DC Tom Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 I want to thank almost everyone in this thread for displaying the required idiocy in not understanding the difference between the actual physical climate change that is occurring (science) and the arguments as to what is causing it (politics). To most people there is no difference, which is why it's far more religion than science at this point.
RkFast Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Ill believe SOME of this Global Warming crapola when one...just ONE of the so-called "solutions" doesnt involve some kind of governmental money grab.
John Adams Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Ill believe SOME of this Global Warming crapola when one...just ONE of the so-called "solutions" doesnt involve some kind of governmental money grab. Prius. About time you started believing.
RkFast Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Prius. About time you started believing. Prius/hybrids were not brought to market as "green" vehicles, but as "high mileage" ones. Oh sure.....they have tacked on "less polluting" to their marketing plans NOW. But orginally? No. On edit.....the original objective of the Prius WAS partly environment in nature. But that was in 1994, according to wiki. Im talking now....what "solution" put forth NOW does NOT involve some "tax" or "fee"?
StupidNation Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Nice and yet it is one of the warmest winters on record in Bucharest. It is climate change and the average earth temperature have risen, not fallen despite your so called facts. Extreme weather is happening more often... but you go on spewing that lie it not being the result of global warming. Well the temperature has cooled in the last 8 years globally. Is that the effects of global warming?
Bill from NYC Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 No. I do not for one second think it is a global scam by thousands of research scientists to make Al Gore rich and raise taxes. That's insanity, really. I asked if you accepted the possibility. Anyway, you are clearly a smart man and a naive kid.
Dan Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Prius/hybrids were not brought to market as "green" vehicles, but as "high mileage" ones. Oh sure.....they have tacked on "less polluting" to their marketing plans NOW. But orginally? No. On edit.....the original objective of the Prius WAS partly environment in nature. But that was in 1994, according to wiki. Im talking now....what "solution" put forth NOW does NOT involve some "tax" or "fee"? If you buy into the CO2 as part of the cause, there are lots of things you can do to reduce your "carbon footprint" such as unplug cell phone chargers and other such things, switch out your light bulbs, car pool, weatherize your home or turn the thermostat down/up, plant a tree, breath less (that was a joke), turn down the thermostat on your water heater, hang your wash to dry as opposed to using a dryer, buy locally grown foods, travel less, and others I'm sure. I'm not arguing any of those will make a hill of beans different or not, but those are the type of things that are claimed individuals can do that cost little or are beneficial to you.
Wacka Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Prius. About time you started believing. How much pollution will occur when the owners have to shell out thousands of $ to replace the batteries soon?
Johnny Coli Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 To most people there is no difference, which is why it's far more religion than science at this point. Wrong. There is a large data set of actual science--a data set that is being added to constantly--suggesting humans are causing global warming. That's not superstition (like religion). That is very real data. You may not like it, or agree with the interpretation. And the handfull of skeptics (who never actually show any data supporting their view, btw) may not agree with it. But the data is out there, published in peer-reviewed scientific journals by scientists who aren't running to Drudge for notoriety, with a very large majority of scientists agreeing with their assessment. If anything, the cult/religion analogy is more apt for the skeptics who seem to bluster and seek out the spotlight, yet never show any data supporting their views.
Johnny Coli Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 I asked if you accepted the possibility. I did answer. I said "no." Anyway, you are clearly a smart man and a naive kid. Forty is the new twenty.
John Adams Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Prius/hybrids were not brought to market as "green" vehicles, but as "high mileage" ones. Oh sure.....they have tacked on "less polluting" to their marketing plans NOW. But orginally? No. On edit.....the original objective of the Prius WAS partly environment in nature. But that was in 1994, according to wiki. Im talking now....what "solution" put forth NOW does NOT involve some "tax" or "fee"? So you already agree that the Prius pops your bubble. How about the renewal of the local grocer and push for locallygrown produce? Face it: there are lots of commercial products that have been developed to help the environment and lots of people buy those products. Global Warming is not all about the government and some power grab.
