Hot Tub Forum
General => General info Somewhat hot tub related => Topic started by: Campsalot on April 13, 2007, 09:59:35 am
-
OK! Granted that line was a cheesy entry into my real subject, "Global Warming". Wait, before you leave this thread do me one favor and view this movie. Yes, it will take about 1 hour and 15 minutes but it is very valid. This global warming crap has to be stopped because we will spend ourselves into oblivion supporting this bunk.
How is this ho tub related? Well on a couple of points it is related. First, if global warming was real, the entire spa industry would be affected. Secondly, there was a string in which this issue was brought up on the "Hot Tub" board and I noticed several people jumped on the "save our planet" band wagon. The problem is these people, I'm sure while being very well educated, have been told this lie and believe it. In fact, we have all been told this lie and are being pushed on a huge wave of media and money that keeps this issue alive and growing.
Check out the movie and get your reality check as I did! http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4340135300469846467
Bill, if you move or delete this post, I will understand even though the hot tub industry will eventually be affected. Thanks for the soap box!
-
I share your opinion and the movies view on Global Warming. While I believe is is a problem I don't see it as devestatiing earth ending event being predicted. And besides, here in Northern Minnesota we could use a little "Global Warming"
Things may be different 10-15 generations from now but my grave will be paved over long before then!!!!
-
Global warming is one of the great lies to advance socialism. Anyone that doesn't realize that is a simpleminded lemming, the target demographic for socialists.
Human beings are so insignificant when compared to the vastness of earth it is laughable to even consider that we amount to anything more than a blip on the screen. Get in a 747, fly halfway around the world, and you realize just how tiny you are. If you can visualize how truly irrelevant we are compared to earth, it's inconceivable imagining what a minute speck you are on a tiny speck in the solar system, galaxy, and universe.
People make too much of themselves and their importance.
Great post Campsalot!
AIDS is another great hoax, by the way.
Terminator
-
We are anxiously awaiting the first winter snow storm to hit this area during the month of April in more than a century - dang global warming!
-
Global warming is one of the great lies to advance socialism. Anyone that doesn't realize that is a simpleminded lemming, the target demographic for socialists...People make too much of themselves and their importance...AIDS is another great hoax, by the way.
How about that... a Troll convention! Since the great minds are weighing on the issues of the day, perhaps you can also save us from the great "lies" in the creation/evolution, sexuality, race, abortion and WMD debates. :-/ Then perhaps you can tackle straight-up politics and religion, and let us know what labels should apply to people who have a different opinion than yours on those issues as well. :P
A.S. Lemming
-
Well,
Although I personally feel that global warming is a hoax I don't feel that the by-product of cleaning up our pollution and environment is that bad.
We need to tighten up a bit for the health of the population and we've lost common sense somewhere in the masses....
-
How about that... a Troll convention! Since the great minds are weighing on the issues of the day, perhaps you can also save us from the great "lies" in the creation/evolution, sexuality, race, abortion and WMD debates. :-/ Then perhaps you can tackle straight-up politics and religion, and let us know what labels should apply to people who have a different opinion than yours on those issues as well. :P
A.S. Lemming
WOW Reese,
Hit a sore spot did they. I have to agree on the hoax of global warming. To little data to say what is really happening now. For thousands of years there have been many climate changes to many extremes. Now it's all mans fault because Al Gore writes a book and gains a following of educated people to promote this very unproven theory. There is almost as many or more educated people that disagree with it. As to the AIDS question it is very real but also very preventable. IMO more money should be spent on cancer research that kills far more buts gets less funding than Aids. As to the other subjects mentioned by you, what is wrong with a little discussion on them. We still have our right to free speech, Don't we?
-
Meteorologists/Scientists can't even predict tommorrow's weather accurate, much less how hot the earth is getting.
Global warming ;D
-
I have to agree on the hoax of global warming. To little data to say what is really happening now.
Personally, I do believe in global warming but have no issue with people who think it's overblown but 2 people in a row using/agreeing with the term "hoax"? I think that's going a bit far!
Between global warming (reality, threat or theory) and the exploding population this world has seen in the past century (maybe the biggest issue overall and defintiely part of many of the world's issues) I think there is reason for concern. While the degree of that concern is certainly debatable I can't buy into the theory that there is any hoax going on. I think both sides (and those in between) beleive what they say.
hoax –noun
something intended to deceive or defraud:
-
We still have our right to free speech, Don't we?
You saw what happened when Imus tried to practice free speech didn't you?
Free speech is a myth. You can't speak freely now a days if it hurts someone's feelings.
-
Political correctness is the liberal's most powerful tool to stifle freedom. It was used to take Imus down, it will be used against others.
Terminator
-
Political correctness is the liberal's most powerful tool to stifle freedom. It was used to take Imus down, it will be used against others.
Terminator
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!
Signed,
crewcut hairdo jug head.
-
Be careful about proclamations regarding freedom of speech. That right is guaranteed by the Constitution- which is a document that is supposed to protect us from an opressive government. Imus made those comments in the scope of his employment and he was terminated by his employer. That isn't something that is protected by the Constitution.
Much like this forum. We can't say whatever we want here, since it's a private entity.
I do agree, however, that we are WAY too politically correct about what people do say or how they say it.
For some intesting counterpoints on global warming, read Goorge Will's columns this week. They are published in our local paper, and probably a lot more.
He raises some interesting counterpoints to the global warming claims using good old common sense.
-
I think a view somewhere inbetween hoax and real immediate threat would be called for here....agreed? To what degree, to each his own. I won't loose any sleep over it, and I dout my kids will or there kids or there kids. After that we may need more sun screen.
-
Political correctness is the liberal's most powerful tool to stifle freedom. It was used to take Imus down, it will be used against others.
