Much like our dietary habits, when a nice bowl of organic plant matter with a tiny portion of animal protein would be the healthier choice but most people are going to take the easy processed route, the majority of media consumers are not going to read a piece about the disastrous effect that pollution has on diatomaceous phytoplankton, the keystone of a marine food pyramid.

I was on the phone for a bit and forgot what I was getting at, and then dumbly hit "Post" before finishing. What I was getting at was that the way these stories are presented to us has long lasting negative effects. After so many years of watching people scrub oil off of seals and birds, people now assess the severity of a spill based on the mortality of cute fuzzy things. In the story I quoted, we were lucky that only 18 birds died in that spill. Yay, no big deal. But what lies beneath it may have been far more damaging to the local ecology, but convincing the average media consumer of that is impossible if only 18 birds died. That's why I brought up acid rain, which is a legitimate, agreed-upon environmental problem that damages plant life and is directly tied to industrial emissions. But the whole carbon-footprint thing won't completely help with acid rain, and you may not be able to get people concerned enough about it in the shadow of global warming/climate change.

[StanUpshaw]

Here's something that will help both on both the carbon and acid rain fronts, and it's about goddamn time:

$8.3B in loans guaranteed for nuclear reactors (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2010-02-16-obama-nuclear-power-plant_N.htm)

[TeeBone]

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/18/climate-official-yvo-boer-resigning/

Uhh----ohhhh. Oh wait, the source is FOXNEWS, so it must be wrong, right?
Fuckers!!!:bye:

[epo]

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/18/climate-official-yvo-boer-resigning/

Uhh----ohhhh. Oh wait, the source is FOXNEWS, so it must be wrong, right?
Fuckers!!!:bye:

I'm always baffled by the right-wing of this country celebrating the lack of global environmental success.

[TeeBone]

I'm always baffled by the right-wing of this country celebrating the lack of global environmental success.

I'm not celebrating anything as such. I am not right wing either. What I do enjoy is watching the collapse of this hoax in all forms, from its lead scientist lying, covering up and ultimately quitting en masse. I enjoy watching thousands of scientists come forward to refute the science of the Gores of the world, only to be dismissed by people like, 'He Who Must Not Be Named.' I also enjoy hearing from the collective squishy-headed environmentalist who know nothing of the subject other than what they have been forced to, 'know.' Its amusing to me to watch how this is all playing out. The notion that fixing the world's climate issues can only be achieved in this country through a Socialist Doctrine is amusing and YES worth celebrating when you watch it fold in and destroy itself.
I have to go burn some styrofoam coolers full of bald eagle eggs and old tires now...See ya'!:smoke:

[WRESTLINGFAN]

I'm not celebrating anything as such. I am not right wing either. What I do enjoy is watching the collapse of this hoax in all forms, from its lead scientist lying, covering up and ultimately quitting en masse. I enjoy watching thousands of scientists come forward to refute the science of the Gores of the world, only to be dismissed by people like, 'He Who Must Not Be Named.' I also enjoy hearing from the collective squishy-headed environmentalist who know nothing of the subject other than what they have been forced to, 'know.' Its amusing to me to watch how this is all playing out. The notion that fixing the world's climate issues can only be achieved in this country through a Socialist Doctrine is amusing and YES worth celebrating when you watch it fold in and destroy itself.
I have to go burn some styrofoam coolers full of bald eagle eggs and old tires now...See ya'!:smoke:


I might fix me some polar bear burgers

Where's ALGORE on this? He doesn't want to accept the fact that the propaganda of his movies have been challenged, the evidence isn't there and the numbers were cooked to make it look like there was a crisis.

The elites in Washington, the public schools will continue to push their agenda and will punish anyone who doesnt fall in lockstep with them.

[StanUpshaw]

...I enjoy watching thousands of scientists come forward to refute the science of the Gores of the world, only to be dismissed by people like, 'He Who Must Not Be Named.'...

Since my opinion on the matter of climate change is only based on the scientific consensus, I'm interested in this statement.

Could you give me some more information?

[TeeBone]

Since my opinion on the matter of climate change is only based on the scientific consensus, I'm interested in this statement.

