Global Warming Discussion

bennett13

In the 70's, scientists were freaking out about global COOLING...then it was global WARMING...now it's "climate change," so I guess all their bases are covered.
If there is such thing as global warming, this is not the first time it's ever happened. Everyone knows the Ice Age ended because the cavemen didn't drive hybrid cars, right?

fear4freedom

Climate Change is a natural occurence! Man Made Global Warming is a man made fear pushed with political implications! Climate Gate proves that there is a left wing agenda that is global and the force is to slow down the US economy! Its a global initiative! Many people and govt.s from around the world seek to slow the USA in any way they can!

Now....is it good to recycle...yes! Does Man destroy the earth.....yes! Does the earth cleanse itself?....yes

The way to battle global warming and climate change is through innovation and hard work! Not to slow the economy down due to CO2 regulations, emissions, etc. This needs to be dealt with by moving forward in a prosperous way! China and India will not follow rules and regulations that any global gov. body puts forth! USA will lose and China and India will win! The Democrats perverted ways of using this issue for political gain is ass backwards and non constructive for our economy and jobs! A strong US economy is the best way out of this mess! China is the worlds number one polluter! If you want to slow down our economy with liberal policies......then make China do it first and set the standard!

remember....Al Gore said that DC would not be getting any more snow right now! LOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLO

He played off your fears! He played off your fears!! He plays off your fears!!!! He plays off your fears!!!!

BinauralJam

7 billion of us, 10 billion cows and 10 billion chickens to feed us, how many cars, planes,trains and ships? and you think we arent making a impact on the climate? huh, weird.

CH156378

BinauralJam wrote:

7 billion of us, 10 billion cows and 10 billion chickens to feed us, how many cars, planes,trains and ships? and you think we arent making a impact on the climate? huh, weird.

+1. thank you.

vomikus39

In the words of the great George Carlin....

"The planet will be fine, it's the PEOPLE WHO ARE FUCKED!!!'

brianlux

inlet13 wrote:

brianlux wrote:

In various threads here on AMT I keep reading posts denying global warming as anthropocentrically caused and even more baffling, the denial of global warming in general, human generated or otherwise. Why is this? Denial of what is feared would be my guess. I don't know that any of us here will convince global warming denialists that it is real and is anthropocentric in nature but I'm willing to keep trying because I believe this is the most important issue we as a species will have to deal with over the next several years. If any of you that have doubts about global warming, let's start an intelligent conversation about it. In a number of AMT threads, I've listed several excellent sources of information on the subject. I'll compile a list of books and resources for anyone interested. Of course, any one here has the right to disagree with global warming as reality, but if you do, at least let your arguments be somewhat intelligent. Accusing someone, for example, of posting "global warming crap" does not qualify as an intelligent argument. (I'm not setting any rules here- that's not my job- I would just like to encourage rational, intelligent conversation.)

Also, those of you who are convinced global warming is real, lets share ideas about how to slow down the process.

First, you're having a discussion on a rock band's message board. No one here is some great intellectual thinker. Even if they were, they are just wasting their time at a rock band's message board. So, chillax.

Second, did you ever think that what you read and source is inherently bias? Because as soon as I read two or three sentences of the sources you post, it's evident to me.

Third, when certain people try to derail threads on other topics because they are fixated with global warming, did you ever think they are wrong?

Fourth, you're awful lonely if you think global warming is the "most important issue we as a species will deal with over the next several years". Look at the economy. I'd think most normal humans would say that's a bigger issue over the "next several years". Seriously, that comment alone is enough for someone to cast someone as a loon.

Fifth, I personally believe that regardless of whether global warming is real and man-made or not... there are some who are abusing the topic to promote social welfare policies, and in doing, are purposefully limiting economic growth because they are so mind-warped that they really believe a growing economy is bad. I believe if there really is an issue with global warming, it won't be solved using those "social welfare" techniques, and in fact, will actually have even worse consequences for an average man (see our faltering economy and debt problems) and what will actually be "the most important issue we as a species will deal with over the next several years".

