I usually try to stay out of these as the science is out of my expertise
but I would ask this, regardless if man is the cause, what is the problem with exploring cleaner ways to live our lives? What is the problem with trying to lower gas emissions that are harmful? what is the problem with exploring cheaper forms of energy? Man may not be the only cause but we are definitely adding to the problem.
I am not sure why people don't want to live a cleaner lifestyle. If all of us did a little it would add up to a lot pretty quickly and maybe we could avoid having to make drastic changes when the shit hits the fan
Nothing. That's great! Figure it out and make a billion bucks. But don't empower the federal or even worse some world government to force it on everybody.
Of course I understand erosion. I am explaining that the ocean level has not risen because while some arctic ice melts other arctic water is freezing and replacing it.
The point is climate changes and it has nothing to do with humans transferring one form of carbon to another.
The Earth itself creates so called "fossil fuels" from deep within the planet due to plate tectonics and geothermal energy. It happens on moons in our solar system. Old oil wells are slowly refilling. Natural gas is so incredibly deep because it too is simply a transfer of carbon just like coal and oil.
Everything is super in this country but some think we somehow are a problem to the planet? Get real.
You're just living in denial, man. I feel bad for people who think that we are not responsible, nor need to do anything to help preserve the beautiful planet we've got, while we're on it. Go ask the polar bears how their habitat is doing. Oh, that's right, the Arctic is fine. :?
You don't know how I live. I am a good steward of the planet. But not because I believe in non-sense.
Do you drive a car or ride a bus or catch a car ride with friends? Yeah, you do. What do you do to help preserve the beautiful planet? Besides belittle those who don't go along with your beliefs and sitting around feeling depressed about phony global warming? Nothing right, that's is?
You go talk to polar bears see what that gets you...you won't understand their language then they'll eat you sport.
Because you call it "nonsense" tells me enough. Good luck with your outlook, does Fox News tell you to think the way you do?
soo ... is it that you don't believe the science of global warming or is it because you've attached global warming to be a gov't conspiracy? ... in that global warming is a propaganda piece utilized by the gov't to impose laws and taxes and impede your freedoms ...
I usually try to stay out of these as the science is out of my expertise
but I would ask this, regardless if man is the cause, what is the problem with exploring cleaner ways to live our lives? What is the problem with trying to lower gas emissions that are harmful? what is the problem with exploring cheaper forms of energy? Man may not be the only cause but we are definitely adding to the problem.
I am not sure why people don't want to live a cleaner lifestyle. If all of us did a little it would add up to a lot pretty quickly and maybe we could avoid having to make drastic changes when the shit hits the fan
This is perfect, without even getting into the argument. Just knowing what's important (the condition of the planet we inhabit) and making sure we take care of it properly to ensure the continuing existence of human civilization should be enough.
But too many people are wrapped up in denying the issue, politicizing the issue, and arguing the issue that keeping what's real, gets lost in the outcome. No other country in the world is in denial to climate change quite like consumeristic America.
And if anyone wants to question the validity of PBS? Public broadcasting is not a part of mainstream media. PBS’ mission is to create content that educates, informs and inspires. To do this, PBS offers programming that expands the minds of children,documentaries that open up new worlds, non-commercialized news programs that keep citizens informed on world events and cultures and programs that expose America to the worlds of music, theater, dance and art.
Hey Otter, you may think nothing is happening at the coasts that YOU visit, but it is, very slowly. So slowly, that it's not obvious.
NASA Satellite Data Help Pinpoint Glaciers' Role in Sea Level Rise
WASHINGTON -- A new study of glaciers worldwide using observations from two NASA satellites has helped resolve differences in estimates of how fast glaciers are disappearing and contributing to sea level rise.
The new research found glaciers outside of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, repositories of 1 percent of all land ice, lost an average of 571 trillion pounds (259 trillion kilograms) of mass every year during the six-year study period, making the oceans rise 0.03 inches (0.7 mm) per year. This is equal to about 30 percent of the total observed global sea level rise during the same period and matches the combined contribution to sea level from the Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets.