Terminator
Political Correctness. Or, as I call it..................The pussification of America.
Now, more importantly. Where can I get a signed copy of Term's new picture? :D
-
You noticed I've been working out, huh! ;D
I agree with Brewman about Imus being fired by his employer and them being completely within their rights to do so. I've listened to him a few times and found him to be a reprehensible, smarmy jackass....so I excercised my right to change the channel.
The only reason he was fired is because certain entities made a big enough commotion to cause his sponsors to pull out. When MSNBC and CBS lost that revenue, then they sent him packing. Follow the money...always!
Terminator
-
Imnus was fired because he was "public" enough to be noticed. I have to say to say this is another BS move (Firing Imnus) when we buy rap records in droves that talk about far worse things. No, I'm not advocating Imnus's remarks, I am simply saying he's a scapegoat in the face of a lot worse public behavior that is sanctioned on a daily basis.
I also want to say this about the Global Warming hoax. Yes, it is a hoax as it has become an industry flooded with money. Thats right, global warming has become an industry. Watch the movie folks. Incidentally, I have never said that those that believe in global warming are "trolls". I believe I said they have simply been mislead. Man kind is a mere spec on this earth. The idea that we could influence our climate by releasing C02 is absurd. Please folks, watch the movie.
Thanks Bill for letting this live! I'm going out to my newly cleaned and fresh water tub tonight and have a cold one.
-
How is this ho tub related?
Man, I hope you put some chlorine in that. ;)
-
Apparently, I'm in the minority here in realizing that global warming is a reality. Unlike a lot of social issues, where reading the "other side" makes me angry and gets me worked up to write back a huge reply, global warming doesn't do that to me. That's because the so-called "debate" is over. The reason for this is that ALL THE SCIENTISTS IN THE WORLD know it's true, and have ended the argument. Those who think global warming isn't real can join those who yell and scream that the moon landing is a hoax, and spend their time with the people chasing down the Loch Ness Monster. Go ahead, make some noise and waste your time. It doesn't bother me.
So no, I didn't watch the video. I'm one of those many liberal lemmings who have decide that if ALL THE SCIENTISTS IN THE WORLD think something is true, it's good enough for me.
-
Apparently, I'm in the minority here in realizing that global warming is a reality. Unlike a lot of social issues, where reading the "other side" makes me angry and gets me worked up to write back a huge reply, global warming doesn't do that to me. That's because the so-called "debate" is over. The reason for this is that ALL THE SCIENTISTS IN THE WORLD know it's true, and have ended the argument. Those who think global warming isn't real can join those who yell and scream that the moon landing is a hoax, and spend their time with the people chasing down the Loch Ness Monster. Go ahead, make some noise and waste your time. It doesn't bother me.
So no, I didn't watch the video. I'm one of those many liberal lemmings who have decide that if ALL THE SCIENTISTS IN THE WORLD think something is true, it's good enough for me.
It's funny you posted this ... as I was going through the posts I was wondering how many of the posters have a scientific background to be able to say that it's a hoax. I saw Al Gore's movie and if the photo's and the video of what was on his movie were real ... it's a scary thing. I do realize that some of it was politicing but it made me think.
Living in NJ, driving to work BY MYSELF, I see hundreds of cars everyday with the same scene as mine ... driving to work by themselves. I own 2 cars and have another company car, my oldest will be getting my car next year. 3 cars for 1 family, wasn't like that in the 60's. All the electricity we need to run our houses, wasn't like that in the 60's. Also, we all have heard for years about the rainforests being removed for housing and farming, Asia is becoming a "new America" - their middle income economy is growing while ours is shrinking ... more money for more goods ... people prosper and have more children ...
I for 1 believe that global warming is a real threat. I am not a scientist but studied engineering for 3 years (unfortunately I am not a degreed engineer). Reading some of the things of what's happening makes sense how the scientists are desribing things. If the top scientists of the world are worried, maybe we should be too. Are they being dramatic, possibly to get people's attention. Remember just a little while ago most people never heard of Tsunamis except on Gilligans Island ... all of a sudden their happening all over the place.
Have your thoughts but I think people much smarter than ourselves are really trying to save the world for a good reason.
-
Thank you Vinny! I'm going to stick out my neck and say that there is not a single person here whose "opinion" on the reality of global warming matters jack-shite. Didn't know you all were so scientifically educated.
It really doesn't matter whether it is real or not, or if it is us creating it or just part of a bigger geologic picture. We as a species are singlehandedly responsible for literally changing the face of the earth even WITHOUT the warming debate.
Go ahead and joke about it. Say you dont care what happens 10-15 generations from now. You're just being human.
-
Thank you Vinny! I'm going to stick out my neck and say that there is not a single person here whose "opinion" on the reality of global warming matters jack-shite. Didn't know you all were so scientifically educated.
It really doesn't matter whether it is real or not, or if it is us creating it or just part of a bigger geologic picture. We as a species are singlehandedly responsible for literally changing the face of the earth even WITHOUT the warming debate.
Go ahead and joke about it. Say you dont care what happens 10-15 generations from now. You're just being human.
Lest we not forget 10-15 generations is 1000-1500 years. The year 3007-3507 What was going on on this planet in the year 507-1007?? Somebody look that up!!
-
Yes, we are going through a climate change. How much is directly related to our use of the planet? Hard to say. What is known from geological evidence is that our climate has changed manytimes before. The planet has a cycle. But I tend to lean toward the other scientific theory that has been stated....Earth's orbit cycle is at the point where we are gradually getting closer to the sun. This will go on for some time, and then it will reverse and expand outward and Earth will begin to cool again.
Should we find cleaner fuel sources that are better for the planet? ABSOLUTELY! But as they say, follow the money. If a select few can't get rich off it, if the government can't regulate it or tax it, it's NOT going to happen.
