I often wonder how many in the stop-global-warming crowd are genuinely concerned about the problem and how many are simply using it as an anti-capitalism tool. I can respect the people that genuinely want to avert catastrophe, but if you're just using global warming to advance your douchebag socialist agenda then do us all a favor and go fly your private jet into the ocean.
To me, air pollution is a bigger problem than global warming. There is well documented evidence that air pollution leads to increased mortality. It seems to me that many solutions to the problem of air pollution will also reduce CO2 levels.
There are people who are genuinely concerned about the problem, and its very frustrating when the higher ups (george bush) ignore the problem. It's equally as frustrating when PETA says that the cure for global warming is becoming vegan, because "methane levels created by animals cause more pollution than every car and plane in the world", and yes, a spokesperson actually said this.
AL GORE IS MY UNCLE!
_________________ VermontRepublic.org Help Vermont Become Free!
I often wonder how many in the stop-global-warming crowd are genuinely concerned about the problem and how many are simply using it as an anti-capitalism tool. I can respect the people that genuinely want to avert catastrophe, but if you're just using global warming to advance your douchebag socialist agenda then do us all a favor and go fly your private jet into the ocean.
To me, air pollution is a bigger problem than global warming. There is well documented evidence that air pollution leads to increased mortality. It seems to me that many solutions to the problem of air pollution will also reduce CO2 levels.
There are people who are genuinely concerned about the problem, and its very frustrating when the higher ups (george bush) ignore the problem. It's equally as frustrating when PETA says that the cure for global warming is becoming vegan, because "methane levels created by animals cause more pollution than every car and plane in the world", and yes, a spokesperson actually said this.
AL GORE IS MY UNCLE!
And by "ignore the problem" you mean "promote cleaner/less CO2 producing energy like nuclear that all the environmental groups oppose for inane reasons"? Also, President Bush has an extremely "green" home, unlike the Goreacle. Now, he may be opposing Kyoto (for damn good reasons, if you ask me), and he may not be making the environment a key policy platform (I happen to agree that the war on terror is a bigger issue, but that's a different debate), but he does actually lead by example, though said example gets absolutely NO publicity.
_________________ The solution of this problem is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader.
but he does actually lead by example, though said example gets absolutely NO publicity.
well, if you were CNN (try to put yourself in the mind of a socialist douchebag), what would you rather do -
a) Report on how a Marine was murdered in cold blood by George bush [and then mention practically as a side note that the Marine was in fact protecting his country, and killed defending innocent people from a terrorist], and then Cut to an argument between a Liberal Democrat and a Liberal democrat about how would be best to impeach bush, and just how evil he is
or
b) Report how the President is leading by example, while at the same time working for an Effective, yet cost effective way of protecting the environment while at the same time reducing oil dependency.
if you picked (a) you're a realist.
if you believed (a) you're retarded.
if you picked (b) you're an idealist.
if you believed (b) you may be a free thinker.
_________________
BigPeeOn wrote:
Here's the deal: chemistry is the devil. Anything beyond balancing an chemical equation is black magic.
I often wonder how many in the stop-global-warming crowd are genuinely concerned about the problem and how many are simply using it as an anti-capitalism tool. I can respect the people that genuinely want to avert catastrophe, but if you're just using global warming to advance your douchebag socialist agenda then do us all a favor and go fly your private jet into the ocean.
To me, air pollution is a bigger problem than global warming. There is well documented evidence that air pollution leads to increased mortality. It seems to me that many solutions to the problem of air pollution will also reduce CO2 levels.
There are people who are genuinely concerned about the problem, and its very frustrating when the higher ups (george bush) ignore the problem. It's equally as frustrating when PETA says that the cure for global warming is becoming vegan, because "methane levels created by animals cause more pollution than every car and plane in the world", and yes, a spokesperson actually said this.
AL GORE IS MY UNCLE!
And by "ignore the problem" you mean "promote cleaner/less CO2 producing energy like nuclear that all the environmental groups oppose for inane reasons"? Also, President Bush has an extremely "green" home, unlike the Goreacle. Now, he may be opposing Kyoto (for damn good reasons, if you ask me), and he may not be making the environment a key policy platform (I happen to agree that the war on terror is a bigger issue, but that's a different debate), but he does actually lead by example, though said example gets absolutely NO publicity.
How much has he actually done to improve CO2 standards? i hear him say all the time that he supports it, but are any government agencies actually researching it? i never hear anything on the news (fox or CNN) about congress approving funding for cleaner technologies. Why didn't bush watch gore's documentary? What are bush's reasons for opposing Kyoto?
amd2800barton wrote:
a) Report on how a Marine was murdered in cold blood by George bush [and then mention practically as a side note that the Marine was in fact protecting his country, and killed defending innocent people from a terrorist]
you also have to realize the fear mongering done by Fox news.
_________________ VermontRepublic.org Help Vermont Become Free!
What do you want him to do? Make already unrealistic fuel economy goals even more out there? Require all power plants to get rid of CO2 emissions? a) all this stuff is LUDICROUSLY expensive and b) we don't even know if its the root cause of the problem!
