Deranged Rhino Posted July 8, 2015 Posted July 8, 2015 This reads just like a Hollywood script. This is why I don't go to movies anymore. The writing raises things to a level of absurdity. Good job [golf clap} I had a friend that did standup with Sam when he was just getting started. He said everyone was terrified of following Sam because they knew there would be no one left in the audience by the time he finished. (Bows)
KD in CA Posted July 8, 2015 Posted July 8, 2015 (edited) The data is overwhelming, if you actually examine it without a political bent. I'm not suggesting this is an urgent threat that's going to wash away the shores tomorrow, but something we should be preparing our children and their children to handle. A rise in sea level of just six inches will cause chaos in much of the world -- even if the US is spared, you'll see massive unrest, political strife, starvation, and large numbers of people who will become refugees within the century. That will have a geopolitical impact, a social impact, an economic impact, and threaten national security. Arguing whether or not it's man made or natural is a waste of time. The only questions that matter is whether or not the climate is changing (it is) and how we are going to deal with it as a nation (carbon taxes aren't the answer). The problem is you're lining up to be counted with the people who ARE saying that and have been saying it for more than a decade, and who haven't proposed any actual solutions other than carbon taxes. And sorry, I'm not buying for one second that a six inch rise in sea levels over a period of 100 years would create any global cataclysm. That's just pure fantasy. It's not anywhere close to reality. Edited July 8, 2015 by KD in CT
unbillievable Posted July 8, 2015 Posted July 8, 2015 Anyone worried that the moon is moving further away every year? How are we going to address that calamity?
Alaska Darin Posted July 8, 2015 Posted July 8, 2015 Anyone worried that the moon is moving further away every year? How are we going to address that calamity? Two words: Tractor Beam.
Deranged Rhino Posted July 8, 2015 Posted July 8, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/08/exxon-climate-change-1981-climate-denier-funding
B-Man Posted July 8, 2015 Posted July 8, 2015 (edited) http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/08/exxon-climate-change-1981-climate-denier-funding FTA: Over the years, Exxon spent more than $30m on thinktanks and researchers that promoted climate denial, according to Greenpeace. Article was written by Suzanne Goldenberg, the US environment correspondent of the Guardian and is based in Washington DC. Here are some of her "articles" in the past three weekss. Episcopal church votes to divest from fossil fuels: 'This is a moral issue' Rich countries' $100bn promise to fight climate change 'not delivered' Secretive donors gave US climate denial groups $125m over three years Jeb Bush cozies up to coal industry barons at closed-door meeting Oil lobby group recruited Canadian minister for secret strategy meeting Also.........from April: Clinton returns to smash glass ceiling, with gender at forefront of campaign In the 2008 Hillary Clinton struggled with the idea that she was making history as a female candidate for president - but nearly eight years later, she plans to put women and children first Ms. Goldenberg is nothing if not consistent. . Edited July 8, 2015 by B-Man
GG Posted July 9, 2015 Posted July 9, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/08/exxon-climate-change-1981-climate-denier-funding Climate Change wasn't an issue until they changed the name from Global warming a few years ago. So we're supposed to believe that ExxonMobil knew about climate change before it was even invented?
4merper4mer Posted July 9, 2015 Posted July 9, 2015 Climate Change wasn't an issue until they changed the name from Global warming a few years ago. So we're supposed to believe that ExxonMobil knew about climate change before it was even invented? Looks like a cigarette style shake down.
unbillievable Posted July 9, 2015 Posted July 9, 2015 Ms. Goldenberg is nothing if not consistent.. The best way to fight bad propaganda is with worse propaganda.