[rant about world violence and self destruction edited out]
IMUS got canned because he stepped over the line of professionalism. I've seen this happen before. Any of you heard of "Opie and Anthony"? They were afternoon dj's on WAAF in Boston. They pulled some good stunts that were real funny, but one April 1st (April Fool's day to you and me) when EVERYONE knew the govenor was at some big public political thing they play a joke by saying he and his family were killed in a plane crash on their way to someplace entirely different. The govenors office got flooded with calls and some minor panic insued for a short period of time before they recanted and said it was an April Fool's joke. They were fired almost instantly. I give IMUS credit though. As a Liberal he held his job longer than any consertive would have in the same situation.
So, live well, live happy ;), and try to get along because on December 23 2012 the world as we know it will come to an end. I KNOW this is true, BECAUSE I SAW IT ON TV!
He who controls the media, controls the world........
-
WOW Reese, Hit a sore spot did they... As to the other subjects mentioned by you, what is wrong with a little discussion on them. We still have our right to free speech, Don't we?
Yes, I never care for extemists on either side who present their position as the only answer, and label dissenting opinions as "bunk", "crap", "lies" or "hoax" -- or the people that disagree with them as "simple-minded lemmings". It has nothing to do with free speech, just civility and respect.
-
Lest we not forget 10-15 generations is 1000-1500 years. The year 3007-3507 What was going on on this planet in the year 507-1007?? Somebody look that up!!
A generation is not 100 years. A generation is usually considered to be 10-20 years.
-
You noticed I've been working out, huh! ;D
The only reason he was fired is because certain entities made a big enough commotion to cause his sponsors to pull out. When MSNBC and CBS lost that revenue, then they sent him packing. Follow the money...always!
Terminator
Speaking of entities, I wonder why they aren't lining up to apologize to the Duke lacrosse players they so venemously declared guilty. >:( >:(
-
A generation is not 100 years. A generation is usually considered to be 10-20 years.
A generation of people is 100 years, or depending on the average life expectancy. Which I think now is 80 or something. You must be think of a decade, then theres a century which is a hundred.
-
Can someone tell me if the earth is 1 giant,nuclear reactor? And if so,when will it run out of fuel?
Lastly,at what stage are we at,as far as the poles reversing?
-
A generation of people is 100 years, or depending on the average life expectancy. Which I think now is 80 or something. You must be think of a decade, then theres a century which is a hundred.
With all due respect to Tman and DP Roberts, I think a generation is usually considered to be 15-40 years -- matching the human reproductive span. I saw something once that defined an average generation as 22 years. Tman, think of a single family with a 80 year old grandmother. If every one has kids by the age of 20, there could be 5 generations alive at once. DP, I'm wondering if your 10 year number comes from the groups demographers identify as having common experiences (Baby Boom, Gen X, etc). While called "generations", they may be a subpart of a whole.
Regardless of your definition of generation, the current focus of global warming discussion is whether changes that are currently observed may have great impact before the end of this century -- not 10-15 generations.
-
According to Ancestry.com; "As a matter of common knowledge, we know that a generation averages about 25 years—from the birth of a parent to the birth of a child—although it varies case by case. We also generally accept that the length of a generation was closer to 20 years in earlier times when humans mated younger and life expectancies were shorter."
Now back to the Globa Warming issue. Yes, this entire theory of Global Warming being caused by man, can be and is being called "bunk" not just by me a normal Joe but by others; including top scientists. What I find so amusing is just like one of the top climatolgy scientists said in the movie; "should one harbor or offer an opinion even though it is based in fact on sound scientific fact, you will be labeled as a heretic. I'm fine with being a heretic as our reasoning for deaclaring this entire notion of Globval Warming being caused by man as a lie is because our fact were and are established using scientific protocals driven by facts, not politics."
So I guess I and few others here are heretics as well. Just remember we "Heretics" are not disputing that we are ina warming cycle, just the fact that it is "NOT" caused by mankind. ;)
-
I wasn't going to comment here but there are no good snacks to eat in my refrigerator so here goes.
On the Imus situation: I think that as a country, we should feel accomplished. The two biggest civil rights icons have no more important issues to deal with than a stupid comment made by a crude talk show radio host. Who really cares and wouldn't it have been so much kinder to the basketball players to just blow it all off as a "consider the source" kind of thing? How much does it really mean when you look at the source? Sorry, but this whole thing was so very over blown!
Global warming? to deny that humans have contributed to changes on the earth and to the climate would be irresponsible. I can just look in my back yard for my evidence. I live in an area mostly comprised of farms...Until recently when Toll Brothers builders started taking a toll on all of us. They have just built a huge development covering much of the ground with concrete, roads and driveways. The result? Less land (surface area)to absorb and divert rain water to underground streams...We are already at flood stage in a local stream..for the amount of rain that we just got overnight as a result of this Nor'Easter, we should not yet be at flood stage..Am I saying this one developement did that? Of course not, but this is one of TOO MANY developments..that have changed the natural process of things. Does anyone know anything about displacement? Like when you remove something and use it to create something else? I am talking about removing badzillions of gallons of oil from the inside of the earth and burning it generating toxic gasses and heat. I wonder if it is too far fetched to imagine that pulling all that oil out of the ground could contribute to earth quakes ..Somebody tell me that is nuts, I want to know the answer to this.
Humans have been responsible for the extinction of animals, and major changes to the face of the earth, we build canals, cause errosion that pollutes and fills waterways blast through mountains, to name just a few things ..,..these are facts. We are awesome creatures that have found a way to do almost anything we can think of, with little regard to the long term consequences. We have filled the earth with trash that will never degrade.. We have polluted the oceans and our own drinking water with man made chemicals. So global warming may be the kindest thing that we have done so far!