Could you give me some more information?

I would be interested in you explaining this so called, 'scientific consensus' now that it has been proven to be a lie, based on faulty data. It seems to grow with each passing day. Seriously, everyday there is more and more coming out that exposes this for what it is. The Science is not proven----Its a fucking lie!!!!!

[StanUpshaw]

I would be interested in you explaining this so called, 'scientific consensus' now that it has been proven to be a lie, based on faulty data. It seems to grow with each passing day. Seriously, everyday there is more and more coming out that exposes this for what it is. The Science is not proven----Its a fucking lie!!!!!

I'm genuinely interested in exploring your outlook. But you screaming "it's a lie" isn't much help. You mentioned "thousands of scientists" before. I'd still like to know about them.

[Chigworthy]

I'm genuinely interested in exploring your outlook. But you screaming "it's a lie" isn't much help. You mentioned "thousands of scientists" before. I'd still like to know about them.

You have to become a Dot Netando first.

[StanUpshaw]

I would be interested in you explaining this so called, 'scientific consensus' now that it has been proven to be a lie, based on faulty data. It seems to grow with each passing day. Seriously, everyday there is more and more coming out that exposes this for what it is. The Science is not proven----Its a fucking lie!!!!!

I might have been unclear in my previous post. I meant to say, "when a scientific consensus has been established, then I will determine my opinions accordingly."

I understand that we might not have reached that point yet, so it's entirely reasonable to not come down on one side or the other. Much like in the realm of physics, I'm not picking sides on String Theory vs M-Theory vs String Field Theory, etc. I'm content to wait until a consensus is reached.

Therefore, I'm very interested in hearing from the scientists you know about who hold differing views.

[Chigworthy]

I'm not picking sides on String Theory vs M-Theory vs String Field Theory, etc. I'm content to wait until a consensus is reached.

You don't have enough time.

[StanUpshaw]

You don't have enough time.

Sure...in this dimension :rolleyes:

[TeeBone]

I might have been unclear in my previous post...
Therefore, I'm very interested in hearing from the scientists you know about who hold differing views.

Gotcha...I see what you mean now. :)

[Syd]

To put the deniers in perspective: there are plenty of people who believe 9/11 was an inside job. People just like to disagree.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

To put the deniers in perspective: there are plenty of people who believe 9/11 was an inside job. People just like to disagree.

Did Bush and Cheney cause global warming too?

[brettmojo]

Did Bush and Cheney cause global warming too?
I don't think so. It would have been very difficult to find the time to do it between planning 9/11, coming up with fake reasons to invade Iraq, shitting on the US Constitution and destroying the US economy.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Definiely not a good week for the climate change religion


http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/18/climate-official-yvo-boer-resigning/

[Syd]

well the temperatures along the north pole are still high and methane is rapidly escaping the permafrost so it doesn't look like his resignation changed reality

anyway hope you all living in the suburbs enjoy the high gas prices as well as the high food and water prices that are coming in the next 10-20 years

[StanUpshaw]

Maybe the former permafrost will become farmable and then food will be even cheaper.

[Chigworthy]

Maybe the former permafrost will become farmable and then food will be even cheaper.

Any permafrost that isn't permanently frosty deserves to melt.

[StanUpshaw]

Fuckin' quitterfrost, if you ask me.

[Syd]

Maybe the former permafrost will become farmable and then food will be even cheaper.

yeah, because it's so easy to transport perishable goods thousands of miles when we've already plateau'd oil production and the price of energy is about to rise exponentially.

[Serpico1103]

Definiely not a good week for the climate change religion


http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/18/climate-official-yvo-boer-resigning/

WASHINGTON - Health problems linked to aging coal-fired power plants shorten nearly 24,000 lives a year, including 2,800 from lung cancer, and nearly all those early deaths could be prevented if the U.S. government adopted stricter rules, according to a study released Wednesday.

How many Americans did drunk illegals kill?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5174391/

[WRESTLINGFAN]

WASHINGTON - Health problems linked to aging coal-fired power plants shorten nearly 24,000 lives a year, including 2,800 from lung cancer, and nearly all those early deaths could be prevented if the U.S. government adopted stricter rules, according to a study released Wednesday.