The study compares traditional ground measurements to satellite data from NASA's Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) and Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) missions to estimate ice loss for glaciers in all regions of the planet. The study period spans 2003 to 2009, the years when the two missions overlapped.
"For the first time, we have been able to very precisely constrain how much these glaciers as a whole are contributing to sea level rise," said Alex Gardner, Earth scientist at Clark University in Worcester, Mass., and lead author of the study. "These smaller ice bodies are currently losing about as much mass as the ice sheets."
soo ... is it that you don't believe the science of global warming or is it because you've attached global warming to be a gov't conspiracy? ... in that global warming is a propaganda piece utilized by the gov't to impose laws and taxes and impede your freedoms ...
I myself don't believe in any conspiracy involving the government ... However I do believe governments are going to use climate change to impose taxes, because that's what governments do ...
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Global warming is real. I teach science (29 years), my son is an environmental geologist, and I have lived on this planet for 53 years. We cannot continue to pollute all over the world and think that this is not taking a toll on our planet. Global warming is global warming and has nothing to do with politics. When all these people who do not believe this is true have great great grandchildren that cannot go outside due to no ozone layer etc. then we will see who suffers. So if you want to be selfish and only care about yourselves living on this planet now and have no concern for those who are not even born yet, then go ahead keep polluting and stay in denial. We should take care of our beautiful planet without the government making us do so.
Global warming is real. I teach science (29 years), my son is an environmental geologist, and I have lived on this planet for 53 years. We cannot continue to pollute all over the world and think that this is not taking a toll on our planet. Global warming is global warming and has nothing to do with politics. When all these people who do not believe this is true have great great grandchildren that cannot go outside due to no ozone layer etc. then we will see who suffers. So if you want to be selfish and only care about yourselves living on this planet now and have no concern for those who are not even born yet, then go ahead keep polluting and stay in denial. We should take care of our beautiful planet without the government making us do so.
Thank you, lcusick. Well said.
What I'm wondering is, if we don't want government in the position of regulating industry (which is the greatest source of pollution) how do you (or others here) suggest industrial pollution be reigned in in a timely manner (because, as you know, time is of the essence) and how do we get more ordinary citizens to do their part? I don't mean this as a challenge- I'm sincerely interest in how we can do that in such a timely manner as to avert an even greater disaster than that with which we will already likely have to deal with. If we look to a less governmental influenced position, who will keep things in check? How focused, for example, are libertarians or Tea Party members on this critical issue?
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
You don't know how I live. I am a good steward of the planet. But not because I believe in non-sense.
Do you drive a car or ride a bus or catch a car ride with friends? Yeah, you do. What do you do to help preserve the beautiful planet? Besides belittle those who don't go along with your beliefs and sitting around feeling depressed about phony global warming? Nothing right, that's is?
You go talk to polar bears see what that gets you...you won't understand their language then they'll eat you sport.
ah, the ultimate cop-out. "I don't have to believe in it because those that do I deem hypocrites!". Actually, riding the bus and catching a ride with friends is called being responsible. Way more environmentally responsible than some schmuck riding alone in his 8 ton tank down the street to 7-11. I ride my bike when I can, I take the bus to work, I walk home, etc etc. that being said, not everyone is able to contribute in the same ways. some have no choice but to drive to work alone in a large vehicle (ex: construction worker who lives out of town and has to take his kids to and from daycare-can't carpool with anyone else). But you can be responsible in other ways too.
I'd like to see one person who thinks the environment is fine like otter, just ONE, treat their home like the average citizen treats the earth and see if it's still acceptable to live that way.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
soo ... is it that you don't believe the science of global warming or is it because you've attached global warming to be a gov't conspiracy? ... in that global warming is a propaganda piece utilized by the gov't to impose laws and taxes and impede your freedoms ...