Fifth, I truly believe that no one, including you, knows with 100% absolute certainty whether global warming is man-made, real, and going to be a huge catastrophe. That's my opinion. You are entitled to yours.

I’ll try my best to stay on track in addressing you points:

1. Yes, this is a rock band message board but AMT is a place where (hopefully) intelligent people come to share ideas. Also, you tell me to “chillax”. I’m not so sure I’m the one who sounds up tight here.

2. I read all sources of information on global warming pro and con. In well thought out expository writing, an essay usually begins with a general premise. If you would read past the first few sentences of what I post you might learn something.

3. I’ll accept that you believe there are people who try to “derail threads” by talking about global warming but I don’t agree- I think that is a matter of opinion so let’s move on.

4. I’m not alone nor do I feel alone and you will have no success bating me with name-calling (“loon”- I’m not insane and I have no feathers). I don’t believe that’s necessary here. By your own words you imply that I am not a “normal human”. What is that about? At the very least this verges on more name-calling.

5. You say, “…there are some who are abusing the topic to promote social welfare policies, and in doing, are purposefully limiting economic growth because they are so mind-warped [more name-calling] that they really believe a growing economy is bad.”
I’ve read and studied global warming since around 1989 when first book (that I know of) that addressed this issue was published - Bill McKibben’s THE END OF NATURE- and in all that reading and research have never come across anyone “abusing the topic to promote social welfare policies”. There is a vast amount of information (some has already been provided for you in this thread) that shows how fighting global warming can be beneficial to a healthy economy and that defining a healthy economy as endless growth is, indeed, harmful. (For example, do you really believe the earth contains a limitless ability to absorb CO2 or that out planet contains an endless supply of resources?) And as Yvon Chounard so aptly put it, in collapsed ecosystems there are no political, social or economic issues to deal with.

5. [You wrote “fifth” twice] I won’t argue 100% certainty about anything and I won’t start here. I do personally believe beyond a doubt that global warming is real and anthropogenic and I respect your right to disagree but I do not respect name-calling. If you’re not interest in a civil conversation and if you continue to bate or label me, from here on out I will ignore your posts.

Bant

polaris_x wrote:

good grief man ... the science is not that hard to understand ... take 20 mins and learn about it ...

It's not that hard to understand if you suffer from conformation bias.

brianlux

bgivens33 wrote:

I get annoyed by people that disbelieve global warming because of the political ramifications. I'm equally annoyed by people that think we are going to stop it.

Right now, there is no solution. Alternative energy is nothing more than supplemental energy. The world isn't going to start conserving energy until we are literally running out. Everyone has seen those, decrease energy use by 20%, increase alternatives by 40% graphs and we would be completely off fossil fuels. It is all crap, and it will never happen. Did you just buy an electric car? Great, but you just plugged it into part of the 70% of the country's energy grid that still comes from hydrocarbons.

The truth of the matter is only a small small percentage of the country actually cares. People love to complain about big oil, but wouldn't dare to actually give up using gasoline(or plastic for that matter).

Our country needs to stop pouring money into technology that has no future(like wind mills) and get serious about solving our energy needs. Our world isn't sustainable off current so called "renewable energy". Once we can all stop pretending it is, we might be able to find a fix. Let's stop wasting money on companies like Solyandra and give the money to NREL or one of the universities for research.

--I honestly don't think we can stop global warming either but I'm fairly certain we can slow it down.

--I think much of the world is starting to conserve energy- I have been making efforts to do so for years. I'm sorry you take such a bleak view that way though I can understand the temptation to do so.

--I agree that electic cars are not the ultimate solution. I have posted many times elsewhere ideas about local economy, walkable communities, improving and expanding rail service (the most efficient means of moving good and people about) and, of course, limiting our driving.

--It absolutely true! Not enough people care! That's why I put together this post. What are you doing about it? We need your help!

fear4freedom

brianlux wrote:

bgivens33 wrote:

I get annoyed by people that disbelieve global warming because of the political ramifications. I'm equally annoyed by people that think we are going to stop it.

