Discussion: Global Warming and Other Environmental Issues

[Memphis Slim]

 

[PemLam]

hybrids are a bunch of rubbish. they do nothing but change where the polution is produced. they get worse milage over all because they have to lug around 2 engines.

Almost zero CO2 emissions and nearly double, sometimes triple the mileage of their non-hybrid same size counterparts...and you think they're rubbish?

It would seem that the exact opposite if they're able to get that kind of mileage and still "lug around 2 engines".

 

[Hotwire]

Denial over an issue that is still up for debate? See...this is the kind of mentality that seems so fanatical. There were all kinds of exagerations in Gore's movie. You'd think that would say to the logical mind...."Hey, don't swallow the rest of his information as gospel."

But because it's Al Gore (the wounded hero from the 2000 Election) you guys don't question anything.

I swear...if it was Bush's movie, none of you would be on board.

The point chaseter was making is that your whole arguement is denial. Global warming isn't real, the planet is fine, etc... I noticed you sidestepped my post, so I'll put it up again. Care to retort?

It would be very egotistical of anyone to think that humans and their habits are not having an adverse effect on this planet. Even if global warming is not an immediate threat, it is something that our children, and their children (And I know how concerned you are about your liniage, Slim.) will have to deal with. And Slim, you are mostly right, the planet will be fine, it's the human race and a lot of other species that would be in trouble. Once we're gone, the planet would recover.

 

[Knightsaber Priss]

I've been telling people this Global Warming thing is a crock. We get bombarded with snow up until April where I live. All this talk about the Great Lakes receding? It's nature's way of making room for all this snow. If not all the melt off would be flooding alot of areas at sea level.

 

[Darthphere]

I swear...if it was Bush's movie, none of you would be on board.

Completely false. For all his faults, most of the free world can see through them and see some of the good things he's done. For example, his work for Africa.

 

[Tron5000]

http://www.globalwarminghysteria.com/

 

[Tron5000]

When trying to figure out wether someone is lying to you or not, one of the first things to do is ask yourself, "What does this person have to gain from lying?" Now, who would stand to gain more, the envrionmentalists by getting us to go green, or big instustry by loosening regulations?

Oh, and thanks Jag.

http://www.nolanchart.com/article2999.html

"Global Warming shills are now anchoring the biggest finance and control bubble since the dotcom boom in the late 1990's. It's a multi-billion dollar industry based on the absence of a discernible product, a new religion where missionaries in grey suits have laid siege on Wall Street and London's Square Mile.

"To question the faith is forbidden, as the financiers tap government and UN funds in their crusade to profit from producing nothing, a monumental achievement even by capitalist standards.

"When asked about the CO2 gravy train', many followers, NGO workers and emerging bio-fuel tycoons will admit to you, 'don't ask where it's going, just jump on.'

"This new economy, proposed by Carbon God Al Gore and Carbon Money Changer George Soros, is to be administrated and run by hundreds of so called 'Private-Public Partnerships', a reinvented form of government now commonly known by its initials, 'PPP'. Here large multinational corporations, NGO's and subservient governments collude to impose their own agenda on regional populations under the cleverly fabricated banner of 'sustainable development'. As power begins to shift over to these PPP's, important decision making then takes place behind closed doors, with the ultimate goal of generating limitless private profits from public taxation programs- in the case, carbon taxes & premiums on all goods, services and labour. PPP's and NGO's now play hardball to get Congress to spend more and more money on global warming and carbon calculation research, and even pass economically damaging legislation to support this false thesis. These companies same organisations who lobby Congress stand to gain immediate millions, and in some cases, billions from the new legislation.

"The leading mechanism is the amazing 'Cap and Trade' scheme, whereby large corporations can slowly monopolise industrial sectors, gradually pushing out smaller businesses and competitors who cannot afford to meet the draconian anti-competitive measures.At present, the controlling organisation has taken the form of the United Nations, under the direction of the world's Central Banks, now working with elites from the G8 nations to form a global bureaucracy known as the 'World Environmental Organisation'."


