Another nail in the Al Gore's CO2 global warming/carbon tax hoax.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24036736-7583,00.html

as per

http://www.prisonplanet.com/top-rocket-scientist-no-evidence-co2-causes-global-warming.html

polaris

yeah ... no ...

it is happening as forecasted ... anyways - anyone who writes for rupert murdoch is always someone to be suspicious of ...

HANKTHELANK

The rapid rise in temperature of the 90's was a legitimate concern. However the cooling of the last 10 years shows that our impact through burning of fossil fuels is negligible to the temperature of the earth. The IPCC, the main drivers who continue to push this agenda, completely leave out the mid-evil warm period from their analysis. This period, proven not only to be warmer then today, but also a global phenomenon, must be ignored if the uneducated masses are to be convinced of the upcoming catastrophe. Global warming is a hoax, and nothing more then a distraction from other, much more serious issues.

Its Evolution Baby

Rather then debate whether or not Global Warming is a hoax or not, everyone should realize there are other reasons to go green.

*We are running low on fossil fuels. Look at the increase in gas in the last decade.
*The smog and air quality is awful in most big cities
*Water in our lakes rivers and oceans is highly polluted.
*We are continually dealing with wackos in the Middle East because we need there oil.
*We have the technology to have any type of vehicle become fuel efficient even hummers so why don't we use it?

There is no real argument against going green other then being stubborn because you don't believe in global warming.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

Rather then debate whether or not Global Warming is a hoax or not, everyone should realize there are other reasons to go green.

*We are running low on fossil fuels. Look at the increase in gas in the last decade.
*The smog and air quality is awful in most big cities
*Water in our lakes rivers and oceans is highly polluted.
*We are continually dealing with wackos in the Middle East because we need there oil.
*We have the technology to have any type of vehicle become fuel efficient even hummers so why don't we use it?

There is no real argument against going green other then being stubborn because you don't believe in global warming.

Correct.

It's more about exposing Al Gore's lies, and introduction of this new carbon tax.

Its Evolution Baby

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Correct.

It's more about exposing Al Gore's lies, and introduction of this new carbon tax.

I disagree that hes lying. He truly believes what he's saying and there are just as many scientists that agree with him that don't.

That's why this debate could go on forever as science can be manipulated to show both sides. That's why I don't even pay attention to the debate as I live in So Cal and I see the effects of CO2 every time I enter LA. It doesn't matter if the Smog is making the world warmer or not, because there is no arguing that breathing that air is unhealthy.

polaris

HANKTHELANK wrote:

The rapid rise in temperature of the 90's was a legitimate concern. However the cooling of the last 10 years shows that our impact through burning of fossil fuels is negligible to the temperature of the earth. The IPCC, the main drivers who continue to push this agenda, completely leave out the mid-evil warm period from their analysis. This period, proven not only to be warmer then today, but also a global phenomenon, must be ignored if the uneducated masses are to be convinced of the upcoming catastrophe. Global warming is a hoax, and nothing more then a distraction from other, much more serious issues.

cooling?? ... what cooling??

if you running a fever and it happens to drop from 39.5 to 39.4 - sure, it's dropped but you are still running a fever ...

the last few years have been one of the hottest on record

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

I disagree that hes lying. He truly believes what he's saying and there are just as many scientists that agree with him that don't.

That's why this debate could go on forever as science can be manipulated to show both sides. That's why I don't even pay attention to the debate as I live in So Cal and I see the effects of CO2 every time I enter LA. It doesn't matter if the Smog is making the world warmer or not, because there is no arguing that breathing that air is unhealthy.

Taxing it is not going to make the air cleaner...just you pocketbook lighter and life harder.

Gore should be the alternative energy mascot more than the carbon tax mascot of you catch my drift....

polaris

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Taxing it is not going to make the air cleaner...just you pocketbook lighter and life harder.

Gore should be the alternative energy mascot more than the carbon tax mascot of you catch my drift....

i know you are a libertarian where the word tax is akin to self-mutilation but there is no way around a carbon tax ... as much as i also hate the gov't regulate these things ... the current situation is that NO industry will voluntarily put themselves at a disadvantage over competitors - so, unless you can figure out a way to address climate change without a carbon tax - the world is listening ...