How many Americans did drunk illegals kill?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5174391/

Drunken illegals behind the wheel are dangerous too

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0geutLwAX5LzOUAqwhXNyoA?p=illegal+imm igrants+and+dwi&fr2=sb-top&fr=yfp-t-890&sao=1

[underdog]

Drunken illegals behind the wheel are dangerous too

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0geutLwAX5LzOUAqwhXNyoA?p=illegal+imm igrants+and+dwi&fr2=sb-top&fr=yfp-t-890&sao=1

Drunken any person behind the wheel is dangerous.

[Serpico1103]

Drunken illegals behind the wheel are dangerous too

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0geutLwAX5LzOUAqwhXNyoA?p=illegal+imm igrants+and+dwi&fr2=sb-top&fr=yfp-t-890&sao=1

Do the math.
People are killed by bees every year. Should we run them out of the country?
People are killed by defective cars, where are your rants about jailing the toyota executives?

You want to compare 24K dead from coal alone to some drunk driving accidents? Rationale.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Do the math.
People are killed by bees every year. Should we run them out of the country?
People are killed by defective cars, where are your rants about jailing the toyota executives?

You want to compare 24K dead from coal alone to some drunk driving accidents? Rationale.

Well if the illegals werent here, those people would be alive. GET IT?

[Serpico1103]

Well if the illegals werent here, those people would be alive. GET IT?

No.
You complain about illegals killing people because they shouldn't be here.
Yet, you defend coal, when it is unnecessarily killing 24,000 TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND, Americans a year.
Please reconcile those, based on your love of American lives.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

No.
You complain about illegals killing people because they shouldn't be here.
Yet, you defend coal, when it is unnecessarily killing 24,000 TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND, Americans a year.
Please reconcile those, based on your love of American lives.

Please dont ever use electricity again since a large majority is derived from coal. When are you stocking up on candles? When coal is outlawed we can continue this conversation

How about nuke power, I cant believe Im saying this, but we should be like the French

Lemme guess NIMBY!!!!

[Serpico1103]

Please dont ever use electricity again since a large majority is derived from coal. When are you stocking up on candles? When coal is outlawed we can continue this conversation

How about nuke power, I cant believe Im saying this, but we should be like the French

Lemme guess NIMBY!!!!

Argue your side. Don't ask me too. You rant and rave about American deaths. I don't. I am asking you to explain why an American killed by a drunk driver is more important to you than an American killed by an inefficient coal plant.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Argue your side. Don't ask me too. You rant and rave about American deaths. I don't. I am asking you to explain why an American killed by a drunk driver is more important to you than an American killed by an inefficient coal plant.

What if they were illegals living near a coal plant?

[Dude!]

Yet, you defend coal, when it is unnecessarily killing 24,000 TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND, Americans a year.

what a crock that is
that is pure speculation
a number fabricated for drama

i just can't believe
the crap you fall for, Mrs.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

what a crock that is
that is pure speculation
a number fabricated for drama

i just can't believe
the crap you fall for, Mrs.

Just like the 47 million uninsured number, Grossly overestimated

[Serpico1103]

Just like the 47 million uninsured number, Grossly overestimated

Air Pollution Blamed for 3% of Deaths in the United Stateshttp://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/412202

So what number is acceptable?
Is it more or less than are killed by illegal alien drunk drivers?

Damn scientists and their arithmetic.

[TeeBone]

Just like the 47 million uninsured number, Grossly overestimated

Trying to reason with the likes of Serpico is like teaching evolution to a Pre-K class. I am not saying to give up on the debate but just know that you are not going to get very far. He DOES NOT GET IT !

[Serpico1103]

Trying to reason with the likes of Serpico is like teaching evolution to a Pre-K class. I am not saying to give up on the debate but just know that you are not going to get very far. He DOES NOT GET IT !

Yeah. I don't love seeing kids getting asthma due to outdated coal plants. Sorry, I don't see the joy in the little things like a sophisticated man, such as yourself, does.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Air Pollution Blamed for 3% of Deaths in the United Stateshttp://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/412202

So what number is acceptable?
Is it more or less than are killed by illegal alien drunk drivers?