NO, I didn't see the movie, and I probably won't see it..I don't need to, I just need to stay in tune with what is happening around us on a daily basis. Is it possible that we will feel the effect of this and that it won't just be something for future generations (whatever their life spans) to deal with? I think we are realizing that now. Yes the climate follows cycles, but isn't possible the actions of man have manipulated these cycles?..OH I don't want to forget our nuclear capabilities! We have the ability to cause a global warming of such magnitude that we won't have to worry about any of this and there will be anyone left to say "I told you so!!!!" :-/
To prevent further opions like this please send snacks to......: :o :o
-
To prevent further opions like this please send snacks to......: :o :o
Boni,
I just mailed a couple of twinkies your way ;D
I think that my opinion of global warming is probably the same as the silent majority.
Do I believe that as humans we have affected the environment?
With out a doubt I do
Is climate change cyclical?
Yes, I believe it is
Have we affected the environment as drastically as some feel we have?
No, I don't believe we have
Should we continue to search out more environmentally friendly ways to help
ensure the future of the planet ?
Without a doubt we should it is our responsibility too
Should we search out alternative fuels to ease our dependency on fossil fuels
Yes
Am I about to join Greenpeace and scale the sides of buildings or drive a zodiac into the way of a whaling ship?
No I probably won't
Will I continue to recycle plastics, glass, paper and other products and try not to leave a footprint while in the woods?
Yes
There are two very vocal opposing views on global warming but I think the majority of the population thinks about the same as I do
-
Your wise words and your twinkies would have prevented me from even commenting ;D ;D..Thanks
-
So I guess I and few others here are heretics as well. Just remember we "Heretics" are not disputing that we are ina warming cycle, just the fact that it is "NOT" caused by mankind. ;)
HEY! I used to be a "Heretic"....until our guild by that name disbanded some months ago. We even had some stuff on googlevideo.
"I live in an area mostly comprised of farms...Until recently when Toll Brothers builders started taking a toll on all of us. They have just build a huge development covering much of the ground with concrete, roads and driveways."
I hear that. My town is an older country town with a lot of farm's This past week I saw one of them being subdivided out with "lot for sale" signs all over it. Definatly a sad state of affairs. How anyone could live in a "cookie cutter" development with no trees is beyond me.
"Lastly,at what stage are we at,as far as the poles reversing?"
Seriously, possibly in 2012. Astronomers have already predicted a major alignment of the sun and planets with the center of our galaxy. What effect this will have on our planet is due to the gravitational forces is unknown. How something can be not aligned with what it is spinning around as a central point and then be aligned with it is beyond me.
Ya, i'm weird! ;D
/sends Bonibelle a bowl of "Ho-Ho Chowder" :)
-
If I had my "Powers of Deletion", Tommy, I would be obligated to delete your reference to "ho s". ::).and you said it 2X! :o No matter that those hos existed long before Imus's hos! ;D ;D Maybe they will be renamed Hahas
-
OK, us hot tubbers are a weird bunch aren't we?
Bonnibelle, your response was so very elegant! Yes, I send you ton's of Fleischkukle! (It's a ethnic German treat of fried bread stuffed with spiced meat) Good stuff and you will find a lot of here in good old North Dakota.
That being said, I do wish you watch the video. Should you watch it you will see that the earth is simply passing through another period as it has done in it's past of heating.
Yes, mankind has effected planet Earth! No, Global Warming is not one of those effects. Yes, we can alter things like the normal drainage of river basins etc however, we cannot alter a climate. My point in posting this was to have everyone look at this for what it is a; "we need money to fund this continued scare tactic on the human race" industry. Again, please watch the video!
-
If I had my "Powers of Deletion", Tommy, I would be obligated to delete your reference to "ho s". ::).and you said it 2X! :o No matter that those hos existed long before Imus's hos! ;D ;D Maybe they will be renamed Hahas
I'm laughing very hard ATM! ;D "Ho-Ho Chowder" is a joke from our old apartment my friend and I had. His girlfriend (now his wife) was a lover of Hostess and Drakes products. Ho-Ho's are a snack cake thing made by one of them. One Sunday afternoon we're all sitting around, she makes the "I'm hungry" statement. He says we have plenty of food, go make something. She says she does not want anything we have on hand. He comes back with "Sorry dear, but we're all out of Ho-Ho Chowder at the moment." ;D ;D ;D
-
I knew what you were talking about, Tommy, Drakes makes Ho hos and guess what?
They are celebrating their 40th anniversary this year...shhhh don't tell Al Sharpton!!. :-?
-
With all due respect to Tman and DP Roberts, I think a generation is usually considered to be 15-40 years -- matching the human reproductive span. I saw something once that defined an average generation as 22 years. Tman, think of a single family with a 80 year old grandmother. If every one has kids by the age of 20, there could be 5 generations alive at once. DP, I'm wondering if your 10 year number comes from the groups demographers identify as having common experiences (Baby Boom, Gen X, etc). While called "generations", they may be a subpart of a whole.
Regardless of your definition of generation, the current focus of global warming discussion is whether changes that are currently observed may have great impact before the end of this century -- not 10-15 generations.
Yeah, either way we're talking about semantics here. I can see the 20 year idea, and that's traditionally the case. A lot of sociologists use shorter lengths of time when a "generation" is linked to an event that precipitates it. For example, the "Baby Boomers" were born shortly after WWII, but it would be hard to call people born in 1965 "Baby Boomers." So, that generation is only 10 years long, or less. Anyway, at longest it's one "human reproductive span" or less, not a human life span.
But I digress. Speaking of digressions, I think the whole "Global Warming" debate is a digression in itself. The debate seems to center on whether humans are causing Global Warming, not whether it's actually happening. Let's just concede, temporarily, that it's all a natural phenomenon, and that eventually the earth will somehow return to what it was a hundred years ago.