Right now, there is no solution. Alternative energy is nothing more than supplemental energy. The world isn't going to start conserving energy until we are literally running out. Everyone has seen those, decrease energy use by 20%, increase alternatives by 40% graphs and we would be completely off fossil fuels. It is all crap, and it will never happen. Did you just buy an electric car? Great, but you just plugged it into part of the 70% of the country's energy grid that still comes from hydrocarbons.

The truth of the matter is only a small small percentage of the country actually cares. People love to complain about big oil, but wouldn't dare to actually give up using gasoline(or plastic for that matter).

Our country needs to stop pouring money into technology that has no future(like wind mills) and get serious about solving our energy needs. Our world isn't sustainable off current so called "renewable energy". Once we can all stop pretending it is, we might be able to find a fix. Let's stop wasting money on companies like Solyandra and give the money to NREL or one of the universities for research.

--I honestly don't think we can stop global warming either but I'm fairly certain we can slow it down.

--I think much of the world is starting to conserve energy- I have been making efforts to do so for years. I'm sorry you take such a bleak view that way though I can understand the temptation to do so.

--I agree that electic cars are not the ultimate solution. I have posted many times elsewhere ideas about local economy, walkable communities, improving and expanding rail service (the most efficient means of moving good and people about) and, of course, limiting our driving.

--It absolutely true! Not enough people care! That's why I put together this post. What are you doing about it? We need your help!

What am i doing? I consume less and recycle more! I also teach others that consumption should be paid attn to! There own consumption with eveything from water usage to lights out...to recycling!
I however think the left and the liberals use this issue for more political expedience in the way they pervert it and use it to divide our nation! The world seeks to slow down the USA and this is the biggest method in doing so!

fear4freedom

brianlux wrote:

bgivens33 wrote:

I get annoyed by people that disbelieve global warming because of the political ramifications. I'm equally annoyed by people that think we are going to stop it.

Right now, there is no solution. Alternative energy is nothing more than supplemental energy. The world isn't going to start conserving energy until we are literally running out. Everyone has seen those, decrease energy use by 20%, increase alternatives by 40% graphs and we would be completely off fossil fuels. It is all crap, and it will never happen. Did you just buy an electric car? Great, but you just plugged it into part of the 70% of the country's energy grid that still comes from hydrocarbons.

The truth of the matter is only a small small percentage of the country actually cares. People love to complain about big oil, but wouldn't dare to actually give up using gasoline(or plastic for that matter).

Our country needs to stop pouring money into technology that has no future(like wind mills) and get serious about solving our energy needs. Our world isn't sustainable off current so called "renewable energy". Once we can all stop pretending it is, we might be able to find a fix. Let's stop wasting money on companies like Solyandra and give the money to NREL or one of the universities for research.

--I honestly don't think we can stop global warming either but I'm fairly certain we can slow it down.

--I think much of the world is starting to conserve energy- I have been making efforts to do so for years. I'm sorry you take such a bleak view that way though I can understand the temptation to do so.

--I agree that electic cars are not the ultimate solution. I have posted many times elsewhere ideas about local economy, walkable communities, improving and expanding rail service (the most efficient means of moving good and people about) and, of course, limiting our driving.

--It absolutely true! Not enough people care! That's why I put together this post. What are you doing about it? We need your help!

What am i doing? I consume less and recycle more! I also teach others that consumption should be paid attn to! There own consumption with eveything from water usage to lights out...to recycling!
I however think the left and the liberals use this issue for more political expedience in the way they pervert it and use it to divide our nation! The world seeks to slow down the USA and this is the biggest method in doing so!

brianlux

fear4freedom wrote:

brianlux wrote:

bgivens33 wrote:

I get annoyed by people that disbelieve global warming because of the political ramifications. I'm equally annoyed by people that think we are going to stop it.

Right now, there is no solution. Alternative energy is nothing more than supplemental energy. The world isn't going to start conserving energy until we are literally running out. Everyone has seen those, decrease energy use by 20%, increase alternatives by 40% graphs and we would be completely off fossil fuels. It is all crap, and it will never happen. Did you just buy an electric car? Great, but you just plugged it into part of the 70% of the country's energy grid that still comes from hydrocarbons.

