Cap and Trade vote on Friday

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

I bolded some stuff to above to reply to the post.

But I got blinded with psuedoscience.

OMG.
I humbly submit a question to the board:
Is this how the general public (Joe the Plumber)
thinks and believes?
Im serious.
This is scary.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html

Okay.
I read it again.

Nothing I read in the article refutes anything
I have read before. Or what I was planning to refute.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Okay.
I read it again.

Nothing I read in the article refutes anything
I have read before. Or what I was planning to refute.

That global warming is a bs theory? Seems like there a lot of evidence that refutes it and people that are certainly qualified that are making these points. The fact remains that we wont know who is right or wrong for a long time but we do know that as Chinese dont seem to give a damn so whatever we do is largely meaningless anyway.

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

That global warming is a bs theory? Seems like there a lot of evidence that refutes it and people that are certainly qualified that are making these points. The fact remains that we wont know who is right or wrong for a long time but we do know that as Chinese dont seem to give a damn so whatever we do is largely meaningless anyway.

Global warming is occurring.
There is no BS.
Global temps have increased for the last 50 years and most likely more.
Scientist who believe otherwise are not looking at
all the numbers based on what I have read.

No actually most evidence says that the temp increases have been
much more rapid than in the past unless you do some number fixing.

AGAIN.
The real question are human beings causing this.
And THIS is the real question that is not clear... to me anyways.

I will also state there is no direct link between cigarrettes and lung
cancer. But the numbers show a close correlation. We have no direct
evidence that any organic products from cigarette smoke has
caused a mutation or altered a person's lung cell DNA so that it undergoes
uncontrolled growth that kills the person.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html

OK..I'll bite..why is everything you disagree with the "Liberal Media" and everything you agree with the Washington Times, FOX News or The WSJ..obviously not media at all...I guess

[Danzig]

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2...6-31282991_ITM



i can't help but wonder, after living thru warnings of impending doom from a soon to occur ice age, and now dealing with catastrophic warming, if these aren't just futile exercises of man attempting to control things that are really beyond his control?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2...6-31282991_ITM



i can't help but wonder, after living thru warnings of impending doom from a soon to occur ice age, and now dealing with catastrophic warming, if these aren't just futile exercises of man attempting to control things that are really beyond his control?

Control..no? But if Joey, Timmi, Cannon or others really believe Global Warming is a huge hoax...a "Cottage Industry"..than there is no conversation.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Control..no? But if Joey, Timmi, Cannon or others really believe Global Warming is a huge hoax...a "Cottage Industry"..than there is no conversation.

But didn't you read the article? There are a whole 700 scientists worldwide estimated to be skeptics of man made global warming. I don't know what could be more conclusive. Oh, wait, I do, if there weren't 99% on the other side.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

But didn't you read the article? There are a whole 700 scientists worldwide estimated to be skeptics of man made global warming. I don't know what could be more conclusive. Oh, wait, I do, if there weren't 99% on the other side.

not a 'majority rules' argument??? i wonder if more would step forward if they didn't fear a backlash. galileo was right, but denied his own correct findings to avoid being burned at the stake.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Danzig

not a 'majority rules' argument??? i wonder if more would step forward if they didn't fear a backlash. galileo was right, but denied his own correct findings to avoid being burned at the stake.

You are really comparing the plight of the modern scientist to Galileo?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Danzig

not a 'majority rules' argument??? i wonder if more would step forward if they didn't fear a backlash. galileo was right, but denied his own correct findings to avoid being burned at the stake.

There are none to step forward..I bet that half the ones that did don't even believe what they are saying but are just doing it hoping for the PR. Arguing the dollars allocated for GW, allocated for windmills, etc is wrong is one thing,...arguing that it doesn't exist is like saying the Earth is flat...or maybe Columbus is still wrong...

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

But didn't you read the article? There are a whole 700 scientists worldwide estimated to be skeptics of man made global warming. I don't know what could be more conclusive. Oh, wait, I do, if there weren't 99% on the other side.

