Global Warming

[Hubbell]

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/no_evidence.pdf

<3

[88Chaz88]

Boring.

Do you have any dancing monkeys?

[Snowie]

So there are still people around who believe in man made global warming?

[Caffy]

So there are still people around who believe in man made global warming?

No. There are people who lie about believing in man made global warming to push their political agenda, or gain access to funding for their research projects.

[DocGonzo]

try a real source, plz...glad to listen then

the top guy at this website is -

President: Robert Ferguson has 26 years of Capitol Hill experience, having worked in both the House and Senate. He served in the House Republican Study Committee, the Senate Republican Policy Committee; as Chief of Staff to Congressman Jack Fields (R-TX) from 1981-1997, Chief of Staff to Congressman John E. Peterson (R-PA) from 1997-2002 and Chief of Staff to Congressman Rick Renzi (R-AZ) in 2002. He has considerable policy experience in climate change science, mercury science, energy and mining, forests and resources, clean air and the environment. His undergraduate and advanced degrees were taken at Brigham Young University and George Washington University, respectively. Ferguson served active duty in the US Army from 1966-1970.


a partisan hack and lobbyist...look him up, the rest of the "top" folks there also wither under even casual scrutiny

not that they don't raise some decent points, but i would bet if you follow their money you would find out all you need to about their real motivations...same as with Gore

try not to be so naive as to be so gullible

[Cautes]

the sun makes the clima, nothing else

[Hubbell]

try a real source, plz...glad to listen then

the top guy at this website is -

President: Robert Ferguson has 26 years of Capitol Hill experience, having worked in both the House and Senate. He served in the House Republican Study Committee, the Senate Republican Policy Committee; as Chief of Staff to Congressman Jack Fields (R-TX) from 1981-1997, Chief of Staff to Congressman John E. Peterson (R-PA) from 1997-2002 and Chief of Staff to Congressman Rick Renzi (R-AZ) in 2002. He has considerable policy experience in climate change science, mercury science, energy and mining, forests and resources, clean air and the environment. His undergraduate and advanced degrees were taken at Brigham Young University and George Washington University, respectively. Ferguson served active duty in the US Army from 1966-1970.


a partisan hack and lobbyist...look him up, the rest of the "top" folks there also wither under even casual scrutiny

not that they don't raise some decent points, but i would bet if you follow their money you would find out all you need to about their real motivations...same as with Gore

try not to be so naive as to be so gullible

Point out any fallacies in it.

oh wait

You can't

Just cause he gets money from x source doesn't mean he isnt' right.

Get back to the nursing home grandpa

[Milo Hobgoblin]

try a real source, plz...glad to listen then

the top guy at this website is -

President: Robert Ferguson has 26 years of Capitol Hill experience, having worked in both the House and Senate. He served in the House Republican Study Committee, the Senate Republican Policy Committee; as Chief of Staff to Congressman Jack Fields (R-TX) from 1981-1997, Chief of Staff to Congressman John E. Peterson (R-PA) from 1997-2002 and Chief of Staff to Congressman Rick Renzi (R-AZ) in 2002. He has considerable policy experience in climate change science, mercury science, energy and mining, forests and resources, clean air and the environment. His undergraduate and advanced degrees were taken at Brigham Young University and George Washington University, respectively. Ferguson served active duty in the US Army from 1966-1970.


a partisan hack and lobbyist...look him up, the rest of the "top" folks there also wither under even casual scrutiny

not that they don't raise some decent points, but i would bet if you follow their money you would find out all you need to about their real motivations...same as with Gore

try not to be so naive as to be so gullible



Doc.. the same can be said about 99% of the guys who publish reports on both sides of the fence.

Eventually you're going to have to get off the fence.. because you cant support legislation that will costs taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars if you are simply unsure.

I think thats a big part of the problem.. the climate is always changing.. but there is no comcrete proof that humans are causing it or that we can actually reverse it .. or that we even should. And for those reasons a lone.. ANY legislation is premature.

[DocGonzo]

Doc.. the same can be said about 99% of the guys who publish reports on both sides of the fence.

Eventually you're going to have to get off the fence.. because you cant support legislation that will costs taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars if you are simply unsure.

