|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 [Next] | ||||||||||
kregg Inner circle 1950 Posts |
You first.
POOF!
|
|||||||||
Close.Up.Dave Inner circle Behind you! 2956 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-11-22 12:59, kregg wrote: What would you have rather it been called: There is a slight rise in temperatures on earth and deforestations and loss of habitat could ruin our food and water supply and by reducing your energy consumption and waste production you can reduce the rate at which this occurs so have you chosen to participate? Yeah, that's a catchy title. Or, I could have just gone with wording that was a lot simpler that people could easily identify with (Even though I didn't realize it would get everyones panties in a bunch). |
|||||||||
kregg Inner circle 1950 Posts |
No. Perhaps, what are you doing to keep your room clean.
I was actually making a joke. The title suggests that we need to help global warming.
POOF!
|
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-11-22 13:08, kregg wrote: I have made no positive scientific claims. I have no facts to present. You, on the other hand, have claimed that anthropogenic global warming is "junk science". The burden of evidence is on you. I am not a climatologist. I do have a degree in mathematics, though. I have read some of the scientific literature, and can make some sense of the arguments being made and can evaluate some of the analysis. I cannot see any evidence of "junk science" nor can I see that any of the studies are iron clad. If you want to claim that a peer-reviewed scientific paper is junk, go ahead. But without evidence, it's only so much hot air. John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
Close.Up.Dave Inner circle Behind you! 2956 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-11-22 13:10, kregg wrote: Well some feel that we need to help it and some don't. I can actually understand both sides when some feel that by helping it we can ruin the economy, but it's open to interpretation. |
|||||||||
kregg Inner circle 1950 Posts |
Wrong Sir John. The burden of proof is on those of you who believe in the theory of AGW.
POOF!
|
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
Kregg, the burden of proof is on those that make claims. You claimed that AGW is "junk science" but instead of supporting your position, you call names. Aggression is no substitute for reasoning.
If you wish to dispute the IPCC, go ahead and read their paper and mount a critique. If you'd like I'll try to understand your critique and say what I think of it. Simply shouting that you're right doesn't make you right. John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-11-21 02:25, David Ranalli wrote: I wish you did not start your discussion and RFI for energy frugality ideas with the above paragraph. While our particular most comfortable environment my be somewhat effected by a temperature rise or fall - it's far from planetary destruction or something we have not seen evidence of in core samples. I happen to support being frugal about energy use simply as part of learning live in a mindful way - that is making conscious choices and seeking out the best choices. That said, it's friggen cold in NY and I lit a candle last night. We are 300 million people in the USA - and guess what? there are four Billion people on the very verge of joining us in our industrialized civilization with cars we sell overseas, cigarettes we sell overseas and computers/game consoles we sell overseas. It's trivial to suggest some "less than kindly" approaches to heading off ecology's energy use/carbon emissions/heat emissions problems - though instead I'd prefer we lead by example - making good choices.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Close.Up.Dave Inner circle Behind you! 2956 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-11-22 13:21, Jonathan Townsend wrote: Well said sir. |
|||||||||
Close.Up.Dave Inner circle Behind you! 2956 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-11-22 13:21, Jonathan Townsend wrote: Well said sir. |
|||||||||
MagicSanta Inner circle Northern Nevada 5841 Posts |
Did some of you green gassers know the air is cleaner now then it was 50 years ago?