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 How much pollution will occur when the owners have to shell out thousands of $ to replace the batteries soon? One reason why I refuse to by the new CFl bulbs... I would just end up pitching them in the regular trash. I can't wait till these white elephants (Pirus') start hitting the used car market! The fun is really gonna begin! I can't wait to see what the poor slep out there does with them and their parts. It is all fine and dandy living in distubia and upgrading these things routinely, until the get old. Sometimes people have good intentions... It doesn't mean things will be any better, actually they could end up worse. Just take at look at zebra mussles and their introduction into the Great Lakes. Not saying we should stop trying to find a better way, but we should stop and think of ALL the consequences.
Johnny Coli Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Well the temperature has cooled in the last 8 years globally. Is that the effects of global warming? Wow. No, it hasn't been cooling.
KD in CA Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 So you already agree that the Prius pops your bubble. Speaking of hybrids, I just bought a Toyota Highlander. The Hybrid version was thousands of dollars more but doesn't get better gas mileage! In fact, on the highway, it gets worse mileage! Nice money grab there. There are a lot of smart things you can and should do to help the environment; locally grown organic food being the one we try to follow (mostly because of all the nasty sh-- they spray on food). But Rk has a good point about Gov't using this as another chance to limit freedoms and steal from the populous -- oops I mean "raise revenue".
DC Tom Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Wrong. There is a large data set of actual science--a data set that is being added to constantly--suggesting humans are causing global warming. That's not superstition (like religion). That is very real data. You may not like it, or agree with the interpretation. And the handfull of skeptics (who never actually show any data supporting their view, btw) may not agree with it. But the data is out there, published in peer-reviewed scientific journals by scientists who aren't running to Drudge for notoriety, with a very large majority of scientists agreeing with their assessment. If anything, the cult/religion analogy is more apt for the skeptics who seem to bluster and seek out the spotlight, yet never show any data supporting their views. Wrong. The science has been perverted because the large data set is considered beyond question, and any contrary research is marginalized simply because it is contrary research. That is the complete antithesis of the scientific method. It is, however, consistent with religious methodology.
Johnny Coli Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Speaking of hybrids, I just bought a Toyota Highlander. The Hybrid version was thousands of dollars more but doesn't get better gas mileage! In fact, on the highway, it gets worse mileage! Nice money grab there. There are a lot of smart things you can and should do to help the environment; locally grown organic food being the one we try to follow (mostly because of all the nasty sh-- they spray on food). But Rk has a good point about Gov't using this as another chance to limit freedoms and steal from the populous -- oops I mean "raise revenue". Except it hasn't. In fact, the past eight years have been about as anti-science as any have seen, with respect to the (Bush) Administration's relationship and attitude towards science. People have been yammerring about some intrusion of their rights and a tax blood-bath, yet no where has that been seen. Not even in very science-friendly, non-skeptical of global warming states. In fact, Massachusetts' Green Industry is actually thriving.
DC Tom Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Wow. No, it hasn't been cooling. Not to defend a cringing idiot...but most of that data on that page supports his position better than it does yours. And deriving long-term trends from short-term data is STILL STUPID!!!
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Today is garbage day at home... It is amazing how many cans of garbage people leave out... WTF are they consuming?
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Wrong. The science has been perverted because the large data set is considered beyond question, and any contrary research is marginalized simply because it is contrary research. That is the complete antithesis of the scientific method. It is, however, consistent with religious methodology. BINGO! Good post.
Johnny Coli Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Not to defend a cringing idiot...but most of that data on that page supports his position better than it does yours. And deriving long-term trends from short-term data is STILL STUPID!!! Not in any way shape or form has it been cooling over the last eight years. No data on that page even remotely shows that the global surface temp is cooling. In fact, Hanson et al go out of their way to repeatedly make the point that that isn't the case. You know, Tom, just because you say it's stupid doesn't necessarily make it so.
Recommended Posts