Damn scientists and their arithmetic.

Illegal Aliens killing Americans, hell, they wont get soot all over their victims

[Serpico1103]

Illegal Aliens killing Americans, hell, they wont get soot all over their victims

Now you are seeing it. Car crash, usually quick death. Coal plant, long suffering miserable death.
The illegals may be doing God's work. I know they are pushing you out of the busboy business.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Now you are seeing it. Car crash, usually quick death. Coal plant, long suffering miserable death.
The illegals may be doing God's work. I know they are pushing you out of the busboy business.

Now that theres no work for your Amigos, they have more time to drink like animals and mow people down. I guess you like that population control, courtesy of Jose

[Dude!]

Yeah. I don't love seeing kids getting asthma due to outdated coal plants. Sorry, I don't see the joy in the little things like a sophisticated man, such as yourself, does.

um, i thought the new vogue is that
the "epidemic" of asthma is caused
by vaccines

i will tell you what all these so-called
epidemics are: the medical community
ginning everyone up to visit doctors
and buy drugs

you are so gullible it is concerning

how's the swine flu epidemic
working out by the way?

[Serpico1103]

um, i thought the new vogue is that the "epidemic" of asthma is caused by vaccines i will tell you what all these so-called epidemics are: the medical immunity
ginning everyone up to visit doctors and buy drugs you are so gullible it is concerning how's the swine flu epidemic working out by the way?

You are right. We were meant to breath in fossil fuels. After all, it's part of nature.

Hold on, I am just taking a drag from a Laramie cigarette, that cool smoke really soothes my irritable lungs.

Will those damn miners ever toughen up and stop complaining about black lung disease. It is probably due to their organic eating habits.

Stupidity runs deep with you.

[underdog]

Please dont ever use electricity again since a large majority is derived from coal. When are you stocking up on candles? When coal is outlawed we can continue this conversation

How about nuke power, I cant believe Im saying this, but we should be like the French

Lemme guess NIMBY!!!!

I like Nuclear power. It's technically the safest and most efficient (although probably has the biggest downside), but it's something else that the general population has been scared away from just by people screaming the loudest. It doesn't matter if it's true as long as you're the loudest.

And it used to be in my back yard. I remember the monthly testing of the warning sirens. This may actually explain a lot.

[underdog]

how's the swine flu epidemic
working out by the way?

According to someone I know that actually works in the medical field, it's incredibly under reported and more dangerous than people thought.

I also had an employee die from it.

[Dude!]

You are right. We were meant to breath in fossil fuels. After all, it's part of nature.

Hold on, I am just taking a drag from a Laramie cigarette, that cool smoke really soothes my irritable lungs.

Will those damn miners ever toughen up and stop complaining about black lung disease. It is probably due to their organic eating habits.

Stupidity runs deep with you.

see, you just make up facts
black lung disease is what coal miners get
that is real and not in dispute

your 24,000 deaths had NOTHING
to do with black lung disease,
and yet you use that as the example

you are intellectually dishonest

[Serpico1103]

see, you just make up facts black lung disease is what coal miners get that is real and not in dispute your 24,000 deaths had NOTHING to do with black lung disease, and yet you use that as the example you are intellectually dishonest

Do you think I was saying 24K miners die from black lung?
Did you think I was saying 24K miners die?
Did anyone?

Please, your writing style is of an imbecile, but tell me it is not a perfect reflection of your intellect.

I posted two links to studies showing death caused by pollution. Should I read them out loud to you? Should I have them
translated
into
your
asinine
writing style?

[Serpico1103]

The health effects caused by air pollutants may range from subtle biochemical and physiological changes to difficulty in breathing, wheezing, coughing and aggravation of existing respiratory and cardiac conditions. These effects can result in increased medication use, increased doctor or emergency room visits, more hospital admissions and premature death. The human health effects of poor air quality are far reaching, but principally affect the body's respiratory system and the cardiovascular system. Individual reactions to air pollutants depend on the type of pollutant a person is exposed to, the degree of exposure, the individual's health status and genetics.[citation needed]

A new economic study of the health impacts and associated costs of air pollution in the Los Angeles Basin and San Joaquin Valley of Southern California shows that more than 3800 people die prematurely (approximately 14 years earlier than normal) each year because air pollution levels violate federal standards. The number of annual premature deaths is considerably higher than the fatalities related to auto collisions in the same area, which average fewer than 2,000 per year [16].

