Au contraire, I did not address Kyoto...Rather I stated that the referenced and other companies encouraged the US to ratify the treaty...
As for 1-4, yes I read your voluminous postings and to summarize them, concluded that you attempted to play"he said, she said" by offering a few fringe viewpoints in an attempt to undermine the overwhelming, far more qualified majority...
As for the "proposed cures being worse than the condition" how do you figure that stoppign deforestation of the Amazon and other subtropical forests is bad for the US economy? How do you figure that raising fuel economy standards is bad for the US economy? How do you figure that develping energy conservation technologies is bad for the US economy?
How do you figure that increasing the % of nuclear energy is bad for the US economy? How do you figure that cap and trade emissions systems are bad for the US economy when similar systems for SOx and NOx have been widely lauded as saving money?
You talk about "wealth redistribution" and "drastic measures"- where do you get the idea that dealing with CO2 emissions will cause such effects? The European Union-Environmental Trading System has been operatiing for two years...Has the economy of Europe been wrecked?
If China doesnt regulate CO2, then why should the US?
If all drunk drivers dont quite drinking and driving, then why should I?
Because one less drunk driver makes our roads safer...
If Brazil doesnt regulate CO2, then why should the US?
If all American smokers dont quite smoking, then why should I?
Because one less smoker reduces the healthcare costs for all of us...
The US is the dominate superpower in the world...We emit 20%-25% of the worlds GHG emissions...We should lead the world on this issue rgardless of what a few penny ante countries do...Incidentally, Russia has ratified Kyoto as has Canada...
You have a severe case of "we are all gonna die anyway so what does it matter"...Let me answer thatt one for you- It matters because the Creator did not give Mankind license to rape and pillage the planet...Simple as that but dont my word for it....Presumably you are hunter so I suggest you check out the father of wildlife management- Aldo Leopold- on this subject...
BTW- you will know when I am attacking the messenger, but I want go there. You are entitled to your opinion no matter uninformed it is.
Take Me Back Tuesday: GLOBAL WARMING CORRAL
-
GordonGekko
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 5070
- Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2001 12:01 am
- Location: a blind near you
- Contact:
Some good points…although they may be slightly less diplomatic than one would hope.
Bottom line…what really is global warming…an observation that temperatures are in a state of flux. We are on a warming trend, we could just as easily be on a cooling trend (and have been recently). Does this mean that man is causing it? Sure, and so are every other living organisms on the planet…you want to stop the causes of global warming…eliminate man…genocide maybe? If we rule that out, a sane solution would be to quit deforesting the planet, and that won't stop until there is no need for lumber. As long as the worlds population increases we will be faced with these concerns. So I guess if you really want to be the ultimate global warming fighter, don’t have kids. Increases in population are causing the strain on the environment.
We as sentient beings are so self-centered that we believe we are the cause of these problems, when in truth if the cause is so much larger than our species. It seems as if environmentalism has become economically viable recently, and that is why the businesses are moving in that direction. They are not doing so as a result of altruism.
Also, even if we could stop the temperature fluctuations should we? We don’t live in a static environment, change is natural. There has historically been a negative backlash every time humans have tried to alter their environment for the better. Look at the flood control measures on the Mississippi River, as a result South Louisiana is melting away into the ocean. There are other examples but I think you all see my point. We place faith in science, which is great at analyzing isolated things, but often falls short when looking at the big picture. If there is a big switch that would cut off global warming, should we flip it, and possibly deprive the planet of its natural cycles? I’m not arrogant to think I know the answer, but it is a question that needs to be asked.
Yes, we should be environmentally responsible, but what does that mean? I really don’t think that regulations and severe reactions will achieve the desired effect. Actually, I think it could hurt us. There is no simple answer and that is what’s giving people fits.
Science and the “inventor of the internet†have been very good at finding intermediate causes without addressing the root of the issue, and that is whether or not global warming is really a problem or simply a natural fluctuation. The older I get the more I realize that man is meddling in things he knows very little about….
Bottom line…what really is global warming…an observation that temperatures are in a state of flux. We are on a warming trend, we could just as easily be on a cooling trend (and have been recently). Does this mean that man is causing it? Sure, and so are every other living organisms on the planet…you want to stop the causes of global warming…eliminate man…genocide maybe? If we rule that out, a sane solution would be to quit deforesting the planet, and that won't stop until there is no need for lumber. As long as the worlds population increases we will be faced with these concerns. So I guess if you really want to be the ultimate global warming fighter, don’t have kids. Increases in population are causing the strain on the environment.
