Want evidence of Warming?

[Chris]

What if what we do is a wasted effort and when time comes there is nothing to protect us from the changes because we wasted all the resources trying to stop what we cannot?

Wasted all our resources?

We are wasting our resources paying $100 billion dollars a year for foreign oil.

Alternative energy is American made!

You really believe that? Damn you are naive.

No, you are naive.

 

[KittenKoder]

Wasted all our resources?

We are wasting our resources paying $100 billion dollars a year for foreign oil.

Alternative energy is American made!

You really believe that? Damn you are naive.

No, you are naive.

Yeah ... sure. Sorry but it's you swallowing what you want to believe, not me.

 

[Chris]

You really believe that? Damn you are naive.

No, you are naive.

Yeah ... sure. Sorry but it's you swallowing what you want to believe, not me.

If you want to give your money to people who support terrorists, that is your business.

Me, I would rather conserve energy and move in the right direction.

Solar, wind, R&D, and conservation is the way to go. No SUVs for me.

 

[KittenKoder]

No, you are naive.

Yeah ... sure. Sorry but it's you swallowing what you want to believe, not me.

If you want to give your money to people who support terrorists, that is your business.

Me, I would rather conserve energy and move in the right direction.

Solar, wind, R&D, and conservation is the way to go. No SUVs for me.

You swallowed their hype hook line and sinker. You realize that smoking pot or drinking beer also support terrorists ... right?

Your shoes support child slave labor.

Your shirt supports African slave labor.

Your computer supports ... well ... everything that you don't like.

 

[BolshevikHunter]

Wasted all our resources?

We are wasting our resources paying $100 billion dollars a year for foreign oil.

Alternative energy is American made!

You really believe that? Damn you are naive.

No, you are naive.

I know you are, but what am I? ~BH

 

[KittenKoder]

You really believe that? Damn you are naive.

No, you are naive.

I know you are, but what am I? ~BH

It's fun isn't it ... the environuts are so far off the deep end that it's the only thing they understand.

 

[elvis]

You really believe that? Damn you are naive.

No, you are naive.

I know you are, but what am I? ~BH

seems to be the only defense Chrissy Lewinsky has.

 

[BolshevikHunter]

No, you are naive.

I know you are, but what am I? ~BH

It's fun isn't it ... the environuts are so far off the deep end that it's the only thing they understand.

Yeah I hear yuh my friend, I mean if they are gonna ignore reality and act like children then maybe they should be treated the same. Actually, I take that back. I don't want to insult the pure Nature of Children by comparing them in any way, Shape or form to these lunatics. ~BH

 

[BolshevikHunter]

No, you are naive.

I know you are, but what am I? ~BH

seems to be the only defense Chrissy Lewinsky has.

He without a doubt just fell off of the stupid wagon. His views on this International Socialist Health care plan by the Madman Obama exposes that in one thread. ~BH

 

[ErikViking]

As long as we are uncertain of how we affect the climate, shouldn't we do what we can to reduce our impact on the environment?

It's like...

- Alright, you have cancer in your lungs. We are not entirely sure that it is because of you smoking 2 packs of cigarettes every day - but we think there might be a chance of that.

- Great, I'll stop smoking when you have some proof.

What if what we do is a wasted effort and when time comes there is nothing to protect us from the changes because we wasted all the resources trying to stop what we cannot?

Sticking the head into the sand isn't uncommon when we face an uncertain and unpleasant future.

There might or might not be a future problem that we perhaps can do something about - or maybe we can't. Nature will most likley evolve in a most surprising manner anyhow.
But I think we should take our hands off - things are happening, there are changes and we can't even tell if we are the only reason behind it. We should quickly remove ourselves from the equation as much as possible.

I think you and I have a different view of what is "doing" and what is not. At this time we constantly DO things to the system.

 

[KittenKoder]

As long as we are uncertain of how we affect the climate, shouldn't we do what we can to reduce our impact on the environment?

It's like...

- Alright, you have cancer in your lungs. We are not entirely sure that it is because of you smoking 2 packs of cigarettes every day - but we think there might be a chance of that.

- Great, I'll stop smoking when you have some proof.

What if what we do is a wasted effort and when time comes there is nothing to protect us from the changes because we wasted all the resources trying to stop what we cannot?

Sticking the head into the sand isn't uncommon when we face an uncertain and unpleasant future.

There might or might not be a future problem that we perhaps can do something about - or maybe we can't. Nature will most likley evolve in a most surprising manner anyhow.
But I think we should take our hands off - things are happening, there are changes and we can't even tell if we are the only reason behind it. We should quickly remove ourselves from the equation as much as possible.