RolandTD20Kdrummer

polaris wrote:

i know you are a libertarian where the word tax is akin to self-mutilation but there is no way around a carbon tax ... as much as i also hate the gov't regulate these things ... the current situation is that NO industry will voluntarily put themselves at a disadvantage over competitors - so, unless you can figure out a way to address climate change without a carbon tax - the world is listening ...

Climate change is going to happen....it's the way the world turns.

but...how bout moving into cleaner energies, and focus on that, rather than asking people to just cough up money for the dirty ones?

polaris

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Climate change is going to happen....it's the way the world turns.

but...how bout moving into cleaner energies, and focus on that, rather than asking people to just cough up money for the dirty ones?

it might be so because collectively we are failing to act ...

how can you move to cleaner energies if oil and gas and coal continue to be subsidized at a rate that prices out cleaner alternatives ... we can ask people to turn off lights all we want but if we don't curtail industry - we won't make an impact ...

how do you propose to stop heavy polluting industries from continuing their ways?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

polaris wrote:

it might be so because collectively we are failing to act ...

how can you move to cleaner energies if oil and gas and coal continue to be subsidized at a rate that prices out cleaner alternatives ... we can ask people to turn off lights all we want but if we don't curtail industry - we won't make an impact ...

how do you propose to stop heavy polluting industries from continuing their ways?

Seemingly impossible things can begin with one prominent spokesperson putting forth new ideas.

I just don't agree with Gore when he says just throw more money at it, but then nothing changes on a fundamental level.

People know the air and water is polluted, but no one is really coming forward with new ideologies from a campaign or "movement" perspective to generate enough momentum.

OutOfBreath

Thing is, taxes are very efficient in making businesses change their practices. If something suddenly gets a price-tag, they have to take it into account. And if the penalty is severe enough and cleverly made, they will have to change their ways to stay profitable.

So we just have to make a carbon tax that will push the industries in the wanted direction. If polluting starts costing them something, they will change when the cost gets high enough. The point will not be the added money (which can go towards tax-breaks elsewhere if so inclined), but that a particular behaviour gets expensive.

Peace
Dan

polaris

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Seemingly impossible things can begin with one prominent spokesperson putting forth new ideas.

I just don't agree with Gore when he says just throw more money at it, but then nothing changes on a fundamental level.

People know the air and water is polluted, but no one is really coming forward with new ideologies from a campaign or "movement" perspective to generate enough momentum.

something has to fund the transition to a more efficient society ... the times of wasting resources has past ... i have no problem with a carbon tax especially if other taxes are rolled back ...

in any case - i don't think you've got an alternative for the carbon tax and as out of breath says - it is the most effective way to make changes ...

and to say no one is coming forward is absurd ... there is almost an alternative to everything we do ... but it goes beyond making something available - there has to be a collective shift to accept why we are making those changes ...

if we continue to let climate skeptics distract us from the task at hand - that is how momentum stalls ...

RolandTD20Kdrummer

polaris wrote:

something has to fund the transition to a more efficient society ... the times of wasting resources has past ... i have no problem with a carbon tax especially if other taxes are rolled back ...

in any case - i don't think you've got an alternative for the carbon tax and as out of breath says - it is the most effective way to make changes ...

and to say no one is coming forward is absurd ... there is almost an alternative to everything we do ... but it goes beyond making something available - there has to be a collective shift to accept why we are making those changes ...

if we continue to let climate skeptics distract us from the task at hand - that is how momentum stalls ...

My focus is on Al Gore and his "campaign" I think he's more about taxing the existing technology rather than promoting real change.

the basis for change has to be founded on solid information. Pollution should be a huge part of his spiel, yet all he talks about are glaciers melting and ocean levels rising.

polaris

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

My focus is on Al Gore and his "campaign" I think he's more about taxing the existing technology rather than promoting real change.

the basis for change has to be founded on solid information. Pollution should be a huge part of his spiel, yet all he talks about are glaciers melting and ocean levels rising.

existing technology IS the problem - again, what solution is out there to curtail the impacts of these existing inefficient ways??

with all due respect - the basis for change IS based on solid information ... all the world's leading climate scientists have already laid out what we are experiencing today ... no peer-reviewed scientific paper exists today that says otherwise ... do you think companies like BP and Shell would even remotely consider doing something if it wasn't a for sure thing?

if you understood the environment and how we are interconnected with it - glaciers melting and rising sea levels post a huge impact to life on this planet ...