The truth of the matter is only a small small percentage of the country actually cares. People love to complain about big oil, but wouldn't dare to actually give up using gasoline(or plastic for that matter).

Our country needs to stop pouring money into technology that has no future(like wind mills) and get serious about solving our energy needs. Our world isn't sustainable off current so called "renewable energy". Once we can all stop pretending it is, we might be able to find a fix. Let's stop wasting money on companies like Solyandra and give the money to NREL or one of the universities for research.

--I honestly don't think we can stop global warming either but I'm fairly certain we can slow it down.

--I think much of the world is starting to conserve energy- I have been making efforts to do so for years. I'm sorry you take such a bleak view that way though I can understand the temptation to do so.

--I agree that electic cars are not the ultimate solution. I have posted many times elsewhere ideas about local economy, walkable communities, improving and expanding rail service (the most efficient means of moving good and people about) and, of course, limiting our driving.

--It absolutely true! Not enough people care! That's why I put together this post. What are you doing about it? We need your help!

What am i doing? I consume less and recycle more! I also teach others that consumption should be paid attn to! There own consumption with eveything from water usage to lights out...to recycling!
I however think the left and the liberals use this issue for more political expedience in the way they pervert it and use it to divide our nation! The world seeks to slow down the USA and this is the biggest method in doing so!

--Actually my question was for bgivens33, but I'm glad you're doing your part.

--Personally I don't know anybody trying to raise awareness and seek solutions to global warming who "pervert" this issue or use it to "divide our nation" or "slow down the USA". Where do you guys get this stuff?

brianlux

For those of us interested in helping reduce global warming, it's a frustrating, uphill battle. Here's an example of why that is:

http://news.yahoo.com/why-climate-chang ... 04995.html

With the exception of Jon Huntsman — who barely registers in polls — you can't find a Republican presidential candidate who unequivocally believes in climate science, let alone one who wants to do anything about it.

It's one thing when people disagree on the effectiveness of different approaches to fix a problem; it's worse when they refuse even to believe that a problem exists — despite an overwhelming scientific consensus that says it does.

Even in places like Western Europe, where belief in climate science tends to be much stronger, it's hard to build support for the actual steps to reduce carbon emissions. Human beings have a hard time dealing not just with pain, but also with long-term problems, especially ones that don't necessarily show immediate effects. Whether it's planning for retirement or losing weight, we find it too easy to disregard very clear science — and disregard our long-term health — in order to satiate our immediate desires. There's no excuse for the sort of half-fictions and outright lies that too often make up the climate-change-denial machine, but it's human psychology — as much as politics — that's preventing us from dealing with one of the greatest threats the species faces. The most powerful denial machine of all may be the one inside our heads.



The whole article:

"Why Climate-Change Denial Is So Powerful

Not too long ago, belief in climate science wasn't a political issue. Honestly! As recently as the 2008 U.S. presidential election, both the Democratic and Republican candidates professed belief in the threat of global warming, and each advanced policies designed to curb U.S. carbon emissions. Senator John McCain had even co-sponsored one of the first congressional bills to create a carbon cap-and-trade system. And it wasn't just McCain; Mitt Romney, runner-up for the GOP nomination last time around, supported a regional cap-and-trade program while he was governor of Massachusetts. There was still a wide gap between Democrats and Republicans on the severity of the climate-change threat and on how ambitious carbon-cutting policy should be, but at least there was a general agreement that global warming was a real thing.

Not anymore. With the exception of Jon Huntsman — who barely registers in polls — you can't find a Republican presidential candidate who unequivocally believes in climate science, let alone one who wants to do anything about it. Instead of McCain — who has walked back his own climate-policy realism since the 2008 elections — we have Texas Governor Rick Perry, who told voters in New Hampshire over the weekend that "I don't believe manmade global warming is settled in science enough." And many Republicans agree with him: the percentage of self-identified Republicans or conservatives answering yes to the question of whether the effects of global warming were already being felt fell to 30% or less in 2010, down from 50% in 2007-08. Meanwhile, liberals and Democrats remained around 70% or more.(See pictures of the effects of global warming.)