I the meantime, lots of really horrible things will happen. For example, the entire subcontinet of India and a large chunk of Southeast Asia depend on runoff from the glaciers in the Himalayas for water. What happens when those glaciers finally disappear? At their current rate, those glaciers will be gone in less than 50 years or so. That means that BILLIONS of people will suddenly run out of water. Are these billions of people going to die of thirst? What are we going to DO about it?
Another example would be the coral reefs. Although they may look pristine, they're dying. Those that aren't dying due to the temperature changes are dying from pollution. For example, only 10% of the reefs in some Southeast Asian countries are still in "pristine" condition. That's bad. Even ignoring the huge loss of animal life, reefs protect coastlines all over the world. Hurricanes (as well as "normal" storms) will cause much more damage once these reefs are gone. What then? What happens when harbors are suddenly no place for a boat? What about fishing? What about shipping?
These are just a few of the environmental problems that "global warming" is causing RIGHT NOW. When all of them are added up - especially if these trends get worse, as predicted - we may be in real trouble.
-
And, by the way: linky no worky. I keep getting a Google video error: "this video may not be available."
It looks like Google deleted it, as it was posted there illegally. However, if you want to view it anyway, just do a search for "The Great Global Warming Swindle." If you do that search, you'll also find out that many critics have already pointed out numerous flaws in the BBC documentary - including one the scientists they misquoted in the movie.
-
That being said, I do wish you watch the video. Should you watch it you will see that the earth is simply passing through another period as it has done in it's past of heating.
Yes, mankind has effected planet Earth! No, Global Warming is not one of those effects.
I think that it is foolish to say that anyone KNOWS with any certainty what the cause is. There are going to be people with "proof" on each side of the argument. I'm not going to watch one video, and accept it for fact. I'm also not going to watch Gore's movie and accept it for fact. I question anyone who clings too vehemently to either side of the argument for their motivation.
It is much safer to assume that human pollution and activity *could* contribute to global warming than to assume that it does not. That is not to say that using scare tactics and paranoia to make people change is appropriate. As Boni put so elequently, and as I stated so gruffly, global warming is just one (possible) aspect of mankind's damage to the earth, and there are plenty of other ways that we have forever changed this planet. If concern over global warming wakes people up and we lighten our heavy tread over nature because of it, all the better.
-
Here is a corrected and/or new link to the video!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170&q=The+Great+Globa+Warming+Swindle
Also I want to clarify! I have seen Al Gores documentary. I have obviously seen the video I posted. I also am a very big believer in "common sense", something I think is severely lacking throughout our country today. Common sense says that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Thats 4,500,000,000 years or look at it this way 4.5 X 109 yrs or (on a calculator) 4.5E9 yrs (1 billion in scientific notation means 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10!) This is a HUGE number!
Man has been present on this earth for only 6 million years! (A very smal number compared to the age of the earth) Truly we have been only in a huge industrial mode(read killing the earth with nasty by-products) for the last 200 years. Do you really think, keeping in mind all of the huge monstrous natural disasters that have occurred in our planets 4.5 billion year history that mankind's paltry 200 year history of pollution actually is changing our climate?
-
Key words: Natural disasters and Man made disasters (ongoing)
As far as you know were there any "natural disasters" that occurred as the result of nuclear fission in the last 1.5 billion years?? ::)
-
Do you really think, keeping in mind all of the huge monstrous natural disasters that have occurred in our planets 4.5 billion year history that mankind's paltry 200 year history of pollution actually is changing our climate?
A quick search indicates that a strong majority of the scientists that do study climate have concerns, and feel that potential remedies need to be evaluated. It also appears that a similar percentage of other scientists that have looked at the information feel the same way. Other than the swindle movie (which took some if the interviews out of context, and edited to support thier conclusion), one professor at MIT, and an oil industry trade group (I wonder why they dispute the need to reduce our consumption of fossil fuels ::)), there is very little to support your position -- as opposed to several credible studies that support the concerns about global warming. It appears that over 80% of the American public also has concerns, which may explain why even conservative politicians are proposing environmental initiatives. Evidently you, Terminator, Thearm, and the others that were quick to jump on the "hoax" bandwagon are smarter/better informed than the vast majority, including most of the people who study climate. :-/ I suspect this has more to do with politics than science.
Regardless of your take on global warming, do you think that a renewed focus on energy conservation, increased use of renewable fuels and developing alternative energy sources to decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and trying to limit the amount of pollutants put into the atmosphere are bad things? :-?
-
Man has been present on this earth for only 6 million years! (A very smal number compared to the age of the earth) Truly we have been only in a huge industrial mode(read killing the earth with nasty by-products) for the last 200 years. Do you really think, keeping in mind all of the huge monstrous natural disasters that have occurred in our planets 4.5 billion year history that mankind's paltry 200 year history of pollution actually is changing our climate?
I look at that VERY differently. It scares the hell out of me to look at the amount of change (species extinction, pollution and destruction, altering of lakes/rivers, waste) that we have caused in ONLY 200 years. Look, I was a ecology/biology major: this was the sort of thing I could have spouted on with a lot more accuracy 10 years ago. I still say it is foolish to refute the idea that we COULD be responsible for global warming. Climate changes should NOT necessarily be measurable over human generations, but rather over thousands of years. I'll quote Edward O Wilson as a better source of information than myself:
In regards to the theories of global warming and debate:
"First rule of the history of science: when a big, new, persuasive idea is proposed, and army of critics soon gathers and tries to tear it down. Such a reaction is unavoidable because, aggressive yet abiding by the rules of civil discourse, that is simply how scientists work. It is further true that, faced with adversity, proponents will harden their resolve and struggle to make the case more convincing. Being human, most scientists conform to the psychological Principle of Certainty, which says that when there is evidence both for and against a belief, the result is not a lessening, but a heightening of conviction on both sides."