I myself don't believe in any conspiracy involving the government ... However I do believe governments are going to use climate change to impose taxes, because that's what governments do ...
this makes no sense ... so, if the gov't imposes a carbon tax ... it's automatically bad? ... they should do nothing about it? ... they should continue to allow us to use resources and energy without paying the true cost?
What I'm wondering is, if we don't want government in the position of regulating industry (which is the greatest source of pollution) how do you (or others here) suggest industrial pollution be reigned in in a timely manner (because, as you know, time is of the essence) and how do we get more ordinary citizens to do their part? I don't mean this as a challenge- I'm sincerely interest in how we can do that in such a timely manner as to avert an even greater disaster than that with which we will already likely have to deal with. If we look to a less governmental influenced position, who will keep things in check? How focused, for example, are libertarians or Tea Party members on this critical issue?
Its sad that most "environmentalists" and people from the "green movement" are the most clueless when it actually
comes to solving the global warming problem and just want to politicize it and turn it into a Gov. regulation system.
If the people posting on this site who claim to know the science, actually did, they would realize there are plenty of ways we can undo global warming within 1-2 decades if we actually desire to.
1. Undo the growing desertification of the world by making it greener, desertification is only furthering global warming.
2. We can Take CO2 out of the atmosphere with "robot trees." 1 robot tree = 1000 natural trees with taking CO2 out of the atmosphere.
3. There's geoengineering, which blocks as much sunlight from hitting the earth's surface.
4. Grass fed Beef.
These methods actually IMPROVE the planet, instead of going around the pollution problem...
The problem with global warming is the politics, who will/are using it to their benefit. More regulations, more taxation, more power grabbing... Why anybody thinks this is the route to follow is a simple partisan and really has no true intent of helping this planet, or they are just clueless and like repeating over and over "look at the science"
Exactly my point.
Because I am not affiliated with your "side" or party, its ignored and mocked...
no ... it's more frustration ... i said I wasn't going to respond to your posts on this anymore because I am not sure you have a grasp of what you are writing ... but just so you know it isn't about mocking you ...
you have no understanding of the environmental movement ... the politicizing of the issue is a necessity in so much as any issue such as war and poverty are ... the gov't is supposed to reflect the desires of its populace through policy and legislation ... trying to solve global warming has to involve gov't policy ... to think otherwise is utterly absurd ...
regardless of that fact ... i have been saying for years that solutions are in front of us and that what the gov't does runs parallel to any change ... been posting solutions for years ... but you aren't listening ... you have never listened ... just the other day you accused me of never explaining global warming ... i proved you wrong ... and now you want to change the topic again by going on some ideological bent on environmentalists of which you clearly know nothing about ...
that is what the :fp: is for ... i'll repeat myself one more time ... stop reading these right wing websites that are feeding you this shit ... i caught you copying and pasting from one of these forums before ... think for yourself ... read up on the issue and see what environmentalists are REALLY doing ... don't lump this issue with your ideological rant against "lefties" or "liberals" or whatever label your partisan-warped beliefs are guiding you ...
Exactly my point.
Because I am not affiliated with your "side" or party, its ignored and mocked...
no ... it's more frustration ... i said I wasn't going to respond to your posts on this anymore because I am not sure you have a grasp of what you are writing ... but just so you know it isn't about mocking you ...
you have no understanding of the environmental movement ... the politicizing of the issue is a necessity in so much as any issue such as war and poverty are ... the gov't is supposed to reflect the desires of its populace through policy and legislation ... trying to solve global warming has to involve gov't policy ... to think otherwise is utterly absurd ...
regardless of that fact ... i have been saying for years that solutions are in front of us and that what the gov't does runs parallel to any change ... been posting solutions for years ... but you aren't listening ... you have never listened ... just the other day you accused me of never explaining global warming ... i proved you wrong ... and now you want to change the topic again by going on some ideological bent on environmentalists of which you clearly know nothing about ...
that is what the :fp: is for ... i'll repeat myself one more time ... stop reading these right wing websites that are feeding you this shit ... i caught you copying and pasting from one of these forums before ... think for yourself ... read up on the issue and see what environmentalists are REALLY doing ... don't lump this issue with your ideological rant against "lefties" or "liberals" or whatever label your partisan-warped beliefs are guiding you ...
