Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Climate Change NOT Debunked
- Thread starter Pilgrim
- Start date
I never said there couldn't be.
It's an argument because we're supposed to believe that Man is seemingly the driving cause behind the Earth's changing and supposedly warming climate.
What percentage of the warming of the planet is due to humans? What percent is natural warming and cooling? No one knows the answers to these questions, yet we're supposed to swallow whole the idea that Man's is the reason the planet "has a fever" which is such a ludicrous concept I can't even wrap my head around it.
Does man have an influence on the global temperature? Probably. Is it going to kill everything here? Almost certainly not. Honestly, the planet has shown more ecological and environmental diversity when the average temperature was hotter, so how do we know this is the ideal temperature? I find myself in agreement with munjibunga when he thinks it a bit arrogant to believe we have the impact we're supposed to believe we do.
The reason I'm so fired up about this though is the hypocrisy that those who would claim to be interested in preventing this. Look at the Copenhagen meeting back last year some time. The "carbon footprint" of those two weeks was greater than 60 small countries combined due to the massive amount of pollution created by these people flying in, driving in their own private tanks, essentially, that get less than like 5 miles to the gallon.
You are correct sir. However, that does not mean that continuing that path is either wise or sensible. My point is that we must chance our course, but do so sensibly.
On whose part? and for what gain?
Everything that is politicized is, in one form or another, a power/influence play. You gotta get more specific if you want me to believe you.
Re: our national debt--in the scheme of the world, we're, dare I say, too big to fail.
Re: our national debt--in the scheme of the world, we're, dare I say, too big to fail.
I'm sure that's what they're counting on. Wait until our credit rating slips and oil is no long exchanged in American dollars. We'll all be walking or driving Smart Cars
We're "chancing" our course all right!!Right into China owning us!!!
QWAP!
Typoo Icantfreakinspell strikes again.
On whose part? and for what gain?
Everything that is politicized is, in one form or another, a power/influence play. You gotta get more specific if you want me to believe you.
Re: our national debt--in the scheme of the world, we're, dare I say, too big to fail.
This isn't science that has been politicized, it's politics with a thin veneer of science. Take our poster boy Al Gore, for example. Does anyone believe he has an ounce of scientific expertise or compassion for future generations?
There are two basic ways to get ahead in this world. You can be a producer, or you can be a thief. I put the global warming alarmists squarely in the latter camp.
If you guys think owners of manufacturing facilities in the U.S. (some clean, some not) moving out of the country has much to do with laws enacted as a result of the global-warming debate--as opposed to cheap labor--I want some of what you're smoking.
Given the overall condition of our national budget and the debt that has been generated over the past 10 years, my personal opinion is that expenses caused by addressing climate change are not an immediate problem. The billions in military expenses spent in a couple of countries not on this continent just happen to come to mind. And there's that little economy thing that has bugged us for the last couple of years. Put together, those are much bigger economic issues.
That's exactly what we should be doing.I'm sure that's what they're counting on. Wait until our credit rating slips and oil is no long exchanged in American dollars. We'll all be walking or driving Smart Cars
Cycling too.
A big part of it is that many N. American cities are designed poorly. You should not have to drive 20 minutes to get to work.
When I bought my condo I specifically had proximity in mind. My house is a 10 minute walk from a major mall with all the amenities I require, including a library. My commute to work is a 20 minute bike ride.
I would love to go completely car free, as I did for seven years in my university days, but now I have a young child and its a lot more difficult. There are alot of things I could do better, and those are challenges I will continue to try to meet.
Legitimate political debate has never existed in this country... our parameters of "acceptable ideas" are far too narrow. Beyond that, you could apply the general charge you just levied at Al Gore to any politician, on any issue, and couch it in the framework of "he's using it for political gain."
That's exactly what we should be doing.
Cycling too.
A big part of it is that many N. American cities are designed poorly. You should not have to drive 20 minutes to get to work.
When I bought my condo I specifically had proximity in mind. My house is a 10 minute walk from a major mall with all the amenities I require, including a library. My commute to work is a 20 minute bike ride.
I would love to go completely car free, as I did for seven years in my university days, but now I have a young child and its a lot more difficult. There are alot of things I could do better, and those are challenges I will continue to try to meet.
Thank you. I'm off to fill up both tanks in my truck AND my boat for the weekend
Not strictly a result of the global-warming debate, but largely a result of actions from the anti-capitalist crowd in general--the regulators, the taxers, the banners, the litigators, the unions...the list goes on and on, all part of the same network and having their strings pulled by the same folks.
I'm sorry, I have nothing for you to smoke, look for your dope elsewhere. Try a global warming rally. Lots of stoners posing as caring, in-the-know, responsible citizens there.
That's okay I still love you.Thank you. I'm off to fill up both tanks in my truck AND my boat for the weekend
...And I suppose this is the point where we devolve from debate to baseless insults?
There are people whose raison d'etre is telling other people how to live their lives. You can see them at work in condo associations and city/town government. Those with real ambition head for the national stage. Not every politician has this as his/her goal, but there are enough of them around to cause problems for the rest of us.
^Again, that description adequately fits 95% of the politicians in America today, and all of the politicians who belong to either one of the major parties.
This is correct and those who dismiss the claim do not have science on their side.
But the IPCC report claims more than this. The scientists who were the major contributors to the report and who also wrote the emails are claiming catastrophic consequences from a 2-5 C rise in atmospheric temperatures that will persist for a thousand years - even if we immediately curtail our emissions of CO2.
The science is not on their side, either, as proper science has had to be bypassed in order to reach those conclusions. They know they have abused the methods of science and it has become obvious that they are trying to cover their transgressions by hiding the evidence and lying about it and also attacking their critics.
The real loser here is the reputation of good scientists, including good climatologists who are just doing their jobs as honestly as they can.
