20 Sep 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziThat's just it. There is no Bible. It is what you want it to be at any given moment.
al gore is not global warming's messiah.
unconvenient truth is not global warming's bible
So there is unbearable cold? Don't call it global warming anymore, call it climate change and blame carbon emissions.
20 Sep 15
Originally posted by whodeyWhy can't the climate change be caused by other things, like clouds and solar activity?
Why is it ludicrous? Why is it ludicrous to expect politicians to tell us the truth about something so personal and economically important as health care?
What is more important than our health and income? Anyone else would be thrown in jail about lying about such important things.
Henrik Svensmark - Galactic Cosmic Rays causes climate change
20 Sep 15
Originally posted by RJHindsCimate change can be caused by other things.
Why can't the climate change be caused by other things, like clouds and solar activity?
Henrik Svensmark - Galactic Cosmic Rays causes climate change
[youtube]EpDDqGqN16s[/youtube]
And it can be caused by human actions.
And it can be aggrevated or slowed down by human actions or by desisting from some actions.
Most people think humanity ought to deploy its resources to protect the future welfare of humanity.
Those who oppose such actions are shown repeatedly to be defending vested interests.
The tobacco industry and cancer, the food industry in the USA and the obesity epidemic caused by irresponsible use of excessive sugar (especially corn syrup to make money for industrial farmers), the big pharmaceutical corporations and skewed health practices, as well as the oil industry and the need to defend the insane asset values of their oil reserves, all are examples of vested interest acting selfishly and deplorably at the expense of the public.
Most people favour action by democratically elected governments. The American Right has become anti democratic and prefers unaccountable, demonstrably irresponsible corporations to pursue greed at the expense of the public without proper regulation. They are developing more and more devices (like the ongoing free trade agreements) to diminish the power of elected government to develop and implement policies for the greater good.
20 Sep 15
Originally posted by finneganTrue dat.
Cimate change can be caused by other things.
And it can be caused by human actions.
And it can be aggrevated or slowed down by human actions or by desisting from some actions.
Most people think humanity ought to deploy its resources to protect the future welfare of humanity.
Those who oppose such actions are shown repeatedly to be defending ...[text shortened]... diminish the power of elected government to develop and implement policies for the greater good.
Originally posted by whodeyal gore's piece of entertainment is not the bible. that doesn't mean global warming is up for debate, just because a movie from 10 years ago might have some inaccuracies.
That's just it. There is no Bible. It is what you want it to be at any given moment.
So there is unbearable cold? Don't call it global warming anymore, call it climate change and blame carbon emissions.
whether global warming is real is not up for debate. it is real. period.
whether we will be facing trouble because of the damage we cause to the environment is not up for debate. we will be getting all kinds of unpleasantness.
what is up for debate is only if our children or our grandchildren will have to deal with the mess.
what is up for debate is only how many inland towns will be flooded after new york, new delhi, shanghai, beijing will be sleeping with the fishes.
what is up for debate is only how much can we save if we start fixing this now.
20 Sep 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziLMAO !!! 😲😀🙄
al gore's piece of entertainment is not the bible. that doesn't mean global warming is up for debate, just because a movie from 10 years ago might have some inaccuracies.
whether global warming is real is not up for debate. it is real. period.
whether we will be facing trouble because of the damage we cause to the environment is not up for debate. we w ...[text shortened]... ith the fishes.
what is up for debate is only how much can we save if we start fixing this now.
20 Sep 15
Originally posted by finneganMaybe, but I believe the "man-made" global warming scare is more hype than truth. I am of the opinion that climate change is mainly due to solar and cosmic activity that effects cloud cover, etc. just as the scientists on the video pointed out.
Cimate change can be caused by other things.
And it can be caused by human actions.
And it can be aggrevated or slowed down by human actions or by desisting from some actions.
Most people think humanity ought to deploy its resources to protect the future welfare of humanity.
Those who oppose such actions are shown repeatedly to be defending ...[text shortened]... diminish the power of elected government to develop and implement policies for the greater good.
I don't see that it would be practical to ruin the economy any more than it already is by putting too much effort in stopping CO2 emissions when we can't force the whole world to do the same. It is not even clear it would help climate change even if we could.
20 Sep 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziIt is clear that Al Gore saw global warming as a way to pad his wallet.
al gore's piece of entertainment is not the bible. that doesn't mean global warming is up for debate, just because a movie from 10 years ago might have some inaccuracies.
whether global warming is real is not up for debate. it is real. period.
whether we will be facing trouble because of the damage we cause to the environment is not up for debate. we w ...[text shortened]... ith the fishes.
what is up for debate is only how much can we save if we start fixing this now.
Originally posted by RJHindsIt is interesting that you fail to acknowledge the concept of risk. Maybe your smug complacency will turn out to be justified but a lot of serious science says you are a fkg idiot not to take precautions. In addition, a lot of fairly accessible investigation has demonstrated that climate change denial is driven by wealthy corporations and individuals with a vested interest to act contrary to the public good. You are spouting their propaganda for them. You have nothing useful to contribute to the debate.
Maybe, but I believe the "man-made" global warming scare is more hype than truth. I am of the opinion that climate change is mainly due to solar and cosmic activity that effects cloud cover, etc. just as the scientists on the video pointed out.
I don't see that it would be practical to ruin the economy any more than it already is by putting too much effor ...[text shortened]... whole world to do the same. It is not even clear it would help climate change even if we could.
Originally posted by finneganYes, and the same argument goes for the propaganda coming form the other side. The destruction of property rights, the growth of guvamint and the growth of corporations going for a ride on green hysteria.
It is interesting that you fail to acknowledge the concept of risk. Maybe your smug complacency will turn out to be justified but a lot of serious science says you are a fkg idiot not to take precautions. In addition, a lot of fairly accessible investigation has demonstrated that climate change denial is driven by wealthy corporations and individuals with ...[text shortened]... You are spouting their propaganda for them. You have nothing useful to contribute to the debate.
What we need to ascertain is how much warmer it is now than what it 'should' be.
zahlardi assures us you can 'google the exact amount'.
- Joined
- 15 Oct 10
- Moves
- 98630
21 Sep 15
Originally posted by WajomaIn your mind are the risks of 1) the destruction of property rights (that's a tad hysterical) the growth of govamint (sic) and the growth of corporations, and 2) the destruction of the planet, equivalent ?
Yes, and the same argument goes for the propaganda coming form the other side. The destruction of property rights, the growth of guvamint and the growth of corporations going for a ride on green hysteria.
What we need to ascertain is how much warmer it is now than what it 'should' be.
zahlardi assures us you can 'google the exact amount'.
If so, thank you very much, we don't need to talk anymore and, if not, your argument needs a lot of work.
21 Sep 15
Originally posted by whodeyDidn't I read somewhere that the 'there's no global warming' group was financed by big money from coal companies?
http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/17/scientists-ask-obama-to-prosecute-global-warming-skeptics/#ixzz3mDx28iSS
Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics
The science on global warming is settled, so settled that 20 climate scientists are asking President Barack Obama to prosecute people who disagree with them on the science behind man-made ...[text shortened]... fossil fuels, have engaged in a misinformation campaign to confuse the public on global warming.
Sounds like criminal behaviour to me.
Paying to forge results to influence policy?