There Is No Debate About "Global Warming"

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    There Is No Debate About "Global Warming"

    James Lawrence Powell

     

    ......Powell reviewed 13,950 peer-reviewed scientific articles published between January 1991 and November 9, 2012 that mentioned --global warming-- or --global climate change--. The grand total of articles that questioned global warming or whether rising emissions are the cause: 24. That's 0.17 percent of all the literature on the topic....

    http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/11/15/why-climate-deniers-have-no-credibility-science-one-pie-chart

    ....The articles have a total of 33,690 individual authors. The top ten countries represented, in order, are USA, England, China, Germany, Japan, Canada, Australia, France, Spain, and Netherlands. (The chart shows results through 9 November 2012.)....



     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    No debate that the earth has warmed and cooled now or ever really in my mind.

    The debate is how much, how much is caused by man and how much man can do about it!

     

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

    Guess crystal balls are ok to use for certain people...



    Yes.

    I guess I sum up the warmist/alarmist opinion this way:

     

    It's happening, people are causing all of it, we can't possibly stop it, so let's become socialists.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    Matty is playing Harry Ried again.

    I thought the outdated the earth has a fever meme went out 2-3 years ago.  Yes climate change is real, its always been real.  Frankly I'm more concerned about our impact on the environment from a health perspective of clean air and water.  Let's focus on those and if we get those then we'll most likely address mankinds impact on the climate.

     

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    In response to NO MO O's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

    Guess crystal balls are ok to use for certain people...



    Yes.

    I guess I sum up the warmist/alarmist opinion this way:

     

    It's happening, people are causing all of it, we can't possibly stop it, so let's become socialists. and tax the cr@p out of workers in the process.




    Minor correction.



    a much needed correction in order to tell the whole global warming mythology according to Gore.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    The trouble is that, without tracking every last atom on Earth, there is never going to be an exact enough answer that everyone can agree upon for just how much man is contributing for holdouts like tvoter to support politicians who want to do something.


    First they denied that man had any impact on warming. When confronted with overwhelming evidence and consensus to the contrary, they retreat to "ok ok. Man is having an impact. But since you can't tell me to the tenth decimal the degree of impact, well, we just shouldn't do a single thing at all."

     

    Which is nonsense. If a person applied that sort of reasoning to living their lives, they would be paralyzed in inaction until the foreclosure firm tossed them out on the street. And then they'd probably starve to death because they couldn't decide which street would yield the most in begging returns.

     

    But hey, at least our children and grandchildren will be paying the price. F**k 'em. Right?



    You logic has a hole in it.  Of course man has an impact.  Cows have about ten times the impact. So, I suggest you get the cows to all sign an anti-flatuence pledge first, then I'm all ears.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from polar123. Show polar123's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

     I recently went hiking in the Northern Cascade Mountains, famous for the number of spectacular glaciers. The problem is that most of them are gone, or recceding at an alarming rate. Some of the larger Glaciers have lost up to 1/4 of their mass, which is a direct result of less snowfall and higher temperatures(almost 2 full degrees warmer in 2012 that it was in the mid 1950's) Scientists attribute higher levels of Carbon Dioxide in the ice pack and atmosphere as a main cause of the melting, these are man-made gases from burning fossil fuels.

    Every year I go back, the snow pack gets lighter and the glaciers get smaller. From what I've seen, global warming is for real.

     

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    You logic has a hole in it.  Of course man has an impact.  Cows have about ten times the impact. So, I suggest you get the cows to all sign an anti-flatuence pledge first, then I'm all ears.



    What you're not getting is that cow flatu(l)ence is not the problem, per se.

    The problem breaks down to, in part: a) the consumption habits of people who eat the cow meat and b) the climate damage from the feed lots where the cows are kept.

     

    This is to say nothing about the volume of methane coming from a lot of peoples' mouths...for instance, the terribly discredited climate change deniers.

     

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from FaolanofEssex. Show FaolanofEssex's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    The US has approximately 5 % of the world's population. Yet we are responsible for over 30% of the world's solid waste ( trash). Lets start there.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from FaolanofEssex. Show FaolanofEssex's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    The US has approximately 5 % of the world's population. Yet we are responsible for over 30% of the world's solid waste ( trash). Lets start there.



    Ok, how? Could you offer specifics? Should we hoard instead of throwing away our trash? What are your specifics?




    For one thing, we should think about how we package things. Convenience = added trash. Recycle more - we are last in modern nations in this. Raise gas and oil prices to the level where people practice conservation. Stop burning so much fossil fuels.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    You logic has a hole in it.  Of course man has an impact.  Cows have about ten times the impact. So, I suggest you get the cows to all sign an anti-flatuence pledge first, then I'm all ears.




    The problem breaks down to, in part: a) the consumption habits of people who eat the cow meat and b) the climate damage from the feed lots where the cows are kept.

     



    So right now, what can we do (besides not breathe?) to lessen the impact of our consumption "habits"? What can we do now? We still need to heat our homes in winter and cool them in the summer. And saying things like car pooling is a joke because it's not realistic for majority of people. Same goes for walking to work, biking to work or taking public transportation. Those who can walk, bike or take public transportation already do...i.e. people who live and work in or just outside of cities like Boston, NY, Chicago, etc. for example.