That's deeply troubling. It's one thing when people disagree on the effectiveness of different approaches to fix a problem; it's worse when they refuse even to believe that a problem exists — despite an overwhelming scientific consensus that says it does. One of America's major political parties has, in effect, adopted denial as policy. How did we get here?

As the sociologists Riley Dunlap of Oklahoma State University and Aaron McCright of Michigan State University suggest, climate denialism exists in part because there has been a long-term, well-financed effort on the part of conservative groups and corporations to distort global-warming science. That's the conclusion of a chapter the two researchers recently wrote for The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. "Contrarian scientists, fossil-fuel corporations, conservative think tanks and various front groups have assaulted mainstream climate science and scientists for over two decades," Dunlap and McCright write. "The blows have been struck by a well-funded, highly complex and relatively coordinated denial machine."

For those who've followed the seesaw of the climate debate in the U.S., there's not much new in Dunlap and McCright's chapter, but they do lay out just how long and how intensively some conservatives have been fighting mainstream climate science. Fossil-fuel companies like Exxon and Peabody Energy — which obviously have a business interest in slowing any attempt to reduce carbon emissions — have combined with traditionally conservative corporate groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and conservative foundations like the Koch brothers' Americans for Prosperity, to raise doubts about the basic validity of what is, essentially, a settled scientific truth. That message gets amplified by conservative think tanks — like the Cato Institute and the American Enterprise Institute — and then picked up by conservative media outlets on the Internet and cable TV. (See TIME's special report about Copenhagen's climate-change conference.)

All of the naysayers seem to be following the playbook written by the tobacco industry in its long, ongoing war against medical findings about the dangers of smoking. For both Big Oil and Big Smoke, that playbook is lethally simple: don't straight-up refute the science, just raise skepticism and insist that the findings are "unsettled" and that "more research" is necessary. Repeat that again and again regardless of the latest research, and you help block the formation of the solid majority needed to create any real political change. That's made all the easier because whether you're quitting smoking or oil, the job is painful — and voters don't like pain.

"It's reasonable to conclude that climate-change-denial campaigns in the U.S. have played a crucial role in blocking domestic legislation and contributing to the U.S. becoming an impediment to international policymaking," write Dunlap and McCright.

It's certainly true that the U.S., even after President Obama's election, remains an international outlier when it comes to belief in climate science, as former President Bill Clinton noted recently. Climate denial makes Americans "look like a joke," Clinton said from the stage of his foundation's annual meeting last month. "If you're an American, the best thing you can do is make it politically unacceptable for people to engage in denial." That was also the main message behind former Vice President Al Gore's recent Climate Reality project, which was broadcast around the world on Sept. 14.

Of course, the fact that the message is coming from two political figures who are — to say the least — highly associated with the Democratic Party is part of the problem. Over time, belief in climate science has become less about the science than about establishing a cultural identity — you're a denier or a believer depending on whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, just like you're a Yankees or a Red Sox fan depending on whether you're from New York City or Boston. Of course, polarization is harmless in sports — and indeed, it can be essential to the fun. It's insanity as a basis for complex public policy.

So would it make a difference if the conservative denial machine were to collapse tomorrow? Sadly, I'm not sure. Even in places like Western Europe, where belief in climate science tends to be much stronger, it's hard to build support for the actual steps to reduce carbon emissions. Human beings have a hard time dealing not just with pain, but also with long-term problems, especially ones that don't necessarily show immediate effects. Whether it's planning for retirement or losing weight, we find it too easy to disregard very clear science — and disregard our long-term health — in order to satiate our immediate desires. There's no excuse for the sort of half-fictions and outright lies that too often make up the climate-change-denial machine, but it's human psychology — as much as politics — that's preventing us from dealing with one of the greatest threats the species faces. The most powerful denial machine of all may be the one inside our heads.

inlet13

polaris_x wrote:

:roll:

pretty much every country accepts the science of global warming including the US ... we have conferences around the world trying to figure it out ... but everyone involved is pimping some agenda!? ... :roll:

good grief man ... the science is not that hard to understand ... take 20 mins and learn about it ...

You so proved his point with this post. ha ha.

inlet13

brianlux wrote:

I’ll try my best to stay on track in addressing you points:

1. Yes, this is a rock band message board but AMT is a place where (hopefully) intelligent people come to share ideas. Also, you tell me to “chillax”. I’m not so sure I’m the one who sounds up tight here.

Yes, you should chillax. You sound unbelievably uptight to me. This issue won't kill us any time soon, so no worries... relax.

brianlux wrote:

2. I read all sources of information on global warming pro and con. In well thought out expository writing, an essay usually begins with a general premise. If you would read past the first few sentences of what I post you might learn something.

Most of the sources of information on global warming is instilled with bias. Thanks for proving my point. You're seeking for what could be propaganda, which is easily found when you're looking for it. Great way to learn.

brianlux wrote:

3. I’ll accept that you believe there are people who try to “derail threads” by talking about global warming but I don’t agree- I think that is a matter of opinion so let’s move on.

There are people who do that. So, it's a fact.

brianlux wrote:

4. I’m not alone nor do I feel alone and you will have no success bating me with name-calling (“loon”- I’m not insane and I have no feathers). I don’t believe that’s necessary here. By your own words you imply that I am not a “normal human”. What is that about? At the very least this verges on more name-calling.

I did not call you a loon directly, re-read. I'll repeat, I said normal humans believe the economy is more important issue than global warming. Although rough, it's true. You're in the minority here. You just don't like that fact.

brianlux wrote:

5. You say, “…there are some who are abusing the topic to promote social welfare policies, and in doing, are purposefully limiting economic growth because they are so mind-warped [more name-calling] that they really believe a growing economy is bad.”
I’ve read and studied global warming since around 1989 when first book (that I know of) that addressed this issue was published - Bill McKibben’s THE END OF NATURE- and in all that reading and research have never come across anyone “abusing the topic to promote social welfare policies”. There is a vast amount of information (some has already been provided for you in this thread) that shows how fighting global warming can be beneficial to a healthy economy and that defining a healthy economy as endless growth is, indeed, harmful. (For example, do you really believe the earth contains a limitless ability to absorb CO2 or that out planet contains an endless supply of resources?) And as Yvon Chounard so aptly put it, in collapsed ecosystems there are no political, social or economic issues to deal with.

I could not care less what propaganda you read. Dude, just read the name of that book. Seriously? You don't think that's a bit ridiculous of a source for unbias info? Nah, I'm sure THE END OF NATURE will present both sides... hahahaha.

brianlux wrote:

5. [You wrote “fifth” twice] I won’t argue 100% certainty about anything and I won’t start here. I do personally believe beyond a doubt that global warming is real and anthropogenic and I respect your right to disagree but I do not respect name-calling. If you’re not interest in a civil conversation and if you continue to bate or label me, from here on out I will ignore your posts.

You have your beliefs are are entitled to them. Those who have their own aren't "deniers". Thanks for changing the thread title.

If you want to ignore posts, feel free. That's also your right. Would be reflective of your source of reading.

brianlux

inlet13 wrote:

If you want to ignore posts, feel free. That's also your right. Would be reflective of your source of reading.

The thread title was not changed.

I've already categorically stated that I've read widely on this subject, pro and con. Seen from that perspective, your post appears to make little sense besides being typically bating. I don't get the feeling you're interested in having an intelligent discussion- I get the feeling you just want to argue. I see no point in you and I discussing matters any further on this thread. Feel free to respond. I'm movin on.

lukin2006

vomikus39 wrote:

In the words of the great George Carlin....

"The planet will be fine, it's the PEOPLE WHO ARE FUCKED!!!'

No truer words...

brianlux

Obviously inlet13 and I don't agree on a lot of things but one thing I will agree with is that the title I gave for this thread was a poor choice of words so I've changed it.

I apologize to anyone who was offended by the word "denial". It's a term that is used generally to describe people who do not believe in global warming and though I do not share that opinion, I do acknowledge that the term can be seen as derogatory. I didn't mean it that way but I appologize for the use of it anyway.

