Possible global cooling?

[Easy Rhino]

What exactly are you saying? Why would 40 years of it not happening have any bearing on whether or not it happens? Planetary events are slow and human lives are short.

so you would believe anything these people say then? because it might happen. do you also believe that paster that has wrongly predicted the end of the world because that might happen too

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

so you would believe anything these people say then? because it might happen. do you also believe that paster that has wrongly predicted the end of the world because that might happen too

No. That response doesn't even make sense. Wth man.

 

[Easy Rhino]

did you hear about the pastor who said the world was gonna end and was wrong? would you believe him a second time if he made the same claim? then why would you do the same thing with climatologists?

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

did you hear about the pastor who said the world was gonna end and was wrong? would you believe him a second time if he made the same claim? then why would you do the same thing with climatologists?

No no. I'm saying it doesn't make sense because it was idiotic and had nothing to do with anything being discussed, it seemed to just be a deflection. You should focus on defending your first statement or not say anything at all. By just saying random crap instead of defending your prior statement it makes your whole stance seem based on personal issues rather than logic.

 

[TheMailMan78]

No no. I'm saying it doesn't make sense because it was idiotic and had nothing to do with anything being discussed, it seemed to just be a deflection. You should focus on defending your first statement or not say anything at all. By just saying random crap instead of defending your prior statement it makes your whole stance seem based on personal issues rather than logic.

I understood him just fine. Don't be mad because he attacked Al Gore lol

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

It's hard to figure how serious you are. What I said was rather independent of a stance on the issue, it just flatly called out the shallowness of his statement with a rather flat logic. Causing you both to have extremely empty responses that belittle your entire stance on the issue. Say something substantive or stop digging yourselves into holes.

For the record, I find Al Gore a bit ridiculous.

My overall point here is that in the whole of this thread I’m not seeing anyone who knows Wtf they’re on about. Supporters who don’t understand everything involved who seem to be supporting it out of personal feelings, and people opposed who either don’t want to understand what’s involved or simple can’t, often, again, due to personal issues. Perhaps I’m being unreasonable, as I find the scientists themselves to be idiots. They’re too specialized, their information sources to narrow. They can’t see and comprehend all the factors at once, even when the information is out there for anyone to utilize.

 

[TheMailMan78]

It's hard to figure how serious you are. What I said was rather independent of a stance on the issue, it just flatly called out the shallowness of his statement with a rather flat logic. Causing you both to have extremely empty responses that belittle your entire stance on the issue. Say something substantive or stop digging yourselves into holes.

For the record, I find Al Gore a bit ridiculous.

My overall point here is that in the whole of this thread I’m not seeing anyone who knows Wtf they’re on about. Supporters who don’t understand everything involved who seem to be supporting it out of personal feelings, and people opposed who either don’t want to understand what’s involved or simple can’t, often, again, due to personal issues. Perhaps I’m being unreasonable, as I find the scientists themselves to be idiots. They’re too specialized, their information sources to narrow. They can’t see and comprehend all the factors at once, even when the information is out there for anyone to utilize.

Unlike you who sees the big picture huh?

 

[m4gicfour]

Oh holy hell. There's more than two perspectives. Quit being George Fucking W Bush. "You're either with us or against us". NO. I'm with you when you're right and deserve an ally. Attack Afghanistan, go after the SOB who brought down the towers. Fuck Yeah. I'm right there with you. Go attack Denmark and see how many people switch sides George.

Climate change IS an issue. The climate is changing. Is that because of us? Yes. Not completely, or perhaps even mostly, but we sure aren't helping. Does that give every company on the planet a reason to rape you on "green" products? No, but you can be sure they will. Of course every company that makes "green" products is playing it up all they can. Governments are too, because many people are too stupid to think for themselves and they just parrot the morons they see on TV. Governments, like it or not, are majority rule. That's money or people, depending on the specific member and how corrupt they are.

Assuming that the climate fluctuates to the degrees the scientists are worried they will (Regardless of whether that's natural or sparked by our actions... and who knows if they'll be right. I didn't do any empirical scientific studies, so I will refrain from passing judgement) IF they are right, we need to figure out what to do about it, or many people will die. Mass extinctions are bad. For all our technology we'd be fucked if the bottom 1/4 of the food chain dissapeared.