Forget about global warming for a moment, say no one ever brought it up. The fact is everyone except those with mental problems are actually working at keeping things cleaner. Companies are coming up with ways to purify water used in processes and have to the point where my former company could not release water that might go to the SF Bay because it was too pure and would take away from the needed brackish water. Water companies are purifying black water to the same level but most cities don't have a means to re use this ultra clean water. Cars run far cleaner than they ever did, even the SUVs' and consumer goods put out less pollutants. People are aware of the importance of trees and parks and cities are making green areas, there are regions with more trees than they use to have before settlers came. The lumber industry continues to plant trees and keeping their industry alive as they have for a hundred plus years. People are not, as some lefties want you to think, trying to destroy the world. Now lets say the carbon pollutants are causing 'global warming', and everyone with half a bit of knowledge knows volcanos are the great evil, and cows. If you want to point your lil' bark covered tree hugging fingers at anyone point them at yourself because you caused the problems. When, in the 70's, atomic engergy was coming into play the libs weeped and cried and gnashed their teeth, all in complete ignorance and terror. with the end result being dependence on oil and coal burning power plants rather than the far cleaner nuc plants....way to go huggers! When car companies should have been working on hybrid motors you demanded congress have them work on the problematic and heavily polluting electric car (those batteries are a major problem in production and afterlife), so now we have barely functioning elec cars that don't meet needs and only Toyota has a really good technology which they are willing to share but the big three are still forced to play with electric. I've even heard huggers claim diesle is cleaner! Come on now.... Then there is the suits filed over and over against us evil people who, after a wild fire, want to cross nature by planting evil trees, bushes, and grasses. Oh my! You want nature to regrow everything in 1,000 years, you muppets ingore the scare on the earth you leave while our evil planted areas thrive. I won't even get into the additives you think make fuel burn cleaner, and it doesn't. So in my opinion you 'greenies' are the problem and we 'capitalist' are and have been the solution. Now stop it and start cooperating while the rest of us save the world from you. |
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
I'm mostly with you up to the final paragraph Santa. It is clear that many improvements have been made in air and water quality in the last half-century. It doesn't follow that there is nothing left to do, however.
John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
MagicSanta Inner circle Northern Nevada 5841 Posts |
I didn't say there was nothing left to do. I'm asking the greenies to let us do it and stay under some oak tree smoking hooter. The rest of us will save the world, the huggers can just take credit for it.
|
|||||||||
kregg Inner circle 1950 Posts |
This is reprint of the letter sent to the IPCC on Monday, April 14
14 April 2008 Dear Dr. Pachauri and others associated with IPCC We are writing to you and others associated with the IPCC position – that man’s CO2 is a driver of global warming and climate change – to ask that you now in view of the evidence retract support from the current IPCC position [as in footnote 1] and admit that there is no observational evidence in measured data going back 22,000 years or even millions of years that CO2 levels (whether from man or nature) have driven or are driving world temperatures or climate change. If you believe there is evidence of the CO2 driver theory in the available data please present a graph of it. We draw your attention to three observational refutations of the IPCC position (and note there are more). Ice-core data from the ACIA (Arctic Climate Impact Assessment) shows that temperatures have fallen since around 4,000 years ago (the Bronze Age Climate Optimum) while CO2 levels have risen, yet this graphical data was not included in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers (Fig. SPM1 Feb07) which graphed the CO2 rise. More recent data shows that in the opposite sense to IPCC predictions world temperatures have not risen and indeed have fallen over the past 10 years while CO2 levels have risen dramatically. The up-dated temperature measurements have been released by the NASA’s Microwave Sounding Unit (MSU) [1] as well as by the UK’s Hadley Climate Research Unit (Temperature v. 3, variance adjusted - Hadley CRUT3v) [2]. In parallel, readings of atmospheric concentrations of CO2 have been released by the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii [3]. They have been combined in graphical form by Joe D’Aleo [4], and are shown below. * These latest temperature readings represent averages of records obtained from standardized meteorological stations from around the planet, located in both urban as well as rural settings. They are augmented by satellite data, now generally accepted as ultimately authoritative, since they have a global footprint and are not easily vulnerable to manipulation nor observer error. What is also clear from the graphs is that average global temperatures have been in stasis for almost a decade, and may now even be falling. A third important observation is that contrary to the CO2 driver theory, temperatures in the upper troposphere (where most jets fly) have fallen over the past two decades. [Footnote 2] IPCC policy is already leading to economic and unintended environmental damage. Specifically the policy of burning food - maize as biofuel - has contributed to sharp rises in food prices which are causing great hardship in many countries and is also now leading to increased deforestation in Brazil, Malaysia, Indonesia, Togo, Cambodia, Nigeria, Burundi, Sri Lanka, Benin and Uganda for cultivation of crops [5]. Given the economic devastation that is already happening and which is now widely recognised will continue to flow from this policy, what possible justification can there be for its retention? We ask you and all those whose names are associated with IPCC policy to accept the scientific observations and renounce current IPCC policy. Yours sincerely, Hans Schreuder, Analytical Chemist, mMensa, hans@tech-know.eu Piers Corbyn, Astrophysicist UK, Dir. WeatherAction.com, piers@weatheraction.com Dr Don Parkes, Prof. Em. Human Ecology, Australia, dnp@networksmm.com.au Svend Hendriksen, Nobel Peace Prize 1988 (shared), Greenland, hendriksen@greennet.gl * graph posted her: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppa......e-errors
POOF!