The earth has been warmer in the past, the earth will be warmer in the future. Mars is warming as well. I went and did a bunch of research on global warming last semester, here is what I came up with. Note: I don't deny that the earth is warming, nor do I deny the fact that we should try to limit the amount of crap we put into the air/water/whatever. However, there is a big difference between saying that we should try to be less wasteful and wanting the president to put all his focus on a "problem" that we probably can't even do anything about. Even those calling for the Kyoto Protocols realize that even perfect implementation will have next to no effect on global climate.
_________________ The solution of this problem is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader.
What do you want him to do? Make already unrealistic fuel economy goals even more out there? Require all power plants to get rid of CO2 emissions? a) all this stuff is LUDICROUSLY expensive and b) we don't even know if its the root cause of the problem!
The earth has been warmer in the past, the earth will be warmer in the future. Mars is warming as well. I went and did a bunch of research on global warming last semester, here is what I came up with. Note: I don't deny that the earth is warming, nor do I deny the fact that we should try to limit the amount of crap we put into the air/water/whatever. However, there is a big difference between saying that we should try to be less wasteful and wanting the president to put all his focus on a "problem" that we probably can't even do anything about. Even those calling for the Kyoto Protocols realize that even perfect implementation will have next to no effect on global climate.
Fossil Fuels do cause greenhouse gasses
green house gasses lead to global warming
fossil fuels lead to global warming.
limiting fossil fuels will stop global warming
has anyone seen "An Inconvienient Truth"?
_________________ VermontRepublic.org Help Vermont Become Free!
Joined: Fri 01-24-2003 7:13PM Posts: 1652 Location: down the hill
Source: Fidelity
Galvatron96 wrote:
Fossil Fuels do cause greenhouse gasses green house gasses lead to global warming fossil fuels lead to global warming. limiting fossil fuels will stop global warming
Fossil fuels do cause gases which have been labeled "greenhouse gases"
"greenhouse gases" lead to global cooling, according to scientists a few years ago
Fossil fuels lead to global cooling and another ice age
The amount of "greenhouse gases" put into the atmosphere by us is insignificant compared to the greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere by natural processes such as volcanos.
Limiting fossil fuels will only make transportation and heating our homes more expensive.
_________________ heretic^ stars as Samuel Jackson in the summer's newest thriller: Owls on a Forum!
when i said limiting fossil fuels i meant making fossil fuel engines more efficient, and even using fuel cells or electric cars. That kind of limiting would make heating homes and transportation less expensive.
_________________ VermontRepublic.org Help Vermont Become Free!
And when those things are econamically feasable, I will support them, and I support research into that. It's just a good idea. However, until we get there, we still use fossil fuels. If you want to buy a hybrid/electric car, good for you. Requiring that cpeople buy them, however, is not what the government should be doing. If people want them, let them buy them.
_________________ The solution of this problem is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader.
when i said limiting fossil fuels i meant making fossil fuel engines more efficient, and even using fuel cells or electric cars. That kind of limiting would make heating homes and transportation less expensive.
One major flaw in electric and hybrid cars is the battery. Lithium-Ion batteries are quite toxic and will need to be replaced every 7 years, based on current projections. And though I have strong feelings about global warming, I have not seen Al Gore's movie either, because he seems to have cherry picked his intelligence on the matter and its hardly the "slam-dunk" he makes it out to be. And yes, I used that phraseology on purpose.
_________________ "...there is no limit to what a man can do or where he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit."
--Ronald Reagan
i'm too lazy to see if anyone mentioned this, but aren't we still a few degrees cooler than earth's average temperature before the ice age? i could've swore we were but i may be wrong. =\
I think gore's big point was that the rate at which the temperature (dT/dt) of the earth is rising is super-duper fast. Also, the effects of global warming are more important than just the temperature. rising temperature's cause violent weather changes, extreme droughts/flooding mass species extinction, yada yada yada.
EDIT: I just noticed that the average temperature of the earth is 288 K so in that little space at the top of the graph that says "Today", the earth's temperature has jumped about 3 degrees, almost like the pre-permian warming jump which led to mass extinction.
_________________ VermontRepublic.org Help Vermont Become Free!
Last edited by Galvatron96 on Sat 03-17-2007 4:11PM, edited 1 time in total.
Yes, this year's hurricane season was to be the worst on record: basically nothing happened. That has been the only verifiable prediction I have heard made, and it was flat wrong. Species have been going extinct for millinea, and some have been due to climate change. Many things cause climate change, not just humans. Also, what are you basing the dT/dt on? You say its rapid, buit rapid compared to what? Is it faster than it was in the 1930s? Well sure, but is it more rapid than the one 3 million years ago? Who knows? We have so little data to compare our findings to that it's impossible to make any legit claims. All the climate models out there have yet to predict weather with any sort of accuracy, just as any in the past couldn't.
_________________ The solution of this problem is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum