Discussion: Global Warming, Emission Standards, and Other Environmental Issues

What is your opinion of climate change?

  • Yes it is real and humanity is causing it.

  • Yes it is real but part of a natural cycle.

  • It is real but is both man made and a natural cycle.

  • It's a complete scam made to make money.

  • I dont know or care.

  • Yes it is real and humanity is causing it.

  • Yes it is real but part of a natural cycle.

  • It is real but is both man made and a natural cycle.

  • It's a complete scam made to make money.

  • I dont know or care.


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
People are probably more worried about Natural Disasters these days, what with the crap load of them we've had recently.
 
That may be true...but shifts in global temperatures are likely influencing the severity of these disasters.
 
I doubt Global Temperatures are influencing the Tectonic Plates, those Earthquakes have been a pain the last couple years.
 
I doubt Global Temperatures are influencing the Tectonic Plates, those Earthquakes have been a pain the last couple years.

I don't think global climate changes have any effect on plates, but I do believe they have an effect on things like blizzards, hurricanes, etc.
 
What the hell have Hurricanes done recently? Ever since Katrina it's been really quiet. I do agree to the blizzards though
 
"Greening" has consequences.

Rush to Use Crops as Fuel Raises Food Prices and Hunger Fears

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/07/science/earth/07cassava.html?_r=1&src=twr

But with food prices rising sharply in recent months, many experts are calling on countries to scale back their headlong rush into green fuel development, arguing that the combination of ambitious biofuel targets and mediocre harvests of some crucial crops is contributing to high prices, hunger and political instability.
Food prices aren't dependent on income. So, if increases in the price of feed due to biofuel development cause the price of beef to rise by $1.00 a pound, the poor man pays the same increase per pound at checkout counter as the "evil" rich man. One could then argue that biofuel development amounts to a "regressive tax" on the poor. Especially, you know, since government is mandating some of this increase:

In the United States, Congress has mandated that biofuel use must reach 36 billion gallons annually by 2022. The European Union stipulates that 10 percent of transportation fuel must come from renewable sources like biofuel or wind power by 2020. Countries like China, India, Indonesia and Thailand have adopted biofuel targets as well.
So, the environment or the poor . . . which does the "green" left value more?
 
Corn based ethanol is the most idiotic plan anybody ever came up with. It's a gigantic mistake.

1) You put more energy than you get out
2) Corn supplies going to ethanol production has dramatically increased the price of foods connected with it...which is a lot.
 
Corn based ethanol is the most idiotic plan anybody ever came up with. It's a gigantic mistake.

1) You put more energy than you get out
2) Corn supplies going to ethanol production has dramatically increased the price of foods connected with it...which is a lot.


Agreed. Honestly, at first I thought it was a good idea. Corn is something readily available in large supplies, and renewable via planting more. Once it had time to sink in tho, it hit me on how it could raise the price of corn. Then I thought about how it's not just canned, or frozen corn, but that corns used in a lot of other products, and foods as well which could lead to the price of several things going up. Plus, like you said, it's just inefficient.


I do think getting off of our oil dependency is important, but it's better not to run to each and every alternative to come out. We have so many half assed ideas that aren't working, or are costing and taking more energy to put in than we get back out. That's not to say I think everything isn't working. Things that take natural phenomena and harness it without great effort like solar (maybe wind, but not sure on how much effort that takes to harness), or things that ease the amount of energy needed to move an object (magnet's, magnet trains in general) always seemed like good ideas to me.
 
That is kind of a duh...
 
This is just...idiotic.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=43089&423

On this date in 1970, a trio of radical dreamers established Earth Day, an annual event designed to assault capitalism, free markets, and mankind.

The initial concept was conceived by then-Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D.-Wis.). Nelson was Congress’ leading environmentalist, a sort of pre-incarnate Sen. Barbara Boxer in drag. He was also the mastermind behind those ridiculous teach-ins that were vogue in the '60s and early '70s. During the teach-ins, mutinous school instructors would scrap the day’s assigned curriculum, pressure their students to sit cross-legged on the floor, and “rap” about how America was an imperialist nation, and converse about why communism really wasn’t such a bad form of government—it just needed to be implemented properly.

Nelson’s teach-in efforts were aided by a young man named Denis Hayes. Hayes was student body president while at Stanford, and well-known for organizing anti-Vietnam war protests. Hayes heard about Nelson’s teach-in concept and eventually helped him institute the practice nationwide.

Rounding out the troika was Prof. Paul Ehrlich of Stanford. In 1968, Ehrlich authored the Malthusian missive, The Population Bomb, in which he infamously spouted wild allegations that included equating the Earth’s supposed surplus of people with a cancer that needs to be eradicated: “A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. ... We must shift our efforts from treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions,” he wrote.

In 1969, following a much-hyped oil spill off the Santa Barbara coast, an overblown patch of fire on Cleveland’s Cuyahoga River, and the drug-induced vibes cast across the nation via the Woodstock Music and Art Fair, Nelson met with Ehrlich and reportedly said, “My God—why not a national teach-in on the environment?” Hayes was brought into play a pivotal role with organization and implementation. After careful consideration, a name and date for the event were chosen: the inaugural Earth Day would be celebrated April 22, 1970—Russian dictator Vladimir Lenin’s centennial.

Environmentalists have always admired Lenin. He was the first disciple of Karl Marx to capture control of a country, and the opening act of his seven-year reign commenced with the abolition of all private property—a Marxist priority. Despite overseeing a bloody civil war, a devastated economy, and a citizenry without hope, Lenin made it a priority to implement his signature decree, “On Land.” In it he declared that all forests, waters, and minerals to be the exclusive property of the state, and he demanded these resources be protected from use by the public and private enterprise. Selling timber or firewood, mining minerals, or diverting water for farming was strictly prohibited.

While Nelson and Ehrlich were already known as nontraditional crackpots, Hayes was that and more. In a New York Times article published the morning after the first Earth Day headlined, “Angry Coordinator of Earth Day,” young Hayes bragged that five years earlier he had fled overseas because “I had to get away from America.” Hayes was so committed to his anti-capitalist cause that he made sure his organization did not even produce Earth Day bumper stickers. “You want to know why?” he explained to the Times, because “they go on automobiles.”

Earth Day has never been a celebration of the beauty and bounty of this awesome terrestrial ball. Instead, it’s always been an assault on man. During the first decade of Earth Day observances, people were proclaimed the polluter. By the '80s, the event’s organizers cast mankind as the tree killer, and, with the '90s, humans evolved into the animal species annihilator. The global warming scare never really became popular until the late '90s, and when it did, it provided compatriots at the Earth Day headquarters with the ultimate hook on which to hang their red berets: humans, particularly Americans, were now screwing up the entire planet’s climate.

Today, rather than join in the Marxist folderol designed to hammer the American way, let’s give thanks for our nation’s abundant resources and dedicate ourselves to electing leaders who will reclaim our natural capital from the stranglehold of regulations, policies, and laws that are more in keeping with the tyranny of Marx than the liberty of Madison.
 
Meh, Earth Day is just day that screws up my curriculum calendar in my class...

People either live it everyday, or go home....
 
When's Uranus Day? That's what I want to know!
 
That is kind of a duh...

I'm still wondering how they're going to fix the underwater oil cloud problems and all of the oil on the ocean floor. These idiots like to drum up their 'successes' based on the fact that 'you can't see the oil so it must be gone'. It's not gone. It's still there. Underwater.
 
Bunch of the AGW types are doing a Pat Robertson; the tornadoes are an act of Mother Gaia in revenge for dirty AGW deniers. The groups in question: Center for American Progress and ThinkProgress.

Stay classy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,269
Messages
22,077,642
Members
45,877
Latest member
dude9876
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"