I think you and I have a different view of what is "doing" and what is not. At this time we constantly DO things to the system.

There's a huge flaw, no one said "ignore everything" ... people are just starting to ask for more than predictions that never happen before taking the chance. If you are wrong, then we are dead as a species.

 

[ErikViking]

What if what we do is a wasted effort and when time comes there is nothing to protect us from the changes because we wasted all the resources trying to stop what we cannot?

Sticking the head into the sand isn't uncommon when we face an uncertain and unpleasant future.

There might or might not be a future problem that we perhaps can do something about - or maybe we can't. Nature will most likley evolve in a most surprising manner anyhow.
But I think we should take our hands off - things are happening, there are changes and we can't even tell if we are the only reason behind it. We should quickly remove ourselves from the equation as much as possible.

I think you and I have a different view of what is "doing" and what is not. At this time we constantly DO things to the system.

There's a huge flaw, no one said "ignore everything" ... people are just starting to ask for more than predictions that never happen before taking the chance. If you are wrong, then we are dead as a species.

Where is the flaw? I never said "ignore everything" either.

This isn't a game or a football season. You ask for more than predictions? You want some kind of physical result? And this you need before taking "the chance"?

You on the other hand have a flaw in your reasoning:
You say that if I am wrong our speicies is dead. I have said nothing except that we should do what we can to minimize our impact on the environment. If I am wrong the right way is the opposite, right? Keep the level of pollution constant. Which means that you believe that if we let nature have it's course without interferrance - it will kill us?

Have I understood you correct?

 

[KittenKoder]

Sticking the head into the sand isn't uncommon when we face an uncertain and unpleasant future.

There might or might not be a future problem that we perhaps can do something about - or maybe we can't. Nature will most likley evolve in a most surprising manner anyhow.
But I think we should take our hands off - things are happening, there are changes and we can't even tell if we are the only reason behind it. We should quickly remove ourselves from the equation as much as possible.

I think you and I have a different view of what is "doing" and what is not. At this time we constantly DO things to the system.

There's a huge flaw, no one said "ignore everything" ... people are just starting to ask for more than predictions that never happen before taking the chance. If you are wrong, then we are dead as a species.

Where is the flaw? I never said "ignore everything" either.

This isn't a game or a football season. You ask for more than predictions? You want some kind of physical result? And this you need before taking "the chance"?

You on the other hand have a flaw in your reasoning:
You say that if I am wrong our speicies is dead. I have said nothing except that we should do what we can to minimize our impact on the environment. If I am wrong the right way is the opposite, right? Keep the level of pollution constant. Which means that you believe that if we let nature have it's course without interferrance - it will kill us?

Have I understood you correct?

Sticking ones head in the sand is ignoring everything, so yes you did.

If we waste our resources and force people to use products and services at prices which are much higher than they should be just because of false predictions, yes it will destroy our species no matter how you spin it. If the global environment wants to change, it will, we cannot stop that. Our influence in the world is not something new, nor is it something alien like so many think, we are "part" of the planet. Therefore our influence is completely natural, all of it, just as the influence of the dinosaurs. What we do cause to change is something the planet is prepared for, it has been preparing for millions of years for it. We cannot destroy it, we cannot end all life, that's impossible, even a nuclear blast couldn't do that. We know this from science, and most sciences deny that we can change the changes, all we can do is adapt to survive what changes occur. Right now, we need resources to adapt to any possible changes, resources which are being wasted on environmentalist corporations who are getting rich off the fearmongering.

 

[ErikViking]

There's a huge flaw, no one said "ignore everything" ... people are just starting to ask for more than predictions that never happen before taking the chance. If you are wrong, then we are dead as a species.

Where is the flaw? I never said "ignore everything" either.

This isn't a game or a football season. You ask for more than predictions? You want some kind of physical result? And this you need before taking "the chance"?

You on the other hand have a flaw in your reasoning:
You say that if I am wrong our speicies is dead. I have said nothing except that we should do what we can to minimize our impact on the environment. If I am wrong the right way is the opposite, right? Keep the level of pollution constant. Which means that you believe that if we let nature have it's course without interferrance - it will kill us?

Have I understood you correct?

Sticking ones head in the sand is ignoring everything, so yes you did.

If we waste our resources and force people to use products and services at prices which are much higher than they should be just because of false predictions, yes it will destroy our species no matter how you spin it. If the global environment wants to change, it will, we cannot stop that. Our influence in the world is not something new, nor is it something alien like so many think, we are "part" of the planet. Therefore our influence is completely natural, all of it, just as the influence of the dinosaurs. What we do cause to change is something the planet is prepared for, it has been preparing for millions of years for it. We cannot destroy it, we cannot end all life, that's impossible, even a nuclear blast couldn't do that. We know this from science, and most sciences deny that we can change the changes, all we can do is adapt to survive what changes occur. Right now, we need resources to adapt to any possible changes, resources which are being wasted on environmentalist corporations who are getting rich off the fearmongering.