Seems like we're just in the middle of the scuffle.
In regards to mankind's effect on the world's species in such a short time:
"...The Cretaceous extinction was only one of five such catastrophes that occurred over the last half-billion years.......the five mass extinctions occurred in this order, according to geological period and time before the present: Ordovician, 440 million years; Devonian, 365 million years; Permian, 245 million years; Triassic, 210 million years, and Cretaceous, 66 million years. ....
...To summarize, life was impoverished in five major events, and to a lesser degree here and there around the world in countless other episodes. After each down turn it recovered to at least the original level of diversity. How long did it take for evolution to restore the losses? ......In general, five million years was enough only for a strong start. A complete recovery from each of the major extinctions required tens of millions of years. ...These figures should give pause to anyone who believes that what Homo sapiens destroys, Nature will redeem. Maybe so, but not within an length of time that has meaning for contemporary humanity."
-
I think that it is foolish to say that anyone KNOWS with any certainty what the cause is. There are going to be people with "proof" on each side of the argument. I'm not going to watch one video, and accept it for fact. I'm also not going to watch Gore's movie and accept it for fact. I question anyone who clings too vehemently to either side of the argument for their motivation.
Too true. After all, global warming is a theory. Evolution is a theory. Even gravity is a theory.
However, almost all scientists believe that global warming - the idea climates are changing rapidly, and humanity is to blame for these changes - is the most scientifically valid theory for what's happening on our planet right now.
That's a fact.
Is global warming a theory , wich may later be proven false? Certainly. Is there real debate in the scientific community over whether it's probably true or not? No.
-
Reese says "Evidently you, Terminator, Thearm, and the others that were quick to jump on the "hoax" bandwagon are smarter/better informed than the vast majority, including most of the people who study climate."
I disagree! Site your sources; "including most of the people who study climate." Perhaps it is fairer to say that some of us posses more common sense than others. Granted for every source you site I'll site 5 to dispute it. That is the problem, there is no proof!
The entire Global Warming (GW) idea is a myth riding the the governments coat tails! It has become an industry and now has a life of it's own. Do you know that if global warming were finally de-bunked millions of people would lose there jobs. All based on the misconception that Co2 gas is causing the earth warm!
If nothing else it makes for exciting debate! ;D
-
Reese says "Evidently you, Terminator, Thearm, and the others that were quick to jump on the "hoax" bandwagon are smarter/better informed than the vast majority, including most of the people who study climate."
I disagree! Site your sources; "including most of the people who study climate." Perhaps it is fairer to say that some of us posses more common sense than others. Granted for every source you site I'll site 5 to dispute it. That is the problem, there is no proof!
Quoting web sites is not proof. Peer reviewed scientific studies are proof. Any review or analysis of the scientific evidence shows support for the "global warming" issue. For example, a Science Magazine article (3 December 2004) showed that of 928 research articles that mentioned global warming in their abstracts, 75% supported the idea that humans are causing global warming. 25% mentioned global warming, but did not directly attribute a cause. But ZERO percent - not one single study - refuted human-caused global warming.
Quote all the web sites and "experts" you want. I would be very interested in hearing about any study of the literature that showed otherwise. If the conclusions mentioned above - which are also the conclusions mentioned in the recent IPCC report and Al Gore's video - are wrong, then you are correct and global warming is a myth, and I will gladly recant everything I have said.
-
I dont see why those of you on the "hoax" bandwagon are so bothered by the idea that global warming deserves research. How can you so close-mindedly just say that because there is no "proof" (yet) that there is not the possibility that GW is real, and is in fact man made? The essence of science is to explore theories like this! It is so selfish and shortsighted to say that this research is a waste of money. And I think that the bigger picture goes far beyond the reality or myth of global warming- that is just a PART of the total change that our species (may be) creating.
-
I dont see why those of you on the "hoax" bandwagon are so bothered by the idea that global warming deserves research. How can you so close-mindedly just say that because there is no "proof" (yet) that there is not the possibility that GW is real, and is in fact man made? The essence of science is to explore theories like this! It is so selfish and shortsighted to say that this research is a waste of money. And I think that the bigger picture goes far beyond the reality or myth of global warming- that is just a PART of the total change that our species (may be) creating.
There's only one or two on the hoax bandwagon, the not to worry band wagon is loaded to capacity and we want nothing more than cleaner burning cars and factorys. But we don't want a whole bunch of tax payer cash lining the pockets of people confesed to the fact that our world is coming to an end because of GW.
Why is a more moderate approach so out of line? It seems that if you are not for it or against it you are suddenly for it in one camp and against it in the other depending on which camp is looking at you!! We have a whole lot of lifetimes to figure it out as a society, this lifetime does not need to overindulge in the cause, but it does need to focus on it's long term cure for our planets betterment long after our grandkids, grandkids, grandkids are gone.
-
Quoting web sites is not proof. Peer reviewed scientific studies are proof. Any review or analysis of the scientific evidence shows support for the "global warming" issue. For example, a Science Magazine article (3 December 2004) showed that of 928 research articles that mentioned global warming in their abstracts, 75% supported the idea that humans are causing global warming. 25% mentioned global warming, but did not directly attribute a cause. But ZERO percent - not one single study - refuted human-caused global warming.
Quote all the web sites and "experts" you want. I would be very interested in hearing about any study of the literature that showed otherwise. If the conclusions mentioned above - which are also the conclusions mentioned in the recent IPCC report and Al Gore's video - are wrong, then you are correct and global warming is a myth, and I will gladly recant everything I have said.
