Members John Sayers Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 [YOUTUBE]l-9WsKlKXJI[/YOUTUBE] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 The glaciers have been retreating for 100s of years, we are in an interglacial period- that's what glaciers do in these periods. The glaciers that covered most of the US during the last ice age have since receded. The last ice age ended 10,000 years ago, so it's hard to argue that the very rapid retreat is part of any 10,000 year long gradual retreat, and that it just happened to occur at the point in time when we started having major sustained industrial output. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kurfu Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 The last ice age ended 10,000 years ago, so it's hard to argue that the very rapid retreat is part of any 10,000 year long gradual retreat, and that it just happened to occur at the point in time when we started having major sustained industrial output. Well, using you correlation equals causation logic, one can argue that the worldwide decline in the number of pirates is responsible for global warming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 Well, using you correlation equals causation logic, one can argue that the worldwide decline in the number of pirates is responsible for global warming. Last I checked, pirates are not scientifically believed to be greenhouse gasses, whereas CO2 is. So it's more than correlation equals causation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Sayers Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 Dean - the Little Ice Age occured in the late 17th century, when people ice skated on the Thames - the glaciers have been retreating since then as we have warmed to our present temp. They started retreating well before man had any CO2 influence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 Well, that was a VERY little ice age. But I assume you've seen the changes in glaciers around the world in the last 20 or 30 years right? As compared to the changes before that. I can't see how you can ignore the possibility that is not part of the natural retreat of the glaciers, because of the high speed of change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jotown Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 Frontline on PBS had a documentary last night about this here is a link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/heat/view/ The vast majority of experts the world over who have been studying this stuff have no doubt that climate change is real. That there are more people on the planet than ever before emiting more greenhouse gasses than ever before is a fact. Look at the air in China during the olympics; do you not get that the polution was man made? Or do you think the toxic air in Beijing is from Yak's farting in the Himylaya's? Mininizing mans role in our current cylcle of global warming is just plain ignorant at this point. We are in a crisis and no matter what you think the cause is we should all be responsible for our part in this mess. If you make soup in your toilet you will get sick. Our planet is sick right now and all of the creatures that inahabit it (including humans) are showing symptoms of this. To ignore it for the sake of argument is irresponsible and ignorant. Have a nice day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 Of course, the problem is that we will not be able to know who's right and who's wrong until it's too late. Thus, any sane, intelligent person should support reasonable efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and back all of our energy efficiency initiatives. That's what I've been arguing throughout this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Sayers Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 remember the pollution in LA? we fixed that - London smog? fixed that. Beijing needs to do the same. To call CO2 a pollutant is ridiculous!! The whole plant kingdom thrives on it and we thrive on the plant kingdom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Richard King Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 Come on. It's so easy when you don't agree with someone to accuse them of being blantantly evil or greedy. Do you really believe that all those scientists have no concern for their professional career and integrity?You're right, it is easy to accuse those who don't agree with the "majority" as being in the grasp of the oil companies. This works both ways, you know. I believe that those who have differing opinions have as much, if not more, integrity as those who agree with the "majority". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MichaelSaulnier Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 I thought Craig solved the GW problem about 2 pages ago? Didn't it work? M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MichaelSaulnier Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 Well, not to worry. Barack is SURE to take care of everything. M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Sayers Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 For 6,000 years we preserved food with salt. 100 years ago someone thought of refrigeration, the first refrigerator cost twice as much as a car. Now we all have refrigerators. Hopefully one day oil wells and coal mines will be as much of the past as salt mines are. That's one story - the other is whether we are contributing to the change in climate. Let's not confuse the two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Richard King Posted October 22, 2008 Members Share Posted October 22, 2008 By the way, with the way oil prices are going these days I think it's probably time to start considering a "Non Windfall Profits" rebate to the poor oil companies. If it's good to demand a "Windfall Profits Tax" when things are good, why isn't it good to do the opposite when things go the other direction? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff Leites Posted October 23, 2008 Members Share Posted October 23, 2008 Do you really believe that all those scientists have no concern for their professional career and integrity? The ones that speak out are ignored by our far left media. [YOUTUBE][/YOUTUBE] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted October 23, 2008 Members Share Posted October 23, 2008 If it's good to demand a "Windfall Profits Tax" when things are good, why isn't it good to do the opposite when things go the other direction? I'm sure that the WPT didn't eat too far into their enormous all time record profits, all of which was out of our pockets. So they will be just fine I'm sure. Most folks aren't business tycoons, but they are smart enough to realize that if the price of something goes up massively, but then the companies that sell it make recording breaking enormous profits as a result, then the cost increase had nothing to do with the actual cost of the product, but just went into the pockets of the sellers. If the cost increase had been related to the actual cost of the product, there would have been no issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted October 23, 2008 Members Share Posted October 23, 2008 The ones that speak out are ignored by our far left media. I'm not sure what that had to do with what I said that you quoted. But anyway, the old 'far left media' thing is so old now that it's moldy. There's lot of media out there, some more to the left, some more to the right. On average, it probably about evens out. But of course people on the left think it leans right and people on the right think it leans left, because they never consider that those things that they agree with represent a leaning in their direction, and only count the things that they don't agree with as proof of a leaning in the other direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.