To be honest, your to partisan to discuss this topic with.
For someone who is the Moving Train's authority on GW/CC you get little to no respect (to your knowledge) because you can't present anything that shows you have an understanding. Anybody can link to other sites, that's not a display of knowledge.
Couple that with your vague "Its the science" or "learn the science" auto-answer and Political solutions (control/tax/regulation) Its impossible to take you serious or listen to what you say...
To ignore actual natural and planet saving solutions and favor gov. control and taxation show your limited "knowledge" of the subject and science.
Nothing I have said (especially my solutions) is right wing, that's how I know you don't listen to anybody but your self on this topic.
You need to take the time and read up and listen to Allan Savory... His solutions are natural and obtainable.
To be honest I think your too stupid and political to "learn the science"
To be honest, your to partisan to discuss this topic with.
For someone who is the Moving Train's authority on GW/CC you get little to no respect (to your knowledge) because you can't present anything that shows you have an understanding. Anybody can link to other sites, that's not a display of knowledge.
Couple that with your vague "Its the science" or "learn the science" auto-answer and Political solutions (control/tax/regulation) Its impossible to take you serious or listen to what you say...
To ignore actual natural and planet saving solutions and favor gov. control and taxation show your limited "knowledge" of the subject and science.
Nothing I have said (especially my solutions) is right wing, that's how I know you don't listen to anybody but your self on this topic.
You need to take the time and read up and listen to Allan Savory... His solutions are natural and obtainable.
To be honest I think your too stupid and political to "learn the science"
haha ... to be expected i suppose ... i do recall one time asking you to pick ANY ONE of your articles you posted from some site ... they were "scientific" ... i said - pick any one ... we will both read it and we can discuss ... of course you chose not to ...
edit: i do find it interesting that you would bring in someone who believes in AGW after claiming that it was not possible ...
What I'm wondering is, if we don't want government in the position of regulating industry (which is the greatest source of pollution) how do you (or others here) suggest industrial pollution be reigned in in a timely manner (because, as you know, time is of the essence) and how do we get more ordinary citizens to do their part? I don't mean this as a challenge- I'm sincerely interest in how we can do that in such a timely manner as to avert an even greater disaster than that with which we will already likely have to deal with. If we look to a less governmental influenced position, who will keep things in check? How focused, for example, are libertarians or Tea Party members on this critical issue?
Its sad that most "environmentalists" and people from the "green movement" are the most clueless when it actually
comes to solving the global warming problem and just want to politicize it and turn it into a Gov. regulation system.
If the people posting on this site who claim to know the science, actually did, they would realize there are plenty of ways we can undo global warming within 1-2 decades if we actually desire to.
1. Undo the growing desertification of the world by making it greener, desertification is only furthering global warming.
2. We can Take CO2 out of the atmosphere with "robot trees." 1 robot tree = 1000 natural trees with taking CO2 out of the atmosphere.
3. There's geoengineering, which blocks as much sunlight from hitting the earth's surface.
4. Grass fed Beef.
These methods actually IMPROVE the planet, instead of going around the pollution problem...
The problem with global warming is the politics, who will/are using it to their benefit. More regulations, more taxation, more power grabbing... Why anybody thinks this is the route to follow is a simple partisan and really has no true intent of helping this planet, or they are just clueless and like repeating over and over "look at the science"
No offense man, but you're not getting anywhere when you begin by calling people "clueless" and their methods "sad."
Honestly, I am very interested in the 4 points you made, but I have a hard time respecting your approach when it begins with such rudeness. Every post you make sounds angry. Just consider your approach.. and perhaps you have more info on those four points you brought up? Maybe people could do both your suggestions and Polaris and Brian's suggestions? I mean, if we're all in agreement that there is a problem, there should be many ways to battle it.