Sticking ones head in the sant isn't the same as ignoring everything. It about inability to face the confusing reality. It is a common effect when we can't deal with or even grasp the problem. So it is not an act of deliberatly ignoring anything.

I like the humble way you picture our capacity in "fixing" the environment. I totally agree. But you could really take some what more pride in our spieces - We aren't dependant on money, cars or hardly anything we have in our daily life.

Humanity has constantly striven for a higher level of understanding. This understanding of our world has helped us to thrive in a extraordinary fashion. Perhaps the understanding of our planets slow and yet unpredictable changes will come in handy. Without tearing down the world economy, abandoning our cities or anything like that I still belive that our technology from now on should take the environment in consideration. We should spend less resources - not more.

I understand that you think that is uneccesary, what ever happens happens - that is sticking your head into the sand.

 

[KittenKoder]

Where is the flaw? I never said "ignore everything" either.

This isn't a game or a football season. You ask for more than predictions? You want some kind of physical result? And this you need before taking "the chance"?

You on the other hand have a flaw in your reasoning:
You say that if I am wrong our speicies is dead. I have said nothing except that we should do what we can to minimize our impact on the environment. If I am wrong the right way is the opposite, right? Keep the level of pollution constant. Which means that you believe that if we let nature have it's course without interferrance - it will kill us?

Have I understood you correct?

Sticking ones head in the sand is ignoring everything, so yes you did.

If we waste our resources and force people to use products and services at prices which are much higher than they should be just because of false predictions, yes it will destroy our species no matter how you spin it. If the global environment wants to change, it will, we cannot stop that. Our influence in the world is not something new, nor is it something alien like so many think, we are "part" of the planet. Therefore our influence is completely natural, all of it, just as the influence of the dinosaurs. What we do cause to change is something the planet is prepared for, it has been preparing for millions of years for it. We cannot destroy it, we cannot end all life, that's impossible, even a nuclear blast couldn't do that. We know this from science, and most sciences deny that we can change the changes, all we can do is adapt to survive what changes occur. Right now, we need resources to adapt to any possible changes, resources which are being wasted on environmentalist corporations who are getting rich off the fearmongering.

Sticking ones head in the sant isn't the same as ignoring everything. It about inability to face the confusing reality. It is a common effect when we can't deal with or even grasp the problem. So it is not an act of deliberatly ignoring anything.

I like the humble way you picture our capacity in "fixing" the environment. I totally agree. But you could really take some what more pride in our spieces - We aren't dependant on money, cars or hardly anything we have in our daily life.

Humanity has constantly striven for a higher level of understanding. This understanding of our world has helped us to thrive in a extraordinary fashion. Perhaps the understanding of our planets slow and yet unpredictable changes will come in handy. Without tearing down the world economy, abandoning our cities or anything like that I still belive that our technology from now on should take the environment in consideration. We should spend less resources - not more.

I understand that you think that is uneccesary, what ever happens happens - that is sticking your head into the sand.

The changes in the environment may make us need them, but so far those changes are well within the common randomness predicted by chaos theory. If the environut scientists predictions (the latest) did happen, only through the use of resources could we survive as a species. However, not one of their predictions have come to pass.

 

[ErikViking]

Sticking ones head in the sand is ignoring everything, so yes you did.

If we waste our resources and force people to use products and services at prices which are much higher than they should be just because of false predictions, yes it will destroy our species no matter how you spin it. If the global environment wants to change, it will, we cannot stop that. Our influence in the world is not something new, nor is it something alien like so many think, we are "part" of the planet. Therefore our influence is completely natural, all of it, just as the influence of the dinosaurs. What we do cause to change is something the planet is prepared for, it has been preparing for millions of years for it. We cannot destroy it, we cannot end all life, that's impossible, even a nuclear blast couldn't do that. We know this from science, and most sciences deny that we can change the changes, all we can do is adapt to survive what changes occur. Right now, we need resources to adapt to any possible changes, resources which are being wasted on environmentalist corporations who are getting rich off the fearmongering.

Sticking ones head in the sant isn't the same as ignoring everything. It about inability to face the confusing reality. It is a common effect when we can't deal with or even grasp the problem. So it is not an act of deliberatly ignoring anything.