Gary M Posted July 9, 2015 Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/08/exxon-climate-change-1981-climate-denier-funding ExxonMobil is not denying climate change is happening, they are denying their product is causing it. Why do you have an issue with that? Edited July 9, 2015 by Gary M
OCinBuffalo Posted July 9, 2015 Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) birdog's answer is lame as hell, so I'm going to have to repost on Sunday unless I hear a real answer. In the meantime, I want to know how I am being myopic, by looking directly at empirical raw data from the very same sattelites used to create the catastrophic predictions in the first place, and finding no increase in observed temps globally. Science: when the data doesn't match your thinking, it's time to change your thinking. Yet, we have this insistence on grasping every straw, and blatant fudging of historical data(which ostensibly was, once upon a time, good enough to "proove" AGW, and now...isn't), on the way down. Who is really being myopic here? Once again, I will ask birdog and GreggT the same question: where is your BS line? What would you have to see in order to say "these AGW people are full of schit, and I am done with them"? You both claim to be following the science, and also to be flying high above the "petty politics". If that is so, then there must be somewhere specific, a fault tolerance, where you say "I've seen/heard enough, this is BS". It's obvious that you have, and thought you were already at, the other line, the "Absolutely true, now do something". But, then comes the raw data which...unsettles this issue...and drags your asses back. We know one line exists for you, but what about the other? See, I don't think there ever was, or will ever be an AGW BS Mendoza line for either of you, precisely because you ARE being partisan, don't care to deal with ALL the data, scientifically/objectively, and will cling to this issue no matter what you are told. (Told, because let's face it, it's not like either of you have done your own work on any of this. Posting F'ing Guardian articles? ) Edited July 9, 2015 by OCinBuffalo
KD in CA Posted July 9, 2015 Posted July 9, 2015 Anyone worried that the moon is moving further away every year? How are we going to address that calamity? Lunar credits
Nanker Posted July 9, 2015 Posted July 9, 2015 Just got back from a cruise in southern France. There were a number of people on board that were pontificating about Climate Change... yes, the temperatures were from 94 - 104 during our stay, so shall we say, it was a popular topic. After stipulating for them that the climate is warming, I challenged these good people to offer some suggestions on solutions that were different than mine. They had none and thought mine were nothing they were interested in. My suggestions for cutting down on human caused CO2 emissions: Ban air conditioning, ban automobiles, ration electricity, ban consumer jet travel. They weren't interested in any of those, but they all agreed that "something has to be done." I told them that we should try to start a vew volcanoes, because nothing can bring on a year without a summer better than Mother Nature.
4merper4mer Posted July 9, 2015 Posted July 9, 2015 Just got back from a cruise in southern France. There were a number of people on board that were pontificating about Climate Change... yes, the temperatures were from 94 - 104 during our stay, so shall we say, it was a popular topic. After stipulating for them that the climate is warming, I challenged these good people to offer some suggestions on solutions that were different than mine. They had none and thought mine were nothing they were interested in. My suggestions for cutting down on human caused CO2 emissions: Ban air conditioning, ban automobiles, ration electricity, ban consumer jet travel. They weren't interested in any of those, but they all agreed that "something has to be done." I told them that we should try to start a vew volcanoes, because nothing can bring on a year without a summer better than Mother Nature. It has been well documented that cow farts and the farts of other mammals cause lots of global warming and/or climate change. Did you suggest to them that we kill all mammals so that humans may live?
B-Man Posted July 9, 2015 Posted July 9, 2015 More Guardian fun Global Warming Hysterics Can Be Hilarious Global warming hysterics wonder why so many people don’t take them–or their cause–all that seriously. Case in point, an unintentionally hilarious column in The Guardian shouting that we are all going to die from global warming. From, “It’s Too Late to Save Our World,” by Stewart Lee: Everything will die soon, except for cockroaches, and Glastonbury favourite the Fall, who will survive even a nuclear holocaust, though they will still refuse to play their 80s chart hits. Everything? Really? Yes. The destruction of all life on Earth is inevitable if fossil fuel use continues unabated. Inevitable? Yes! Our children already have no stable baseline from which to calibrate the loss of all that lives. It’s game over. Bearing this in mind, I finally find myself reluctantly agreeing with the business community. There is no time for delay. Let’s build the runway. Let’s choke the Earth. Let’s get this damn thing over with, for what can be avoided, whose end is purposed by the mighty gods of business? Hasten our demise, let our children be the last of their sorry line, and spare their unborn descendants any further suffering. We will not save the rhino. We will not even save the hedgehog. How can we save the world? And here’s the really funny part: But, if you can purge cheap sentiment from your mind, how exciting and fascinating it will be to watch as the world becomes uninhabitable. It’s almost worth going on a health kick to survive another 60 years and see everything immolated. How many humans have had the awe-inspiring opportunity to witness such spectacle: the end of all that is? But something of us should be preserved, I think, for posterity. Wait. If we are all dead, if the “whole damn thing” is going to be “over with,” if it’s the “end of all that is,” there won’t be any posterity. Kinda proves Lee doesn’t believe his own hysteria, doesn’t it? Unless he doesn’t know the definition of “posterity.” Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner
Chef Jim Posted July 9, 2015 Posted July 9, 2015 So if climate change is causing our drought what is causing this? http://www.news10.net/story/weather/2015/07/09/el-nino-weather-flooding-1997-satellite-images/29899151/
Azalin Posted July 10, 2015 Posted July 10, 2015 It has been well documented that cow farts and the farts of other mammals cause lots of global warming and/or climate change. Same thing with termites. Obviously, we need to plow over the forests and only build with brick or stone to save the planet.