Thanks climate expert!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Control..no? But if Joey, Timmi, Cannon or others really believe Global Warming is a huge hoax...a "Cottage Industry"..than there is no conversation.

hoax might be the wrong word. i'm sure some scientists then believed in a looming ice age as much as some scientists now believe there is warming. the question is just how much we affect it for good or bad? we seem to think we are far more important than we really are, so i'd imagine we also think we play a far greater role in the grand scheme of things than we really do...
i also can't help but wonder if there isn't an agenda for some folks. one argument against fossil fuels is the pollution-what better way to convince everyone there's need to change to alternative energy than to say that continued use of what we're relying on now means the end of the world? i'm skeptical about the whole deal, mainly due to past actions-which is why i posted that link. we've been here before, only we were headed to a cold disaster, not a warm one. it seems, according to scientists, that whatever we're doing is wrong-we cause too much cold, and now too much heat. either way, i guess we're screwed.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

hoax might be the wrong word. i'm sure some scientists then believed in a looming ice age as much as some scientists now believe there is warming. the question is just how much we affect it for good or bad? we seem to think we are far more important than we really are, so i'd imagine we also think we play a far greater role in the grand scheme of things than we really do...
i also can't help but wonder if there isn't an agenda for some folks. one argument against fossil fuels is the pollution-what better way to convince everyone there's need to change to alternative energy than to say that continued use of what we're relying on now means the end of the world? i'm skeptical about the whole deal, mainly due to past actions-which is why i posted that link. we've been here before, only we were headed to a cold disaster, not a warm one. it seems, according to scientists, that whatever we're doing is wrong-we cause too much cold, and now too much heat. either way, i guess we're screwed.

That is what the entire push has been. A politicalized agenda. The facts are still murky but the way that some have characterized Global warming as an absolutely man made phenomenon, they cant turn back now. Hell if the earth starts cooling they will still be maintaining they were right and their actions worked! The problem is the world is a really big place and it is close to impossible to interpret all the data and factors in play to come up with a usable hypothesis that is 99.9% right. Because of this it is also impossible to tell if any of the measures that we have taken or will take will do any good.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

That is what the entire push has been. A politicalized agenda. The facts are still murky but the way that some have characterized Global warming as an absolutely man made phenomenon, they cant turn back now. Hell if the earth starts cooling they will still be maintaining they were right and their actions worked! The problem is the world is a really big place and it is close to impossible to interpret all the data and factors in play to come up with a usable hypothesis that is 99.9% right. Because of this it is also impossible to tell if any of the measures that we have taken or will take will do any good.

I've never seen anybody characterize climate change as "an absolutely man-made phenomenom."

No, it's not "close to impossible to interpret all the data". It's done every day.

We have already measured the results of changes we have made, and seen the good they will do, for example concerning acid rain and pollution in cities.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Control..no? But if Joey, Timmi, Cannon or others really believe Global Warming is a huge hoax...a "Cottage Industry"..than there is no conversation.

No one said it is a huge hoax but there certainly is a lot of inconclusive data and a growing group of influential scientists that have created a doubt. Trying to say that the global warming push hasn't been jammed down our throats as an absolute truth is myopic. I have no knowledge in this field but as more data is being crunched, non-political scientific figures are casting doubt. Why shouldn't I?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

No one said it is a huge hoax but there certainly is a lot of inconclusive data and a growing group of influential scientists that have created a doubt. Trying to say that the global warming push hasn't been jammed down our throats as an absolute truth is myopic. I have no knowledge in this field but as more data is being crunched, non-political scientific figures are casting doubt. Why shouldn't I?

Why do these scientists get press in front of the general public? It's because the vast majority of the rest of the scientific community thinks their theories have no basis, and are wrong. They have no validity in front of the scientific community.

There is not a big lack of consensus at all regarding global warming. Only a small minority across disciplines "cast doubt".

Bush confused and intertwined science with religion and politics. That has to stop.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Why do these scientists get press in front of the general public? It's because the vast majority of the rest of the scientific community thinks their theories have no basis, and are wrong. They have no validity in front of the scientific community.

There is not a big lack of consensus at all regarding global warming. Only a small minority across disciplines "cast doubt".

Bush confused and intertwined science with religion and politics. That has to stop.

What does Bush have to do with this? Are you drinking?

Since when do the anti global warming scientists get the headlines? And why would any of the scientists mentioned in just the posted article have no validity? Says who? You have no idea which side is correct, you just think you do.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2...6-31282991_ITM



i can't help but wonder, after living thru warnings of impending doom from a soon to occur ice age, and now dealing with catastrophic warming, if these aren't just futile exercises of man attempting to control things that are really beyond his control?

.....or attempting to control others!

It's the sun, stupid.

Or not.

Jobs > environment

Get some god damned jobs for the people to pay for this global warming tax and stop punishing the people who have jobs by having them carry the burden of increased taxes so slapdicks who don't have jobs can have a/c.

Obama is a failure.