...more can be found at the link above

 

[redmarvel]

Whether or not you believe in Global warming, you need to take a look at the health issues involved if we don't start changing some of our bad habits. Cancer rates are on the rise... why? Do you really want your kids to get cancer because you couldn't be bothered to even try to clean up your act? We need to stop polluting our air so we can breath, we need to stop polluting our water so we can drink it and we need to stop polluting our land so that the pollutants won't get washed into the water and so we can continue to grow things on it.

 

[Tron5000]

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st308/st308.pdf

"In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued its Fourth Assessment Report. The report included predictions of big increases in average world temperatures by 2100, resulting in an increasingly rapid loss of the world’s glaciers and ice caps, a dramatic global sea level rise that would threaten low-lying coastal areas, the spread of tropical diseases, and severe drought and floods.

"These dire predictions are not, however, the result of scientific forecasting; rather, they are the opinions of experts. Expert opinion on climate change has often been wrong.

"Skepticism Among the Scientists. Thus it is not surprising that international surveys of climate scientists from 27 countries in 1996 and 2003 found growing skepticism over the accuracy of climate models. Of more than 1,060 respondents, only 35 percent agreed with the statement, 'Climate models can accurately predict future climates,' whereas 47 percent disagreed.

"Violations of Forecasting Principles. Forty internationally-known experts on forecasting methods and 123 expert reviewers codified evidence from research on forecasting into 140 principles. The empirically-validated principles are available in the Principles of Forecasting handbook and at forecastingprinciples.com. These principles were designed to be applicable to making forecasts about diverse physical, social and economic phenomena, from weather to consumer sales, from the spread of nonnative species to investment strategy, and from decisions in war to egg-hatching rates. They were applied to predicting the 2004 U.S. presidential election outcome and provided the most accurate forecast of the two-party vote split of any published forecast, and did so well ahead of election day (see polyvote.-com).

"The authors of this study used these forecasting principles to audit the IPCC report. They found that:
Out of the 140 forecasting principles, 127 principles are relevant to the procedures used to arrive at the climate projections in the IPCC report.
Of these 127, the methods described in the report violated 60 principles.
An additional 12 forecasting principles appear to be violated, and there is insufficient information in the report to assess the use of 38."

...much more at the link above

 

[chaseter]

Denial over an issue that is still up for debate? See...this is the kind of mentality that seems so fanatical. There were all kinds of exagerations in Gore's movie. You'd think that would say to the logical mind...."Hey, don't swallow the rest of his information as gospel."

But because it's Al Gore (the wounded hero from the 2000 Election) you guys don't question anything.

I swear...if it was Bush's movie, none of you would be on board.

Carbon dioxide has increased from .32% to .38% in the last 50 years. That is a fact. The globe is warming because carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. What happens when the Earth warms? There is nothing up for debate...it is happening. I also love how you pin things on Al Gore and refute actual science.

 

[chaseter]

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st308/st308.pdf

"In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued its Fourth Assessment Report. The report included predictions of big increases in average world temperatures by 2100, resulting in an increasingly rapid loss of the world’s glaciers and ice caps, a dramatic global sea level rise that would threaten low-lying coastal areas, the spread of tropical diseases, and severe drought and floods.

"These dire predictions are not, however, the result of scientific forecasting; rather, they are the opinions of experts. Expert opinion on climate change has often been wrong.

"Skepticism Among the Scientists. Thus it is not surprising that international surveys of climate scientists from 27 countries in 1996 and 2003 found growing skepticism over the accuracy of climate models. Of more than 1,060 respondents, only 35 percent agreed with the statement, 'Climate models can accurately predict future climates,' whereas 47 percent disagreed.

"Violations of Forecasting Principles. Forty internationally-known experts on forecasting methods and 123 expert reviewers codified evidence from research on forecasting into 140 principles. The empirically-validated principles are available in the Principles of Forecasting handbook and at forecastingprinciples.com. These principles were designed to be applicable to making forecasts about diverse physical, social and economic phenomena, from weather to consumer sales, from the spread of nonnative species to investment strategy, and from decisions in war to egg-hatching rates. They were applied to predicting the 2004 U.S. presidential election outcome and provided the most accurate forecast of the two-party vote split of any published forecast, and did so well ahead of election day (see polyvote.-com).

"The authors of this study used these forecasting principles to audit the IPCC report. They found that:
Out of the 140 forecasting principles, 127 principles are relevant to the procedures used to arrive at the climate projections in the IPCC report.
Of these 127, the methods described in the report violated 60 principles.
An additional 12 forecasting principles appear to be violated, and there is insufficient information in the report to assess the use of 38."

