President Bush 1: Crazy Environmentalists 0

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Why do you think I don't have any hobbies? I'm fairly active on chess side of this site.

That, I´ve noticed 🙂

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Do you know what life would be like if we attempted to reduce global emissions at 50% by 2050? Try imagining how they lived during the time of the American Civil War -- because that's the last time we were even close to living like that. Wouldn't you agree that it would be most unpleasant to give up air conditioning, central heating, cars, refrig ...[text shortened]... the wealth of the United States and use it to fund the United Nation's anti-poverty programs?

If we fail to decrease our consumption of oil by 2050 (and even increased it?), could the oil become so scare by 2050 that we would be forced to rapidly make at least a 50% cut anyway? -in which case, we would have to “give up air conditioning, central heating, cars, refrigerators, big screen TVs, etc “ because we wouldn’t have bought ourselves enough time to develop reasonably economically viable alternatives -(actually I think it would be worse than that for it may cause a world famine).

Originally posted by Wheely
Perhaps you should get yourself a hobby or something.

Wait a second. Are you suggesting that spending hours scanning the internet for links to right wing news articles then cutting and pasting them into this forum in an attempt to bludgeon left wing euro socialists into submission isn't a valid hobby?

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
I don't deny climate change/global warming -- it's called summer. What I have a problem with is blaming it on economic activity. Without economic activity, then there's no reason for any of us to be here. Fortunately, at the G8 Summit, President Bush schooled the other leaders and brought them back to reality.

You are so FRUSTRATING!!!!! ARGGGG!!!

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
It just drives you insane when I'm right, doesn't it? By the way, douchebag, you still owe me an apology.

You are wrong.

Originally posted by UzumakiAi
You are wrong.

He invariably is ... he can be amusing at times, though ... in a 'sad git' kind of way.

Originally posted by treetalk
He invariably is ... he can be amusing at times, though ... in a 'sad git' kind of way.

I think FRUSTRATING and INFURIATING are better words.... He upsets me a lot sometimes with his lack of understanding, and the way any conservative news article convinces him instantly and yet he puts liberal or normal thought through a series of tests that can't be overcome... Oh, whatever.

Originally posted by UzumakiAi
I think FRUSTRATING and INFURIATING are better words.... He upsets me a lot sometimes with his lack of understanding, and the way any conservative news article convinces him instantly and yet he puts liberal or normal thought through a series of tests that can't be overcome... Oh, whatever.

Yes, it is simply not worth responding to the site's resident CARTMAN.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
I don't deny climate change/global warming -- it's called summer. What I have a problem with is blaming it on economic activity. Without economic activity, then there's no reason for any of us to be here. Fortunately, at the G8 Summit, President Bush schooled the other leaders and brought them back to reality.

Um, NO. It's not called Summer. What you are referring to is "Season" and/or "Weather". Weather and Climate are two entirely different things.

Before denying climate change, you might want to learn what it actually is.


Climate: Climate is the average and variations of weather in a region over long periods of time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate

Originally posted by Sickboy
Um, NO. It's not called Summer. What you are referring to is "Season" and/or "Weather". Weather and Climate are two entirely different things.

Before denying climate change, you might want to learn what it actually is.


Climate: Climate is the average and variations of weather in a region over [b]long periods of time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate[/b]

I don't think he'll believe you. Wikipedia is just TOO liberal. And fox news disagrees.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Do you know what life would be like if we attempted to reduce global emissions at 50% by 2050? Try imagining how they lived during the time of the American Civil War -- because that's the last time we were even close to living like that. Wouldn't you agree that it would be most unpleasant to give up air conditioning, central heating, cars, refrig ...[text shortened]... the wealth of the United States and use it to fund the United Nation's anti-poverty programs?

Why would you have to give up air conditioning etc? There are many ways to produce electricity that don't involve burning fossil fuels.

Originally posted by howardgee
Yes, it is simply not worth responding to the site's resident CARTMAN.

Oh yeah? Well you're the site's resident FARTMAN! You're also the same douchebag that makes unfounded accusations that people people cheat at chess simply because you don't like their point of view and because they don't share your delusion that the sky is falling. Face it Howie, I'm better than you...in all areas.

Originally posted by The Snapper
'Without economic activity, then there's no reason for any of us to be here.

My deepest sympathies.

Descartes 1644 : I think therefore I am
dSR 2008 : I spend therefore I am.

364 years and apparently we've progressed. 🙄

Originally posted by kmax87
Descartes 1644 : I think therefore I am
dSR 2008 : I spend therefore I am.

364 years and apparently we've progressed. 🙄

Good post! Short and to the point.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Oh yeah? Well you're the site's resident FARTMAN! You're also the same douchebag that makes unfounded accusations that people people cheat at chess simply because you don't like their point of view and because they don't share your delusion that the sky is falling. Face it Howie, I'm better than you...in all areas.

Wow, when DSR gets angry, it's pretty predictable what he'll do.

Instead of trying to find a reasonable argument and solution to arguments facing him (most of which I support, may I add), he debases the conversation to become some sort of flame war, with name-calling galore. He'd make a good US army officer ... and that's about all he'd be good at, chess rating notwithstanding. But if he were a professional chess player and someone smoked him in a live over-the-table tournament, he wouldn't say "Good game;" he'd say something that, if I posted it here, would undoubtedly get me banned from the forum.