We as sentient beings are so self-centered that we believe we are the cause of these problems, when in truth if the cause is so much larger than our species. It seems as if environmentalism has become economically viable recently, and that is why the businesses are moving in that direction. They are not doing so as a result of altruism.
Also, even if we could stop the temperature fluctuations should we? We don’t live in a static environment, change is natural. There has historically been a negative backlash every time humans have tried to alter their environment for the better. Look at the flood control measures on the Mississippi River, as a result South Louisiana is melting away into the ocean. There are other examples but I think you all see my point. We place faith in science, which is great at analyzing isolated things, but often falls short when looking at the big picture. If there is a big switch that would cut off global warming, should we flip it, and possibly deprive the planet of its natural cycles? I’m not arrogant to think I know the answer, but it is a question that needs to be asked.
Yes, we should be environmentally responsible, but what does that mean? I really don’t think that regulations and severe reactions will achieve the desired effect. Actually, I think it could hurt us. There is no simple answer and that is what’s giving people fits.
Science and the “inventor of the internet†have been very good at finding intermediate causes without addressing the root of the issue, and that is whether or not global warming is really a problem or simply a natural fluctuation. The older I get the more I realize that man is meddling in things he knows very little about….
"In God we trust, all others pay cash."
Noli nothis permittere te terere.
Press Alt+F4 to ignore my posts
Noli nothis permittere te terere.
Press Alt+F4 to ignore my posts
It boils down to one simple fact: the earth is on a natural cycle. ALways has been, always will be. As much as we like to think that we are the cause of 'global warming' - we're not. Whether we were here or not, at this EXACT moment the earth would be on a warming trend. What about the ice age? Did humans cause that? Dinosaur extinction - did we do that? Absolutely not, earth's natural cycle caused all of that, sans human intput. Are we accelerating the warming trend? Probably... but by NEAR as much as we think, we are giving ourselves way too much credit on this issue. It would be on the same cycle REGARDLESS if we were here or not.
Μολὼν λαβέ
HRCH Man with a Loaded Gun MH
HR Quest's Loaded Gun 4/8/00-7/5/12 RIP
HRCH Man with a Loaded Gun MH
HR Quest's Loaded Gun 4/8/00-7/5/12 RIP
-
Po Monkey Lounger
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 5975
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 12:01 am
- Location: Sharby Creek
"how do you figure that stoppign deforestation of the Amazon and other subtropical forests is bad for the US economy? "
Well, lets see. How exactly will we stop deforestation in the Amazon and other subtropical forests? By fiat? No. Foreign government takeover? Probably not. Money? Bingo. And from where will that money come from? The US taxpayers ---paying money to other countries in exhange for them not destroying their own ecosystems.
How much will it take? Who knows. Who enforces a breach in the deal? Not sure. By what means? A stern lecture?
"How do you figure that raising fuel economy standards is bad for the US economy? "
If done in a reasonable fashion, in increments that will not destroy our economy, it won't. If done on others' timetable, out of panic, it will. We need to wean ourselves off foreign oil for national security reasons more so than any other reason.
"How do you figure that develping energy conservation technologies is bad for the US economy? "
Its not, unless it is mandated before economically viable from a cost/benefit standpoint.
"How do you figure that increasing the % of nuclear energy is bad for the US economy? "
Its not and should be done immediately. Nuclear power can be a very safe, efficient source of power. There was no need for the US to abandon it. It was hijacked by the ultra libs back in the 70s --- a lot of the same folks who now think the sky is falling due to GW --the same folks who thought global cooling was going to kill us all.
"You talk about "wealth redistribution" and "drastic measures"- where do you get the idea that dealing with CO2 emissions will cause such effects? The European Union-Environmental Trading System has been operatiing for two years...Has the economy of Europe been wrecked? "
The carbon credit system is nothing but a redistribution of money from the bigger, wealthier countries, to the poorer developing countries. And the European model for their economy and anything else is hardly something worthy of emulation. Most of the European countries are FUBAR.
"If China doesnt regulate CO2, then why should the US? "
Well, for starters, China is projected to be the world leader in carbon emissions within a decade or so. (of course, based upon your biblical prophesy, none of us will be alive by then, but, I digress). As of right now, China is already cleaning our clock in certain industries because they can manufacture goods much cheaper ---eg our local furniture industry in MS comes to mind. Stricter regulations that require US companies to comply, but not China (or other countries), will only widen that competitive gap. We need to do what is best for the US, and not out of fear of calamity based upon highly questionable scientific conclusions.
"If all American smokers dont quite smoking, then why should I?