Eek, more numbers. Head hurts.

[Dude!]

Do you think I was saying 24K miners die from black lung?
Did you think I was saying 24K miners die?
Did anyone?

Please, your writing style is of an imbecile, but tell me it is not a perfect reflection of your intellect.

i am so much smarter than you...
it's not even close

you just spout off what others have
brainwashed you into saying

i feel sorry for you
but sorrier for your parents
they must be so disappointed

[Serpico1103]

i am so much smarter than you...it's not even close you just spout off what others have brainwashed you into saying i feel sorry for you but sorrier for your parents they must be so disappointed

No, I am smarter than you!

http://www.alternet.org/health/119890
Black Lung Disease Is Back
In some parts of the country, rates of black lung disease have more than doubled among coal miners.


More of my silly statistics. I wish I could just make up my own facts like you. Instead, I must rely on experts in the field.

http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4419
A 2007 study published in Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association suggested that long-term exposure to air pollution from a nearby freeway or heavily trafficked streets is associated with a hardening of the arteries that could raise the risk of heart disease and stroke.

A 2007 study presented at the American Heart Association's annual Scientific Sessions indicated that increased roadway pollution produced by diesel fuel in vehicles is leading to a cascade of conditions that could result in heart attack or stroke.

A study published in 2007 in Stroke: Journal of the American Heart Association found that breathing fine particle pollution during warm weather months can increase stroke risk.

A 2005 study published in Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association suggested that inhaling diesel exhaust at levels typically found in large cities may disrupt normal blood vessel and clotting activity.

Now,
enlighten
me on
how intelligent
you are, without
supporting
any of
your assertions
with facts,
studies, sources,
etc.

[Chigworthy]

Will you guys ever climax? This must be exhausting.

[Dude!]

Mom Serpico: "Honey, where did we go wrong?"

Dad Serpico: " I don't know, we tried so hard."

Mom Serpico: "We should have listened when the
doctor said the tests showed brain damage."

Dad Serpico: "i know, I know..you should have
had the abortion like he suggested".

[Serpico1103]

Mom Serpico: "Honey, where did we go wrong?"

Dad Serpico: " I don't know, we tried so hard."

Mom Serpico: "We should have listened when the
doctor said the tests showed brain damage."

Dad Serpico: "i know, I know..you should have
had the abortion like he suggested".
Ha joke is on you. Dad serpico killed himself before I was born. Want to move onto deaths due to water and soil pollution?

[Dude!]

Ha joke is on you. Dad serpico killed himself before I was born.

i am very, very sorry to hear that
i would have done the same, though

[Serpico1103]

i am very, very sorry to hear that
i would have done the same, though
Yeah, he was suffering from lung cancer. Couldn't fight anymore.

[Dude!]

Yeah, he was suffering from lung cancer. Couldn't fight anymore.

that's sad
was it coal dust?

[Serpico1103]

that's sad
was it coal dust?
How did you know? His nickname was ol' canary lungs.

[Furtherman]

When Sea Levels Attack! (http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/when-sea-levels-attack/)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/infobeautiful/when_sea_levels_attack_550.png

[StanUpshaw]

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/maps_and_graphs/2010/2/22/1266848238594/Info-is-beautiful-sea-lev-001.jpg

[Snoogans]

for all the people who said we arent fuckin up the climate and used this blizzard as an example, id like to counter

Have you ever seen a blizzard drop over 15 inches of snow and within 2 weeks the snow is melted so much you can see grass most places?

Or ever seen 5 inches of snow be completely gone within a day and a half?

my town in the last 3 weeks has had 21 inches of snow, yet I can see the grass when I look out front. The only places they still have snow were where they piled up the snow they cleared.