And there's nothing wrong with linking to other sites that have done respectable research on the matter.
I will check out Allan Savory too.. Thanks for that suggestion.
Do anything to combat global warming in Glenn Beck’s office? You’re fired.
To prove his case against global warming, which Beck labels a “load of socialist, communist crap,” the right-wing talk-show host announced his war against energy-efficient light bulbs.
On air, he asked a staffer to write a memo that threatened to fire anyone caught using one. The YouTube video of the moment was picked up by Grist.
"I'm dead serious," Beck said on his radio program, as his employees titter nervously. "I fire the person that starts to purchase fluorescent light bulbs, unless that is the only light bulb for a very specific reason, and I want to be cc'd on what that reason is." How about to light a dark room? Is that reason enough?
But Beck’s vendetta against eco-friendly office supplies doesn’t end there. He told one worker not to purchase any more recyclable spoons, either.
“If anyone does anything in this company because of global warming, they’re fired,” he said. He’s OK with saving trees, though. Except for writing all those memos.
Perhaps Beck didn’t get the memo that a majority of Americans believe climate change is real.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
To be honest, your too partisan to discuss this topic with.
Fixed.
While you're doing all that good reading on how global warming is a hoax... can I suggest, without you calling me stupid as well, to spend a few minutes to read up on the various forms of 'to' and how they are each used in proper context to avoid making yourself look like an idiot.
What I'm wondering is, if we don't want government in the position of regulating industry (which is the greatest source of pollution) how do you (or others here) suggest industrial pollution be reigned in in a timely manner (because, as you know, time is of the essence) and how do we get more ordinary citizens to do their part? I don't mean this as a challenge- I'm sincerely interest in how we can do that in such a timely manner as to avert an even greater disaster than that with which we will already likely have to deal with. If we look to a less governmental influenced position, who will keep things in check? How focused, for example, are libertarians or Tea Party members on this critical issue?
Its sad that most "environmentalists" and people from the "green movement" are the most clueless when it actually
comes to solving the global warming problem and just want to politicize it and turn it into a Gov. regulation system.
Calling us "clueless"... nice inflammatory touch. That will surely instigate some useful conversation, right? :roll:
If the people posting on this site who claim to know the science, actually did, they would realize there are plenty of ways we can undo global warming within 1-2 decades if we actually desire to.
1. Undo the growing desertification of the world by making it greener, desertification is only furthering global warming.
2. We can Take CO2 out of the atmosphere with "robot trees." 1 robot tree = 1000 natural trees with taking CO2 out of the atmosphere.
3. There's geoengineering, which blocks as much sunlight from hitting the earth's surface.
4. Grass fed Beef.
These methods actually IMPROVE the planet, instead of going around the pollution problem...
True, many believe technology is the answer. Others believe understand the natural world and working within it's parameters makes more sense. Time will tell. Personally, I'd rather live in a world in which based on nature and natural cycles rather than one purely artificial- which is the end result of "solving" everything with technology.
The problem with global warming is the politics, who will/are using it to their benefit. More regulations, more taxation, more power grabbing... Why anybody thinks this is the route to follow is a simple partisan and really has no true intent of helping this planet, or they are just clueless and like repeating over and over "look at the science"
Is this how you instigate useful conversation- by telling us what our "true intent" is and calling us "clueless"? I'm supposed to take that seriously? :roll: Sounds more like trolling. You obviously have read your own thoughts into my words. I have not politicized the discussion on environment nor have I seen most others here who care about the environment.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
To be honest, your too partisan to discuss this topic with.
Fixed.
While you're doing all that good reading on how global warming is a hoax... can I suggest, without you calling me stupid as well, to spend a few minutes to read up on the various forms of 'to' and how they are each used in proper context to avoid making yourself look like an idiot.
LOL...
Spelling errors vs. reading comprehension.
What in my posts lead you to believe I think global warming is a hoax...
Offering technological and sustainable solutions to our problem vs having the Gov. Tax and regulate means I think global warming is a Hoax???