I see, if the government (Intergovermental Panel On Climate Change IPCC) and Al Gore say it then it must be true! Right, open your umbrellas folks the sky is truly falling. Remember the government study on acid rain?
-
Or the government study on sacherine? That was banned for decades- until recently when they realized they were wrong. Not that I'm a big sacharine fan- the stuff tastes kinda icky.
Then they attacked aspartame- but that went silent when the sacharine blunder was uncovered.
One other thing to consider- make sure the cure isn't worse than the disease. Sometimes solutions to problems just shift the issue and in the grand scheme of things don't make too much difference except in perception.
-
There's only one or two on the hoax bandwagon, the not to worry band wagon is loaded to capacity and we want nothing more than cleaner burning cars and factorys. But we don't want a whole bunch of tax payer cash lining the pockets of people confesed to the fact that our world is coming to an end because of GW.
Why is a more moderate approach so out of line? It seems that if you are not for it or against it you are suddenly for it in one camp and against it in the other depending on which camp is looking at you!! We have a whole lot of lifetimes to figure it out as a society, this lifetime does not need to overindulge in the cause, but it does need to focus on it's long term cure for our planets betterment long after our grandkids, grandkids, grandkids are gone.
Well said and I agree! Once again I'm not saying we should continue to burn fossil fuels, add fossil fuel power plants (nuclear is much cleaner), and ignore our enviroment. I am saying GW is not man made! I am all for smart energy technologies like wind, Hydrogen engines, coal gasification (diesel), and solar.
However because GW is become a political action committee and an industry in it's self we are faced with killing this monster before it's too late. The big problem is we (the US) are into self mutilation. It's is cool to acknowledge how crappy we are as a country. On the other hand we are the mean nasty buggers that consume the majority of oil and pollute the majority of air and kill the majority of all things living. We bad! I just wonder what will happen when China becomes the do-badder. China is adding a coal power plant about once a week and 7 million cars a year, it won't be long before they take the emissions crown away from the US. I wonder if it will change the debate at all? " How do you say "Al Gore" in Chinese? [ch36817][ch20041][ch35789] [ch22269][ch38469][ch20114][ch32852][ch32593] (Father Internet)
-
So lets talk about acid rain!!!
-
Before anyone goes around claiming that the government or corporations, or anyone but "me" needs to do something consider:
1. We all own hot tubs that consume a lot of electricity- many outside of this forum would consider that very ungreen.
2. I own several non essential polluters- Lawn mower, snowblower, weed wacker,
a boat, a truck, two cars, and a motorcycle. Many would consider that very non green.
3. I also own several TV sets, a computer, and all sorts of appliances that consume electricity just sitting there. I have air conditioning.
4. I don't carpool, or take mass transit.
I have a feeling we all share some if not more of the above to one degree or another.
Point being that before we start harping on others we should all have our own houses in order. I for one don't intend to change anything about my "non green" habbits I listed above.
But then I'm not going around demanding that "someone" has to do "something"
Call me what you will- but I suspect my situation is plenty common amoung this group.
-
Hear, hear Brewman!!
Amoungst???
-
I've been out of school way too long to know how to spell. ;D
-
It seems that if you are not for it or against it you are suddenly for it in one camp and against it in the other depending on which camp is looking at you!!
??? I never said that I was "not for or against..." ??? I (in slightly different words) said that clinging too strongly to either side makes one less reputable, as they seem to have something to prove. Extremists "for" seem to want to scare everyone. Extremist "against" seem uncaring and lacadasical. (sp- sorry) I'm very much in the camp that believes that humans contribute to GW, and it is real, I just am open minded to any research that either debunks that, or helps us to figure out what *else* is causing it.
I'm going to be late for work now, but I could not handle leaving all day with anyone thinking that!!!!! ::)
-
I see, if the government (Intergovermental Panel On Climate Change IPCC) and Al Gore say it then it must be true! Right, open your umbrellas folks the sky is truly falling. Remember the government study on acid rain?
No, what you're saying is the OPPOSITE of what I'm saying. What I said whas that ALL the scientific research points to human-caused global warming. Al Gore, the IPCC, the AMA, and every other scientific organization have come to the same conclusion, based on that research. I don't believe it because Al Gore said it, I believe it because the research supports it - and Al Gore and everyone else have come to the same conclusion.
I'd be happy to discuss saccharine and acid rain, but those are different issues. Either way, bringing them up is faulty logic. What you're saying is "the government says that global warming is happening. The government said that saccharine was bad, and the government was wrong about that. Therefore, the government is wrong about global warming." That conclusion does not follow.
I would say the same thing to those of you in the "moderate" group. If all the scientific research indicates that a drastic change is necessary, what basis do you have for coming to a different conclusion?
And finally, as I will do with every post on this topic, I challenge everyone to focus on the scientific research, not the claims of any one person, television program, or web site. The scientific research says global warming is happening, and it's a serious problem. If you're really sure global warming isn't happening, show me one scientific study that says otherwise.
-
The big problem is we (the US)
[size=36]PHEWWW ![/size]
At least now I can relax, knowing that this will not effect Canada and that we Canadians have not contributed to GW in any way ::)
-
No...you Canadians will be sitting on some super duper prime real estate in, ohhhhh.....3-4 hundred years at the currnt pace, unless of course it turns and gets cold gain and the ocean currents shift back and ice gets thicker in the next 100 years as has happened in the past. ;D
-
No...you Canadians will be sitting on some super duper prime real estate in, ohhhhh.....3-4 hundred years at the currnt pace, unless of course it turns and gets cold gain and the ocean currents shift back and ice gets thicker in the next 100 years as has happened in the past. ;D
I'm surprised Canadians even have time to worry about Global Warming, what with "the war" going on. >:(
-
[size=36]PHEWWW ![/size]
At least now I can relax, knowing that this will not effect Canada and that we Canadians have not contributed to GW in any way ::)
Now thats funny! LOL! ;D
And I cannot believe no one got a kick out of my Chines Al Gore remark! I'm bummed!