I like the humble way you picture our capacity in "fixing" the environment. I totally agree. But you could really take some what more pride in our spieces - We aren't dependant on money, cars or hardly anything we have in our daily life.

Humanity has constantly striven for a higher level of understanding. This understanding of our world has helped us to thrive in a extraordinary fashion. Perhaps the understanding of our planets slow and yet unpredictable changes will come in handy. Without tearing down the world economy, abandoning our cities or anything like that I still belive that our technology from now on should take the environment in consideration. We should spend less resources - not more.

I understand that you think that is uneccesary, what ever happens happens - that is sticking your head into the sand.

The changes in the environment may make us need them, but so far those changes are well within the common randomness predicted by chaos theory. If the environut scientists predictions (the latest) did happen, only through the use of resources could we survive as a species. However, not one of their predictions have come to pass.

Well, this issue sure has got an extra layer of complexity. Any scientist predicting climate changes is estimating or guessing. Or just pointing to a possible future. Those predictions are then used in a debate regarding much more practical and immidiate things. This is something we could have done without - or perhaps some doomsday reports where needed to put the light in the right direction, I don't know.

When you link our speicies destiny so tight with resources we should perhaps define those resources? They are low grade, non-renewable and rapidly depleted from the planet. You can't hope for them to outlast a long-term higher strain caused by nature.

Now we are talking practical immidiate issues.

The other issue is more subtle. We know that our existance here causes great change to the environment. What the effect will be, we can not say. Perhaps it even is a good thing for us? But I am not willing to take the chance. Lets play it safe and STOP altering the atmospheres composure.

 

[code1211]

Global Warming - Misconceptions

Antarctica - Global warming

This is an obviously slanted, biased piece. Half truths, implications and deliberate ommissions.

 

[code1211]

Want evidence of Warming?

So what? Over the course of the Earth's existance I am sure the same thing has happened. Hot then cold. Hot then cold. Hot then cold. For example, the glaciers. What's so unusual about this "warming" thing you're chirping about. Contact me in say, 200 years, and let me know if it was really significant. Until then, maybe there's something better to watch on tv than all of this environmental climate change horseshit. Try to get a grip. The Earth is always in a constant change. Is that so hard to understand? What part of constantly evolving don't you understand?

You are correct, the dynamic weather on this planet constantly changes, but what you partisan hacks don't get is how quickly we have warmed, only a cataclysmic natural disaster has caused this rapid increase before. The only horseshit is the manure that the right wing nutbags are feeding you.

Over 2000 years, the planet has warmed about 0.7 degrees. During the first 1000 of that 2000, it warmed about 0.4 degrees and over the second 1000, about 0.3 degrees. These are net numbers as the global temp goes both up and down.

What kind of a "cataclysmic natural disaster" in the past has caused a "rapid increase" of this type?

 

[code1211]

You do realise that the planet we live on is a living organism that is in a cycle of constant change don't you. That irrespective of mans activities past or present this cycle will continue and if we are here or not. Or do you just assume that only arrogant man can bring about change?

No, it is not a living organism. It has a series of very complex feedbacks that mimics the reactions of a living organism. That is the thrust of Lovelock's Gaia Hypothesis. And Lovelock himself believes that we have already passed the tipping points. He believes that the human race will be decimated to the point where the population level will be less than 10 percent of what it is today. And he call that optimistic.

Your man's conclusion may be right, but there is little chance that he understands all of the underlying causes of why the Earth's systems behave as they do in terms of all of the interactions that are taking place.

As far as whether or not the whole planet is a living organism or not goes, this is dependant more on definition than on anything else. It's certainly not a single cell, but our bodies have their own little sphere of interactions and the analogy is pretty coherant between our own bodies and the eco-sphere.

 

[code1211]

Rocks,

you do nothing of the sort...you come out with the same sources which are all bullshit...you think just because its the IPCC that it has merit to anyone thta has half a brain.

They are a bullshit orgnzation who are in the business of global warming...the more they can get it going the more money they make you dimwit.

The planets been cooling since 1998 which the IPCC has even admitted

THE BIGGEST CAUSE TO PLANET WARMING IS WATER VAPOR!!!! NO CO2....BUT HEY LETS BAN THE CLOUDS I GUESS RIGHT.

go back to reading Time you old diluted fuck

Ah yes, such remarkably enlightening prose. Such lucid logic you present.

I didn't not mention the IPCC, now, did I. Do you even know what these organizations do?

Well, try Roy Spencer. He has cited July, 2009 as one of the highest anamolies in history. You could use his data, but, sadly, he is a hack who is bought and paid for by the oil industry and "owned" by Rush Limbaugh, so we know that he has no credibility.

Roy Spencer, Ph. D.