OCinBuffalo Posted July 10, 2015 Posted July 10, 2015 (edited) More Guardian fun Global Warming Hysterics Can Be Hilarious Global warming hysterics wonder why so many people don’t take them–or their cause–all that seriously. Case in point, an unintentionally hilarious column in The Guardian shouting that we are all going to die from global warming. From, “It’s Too Late to Save Our World,” by Stewart Lee: Everything will die soon, except for cockroaches, and Glastonbury favourite the Fall, who will survive even a nuclear holocaust, though they will still refuse to play their 80s chart hits. Everything? Really? Yes. The destruction of all life on Earth is inevitable if fossil fuel use continues unabated. Inevitable? Yes! Our children already have no stable baseline from which to calibrate the loss of all that lives. It’s game over. Bearing this in mind, I finally find myself reluctantly agreeing with the business community. There is no time for delay. Let’s build the runway. Let’s choke the Earth. Let’s get this damn thing over with, for what can be avoided, whose end is purposed by the mighty gods of business? Hasten our demise, let our children be the last of their sorry line, and spare their unborn descendants any further suffering. We will not save the rhino. We will not even save the hedgehog. How can we save the world? And here’s the really funny part: But, if you can purge cheap sentiment from your mind, how exciting and fascinating it will be to watch as the world becomes uninhabitable. It’s almost worth going on a health kick to survive another 60 years and see everything immolated. How many humans have had the awe-inspiring opportunity to witness such spectacle: the end of all that is? But something of us should be preserved, I think, for posterity. Wait. If we are all dead, if the “whole damn thing” is going to be “over with,” if it’s the “end of all that is,” there won’t be any posterity. Kinda proves Lee doesn’t believe his own hysteria, doesn’t it? Unless he doesn’t know the definition of “posterity.” Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner Whaaat?...um...yeah there's nothing "ignorant" or "myopic" or hysterical(the mental illness def.) about this at all. No, this is all carefully considered. What should we do to posters who link to the Guardian going forward? Can we get a ban on it, like we have on Bleacher Report? I mean, at least Bleacher Report is honest idiocy. The Guardian, as is once again demonstrated above, is dishonest idiocy. Then again, perhaps we shouldn't ban it? Perhaps it still can inform PPP: "the leftist idiot sounds like...", when we push the button? I mean, I realize we already have a gatorman button, but perhaps more than one note is required? I never considered a 3rd option for the AGW credibility suicide pact. Let's reveiw the first 2: "there is no 18 pause in GW"(data kills this) vs. "there is a pause, but it's coming from the Indian Ocean"(grandiose speculation that saves something supposedly "settled", and therefore, supposedly doesn't need saving?). Yikes. Yes, now they have a glorious new 3rd option which is: "I'm taking my toys and going home to my safe zone, where my sweeping conclusions aren't subject to scrutiny. Oh, and F all of you. You're all going to die for daring to ask me questions I should never have to answer because I'm smarter than all of you. Because I'm on the side of science, dammit! Stop making fun of me. Look, I told you your children are going to die! Don't you care about them? I know that because I'm smart. Not like everybody says, like dumb. I'm smart, and I want respect!". Yes, let's call this 3rd option the "Fredo Option". These clowns know that they will only be taken seriously until Obama's presidency dies, so they are lashing out at us, rather than begging our forgiveness for their bad behavior. Skipping to the end: at the Obama administration funeral, their credibility will be taken "fishing" as well. Edited July 10, 2015 by OCinBuffalo
Nanker Posted July 11, 2015 Posted July 11, 2015 OMG! A new mini Ice Age is Coming!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!! Of course it's man-made, of course. Oh, the humanity! If we had only listened more seriously to the CO2 issue. Maybe it's not too late. Everyone on the Left - stop exhaling. Just stop. For the sake of the planet, stop. It's our only hope.
Recommended Posts