I know you didn't want me to call you stupid, but how can I not after that representation of your reading comprehension???
LOL...
LOL...
Spelling errors vs. reading comprehension.
What in my posts lead you to believe I think global warming is a hoax...
Offering technological and sustainable solutions to our problem vs having the Gov. Tax and regulate means I think global warming is a Hoax???
I know you didn't want me to call you stupid, but how can I not after that representation of your reading comprehension???
LOL...
one would think that if someone were going to lob the "stupid" accusation that that person would know the difference between "your" and "you're".
just sayin.
I think in subtle fashion... this line of thinking should have been successfully conveyed. Yet the message was not received.
I'll frame it this way: what pictures come to mind when, while refuting global warming, some dude is calling people stupid... and spelling 'the' and 'cat' wrong?
one would think that if someone were going to lob the "stupid" accusation that that person would know the difference between "your" and "you're".
just sayin.
I think in subtle fashion... this line of thinking should have been successfully conveyed. Yet the message was not received.
I'll frame it this way: what pictures come to mind when, while refuting global warming, some dude is calling people stupid... and spelling 'the' and 'cat' wrong?
Someone wearing a tinfoil hat and opening up Internet Explorer 6.0 which is, of course, set to open up infowars.com as the homepage.
Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
one would think that if someone were going to lob the "stupid" accusation that that person would know the difference between "your" and "you're".
just sayin.
I think in subtle fashion... this line of thinking should have been successfully conveyed. Yet the message was not received.
I'll frame it this way: what pictures come to mind when, while refuting global warming, some dude is calling people stupid... and spelling 'the' and 'cat' wrong?
Someone wearing a tinfoil hat and opening up Internet Explorer 6.0 which is, of course, set to open up infowars.com as the homepage.
Comments
Nothing. That's great! Figure it out and make a billion bucks. But don't empower the federal or even worse some world government to force it on everybody.
Because you call it "nonsense" tells me enough. Good luck with your outlook, does Fox News tell you to think the way you do?
But too many people are wrapped up in denying the issue, politicizing the issue, and arguing the issue that keeping what's real, gets lost in the outcome. No other country in the world is in denial to climate change quite like consumeristic America.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... /cron.html
And if anyone wants to question the validity of PBS? Public broadcasting is not a part of mainstream media. PBS’ mission is to create content that educates, informs and inspires. To do this, PBS offers programming that expands the minds of children,documentaries that open up new worlds, non-commercialized news programs that keep citizens informed on world events and cultures and programs that expose America to the worlds of music, theater, dance and art.
NASA Satellite Data Help Pinpoint Glaciers' Role in Sea Level Rise
WASHINGTON -- A new study of glaciers worldwide using observations from two NASA satellites has helped resolve differences in estimates of how fast glaciers are disappearing and contributing to sea level rise.
The new research found glaciers outside of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, repositories of 1 percent of all land ice, lost an average of 571 trillion pounds (259 trillion kilograms) of mass every year during the six-year study period, making the oceans rise 0.03 inches (0.7 mm) per year. This is equal to about 30 percent of the total observed global sea level rise during the same period and matches the combined contribution to sea level from the Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets.
The study compares traditional ground measurements to satellite data from NASA's Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) and Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) missions to estimate ice loss for glaciers in all regions of the planet. The study period spans 2003 to 2009, the years when the two missions overlapped.
"For the first time, we have been able to very precisely constrain how much these glaciers as a whole are contributing to sea level rise," said Alex Gardner, Earth scientist at Clark University in Worcester, Mass., and lead author of the study. "These smaller ice bodies are currently losing about as much mass as the ice sheets."
*******************
Another link documenting the increasing sea levels, CO2, Sea Ice, and global surface temps from NASA. http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators
I myself don't believe in any conspiracy involving the government ... However I do believe governments are going to use climate change to impose taxes, because that's what governments do ...
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Thank you, lcusick. Well said.