|
|||||||||
balducci Loyal user Canada 227 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-11-22 13:42, MagicSanta wrote: I am willing to accept that is all probably true in North America, but of course it is a different story in many far more populous parts of the world, such as China, India, etc. And even though cars in America are far cleaner these days than they were 40 or 50 years ago, I wonder how many more of them are on the road today compared to back then? Not that it matters, what with GM, Ford, etc., all failing. The smart money is moving back into the horse and buggy industry.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
|
|||||||||
Destiny Inner circle 1429 Posts |
Quote:
As for why Americans are so fat...well, some of us eat to much. In the Capitalist form of Government we are able to prosper like no one else and therefore are able to eat more. I kept trying to think we're I heard that before. I think I've remembered. Didn't one of the last Roman Emperors say something similar? Destiny |
|||||||||
Doug Higley 1942 - 2022 7152 Posts |
That's not exactly 'Smart' money. Cowardly is more like it.
Buckling under the greenies claims of catstrophy and dire GLOOM and Doom is ridiculous. Santa had it on target. All greenies and leftys have to offer is the whining hand wringing fear factor. Ignore them and put SMART money into what works AND retains a quality lifestyle. We can't control what China does but we can clean our own house up and run eficiently for our own citizens. Despite what we do or anyone else does, EARTH ABIDES. The end is not near for the planet...just a lifestyle we have EARNED and deserve...and now for no reason we throw it away on a moron's whim and questionable computer modeling? Huh? This is just more anti American horse crap from the so sad left. Kiss my butt.
Higley's Giant Flea Pocket Zibit
|
|||||||||
Cohiba Special user Michigan 749 Posts |
I haven't read this whole thread, but if you look at the last 10 years, there is absolutely no evidence of global warming taking place.
|
|||||||||
Destiny Inner circle 1429 Posts |
Quote:
just a lifestyle we have EARNED and deserve.. True of the older generations Doug - not so true of the younger generations who are running through and disposing of resources faster than the Chinese can loan the money for them - and feel 'entitled' to such a lifestyle merely because they were born in a Western country - I won't single out the US - Australians are now apparently fatter than Americans per capita. Destiny |
|||||||||
MagicSanta Inner circle Northern Nevada 5841 Posts |
Thank you Balducci! You have brought up the very fact that had I brought it up it would have been discounted, you are a stud. The Kyoto Accord was designed to tie one of the US's hands behind her back and didn't address the pollution being generated by China and India. The cloud of pollution people worried about during the olympics circles the planet just like the smoke from a volcano does yet people scream about the US, which I believe is still the most productive country in the world, while giving 'the third world' a pass. Hey world, don't worry about the US, Canada, or Europe....we are doing out part against pollution. Go after the culprits. Frankly if the pollution didn't leave their borders I'd say let 'em gaddify themselves but that ain't happening. So thank you for brining up a very good point, the biggest problems are China and India bolstered by the greedy ****** running US and other companies moving work there because they are lax and have good cheap labor.
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Global Warming - What have you done to help? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |