TomSeller
Super Member
Threats and intimating families is over the top. People need to civilly disagree. Those that don't can break from civilization and go live in a cave somewhere.
Look like Global warming was a HOAX after all
- Thread starter Cat_Driver
- Start date
- Views: 12192
- Status
Threats and intimating families is over the top. People need to civilly disagree. Those that don't can break from civilization and go live in a cave somewhere.
k0ua
Epic Contributor
Now that sure was a fair and balanced report... sarcasm font off.
Farmer Dell
New member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2013
- Messages
- 13
- Location
- Stevensville, MD.
- Tractor
- 1953 Farmall Cub - 1964 110 John Deere - 1960 Economy Jim Dandy
I once held a universal refrigeration certification from the feds. The CFC's from refrigerants were supposed to take 40 years, to punch giant holes in the ozone layer; (maybe a 32nd of an inch thick). Over New Zealand, it was said that sheep would go blind from ultra violet light, plant life would be destroyed and so fourth. As a result,the industry changed many refrigerant to isotropic blends (which causes problems when you get a leaky system), changed the tools, couplings ect... yet nothing happened! I also learned that dry cleaners were exempt from spraying CFC's directly onto suites for cleaning, hmm that sounds fishy too...
These type of inconsistencies tells me it is all about money and politics; to include any type of "fossil fuels" which could be produced right here in the USA, and produce more energy than the 1901 oil boom! Green energy is wonderful and all; but no reason has been proven to exists which should hinder or stop production of fossil fuels: drilling, mining, or fracking practices, with modern technology and filtration seems to be safe.
The exceptions have been halted, but the media seems to still generate propaganda on the subject. For me this is all about, promoting one political party over another, and their energy industry buddies, using voodoo science, while attempting to control money, business, and to keep hold of political power, instead of everyone working together for the common good like during WWII.
That's my opinion about what is actually going on nowadays, yet with so much info overload today, it seems you can't prove anything to anyone unwilling to listen.
These type of inconsistencies tells me it is all about money and politics; to include any type of "fossil fuels" which could be produced right here in the USA, and produce more energy than the 1901 oil boom! Green energy is wonderful and all; but no reason has been proven to exists which should hinder or stop production of fossil fuels: drilling, mining, or fracking practices, with modern technology and filtration seems to be safe.
The exceptions have been halted, but the media seems to still generate propaganda on the subject. For me this is all about, promoting one political party over another, and their energy industry buddies, using voodoo science, while attempting to control money, business, and to keep hold of political power, instead of everyone working together for the common good like during WWII.
That's my opinion about what is actually going on nowadays, yet with so much info overload today, it seems you can't prove anything to anyone unwilling to listen.
adventure bob
Platinum Member
I think it may be problematic to look at the earth on a human time scale, which is part of the issue that leads to distrust of those supporting global warming. The earth as a mechanism, as an environment will change. It has changes over time on scales so great that humanity would not have survived those previous changes. In our arrogance we think anything we can do will affect the planet in global ways. There is evidence that at one time the planet was so warm and so high in CO2 levels that plants were the dominant species on the planet. Water was everywhere and the ice caps were minimal. It would appear that the planet has been here before. We were not part of it. We as humans like our little habitat just the way it is and will attempt to do anything to keep the same: change bad! Change is natural and inevitable. Prime example of the arrogance of humans: Mt St Helens. For years those supporting an eco agenda limited and reduced human interaction in the park to ridiculous level in attempt to limit change. They liked the forest and didn't want to see it altered by us. People were even forced to carry out poop. (I always laugh and have to ask: Bear poop is bigger than mine, what about them?) In 18 seconds the mechanism did its thing and 230 sq miles were wiped flat. 490M Kilotons of ash were thrown into the atmosphere. While environmentalists like to point out that volcanoes produce less greenhouse gases than humans, they're always measuring CO2. But if all the other toxic outputs of a volcano are measured, Mt St Helens is one of the largest producers in US History. The environmentalist had spent years, and millions trying to keep the forest pristine and in 8 seconds all of their effort was rendered useless.
Bottom line: Yep the world is changing. Yep we could do some stuff to help with our own environment. It is however arrogant to think this planet will not shake us off like the parasites we are and keep on hurtling through space.
Bottom line: Yep the world is changing. Yep we could do some stuff to help with our own environment. It is however arrogant to think this planet will not shake us off like the parasites we are and keep on hurtling through space.
k0ua
Epic Contributor
Well said.
Pixguy
Elite Member
X2 :thumbsup:
troutsqueezer
Veteran Member
Algore is not a weatherman, so how could he know for sure? Now, Al Roker, he is a weatherman and a good one, I know because he is on the nationally syndicated Today Show and they wouldn't hire anyone who wasn't a real expert. It's easy to see when watching the show (ok, my wife watches the show, I pass by every now and then for a cup of coffee) that Al Roker is heavily focused on the scientific aspect of the weather when he's not joking around or interviewing or talking to celebrities or emceeing parades or pooping in the White House. Anyway, the day after Hurricane Sandy hit the East Coast, Matt Lauer asked his thoughts on this particular weather pattern and Al replied that it was the "new normal". Ever since, I've been observing the hurricane forecasts and sure enough, hurricane season for 2013 had the fiercest and highest number of hurricanes heretofore. Oh wait, maybe I'm remembering that wrong....oh that's right, 2013 had ZERO Atlantic hurricanes and was the first since 1968 to feature no storms of at least category 2 intensity. I'm confused.... is it just anyone with the name "AL" I should't trust or anyone who claims to be an "expert"? :gloomy:
Yes, money only talks when "big business" waives it around. Of course, the money the government, and the extremest sponsored foundations pass out to "study" this, has absolutely no effect what so ever on the "scientists" who make very comfortable livings from it.
And of course, these "scientists" do not ever use intimidation or threats against those who disagree with them.
We also know that "environmentalists", also known sometimes as "eco-terrorists" never do anything wrong, or illegal, or shut down free speech, in the pursuit of their cause.
Yes, it's all good on that side of this debate.
And of course, these "scientists" do not ever use intimidation or threats against those who disagree with them.
We also know that "environmentalists", also known sometimes as "eco-terrorists" never do anything wrong, or illegal, or shut down free speech, in the pursuit of their cause.
Yes, it's all good on that side of this debate.
troutsqueezer
Veteran Member
You write as if that article proves the "deniers" are wrong. Any article or publication will cite facts and figures to support its stance on any issue all the while playing down or ignoring evidence/opinions to the contrary. It's what you do when you want to win the debate. Popular Science, even though I like it, is a fluff magazine. Jacob Ward, the magazine's Editor in Chief has just left to go to work for Al Jazeera. I think his first assignment is to investigate chemical weapons in Syria so we can probably rule him out as having any sort of scientific mindset.
- Status