HANKTHELANK

polaris wrote:

cooling?? ... what cooling??

if you running a fever and it happens to drop from 39.5 to 39.4 - sure, it's dropped but you are still running a fever ...

the last few years have been one of the hottest on record

How about this past year. Granted it is only one year, but its significant considering we didn't shut down the power plants. The past 10 years have been cooling off, not alot like you said, but we aren't reducing the amount of co2 going into the atmosphere. There are so many factors that effect the climate, to say with complete certainty that it is co2 i think is short sited. The companies that are going to get taxed by this new carbon tax are going to pass it down to the consumer, simple as that. We need to cut down on fossil fuel consumption, i'm all for that and have a very small "carbon footprint" myself. but i see this new form of taxation as having a hidden agenda. I guess i'm skeptical, does al gore really give 2 fucks? i really doubt it. So then why is he now the talking head for going green, and implimenting this carbon tax?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

polaris wrote:

existing technology IS the problem - again, what solution is out there to curtail the impacts of these existing inefficient ways??

with all due respect - the basis for change IS based on solid information ... all the world's leading climate scientists have already laid out what we are experiencing today ... no peer-reviewed scientific paper exists today that says otherwise ... do you think companies like BP and Shell would even remotely consider doing something if it wasn't a for sure thing?

if you understood the environment and how we are interconnected with it - glaciers melting and rising sea levels post a huge impact to life on this planet ...

Global warming is quite far from solid and proven conclusive information...what it does look like is the earth moving through ongoing warming and cooling cycles as it has always done prior to man even being part of the equation.

Al Gore says pay up...not clean up that's the problem with his situation.

polaris

HANKTHELANK wrote:

How about this past year. Granted it is only one year, but its significant considering we didn't shut down the power plants. The past 10 years have been cooling off, not alot like you said, but we aren't reducing the amount of co2 going into the atmosphere. There are so many factors that effect the climate, to say with complete certainty that it is co2 i think is short sited. The companies that are going to get taxed by this new carbon tax are going to pass it down to the consumer, simple as that. We need to cut down on fossil fuel consumption, i'm all for that and have a very small "carbon footprint" myself. but i see this new form of taxation as having a hidden agenda. I guess i'm skeptical, does al gore really give 2 fucks? i really doubt it. So then why is he now the talking head for going green, and implimenting this carbon tax?

2007 was the second warmest year on record ... how is that cooling?

listen - i will post what i always post to all climate skeptics ... study the simple scientific principle known as the greenhouse effect ... if you don't buy this piece of science then feel free to join all the skeptics (who are paid by oil companies) - but if you do accept this principle - then there is no debating climate change ...

forget about all the distracting shit written everywhere ... it boils down to very simple science ...

RolandTD20Kdrummer

polaris wrote:

2007 was the second warmest year on record ... how is that cooling?

listen - i will post what i always post to all climate skeptics ... study the simple scientific principle known as the greenhouse effect ... if you don't buy this piece of science then feel free to join all the skeptics (who are paid by oil companies) - but if you do accept this principle - then there is no debating climate change ...

forget about all the distracting shit written everywhere ... it boils down to very simple science ...

Some say it's getting colder...some say warmer. now theres a new tax...I mean fine essentially on trying to heat ones house to avoid freezing in the winter, getting to work to survive, and even cook food if you have a gas stove ...

that's fucked.... I don't accept it. Not the solution we as a population should be aiming for.

I think we can do better.

In any event I think need to see some official graphs on temperature cycles again from both sides....

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Hey how about divert a few months from the global empire war circus spending budget, and build a solar panel 5 times the size of Texas distributed across various states. Then start passing out electric cars. Oil is as free to the earth, and human beings, as sunshine is....nobody really owns any of it.....that's the sick part.

anyhow.....Gore is falling short....