-
In all honesty Global Warming is the last thing on my mind. There are [glow]FAR[/glow] greater concerns in the world right now. I for one would like all of it's attention and money to go to more productive research. For instance cures for Cancer, just to name one of thousands. Brewman brought up a great point about all of us being hot tub owners. How can all the people here who are soooooo energy conscience own a hot tub? Are you serious? If you're really that concerned you shouldn't even be veiwing this post. I wonder how much power I'm wasting while logged on right now just for my enjoyment? Excuse me, I'm gonna go give mother nature a good 20 minute roast in my tub.
-
My dad used to piss me off by saying "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."
The context when I was 10 was that I was not doing much about my brothers squabbling.
The context when I was a teen usually had something to do with household chores, or again, my brothers and my ability to silently make them seem guilty of something.
I figured out when I was about 16 that there was a much bigger context.
Seems that some of us still have to figure that out.
-
My dad used to piss me off by saying "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."
The context when I was 10 was that I was not doing much about my brothers squabbling.
The context when I was a teen usually had something to do with household chores, or again, my brothers and my ability to silently make them seem guilty of something.
I figured out when I was about 16 that there was a much bigger context.
Seems that some of us still have to figure that out.
I'm assuming you are still listing yourself as part of the problem Anne? As we all are, if there is a problem?
-
Quoting web sites is not proof. Peer reviewed scientific studies are proof. Any review or analysis of the scientific evidence shows support for the "global warming" issue. For example, a Science Magazine article (3 December 2004) showed that of 928 research articles that mentioned global warming in their abstracts, 75% supported the idea that humans are causing global warming. 25% mentioned global warming, but did not directly attribute a cause. But ZERO percent - not one single study - refuted human-caused global warming.
Quote all the web sites and "experts" you want. I would be very interested in hearing about any study of the literature that showed otherwise. If the conclusions mentioned above - which are also the conclusions mentioned in the recent IPCC report and Al Gore's video - are wrong, then you are correct and global warming is a myth, and I will gladly recant everything I have said.
DP, When you say any review or all the researchers come to this or that point leads me to question that. I think what campsalot was saying is for all the opinions claiming humans are causing GW you can find a substantial amount of equally educated opinions to the contrary. I don't disagree with GW but question weather it is man made or a natural occurence. Maybe Hoax was a poor choice of words. I find it interesting that if someone agrees with me we get called names and our sources are puppets of big oil. As somebody said follow the money and it leads to lots of GOVERNMENT Grants and painting the US as the worst. One simple comment on renewable resources. There are more trees in the US today than 100 yrs ago. Source the Arbor Day Foundation. Bottom line is we do need to conserve more and use less.
-
DP, When you say any review or all the researchers come to this or that point leads me to question that. I think what campsalot was saying is for all the opinions claiming humans are causing GW you can find a substantial amount of equally educated opinions to the contrary.
My problem with these "educated opinions" is how people come to their educated conclusions when there's no research that would logically lead them to this conclusion.
For example, I really like the idea of nationalized health care. Most left-leaning people do. However, when you look at the evidence- like the number of people around the world who come to the U.S. when they want the best health care in the world. I like the idea of health care being available to everyone, and I think our country needs to do more to make sure that people who are really sick can get the help they need. However, I just don't see the evidence that would lead anyone to the conclusion that nationalized health care is a good idea.
So, that's the same problem I have with gobal warming. If maybe 10% or 20% of the research showed that humans weren't causing the problem, I would still tend to believe it's happening. It would also give the anti-global warming people a leg to stand on. However, when there's no research at all, I just don't see where the argument is.
I don't disagree with GW but question weather it is man made or a natural occurence. Maybe Hoax was a poor choice of words. I find it interesting that if someone agrees with me we get called names and our sources are puppets of big oil. As somebody said follow the money and it leads to lots of GOVERNMENT Grants and painting the US as the worst. One simple comment on renewable resources. There are more trees in the US today than 100 yrs ago. Source the Arbor Day Foundation. Bottom line is we do need to conserve more and use less.
As for the U.S. being the worst - we are, for now. As someone brought up earlier, China is catching up fast. I heard earlier today that China will pass the U.S. in CO2 emissions NEXT YEAR. That's pretty amazing, when you consider how fast they're still industrializing.
-
Listen folks, left or right, we all hang out here for one reason! That's right, we all love Term! No, just kidding! Actually we hang out here because we have things in common (hot tubs) among other things. I posted the entire GW string because it irritates my butt that people out there believe something just because; "they heard or were told or they saw". Sometimes I think we all have a little Lemming in us!
No I do not buy into the fact that mankind is causing GW. Yes, the Earth is warming; however, it has in the past on several occasions.
I think we, are for the most part educated people or we would be on "Im the Im's" forum discussing our heavenly Ravens! Since we are not, we should agree to disagree. Yes, even though we are right! ;D
This has been an enjoyable string!
-
I'm assuming you are still listing yourself as part of the problem Anne? As we all are, if there is a problem?
Yes, we are all part of the problem, but that was not my point.
Any yes, of course there is a problem. There is no "if."
This thread has started to bum me out.
-
Yes, we are all part of the problem, but that was not my point.
Any yes, of course there is a problem. There is no "if."
This thread has started to bum me out.
Don't be bummed out. Rather than be so ademently convinced by one side of the argument and bummed that alot seem to not view it the same way. Be happy that there JUST MAY BE some validity to the other side of the argument, investigate it and rejoice in the fact that it MAY NOT be the end of our society, or the next, or then next, or the next, or the next.......you get the idea.