...much more at the link above

That is what we just went over last week in Biology

Of the hundreds of scientists that were working on it, like 2 or 3 didn't agree with the rest so it cannot be called a 'fact'. But I think they know a lot more than CellSlim about our environment.

 

[Tron5000]

http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_17772.shtml

"In 2007, meteorologist Anthony Watts who led a team of researchers revealed that, 'The U.S. National Climate Data Center is in the middle of a scandal. Their global observing network, the heart and soul of surface weather measurement, is a disaster.' It had been discovered that many of the measuring stations were placed in locations such as on hot black asphalt, next to trash burn barrels, beside heat exhaust vents, and even attached to hot chimneys and above outdoor grills!

"In May 2007, Dr. Reid Bryson, the founding chairman of the Department of Meteorology at the University of Wisconsin dismissed fears of increased man-made CO2 in the atmosphere. He called the 'global warming' argument 'absurd.' As to any increase in the Earth’s temperature, he said, 'Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting carbon dioxide in the air.'

"On August 15, 2007, meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo, the first Director of Meteorology at The Weather Channel and former chairman of the American Meteorological Society’s Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecasting, said, 'If the atmosphere was a 100 story building, our annual anthropogenic (man-made) CO2 contribution today would be equivalent to the linoleum on the first floor.'"

...more at the link above


http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

"Just how much of the 'Greenhouse Effect' is caused by human activity?

"It is about 0.28%, if water vapor is taken into account-- about 5.53%, if not.

"This point is so crucial to the debate over global warming that how water vapor is or isn't factored into an analysis of Earth's greenhouse gases makes the difference between describing a significant human contribution to the greenhouse effect, or a negligible one.

"Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect (4). Interestingly, many 'facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold.

"Water vapor is 99.999% of natural origin. Other atmospheric greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and miscellaneous other gases (CFC's, etc.), are also mostly of natural origin (except for the latter, which is mostly anthropogenic).

"Human activites contribute slightly to greenhouse gas concentrations through farming, manufacturing, power generation, and transportation. However, these emissions are so dwarfed in comparison to emissions from natural sources we can do nothing about, that even the most costly efforts to limit human emissions would have a very small-- perhaps undetectable-- effect on global climate."

 

[Tron5000]

That is what we just went over last week in Biology

Of the hundreds of scientists that were working on it, like 2 or 3 didn't agree with the rest so it cannot be called a 'fact'. But I think they know a lot more than CellSlim about our environment.

That is patently false. There are several scientists who not only disagree with it, but blatantly refute it.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....ecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb

"Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called 'consensus' on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore."

"This new report details how teams of international scientists are dissenting from the UN IPCC’s view of climate science. In such nations as Germany, Brazil, the Netherlands, Russia, Argentina, New Zealand and France, nations, scientists banded together in 2007 to oppose climate alarmism. In addition, over 100 prominent international scientists sent an open letter in December 2007 to the UN stating attempts to control climate were 'futile.' (LINK)

"Paleoclimatologist Dr. Tim Patterson, professor in the department of Earth Sciences at Carleton University in Ottawa, recently converted from a believer in man-made climate change to a skeptic. Patterson noted that the notion of a 'consensus' of scientists aligned with the UN IPCC or former Vice President Al Gore is false. 'I was at the Geological Society of America meeting in Philadelphia in the fall and I would say that people with my opinion were probably in the majority.'”


...more at the link above

 

[chaseter]

That is patently false. There are several scientists who not only disagree with it, but blatantly refute it.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....ecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb

"Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called 'consensus' on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore."

I was talking about it happening, not it being mad made. It being man made is still a huge debate. But the majority of science accepts that it is happening.

 

[Superhobo]

Neither of those are even the same continent as the original pic. Good job.

 

[Victarion]

Let the good times roll on! :tossesaerosolcaninthefire:

 

[Memphis Slim]

Originally Posted by Mal'Akai
It would be very egotistical of anyone to think that humans and their habits are not having an adverse effect on this planet. Even if global warming is not an immediate threat, it is something that our children, and their children (And I know how concerned you are about your liniage, Slim.) will have to deal with. And Slim, you are mostly right, the planet will be fine, it's the human race and a lot of other species that would be in trouble. Once we're gone, the planet would recover.

I side step any comments I deem not worth addressing. Like that one. This earth will always have good spots and bad spots. Those photos just prove how big this planet is. Man is not destroying the planet. You give man too much credit. You under estimate the power and resiliency of this earth.

My children will be fine....as long as they don't listen you Gore-danians.

 

[Arc-Light]

I side step any comments I deem not worth addressing. Like that one. This earth will alwyas have good spots and bad spots. Those photos just prove how big this planet is. Man is not destroying the planet. You give man too much credit. You under estimate the power and resiliency of this earth.

My children will be fine....as long as they don't listen you Gore-danians.

Oh please dont breed.....plz.

 

[Memphis Slim]

Neither of those are even the same continent as the original pic. Good job.

Not suppose to be. That was was my whole point. This planet is much more powerful than we are and much bigger than we think. There are polluted places and pristine places.

 

[Carcharodon]

Not suppose to be. That was was my whole point. This planet is powerful than we are and much bigger than we think.

100% agreed! Once we trash one spot, we can just move to another! It's just like Ron White's "Tater Salad," standup routine, right? Party at the Sears Tower. Oh, this floor's trashed! Move up, people, next floor!

Jesus, these crazy commie environmentalists. It's like they think that there are actually global systems in place that mean the products of our activities are communicable to other areas of the planet. What idiots!

Atmospheric and oceanic circulation are poppycock! Liberal propoganda!

It's a known fact that everything that gets dumped in the ocean stays right the **** where it is. The pollution we put into the air stays precisely above the spot it was emitted! We planned it that way for a reason.

 

[Memphis Slim]

100% agreed! Once we trash one spot, we can just move to another! It's just like Ron White's "Tater Salad," standup routine, right? Party at the Sears Tower. Oh, this floor's trashed! Move up, people, next floor!

Jesus, these crazy commie environmentalists. It's like they think that there are actually global systems in place that mean the products of our activities are communicable to other areas of the planet. What idiots!

Atmospheric and oceanic circulation are poppycock! Liberal propoganda!

It's a known fact that everything that gets dumped in the ocean stays right the **** where it is. The pollution we put into the air stays precisely above the spot it was emitted! We planned it that way for a reason.

I knew you could say it!!!

 

[Carcharodon]

I knew you could say it!!!

It's really depressing that the only time you can agree with me is when I say something that flies completely in the face of all knowledge and logic.

 

[kedrell]

I love how the enviro-wacko's(anti-capitalist socialist types) have rigged the game so that no matter whether it seems colder than usual or warmer than usual, it's climate change/global warming. Pretty sneaky. If it's hotter then global warming is in effect(as traditionaly understood) is the cause. If it's colder then it's the whole Day After Tomorrow thing coming to get us. Gee, I wonder if the fact that the sun has entered a period of increased activity might have something to do with it? Hmmm....

 

[Carcharodon]

I love how the enviro-wacko's(anti-capitalist socialist types) have rigged the game so that no matter whether it seems colder than usual or warmer than usual, it's climate change/global warming. Pretty sneaky. If it's hotter then global warming is in effect(as traditionaly understood) is the cause. If it's colder then it's the whole Day After Tomorrow thing coming to get us. Gee, I wonder if the fact that the sun has entered a period of increased activity might have something to do with it? Hmmm....

It certainly might have something to do with it. It's more than likely that we're facing a combination of factors that are causing a warming trend.

By the way: they started calling it, "climate change," because people who are quite vocal about the subject (yet have not one clue as to the actual science behind the phenomenon) began using anomalous cold weather as some sort of primitive counter-argument.

Basically, they got annoyed by people that don't realize that, despite cold-snaps as of late, the average global temperature has been on the rise.

Actually, that's why I find the recent rapid cooling interesting. We've had a huge drop in temperature (global average) as of late, but I'd bet top dollar that it isn't permanent. Yet again, those people began calling it an, "erasure," of prior warming (something we don't at all know to be the case).

I'm going to keep my eye on that as new data presents itself.

 

[Memphis Slim]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ft8LfE7AI2w

This is great!