Because one less smoker reduces the healthcare costs for all of us... "
Its called freedom. This is not a communist country. And I will enjoy my cigars if it pleases me, thank you. I smoke outside, so my secondhand smoke bothers no one. And I have been paying Medicare taxes and private health insurance premiums for many years now without any withdrawals or claims. When my time comes, I think I will have more than earned whatever is paid out for my benefit.
"You have a severe case of "we are all gonna die anyway so what does it matter"..."
No, actually I don't. I don't believe for a second that the earth is going to end in 10-20 years due to GW as you apparently do. And according to the UN report, IF they are correct, there is no way that we can reduce CO2 levels to any significant extent for 100s or 1000s of years, even if we stopped all CO2 emissions. So, if I (and many scientists ) are right, then we have nothing to worry about. If you and your referenced scientists are right, then there is nothing we can do about it and we are going to all die anyway, so why worry?
I think I'll have a drink now. A toast to the chicken littles of the world. "The sky is falling"!!!! " Run for your lives"!!!
Well, lets see. How exactly will we stop deforestation in the Amazon and other subtropical forests? By fiat? No. Foreign government takeover? Probably not. Money? Bingo. And from where will that money come from? The US taxpayers ---paying money to other countries in exhange for them not destroying their own ecosystems.
How much will it take? Who knows. Who enforces a breach in the deal? Not sure. By what means? A stern lecture?
"How do you figure that raising fuel economy standards is bad for the US economy? "
If done in a reasonable fashion, in increments that will not destroy our economy, it won't. If done on others' timetable, out of panic, it will. We need to wean ourselves off foreign oil for national security reasons more so than any other reason.
"How do you figure that develping energy conservation technologies is bad for the US economy? "
Its not, unless it is mandated before economically viable from a cost/benefit standpoint.
"How do you figure that increasing the % of nuclear energy is bad for the US economy? "
Its not and should be done immediately. Nuclear power can be a very safe, efficient source of power. There was no need for the US to abandon it. It was hijacked by the ultra libs back in the 70s --- a lot of the same folks who now think the sky is falling due to GW --the same folks who thought global cooling was going to kill us all.
"You talk about "wealth redistribution" and "drastic measures"- where do you get the idea that dealing with CO2 emissions will cause such effects? The European Union-Environmental Trading System has been operatiing for two years...Has the economy of Europe been wrecked? "
The carbon credit system is nothing but a redistribution of money from the bigger, wealthier countries, to the poorer developing countries. And the European model for their economy and anything else is hardly something worthy of emulation. Most of the European countries are FUBAR.
"If China doesnt regulate CO2, then why should the US? "
Well, for starters, China is projected to be the world leader in carbon emissions within a decade or so. (of course, based upon your biblical prophesy, none of us will be alive by then, but, I digress). As of right now, China is already cleaning our clock in certain industries because they can manufacture goods much cheaper ---eg our local furniture industry in MS comes to mind. Stricter regulations that require US companies to comply, but not China (or other countries), will only widen that competitive gap. We need to do what is best for the US, and not out of fear of calamity based upon highly questionable scientific conclusions.
"If all American smokers dont quite smoking, then why should I?
Because one less smoker reduces the healthcare costs for all of us... "
Its called freedom. This is not a communist country. And I will enjoy my cigars if it pleases me, thank you. I smoke outside, so my secondhand smoke bothers no one. And I have been paying Medicare taxes and private health insurance premiums for many years now without any withdrawals or claims. When my time comes, I think I will have more than earned whatever is paid out for my benefit.
"You have a severe case of "we are all gonna die anyway so what does it matter"..."
No, actually I don't. I don't believe for a second that the earth is going to end in 10-20 years due to GW as you apparently do. And according to the UN report, IF they are correct, there is no way that we can reduce CO2 levels to any significant extent for 100s or 1000s of years, even if we stopped all CO2 emissions. So, if I (and many scientists ) are right, then we have nothing to worry about. If you and your referenced scientists are right, then there is nothing we can do about it and we are going to all die anyway, so why worry?
I think I'll have a drink now. A toast to the chicken littles of the world. "The sky is falling"!!!! " Run for your lives"!!!
Last edited by Po Monkey Lounger on Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:40 am, edited 2 times in total.
What is the most abundant greenhouse gas? CO2? Nope its water vapor.
There was a tree in Canada above the current tree line that was carbon dated a few thousand years ago. And the
SCIENTIST that was explaining this went on to say that this tree was able to survive in this particular area because the Earth was 8 degrees Celsius warmer than it is currently.
Please do not drink the Gore kool-aid, I quit sipping after listening to this scientist(who has no political motive whatsoever) point out several fundamental errors in Gore's presentation. Gore says that the Earth is a goldie-locks planet - Not Too Hot Not Too Cold, what would he say about the Earth when it was covered in ICE.