What I'm wondering is, if we don't want government in the position of regulating industry (which is the greatest source of pollution) how do you (or others here) suggest industrial pollution be reigned in in a timely manner (because, as you know, time is of the essence) and how do we get more ordinary citizens to do their part? I don't mean this as a challenge- I'm sincerely interest in how we can do that in such a timely manner as to avert an even greater disaster than that with which we will already likely have to deal with. If we look to a less governmental influenced position, who will keep things in check? How focused, for example, are libertarians or Tea Party members on this critical issue?
ah, the ultimate cop-out. "I don't have to believe in it because those that do I deem hypocrites!". Actually, riding the bus and catching a ride with friends is called being responsible. Way more environmentally responsible than some schmuck riding alone in his 8 ton tank down the street to 7-11. I ride my bike when I can, I take the bus to work, I walk home, etc etc. that being said, not everyone is able to contribute in the same ways. some have no choice but to drive to work alone in a large vehicle (ex: construction worker who lives out of town and has to take his kids to and from daycare-can't carpool with anyone else). But you can be responsible in other ways too.
I'd like to see one person who thinks the environment is fine like otter, just ONE, treat their home like the average citizen treats the earth and see if it's still acceptable to live that way.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
this makes no sense ... so, if the gov't imposes a carbon tax ... it's automatically bad? ... they should do nothing about it? ... they should continue to allow us to use resources and energy without paying the true cost?
Its sad that most "environmentalists" and people from the "green movement" are the most clueless when it actually
comes to solving the global warming problem and just want to politicize it and turn it into a Gov. regulation system.
If the people posting on this site who claim to know the science, actually did, they would realize there are plenty of ways we can undo global warming within 1-2 decades if we actually desire to.
1. Undo the growing desertification of the world by making it greener, desertification is only furthering global warming.
2. We can Take CO2 out of the atmosphere with "robot trees." 1 robot tree = 1000 natural trees with taking CO2 out of the atmosphere.
3. There's geoengineering, which blocks as much sunlight from hitting the earth's surface.
4. Grass fed Beef.
These methods actually IMPROVE the planet, instead of going around the pollution problem...
The problem with global warming is the politics, who will/are using it to their benefit. More regulations, more taxation, more power grabbing... Why anybody thinks this is the route to follow is a simple partisan and really has no true intent of helping this planet, or they are just clueless and like repeating over and over "look at the science"
Because I am not affiliated with your "side" or party, its ignored and mocked...
no ... it's more frustration ... i said I wasn't going to respond to your posts on this anymore because I am not sure you have a grasp of what you are writing ... but just so you know it isn't about mocking you ...
you have no understanding of the environmental movement ... the politicizing of the issue is a necessity in so much as any issue such as war and poverty are ... the gov't is supposed to reflect the desires of its populace through policy and legislation ... trying to solve global warming has to involve gov't policy ... to think otherwise is utterly absurd ...
regardless of that fact ... i have been saying for years that solutions are in front of us and that what the gov't does runs parallel to any change ... been posting solutions for years ... but you aren't listening ... you have never listened ... just the other day you accused me of never explaining global warming ... i proved you wrong ... and now you want to change the topic again by going on some ideological bent on environmentalists of which you clearly know nothing about ...
that is what the :fp: is for ... i'll repeat myself one more time ... stop reading these right wing websites that are feeding you this shit ... i caught you copying and pasting from one of these forums before ... think for yourself ... read up on the issue and see what environmentalists are REALLY doing ... don't lump this issue with your ideological rant against "lefties" or "liberals" or whatever label your partisan-warped beliefs are guiding you ...
To be honest, your to partisan to discuss this topic with.
For someone who is the Moving Train's authority on GW/CC you get little to no respect (to your knowledge) because you can't present anything that shows you have an understanding. Anybody can link to other sites, that's not a display of knowledge.
Couple that with your vague "Its the science" or "learn the science" auto-answer and Political solutions (control/tax/regulation) Its impossible to take you serious or listen to what you say...