[Dude!]

for all the people who said we arent fuckin up the climate and used this blizzard as an example, id like to counter

Have you ever seen a blizzard drop over 15 inches of snow and within 2 weeks the snow is melted so much you can see grass most places?

Or ever seen 5 inches of snow be completely gone within a day and a half?

my town in the last 3 weeks has had 21 inches of snow, yet I can see the grass when I look out front. The only places they still have snow were where they piled up the snow they cleared.

wow, that is a dramatic
and very scientific analysis
i'm convinced now

[Furtherman]

Or ever seen 5 inches of snow be completely gone within a day and a half?

.

Yes, I have seen that before and it happens every winter. Just because we got a little more snow this year, it might seem dramatic, but it's no different than other years.

[Snoogans]

wow, that is a dramatic
and very scientific analysis
i'm convinced now

just as scientific as tryin to say look we got 2 feet of snow that means climate change is bullshit.

But use your memory and think back to even a few years ago. When have we ever gotten 2 feet of snow in February and it was all gone in February

[Snoogans]

Yes, I have seen that before and it happens every winter. Just because we got a little more snow this year, it might seem dramatic, but it's no different than other years.

yea when we get a rare snow storm in march it happens. It doesnt usually happen in february bro

[Furtherman]

yea when we get a rare snow storm in march it happens. It doesnt usually happen in february bro

Let me see your meteorological logs and data from the last 20 years or so, and prove to me that what happened last week was so unusual.

[Snoogans]

Let me see your meteorological logs and data from the last 20 years or so, and prove to me that what happened last week was so unusual.

i got some fuckin logs for you


seriously though who cares. Why not just prepare for it anyway. if its not happening, then we clean shit up and bit and move on. If it is happening, maybe we save everyone. its alot better than goin the other way

[sailor]

I think it's melting slower than in the past, near me. I'm shocked we still have so much around.

[Syd]

for all the people who said we arent fuckin up the climate and used this blizzard as an example, id like to counter

Stop bothering. Just wait 10 years and see if they still want to deny it. Chances are they'll move onto something else their corporate puppet masters wish them to and they'll be whining about why no one is doing anything about water rationing.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

More lunacy from the cultists. Thanks Vermont!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3Q9fnYud4c

Since When was Bernie sanders a warhawk?

[keithy_19]

Bring it on global warming. If the earth freezes, that's fine. If the earth melts, that's cool too.

I say when the end is imminent that we have a final bar crawl and we let Serpico and Dude buy everyone drinks.

[tanless1]

Stop bothering. Just wait 10 years and see if they still want to deny it. Chances are they'll move onto something else their corporate puppet masters wish them to and they'll be whining about why no one is doing anything about water rationing.

Even if your logic is correct and the blazing heat melt all glaciers, water rationing will not be the issue as water only changes states......soooo, our climates would be more tropical in nature, and brother....that is good farming. Let's think a little further. The rain forest your always squawkin about..........all a cross the bottom so.cal to florida. Finaly well be able to stop piping water into nevada....... The benifits of global warming are many....to bad its not man caused

[keithy_19]

Even if your logic is correct and the blazing heat melt all glaciers, water rationing will not be the issue as water only changes states......soooo, our climates would be more tropical in nature, and brother....that is good farming. Let's think a little further. The rain forest your always squawkin about..........all a cross the bottom so.cal to florida. Finaly well be able to stop piping water into nevada....... The benifits of global warming are many....to bad its not man caused

And then you won't be tanless! You will be tan-have!

[Dude!]

And then you won't be tanless! You will be tan-have!

wouldn't he be
tanmore?

[tanless1]

...dare to dream

[keithy_19]

wouldn't he be
tanmore?

Fuck you.

:smoke:

[epo]

Bring it on global warming. If the earth freezes, that's fine. If the earth melts, that's cool too.

I say when the end is imminent that we have a final bar crawl and we let Serpico and Dude buy everyone drinks.

I can't wait for global warming and for New Jersey to go underwater. Its gonna be fabulous!

[keithy_19]

I can't wait for global warming and for New Jersey to go underwater. Its gonna be fabulous!

Well it looks like someone won't be getting a free drink.