I do not dispute the fact that CO2 comes from cars and its not good for the environment but the inconvenient truth is that the Earth's climate runs in one big cycle.
Good Gracious now I have another thread to follow.
There was a tree in Canada above the current tree line that was carbon dated a few thousand years ago. And the
SCIENTIST that was explaining this went on to say that this tree was able to survive in this particular area because the Earth was 8 degrees Celsius warmer than it is currently.
Please do not drink the Gore kool-aid, I quit sipping after listening to this scientist(who has no political motive whatsoever) point out several fundamental errors in Gore's presentation. Gore says that the Earth is a goldie-locks planet - Not Too Hot Not Too Cold, what would he say about the Earth when it was covered in ICE.
I do not dispute the fact that CO2 comes from cars and its not good for the environment but the inconvenient truth is that the Earth's climate runs in one big cycle.
Good Gracious now I have another thread to follow.
-
Po Monkey Lounger
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 5975
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 12:01 am
- Location: Sharby Creek
-
Po Monkey Lounger
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 5975
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 12:01 am
- Location: Sharby Creek
Yes, JDGator, you are correct. And if we add to that highly increased costs on our end with respect to costly carbon dioxide removal systems and other restrictions on emissions whose potential positive effects on overall climate change are speculative at best, we will be at even more of a competitive disadvantage in terms of manufacturing costs. China has not agreed to the Kyoto treaty, and does not intend to do anything to reduce its huge CO2 emissions.
al gore
Re: GLOBAL WARMING CORRAL
Hammer wrote:
BULLET 4: There is more CO2 in the our air than at any time in the last 2 MM years and possibly as far back as 30 MM years...BY definition, that is not a natural phenomena...It is the result of human emissions of fossil fuels as concluded by every credible scientist on the planet
Can someone please show me a scientist who is 2 million years old? I hear them toss around numbers that this fossil is 5 million years old, and this. I aint never met someone that has personal knowledge of these dates. They are all based on calculations created in the last 100 years or so. I take all of it with a grain of salt.
http://safefireshooting.com/
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them"
-George Washington
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them"
-George Washington
-
SupperDuck
- Regular
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 5:13 am
- Location: Brandon, MS
Belief in Gore's Global Warming theory is like belief in UFO's or Bigfoot. No amount of "proof" or "evidence" from either side is going to change the minds of the believers or the skeptics.
I question any "science" that is based on "belief." For example, "I believe in global warming because expert X, Y, & Z said so." That is a belief system, not a scientific system. Each side brings out "experts" to prove their side is right - that's not a system based on logic, but rather one based on popularity.
Notice how none of the "evidence" or "experts" presented here has changed anyone's mind on this subject.
You see the evidence you want to see.
And just so you know, I think the politically correct version of global warming is bunk. It is a known fact that after the "fall of Communism" in the late 80's that the last refuge for the dedicated collectivists was the Environmental movement. If we can't take everyting you own for the benefit of the State, let's shift gears and take everything you have for the good of the Environment. And if you don't think the hardcore environmentalists are pushing for that, then you are blind. Isn't it ironic that the Global Warming hysteria began shortly after the fall of Communism?
It is politics disguised as science.
The whole debate is nothing more than intellectual masturbation because it has no point other than to make the debaters feel good. No matter what your viewpoint, the governments of the world will not unite to "solve global climate change." As we have seen fron this blog, there is no consensus on this issue. Therefore, no "solutions" will be enacted globally that will make any difference. Therefore, global warming and it causes and solutions will never be more than a debate club topic.
Have I changed anyone's mind on this topic? The answer is no.
Dammit, I need to go wash up.
I question any "science" that is based on "belief." For example, "I believe in global warming because expert X, Y, & Z said so." That is a belief system, not a scientific system. Each side brings out "experts" to prove their side is right - that's not a system based on logic, but rather one based on popularity.
Notice how none of the "evidence" or "experts" presented here has changed anyone's mind on this subject.
You see the evidence you want to see.
And just so you know, I think the politically correct version of global warming is bunk. It is a known fact that after the "fall of Communism" in the late 80's that the last refuge for the dedicated collectivists was the Environmental movement. If we can't take everyting you own for the benefit of the State, let's shift gears and take everything you have for the good of the Environment. And if you don't think the hardcore environmentalists are pushing for that, then you are blind. Isn't it ironic that the Global Warming hysteria began shortly after the fall of Communism?
It is politics disguised as science.