Looking back on this thread I would also say I'm guilty of trying to hard to make a point that I consider essential. You can say I'm guilty of being too eager, ardent, fervant, or even too impassioned. Sometime it's true: the harder you try, the less you succeed. I certainly didn't come here just to rant or one-up anybody or any of the other things I've been accused of. I have not at all meant to come across as condescending. I try to be educated and think intelligently but I would not call myself an intellectual. I think there is a big difference between being intellligent and being an intellectual. Also, I don't wear tweed coats with patches on the elbows. I write as acurately as possible and I suppose at times that comes ascross as being pedantic. Sorry if my writing style sucks.

The information I have on global warming comes from a lot of reading, studying and a lot of time talking with specialists in various sciences fields. These people are not politically motivated. They are far too cerebral, meticulous and precise in their mothods for that. I hate what they tell me. Maybe I should keep it to myself.

I'm mostly sorry I started this thread. A few of you quoted George Carlin my favorite comedian: "The planet will be fine, it's the people who are fucked!" I imagine some of you think I'm fucked. Probably, I mean after all, we're all people. But maybe I'm more fucked for trying too hard here. I really don't care about global warming, peak oil or any of that shit- not for myself anyway. The worst won't affect me, I'll be dead by then. Dead as fucking door nail as George once said. This is no ego trip for me- it's just an effort that's gone sour and I say that because it's just become another battle zone. I don't really know any of you so I have no quarrel with any of you and I'm sorry I let this thread turn bitter. You know what the people I respect the most would say about that? They'd say, "Fuck that".


I'm sorry for this thread. I'll just go away for awhile and maybe when I came back we can be nice to each other.

Peace, all. Later

polaris_x

hey ... brian ... don't let the ignorant send you away ... i know it's disheartening when people refuse to accept the science (btw there is no proof that global warming is not anthropogenic) ... what is even sadder is that all it takes is a little reading and an open mind to realize that global warming is real ... is caused by man and has already resulted in the loss of many lives ... denial was an operative word because that is what it is ... the science IS overwhelming ... all they have are links to articles that when traced and dissected are fraudulent ...

JonnyPistachio

polaris_x wrote:

hey ... brian ... don't let the ignorant send you away ... i know it's disheartening when people refuse to accept the science (btw there is no proof that global warming is not anthropogenic) ... what is even sadder is that all it takes is a little reading and an open mind to realize that global warming is real ... is caused by man and has already resulted in the loss of many lives ... denial was an operative word because that is what it is ... the science IS overwhelming ... all they have are links to articles that when traced and dissected are fraudulent ...

I Agree here polaris...I honestly havent read enough to judge if global warming is man-made or not, but i've seen enough environmental destruction to know that we better do something about it. I think its lazy to sit back and say "it won't kill us now, chillax!"

The amount of automobiles (exhaust), smog, deforestation, litter in our oceans, and release of too much CO2 CANNOT BE GOOD, and its pretty fucking unnatural if you ask me.

EdsonNascimento

JonnyPistachio wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

hey ... brian ... don't let the ignorant send you away ... i know it's disheartening when people refuse to accept the science (btw there is no proof that global warming is not anthropogenic) ... what is even sadder is that all it takes is a little reading and an open mind to realize that global warming is real ... is caused by man and has already resulted in the loss of many lives ... denial was an operative word because that is what it is ... the science IS overwhelming ... all they have are links to articles that when traced and dissected are fraudulent ...

I Agree here polaris...I honestly havent read enough to judge if global warming is man-made or not, but i've seen enough environmental destruction to know that we better do something about it. I think its lazy to sit back and say "it won't kill us now, chillax!"

The amount of automobiles (exhaust), smog, deforestation, litter in our oceans, and release of too much CO2 CANNOT BE GOOD, and its pretty fucking unnatural if you ask me.

2 things:

1) The scientific evidence is not overwhelming in the global warming direction. In fact, it's quite the opposite (the internet inventor's propaganda film aside).

2) Yes, the things you list are clearly detrimental to the environment. I don't think anyone has argued that. It is not natural to be spewing so much CO2 into our atmosphere. So, focus on that instead of trying to convince people of your religion - global warming. Religious discussions are never productive.