A new look on global warming

Remove all ads!

That's actually the most interesting thing I've seen about global warming. I have to say, the whole 'warming' bit does confuse me seeing as it's April and we've had snow and hail this month.

 

hi faerie, welcome to the cutthroat section of the boards, please don't let the latent(and open) hostility here drive you away. We get pretty heated at times as there are 2 very stubborn sides here that butt heads frequently.

 

Ah, not to worry. Stubborn myself, so I look forward to the debates

 

Dangit blackthorne!!! you made me shoot pepsi out of my nose all over my keyboard!! Do you know how hard that is to clean up!??
Morton huh?, must be Murphys brother.

 

I'm sure I've said something similar before, but having read through what I could of this thread I feel the need to re-iterate. I'll start with a quote by Mark Twain: "There's lies, there's DAMN lies and then there's statistics!"

Whenever people start throwing around studies here and research there by "the highly respected in the scientific community but no one else has heard of them" sorts, I get worn out. Is the earth warming? Probably -- the footage of the glaciers melting and breaking up is pretty convincing. Do humans effect the environment? Again, I don't need a study to see that with my own two eyes. Is this a problem? Of course! Food prices are skyrocketting worldwide and the pollution our society creates is right there to be seen -- I don't need a scientist to tell me that. Is this problem going to be solved by giving huge chunks of money to all sorts of fringe groups who are drawing up a seemingly infinite number of charts trying to convince me that the world will end in the next 20 years if I don't change and become more like them? THAT'S where I jump off the train. As I have said before, people have been crying doom and gloom for thousands of years. The world hasn't come to a complete stop yet and I'm pretty darn sure it won't anytime soon.

Scaremongering is wrong and ridiculous whether it's the Republicans saying the Muslims will kill us all in our sleep if we don't keep a Republican in office or environmental activists trying to scare us with threats of all the water in the world turning into acid. I can smell BS like this a mile away (and let me make it clear, BOTH sides are equally guilty -- the anti-environmental group trying to say that the world ISN'T changing are just as guilty.)

 

Well, I think the point those "fringe activists" groups is trying to make is not that we shuold throw money at them, even though would probably appreciate it but that we really should spend a whole bunch of money by cutting out CO2 emissions. It is the cutting down on our emissions the nay sayers is too costly to be worthwhile or they just play a game of pass the potato with the entire issue. The US say they wont cut their emissions if India does and India say they wont unless China does and China say they wont cut if the US dont and so forth and so on. I am pretty sure that everyone in leading positions are aware that there is a problem what they are doing is trying to push that problem to the future and let someone else deal with it because if we take the US as an example if they would do it now a huge industry would be mightily peeved off and if we look at China they dont want to deal with it until they deem they have reached a sufficently developed level to be square with the west.

 

And that there is my point, Joaquin! I'm not going to follow the recomendations of the doomsayers, crippling my economy while I'm at it, and just have another country say "cool, the Canucks are at a disadvantage now, we can UP our emissions!" If there's something tangible I can do that will definitely have an effect I'd be willing to do it, but I'm not going to hinder myself to no environmental advantage.

 

Here is a fantastic article about the BBC reporting on this issue. You have to scroll down a little bit.

If someone has the time, can they research to find out how the "Evil" oil companies and/or George Bush are to blame

Always remember- Beware of people who only support "freedom of speech" if you agree with them.

 

So LKD, you dont think it is right to do anything because others arent doing anything and they arent doing anything because you arent doing anything? So if you and another guy see someone getting savagely beaten it would be ok to do nothing because none of you dared take the first step?

 

joacqin, get it through your head, co2 isn't the problem. the biggest greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is suspended water vapor. so what if carbon has increased from 250ppm to 350ppm that is still only 350 parts per MILLION! thats .00035%. Do you know what happens when there is more co2 in the atmosphere? plants grow better, which takes more co2 out of the atmosphere. do you see were we are going with this.
co2 has been made into this huge monster when it isn't.

 

More accurate would be a homeless man with no money. I could take some steps to help him. However, I also see the criminal hiding in the corner. As soon as I give the homeless fellow some money, the criminal will beat the crap out of the guy and take the money. Now I'M out some money and the homeless fellow is not helped one little bit!

And to be honest, even using your example, if 5 guys are beating on a fellow and I come along unarmed, I don't do the guy any good by going into the fight and ALSO getting the crap kicked out of me. That's not cowardice, that's common frigging sense. All I can accomplish by going off half cocked is getting myself hurt. I don't help the victim at all. Now, I would go and try to get help, maybe get a car and run over the guys or call the cops or something, but just diving in to no good result? Pure stupidity.

 

Martaug, I am letting my demon deal with you. Apologies but you are crying so loud about stuff that seems so contrary to a few hundred thousand other sensible people that my demon is screening you out.

LKD, I guess you didnt read my example. I thought it could be understood that there were two guys (one of them you) watching a third man being assaulted by one person. Now if one of you go in it can be a bit risky but if both of you go in the problem would be solved in no time but instead both of you just stand and watch the poor sap being beaten because none of you want to risk going in alone. That is what is happening with the climate issue and that is the root of so many of humanities ills.

As for my personal opinion, I know I am a jerk. I dont give a rats ass about what happens to the planet after I am gone and I am pretty sure that things will work decently for another few decades so I can be dust well before it affects me to any greater degree. I am honest enough with myself to see me for the jerk I am and not try to hide behind something else or even explain the issue away. I do not care if people I dont know die or starve and neither does a huge amount of the worlds population but trying to actively hinder and bar the people who do care and do try to make a difference is a bit too strong even for my lazy selfish little butt. Trying to explain away or moralize over obvious wrongs done bugs me, acknowladge that oyu are a lazy selfish jerk like I am if that is what you but do not try to claim a false moral highground that does not exist. (This isnt really aimed at you personally LKD but rather at humanity in general).

 

- - -

 

You really don't know what a troll is, do you.

 

i know some of your(and my own) posts would possibly qualify

 

No pun intended

 

The article Snook posted last page was a wonderful example of spin. Word games are fun. 'Global temperature hasn't risen since 1998', for example, is hilarious. Yes, if you define things such that you can only say temperature has risen in the past 10 years if it exceeds where it was in 1998, then that's accurate. If, however, you actually look at the data, you notice that temp fell immediately after 1998 and then proceeded to, um, rise from year to year.

But they didn't rise past the '98 level, so they didn't actually rise. Or something.

And, yes, the woman in question was likely way over the line (though given how much spin is present in the article, I won't take that on faith). So what? All that proves is that, um, one particular activist type is, ah, overly aggressive. And insulting. And abusive. I'm shocked, shocked to learn that there is at least one 'climate activists' who can be a jerk.

 

No, wrong there mate, famine contributed to the severity of the pandemic, it did not cause it. Famine was caused by *ta-ta-da-ta-daa!* overpopulation, which was made possible by the food production during the warm period!

Malaria is endemic to warm climates, because the malaria mosquito cannot survive colder winters. When the global temperature gets higher, the malaria mosquito can and will spread to areas it does not currently inhabit. The most efficient way to combat malaria is to kill the mosquito. So far only DDT is efficient enough. Hands up who likes DDT! Malaria kills more than a million people every year and mainly on impoverished areas.

Does that sum things up a little more, or make it more understandable? Probably not. But poverty, disease, global warming and changing of weather patterns does lead to deaths that could be preventable. Even more so if the global warming is caused by or made worse by human activity.

Well, then it's a poorly made graph.

martaug:

There's contradictory studies to that, for example this bit from 2002: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/12/021206075233.htm