The whole debate is nothing more than intellectual masturbation because it has no point other than to make the debaters feel good. No matter what your viewpoint, the governments of the world will not unite to "solve global climate change." As we have seen fron this blog, there is no consensus on this issue. Therefore, no "solutions" will be enacted globally that will make any difference. Therefore, global warming and it causes and solutions will never be more than a debate club topic.
Have I changed anyone's mind on this topic? The answer is no.
Dammit, I need to go wash up.
That one takes the cake...There are billions of dollars being spent by the smartest businessmen in the world, there are interational treaties being signed by all countries in the world (including the US whichy signed a treaty with Australia,New Zealand and Japan to develop technologies to remove CO2 from the air), there is science coming out the ying and Supper Club says "Ah what the hell, its nothing more than a debate club" issue.
Fellas, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but yall are way behind the times on this...All the arguments yall are making have been roundly debunked by the scientific community....
So you dont like Al Gore- fine...Did you realize that John McCain has been sponsoring Climate Change legislation since 1997? I guess the enviro/commies got to him? Must of happened when he was in that POW camp...Those darn Viet Cong enviro/commies....
And what about Old Ted Turner, heck he is nothing but a communist, never mind that he owns the frigging Braves, has been hunting his whole life and owns more hunting land than all of us put together...Enviro-commie for sure...Heck he was married to Hanoi Jane, never mind that she apologized a thousand times for undercutting our US service men during Nam...
Okay, I admit it, Yall are right- DU and DW are sellign the duck hunter out so they can pander to their liberal,enviro, gun hating, aborting, commie members by agreegn that GW is a problem...That is definitely where the money is...Look at how powerful the enviro-commies are...They shut down the development in Madison COunty and Oxford, Desoto County and Panola County, hell they just ran Toyota clear out of Mississippi...Damn those enviromentalists!
But wait a minute...How can you explain that the US SENATE has issued letter upon letter to Bush begging him to either ratify Kyoto or come up with his own mandatory emissions caps? Did yall realize that the first letter was written in 2005- way befoe the Democrats took control of the Senate in November, 2006? IN other words, Republican Senate gets it but you guys dont...
Yall are clearly in the wrong business...You need to start a consulting company and explain to all these businessman, big companies, government leaders, scientists, biologists, and especially Al Gore, why they are wrong about GW...While you are at it, fly over to Moscow and explain it to Vladimar Putin cause Russia signed Kyoto a few months ago...Yall will make big, big bucks doing this cause all the other spindoctors that have tried have run out of spin...You will have the market to yourself...
I'll be out of the office a few days but will look forward to seeing what yall come up with while I am gone. I might even have a surprise or two for you when I get back.HEHE
Fellas, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but yall are way behind the times on this...All the arguments yall are making have been roundly debunked by the scientific community....
So you dont like Al Gore- fine...Did you realize that John McCain has been sponsoring Climate Change legislation since 1997? I guess the enviro/commies got to him? Must of happened when he was in that POW camp...Those darn Viet Cong enviro/commies....
And what about Old Ted Turner, heck he is nothing but a communist, never mind that he owns the frigging Braves, has been hunting his whole life and owns more hunting land than all of us put together...Enviro-commie for sure...Heck he was married to Hanoi Jane, never mind that she apologized a thousand times for undercutting our US service men during Nam...
Okay, I admit it, Yall are right- DU and DW are sellign the duck hunter out so they can pander to their liberal,enviro, gun hating, aborting, commie members by agreegn that GW is a problem...That is definitely where the money is...Look at how powerful the enviro-commies are...They shut down the development in Madison COunty and Oxford, Desoto County and Panola County, hell they just ran Toyota clear out of Mississippi...Damn those enviromentalists!
But wait a minute...How can you explain that the US SENATE has issued letter upon letter to Bush begging him to either ratify Kyoto or come up with his own mandatory emissions caps? Did yall realize that the first letter was written in 2005- way befoe the Democrats took control of the Senate in November, 2006? IN other words, Republican Senate gets it but you guys dont...
Yall are clearly in the wrong business...You need to start a consulting company and explain to all these businessman, big companies, government leaders, scientists, biologists, and especially Al Gore, why they are wrong about GW...While you are at it, fly over to Moscow and explain it to Vladimar Putin cause Russia signed Kyoto a few months ago...Yall will make big, big bucks doing this cause all the other spindoctors that have tried have run out of spin...You will have the market to yourself...
I'll be out of the office a few days but will look forward to seeing what yall come up with while I am gone. I might even have a surprise or two for you when I get back.HEHE
-
Po Monkey Lounger
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 5975
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 12:01 am
- Location: Sharby Creek
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot] and 36 guests