Does that mean I'm going to go out and buy a prius and tattoo al gore's face on my ass? No. I'm not going to waste a shitload of gas driving some piece of shit hummer though either. Mainly because it's ugly as sin and gas is expensive, but hey, if I can drive a cheap car that gets me from A to B and I don't have to listen to some idiot in the parking lot whining about greenhouse gasses, that'll be what I do. I'm not going to go pour oil down a storm drain so I can gloat when the world doesn't spontaneously explode.


Oh and BTW, I don't really give a shit. Flame on if you must. This post wasn't directed at any particular person, just the attitude this thread is taking

 

[qubit]

Climate change IS an issue. The climate is changing. Is that because of us? Yes. Not completely, or perhaps even mostly, but we sure aren't helping. Does that give every company on the planet a reason to rape you on "green" products? No, but you can be sure they will. Of course every company that makes "green" products is playing it up all they can. Governments are too, because many people are too stupid to think for themselves and they just parrot the morons they see on TV. Governments, like it or not, are majority rule. That's money or people, depending on the specific member and how corrupt they are.

Yup, what I said a few posts ago, but better.

 

[Easy Rhino]

here is the problem. al gore made climate science political. we know he is a flaming liberal who believes that HE should control wealth redistribution. meanwhile he owns a gigantic house which requires shit tons of energy to heat and keep cool. not to mention his entire fleet of vehicles he owns. most of the IPCC act the same way as well as big time liberal politicians. i will tell you what, the day i see the scientists and politicians who support man made climate change actually CHANGE their lifestyles FIRST then i will start taking it seriously. until then they are a bunch of fear mongering, self promoting opportunists.

 

[twilyth]

From ancient ice core and other sources for prehistoric climate data, there doesn't seem to be much doubt that high levels of CO2 are tightly correlated with periods high mean temperatures globally. And while that doesn't prove cause and effect, it's pretty damned close.

If we had no idea what the mechanism was by which such gases raise the temperature, then some skepticism might be warranted. But we understand that certain gases reflect infrared radiation and the more of those gases you have, the more radiation gets trapped.

There might be some countervailing factors like the decrease in sun spot activity which might lessen the impact of high CO2 levels, at least temporarily, but that doesn't mean that Co2 is irrelevant.

The real question is how urgent is the problem. And the reason you get a certain amount of hysteria there is because we don't really understand climate well enough to predict the effects of increasing CO2 levels. For example it's possible that at some point the climate changes in a non-linear way in response to CO2 - the so-called tipping-point situation.

The point is that the longer the problem is ignored, the more likely we are to see consequences as a result.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

i will tell you what, the day i see the scientists and politicians who support man made climate change actually CHANGE their lifestyles FIRST then i will start taking it seriously. until then they are a bunch of fear mongering, self promoting opportunists.

I'd be interested to see if you'd really hold true to that, or if you'd just make something else the focus of your argument.

Personally I dislike lifestyle change solutions. Food is bad for you? Engineer better food. I recall reading once about some reverse sugar or w/e that bacteria and your body couldn't absorb but that tasted and cooked the same. That alone would relieve a massive health burden for your gut and your teeth while maintaining "bad" eating habits. Climate change? Just force technological developments. Fusion is on the verge of being viable. Renewable energy can be cheaper in the long run for business. Gas mileage is going up considerably, even in pickups. Weather control is constantly advancing. Who needs to change? I agree we need to take some responsibility but we also need our vices...

 

[Easy Rhino]

I'm not diverting my argument. if you believe something as important as climate change then you better adjust your own lifestyle first, not demand others do it for you. hypocrites! they are the wealthy that can actually afford the expensive green alternatives yet they dont buy them. they create ideas about carbon taxation which they can directly benefit from. i dont buy their shit for one second.

 

[cadaveca]

they create ideas about carbon taxation which they can directly benefit from.

The problem is that removing cardon dioxide from the atmosphere, at 3 parts per million, isn't economical.

Carbon taxation is an effort to make it economical.

Branson offered millions to anyone who could come up with an idea that'd even be slightly in the black.

He paid nothing.

 

[Easy Rhino]

Carbon taxation is an effort to make it economical.

it won't make it economical, only profitable for politicians and corporatists.

 

[cadaveca]

it won't make it economical, only profitable for politicians and corporatists.

Who are the ones running the companies and paying the contracts to businesses that employ the peons.

So what?

The tertiary point is job creation.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

I'm not diverting my argument. if you believe something as important as climate change then you better adjust your own lifestyle first, not demand others do it for you. hypocrites! they are the wealthy that can actually afford the expensive green alternatives yet they dont buy them. they create ideas about carbon taxation which they can directly benefit from. i dont buy their shit for one second.

Then forget about them and dig up every scrap of data you can and analyze it yourself. Don't bitch about al gore politicizing it when it has to bearing on it's merits. You don't buy it because you don't want to buy it, regardless of the messenger... or because of it, I'm not sure which. Neither seems logical to me.

 

[Sir B. Fannybottom]

The way I see it, global cooling= better case temperatures...

 

[TheMailMan78]

Who are the ones running the companies and paying the contracts to businesses that employ the peons.

So what?

The tertiary point is job creation.

Trickle down economics work only with a green economy now?

Then forget about them and dig up every scrap of data you can and analyze it yourself. Don't bitch about al gore politicizing it when it has to bearing on it's merits. You don't buy it because you don't want to buy it, regardless of the messenger... or because of it, I'm not sure which. Neither seems logical to me.

Easy is right. Until I see some of these elitist "walk the walk" Ill take the whole green economy thing with a grain of salt.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Expanding into what?

The rest of the universe. There was likely an implosion before the big bang which created a gap in the universe. The "known" universe is expanding at an increasing rate in order to fill the gap. Light has a limited velocity so we simply can't see beyond about 14 billion light years in distance (or 28 billion light years on the assumption the rest of the universe is expanding towards the gap). The gap could easily be 100s if not thousands of billions of light years across. It is impossible to know.


All that is known is that the mean temperature of Earth has increased since the 1970s. No concrete conclusions can be drawn from less than 40 years of data. Hell, we can't even acurately predict if a storm will hit tomorrow, its location, it's direction, nor its intensity. All we make is educated guesses and those educated guesses are based on hundreds of years of data.

One group of people claim it's warming, another group claims it's cooling, and I say there ain't enough information.


Virtually everything "green" is bullshit/marketing gimmick. Hell, Jimmy Carter had solar panels installed on the White House and Ronald Reagan removed them seven years later because they were "not cost-effective."

 

[Damn_Smooth]

did you hear about the pastor who said the world was gonna end and was wrong? would you believe him a second time if he made the same claim? then why would you do the same thing with climatologists?

Actually, this last prediction was the guy's 3rd end of the world prediction and the same morons fell for it the first 2 times also.

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

His next one is October 21st, so make sure you're prepared.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

His next one is October 21st, so make sure you're prepared.

..for Halloween!

 

[MilkyWay]

Whether or not you believe in human impact on climate change cutting CO2 emissions can only be a good thing. Also cars are a big problem in the world with congestion increasing and fuel consumption increasing while fuel is depleting. Saving energy and recycling has its benefits too a lot of which are not emissions related benefits.

Taxing businesses and consumers indirectly is stupid since people will not change they will just pay the increased taxes. What they really need to do is get these new technologies out the door instead of saying only another 5 years... only another 10 years. Wtf happened to hydrogen powered engines? and wtf happened to carbon capture?

Fusion is old news from decades ago and is still in development i hear about it every single year that its only x years away.

The only reason nothing changes is because the world is based on making a profit, that is why "green" is sold to us as products and commodities and not based on purely a humanitarian effort.

I don't understand as far as i can tell humans have increased "greenhouse" emissions since the industrial revolution, they take data from ice core samples btw. Also there is trapped methane under the ice and if the ice melts it will release. Some say trapped oxygen in the ice and water would cause a global ice age but other say it wont have an effect. Temps increase and decrease naturally but to what extent humans have effected that i have no idea, no ones given me strong enough evidence in either camp but cant hurt to cut emissions anyway since it has other benefits.

HA well Mailman is right about the cutting down of the Amazon but it was partially fuelled by American consumption, mining ore and logging, cheap cattle farming ect.

EDIT:

Actually, this last prediction was the guy's 3rd end of the world prediction and the same morons fell for it the first 2 times also.

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

His next one is October 21st, so make sure you're prepared.

Hes just like that burn a Qur'an day guy, out there for the attention i think.

 

[cadaveca]

Trickle down economics work only with a green economy now?

Not at all, however, creation of a new GLOBAL economic influencer is something that must not be overlooked.

I hold no opinion in the general subject, but I do think creation of jobs and such makes it almost excusable, if wrong.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Not at all, however, creation of a new GLOBAL economic influencer is something that must not be overlooked.

I hold no opinion in the general subject, but I do think creation of jobs and such makes it almost excusable, if wrong.

I personally will not buy anything unless I am sure it will drown polar bears.