To ignore actual natural and planet saving solutions and favor gov. control and taxation show your limited "knowledge" of the subject and science.
Nothing I have said (especially my solutions) is right wing, that's how I know you don't listen to anybody but your self on this topic.
You need to take the time and read up and listen to Allan Savory... His solutions are natural and obtainable.
To be honest I think your too stupid and political to "learn the science"
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
haha ... to be expected i suppose ... i do recall one time asking you to pick ANY ONE of your articles you posted from some site ... they were "scientific" ... i said - pick any one ... we will both read it and we can discuss ... of course you chose not to ...
edit: i do find it interesting that you would bring in someone who believes in AGW after claiming that it was not possible ...
No offense man, but you're not getting anywhere when you begin by calling people "clueless" and their methods "sad."
Honestly, I am very interested in the 4 points you made, but I have a hard time respecting your approach when it begins with such rudeness. Every post you make sounds angry. Just consider your approach.. and perhaps you have more info on those four points you brought up? Maybe people could do both your suggestions and Polaris and Brian's suggestions? I mean, if we're all in agreement that there is a problem, there should be many ways to battle it.
And there's nothing wrong with linking to other sites that have done respectable research on the matter.
I will check out Allan Savory too.. Thanks for that suggestion.
fixed.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Don't get caught using eco-friendly light bulbs in Glenn Beck's office
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/do ... 52793.html
Do anything to combat global warming in Glenn Beck’s office? You’re fired.
To prove his case against global warming, which Beck labels a “load of socialist, communist crap,” the right-wing talk-show host announced his war against energy-efficient light bulbs.
On air, he asked a staffer to write a memo that threatened to fire anyone caught using one. The YouTube video of the moment was picked up by Grist.
"I'm dead serious," Beck said on his radio program, as his employees titter nervously. "I fire the person that starts to purchase fluorescent light bulbs, unless that is the only light bulb for a very specific reason, and I want to be cc'd on what that reason is." How about to light a dark room? Is that reason enough?
But Beck’s vendetta against eco-friendly office supplies doesn’t end there. He told one worker not to purchase any more recyclable spoons, either.
“If anyone does anything in this company because of global warming, they’re fired,” he said. He’s OK with saving trees, though. Except for writing all those memos.
Perhaps Beck didn’t get the memo that a majority of Americans believe climate change is real.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Fixed.
While you're doing all that good reading on how global warming is a hoax... can I suggest, without you calling me stupid as well, to spend a few minutes to read up on the various forms of 'to' and how they are each used in proper context to avoid making yourself look like an idiot.
Calling us "clueless"... nice inflammatory touch. That will surely instigate some useful conversation, right? :roll:
True, many believe technology is the answer. Others believe understand the natural world and working within it's parameters makes more sense. Time will tell. Personally, I'd rather live in a world in which based on nature and natural cycles rather than one purely artificial- which is the end result of "solving" everything with technology.
Is this how you instigate useful conversation- by telling us what our "true intent" is and calling us "clueless"? I'm supposed to take that seriously? :roll: Sounds more like trolling. You obviously have read your own thoughts into my words. I have not politicized the discussion on environment nor have I seen most others here who care about the environment.
Spelling errors vs. reading comprehension.
What in my posts lead you to believe I think global warming is a hoax...
Offering technological and sustainable solutions to our problem vs having the Gov. Tax and regulate means I think global warming is a Hoax???
I know you didn't want me to call you stupid, but how can I not after that representation of your reading comprehension???
LOL...
just sayin.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
perhaps ... this post?
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=215907#p5205340
I think in subtle fashion... this line of thinking should have been successfully conveyed. Yet the message was not received.
I'll frame it this way: what pictures come to mind when, while refuting global warming, some dude is calling people stupid... and spelling 'the' and 'cat' wrong?
Someone wearing a tinfoil hat and opening up Internet Explorer 6.0 which is, of course, set to open up infowars.com as the homepage.
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
Ok. Now I have some imagery.
who gives a shit?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014