    Sure the govt can lower emissions but that won't have immediate affect. Plus we're not the only ones who drive. How about India and China?

    What should be done with the feed lots to lessen the damage? 

    I'm all for hearing solutions but all I ever hear are things that won't have immediate impact. This of course doesn't mean we shouldn't do them, but if it's as dire as I keep reading about then we need changes NOW.

     

     



    Those are a lot of different questions with different answers.

    As you've mentioned viz. another social issue (obesity), information is the first step.  We have to acknowledge the situation before we can adapt as a species.

    This means giving no quarter to the propagandists who insist that the earth "will right itself" and no action is necessary.  (Maybe it will...but if so, it will be without Us.)

    Then, it's important to understand the connections to everything we do, whether it's driving a car, eating meat, heating our homes, etc.  The individual things we can do are indeed very small, but that just means there's less of an excuse for doing it in the first place.

    Re: obesity...it's like everyone who needs to lose weight loses 5 punds all at once and keeps it off.  The end-toll of health care savings would be enormous.  Conservation is like that, IMO.

    (On public transportation, I present L.A.  8 million people and next to no public transport.  Lots of cities need it but don't have it; very few have it and don't use it.)

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    In response to NO MO O's comment:

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    The US has approximately 5 % of the world's population. Yet we are responsible for over 30% of the world's solid waste ( trash). Lets start there.



    Ok, how? Could you offer specifics? Should we hoard instead of throwing away our trash? What are your specifics?




    For one thing, we should think about how we package things. Convenience = added trash. Recycle more - we are last in modern nations in this. Raise gas and oil prices to the level where people practice conservation. Stop burning so much fossil fuels.



    Sounds like HCR....

    WE pay X now... we will pay X+Y for the same soon

    The extra we pay goes into some government fund which cannot be audited.

    On top of that.. jack up the price of gas and oil.

    Again, Uncle Obama takes the money and goes shopping.

    Stop burning so much fossil???  Force Americans to consume less by charging more.

    Aren't we on the brink of an economic disater.. and some idiot wants to whack us again on everything we touch or is transported.

     

    F'ing brilliant.



    It IS brilliant actually.  Money is fairly pointless without a world to spend it in.

     

    Here's an idea: If you don't want to spend so much on fuel, then use LESS of it.

     

     

     

     

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    The trouble is that, without tracking every last atom on Earth, there is never going to be an exact enough answer that everyone can agree upon for just how much man is contributing for holdouts like tvoter to support politicians who want to do something.


    First they denied that man had any impact on warming. When confronted with overwhelming evidence and consensus to the contrary, they retreat to "ok ok. Man is having an impact. But since you can't tell me to the tenth decimal the degree of impact, well, we just shouldn't do a single thing at all." 

    Which is nonsense. If a person applied that sort of reasoning to living their lives, they would be paralyzed in inaction until the foreclosure firm tossed them out on the street. And then they'd probably starve to death because they couldn't decide hich street would yield the most in begging returns. 

    But hey, at least our children and grandchildren will be paying the price. F**k 'em. Right?




    WOW are you really that dense?

    Whow ever said we should do nothing?

    I think we should absolutely look at clean alternatives in a realistic way to reduce harmful emissions.

    The honest truth is emissions have been drastically reduced the last 30 years with volunteer programs and incentive.

    Water is much much ceaner now than then.

    All I am against (ALL I AM AGAINST) is putting in govt regulations and restrictions that hinder energy companies alot of small businesses ability to stay in business, expand and maintain our affordable energy supply!!

    Do you even consider how much it hurts business for gas/diesel to go from 1.85 a gallon to 3.80 a gallon??

    Everything is affected in a negative way including and especially consumers and consumer spending!!

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from FaolanofEssex. Show FaolanofEssex's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    The US has approximately 5 % of the world's population. Yet we are responsible for over 30% of the world's solid waste ( trash). Lets start there.



    Ok, how? Could you offer specifics? Should we hoard instead of throwing away our trash? What are your specifics?




    For one thing, we should think about how we package things. Convenience = added trash. Recycle more - we are last in modern nations in this. Raise gas and oil prices to the level where people practice conservation. Stop burning so much fossil fuels.



    Packaging is up to govt to demand companies package things differently. But do you have examples of things that are excessively packaged?

    I see recycling bins all over the place. On trash day in front of peoples homes, in many stores, etc. Not sure how much more recycling we can do. 

    Stop buring so much fossil fuels? Like what for example?

     




    Oil for one. We recycle here.  But that is not true of much of the country. Most everything considered "convenient is excessively packaged. most takeout , fast food, etc. Electronics. Perhaps the saddest thing is the amount of food we throw out.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: There Is No Debate About

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Frankly I'm more concerned about our impact on the environment from a health perspective of clean air and water.  Let's focus on those and if we get those then we'll most likely address mankinds impact on the climate.



    I don't see why we should only focus on one at a time. But we are focusing on clean air and water. Republicans want us to stop because "regulations kill jobs."

     

     

     

     

    PS: Ryan wanted to cut the agency that is responsible for focusing on the pollutants you think should be focused on.

    ok ok. He didn't specifically name the EPA, he just wanted to cut everything after $100 billion or so. 



    I deal with the EPA on pernitting transportation projects; they are out of control and need to be reigned in and brought back to reality.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share