I think thats a big part of the problem.. the climate is always changing.. but there is no comcrete proof that humans are causing it or that we can actually reverse it .. or that we even should. And for those reasons a lone.. ANY legislation is premature.

here's a practical experiment for you...

seal up your garage, airtight...lock the door from the outside

then start up your car and let it run for 8 hours

then get back to me...

EDIT: do note what i said about Gore...same thing as this "group"...follow the money and fuck those who stand to profit by false reporting/writing from either "side"

just don't be taken in by ANY shill, imo

[Konjikino]

omg the planet is melting people!

[Grisu]

so far this has been the coldest summer in like 4 years. hmmm

[Hubbell]

so far this has been the coldest summer in like 4 years. hmmm

word
I've been wearing a sweatshirt the last few days here in CT

[Milo Hobgoblin]

here's a practical experiment for you...

seal up your garage, airtight...lock the door from the outside

then start up your car and let it run for 8 hours
then get back to me...

EDIT: do note what i said about Gore...same thing as this "group"...follow the money and fuck those who stand to profit by false reporting/writing from either "side"

just don't be taken in by ANY shill, imo

LOL.. you're joking with that example .. right? But I guess that does tell us which side of the fence you're already on.. even if you dont realize it.

[Milo Hobgoblin]

so far this has been the coldest summer in like 4 years. hmmm

Because the climate nuts hav changed their mind.. sicne the actualy physical world isnt working towards their predictions.. they went from calling it "global warming" to 'climate change"

now it all works exactly as they predict... if we dont immediately move back into caves.. stop using any sort of electricity.. we are all DOOMED!!!!!!!!!

[Bissen]

I love how most people on forumfall have taken the train from global warming valley and straight to conspiracy alley.

You guys are right up there with JFK, the moonlanding, 9/11 and all the other shit corporate media wont touch with a pitchfork.

Smell that?

[DocGonzo]

LOL.. you're joking with that example .. right? But I guess that does tell us which side of the fence you're already on.. even if you dont realize it.

you are making assumptions without reading, or perhaps without thinking about what you read

read it again

as for my "experiment", it's deadly serious...

i cannot say for certain that what Man has spewed is the only cause..i wouldn't say it without definitive proof...which there is none, afaik....but my little "experiment" does point out one very real fact

we throw shit into the air that's poisonous, and the quantity/quality of which does not happen just by nature alone...

my thinking is that whatever we can do to decrease the shitting in our own beds, so to speak, is a good thing for the long term health of Humanity and our environs...so how about putting less poisonous shit in our air?

so we don't wind up like the person in the garage of my little "experiment"

simple enough?

[Silverhandorder]

you are making assumptions without reading, or perhaps without thinking about what you read

read it again

as for my "experiment", it's deadly serious...

i cannot say for certain that what Man has spewed is the only cause..i wouldn't say it without definitive proof...which there is none, afaik....but my little "experiment" does point out one very real fact

we throw shit into the air that's poisonous, and the quantity/quality of which does not happen just by nature alone...

my thinking is that whatever we can do to decrease the shitting in our own beds, so to speak, is a good thing for the long term health of Humanity and our environs...so how about putting less poisonous shit in our air?

so we don't wind up like the person in the garage of my little "experiment"

simple enough?
CO2 is not poisonous...

[jonyak]

CO2 is not poisonous...

Carbon monoxide poisoning occurs after the inhalation of carbon monoxide (CO). Carbon monoxide is a significantly toxic gas, but, being colorless, odorless, tasteless, and non-irritating, it is very difficult for people to detect.[1] Exposures at 100 ppm can be life-threatening. In the United States, OSHA limits long-term workplace exposure levels to 50 ppm.

Carbon monoxide is a product of combustion of organic matter with insufficient oxygen supply, and is often produced in domestic or industrial settings by vehicles and other gasoline-powered tools, heaters, and cooking equipment. As a result, carbon monoxide poisoning is the most common type of fatal poisoning in many countries.[2] Symptoms of mild poisoning include headaches, vertigo, and flu-like effects; larger exposures can lead to significant toxicity of the central nervous system, heart, and even death. Following poisoning, long-term sequelae often occur. Carbon monoxide can also have severe effects on the fetus of a pregnant woman.

Carbon monoxide combines with hemoglobin to form carboxyhemoglobin (HbCO) in the blood and prevents binding of oxygen, so causing anoxemia. Myoglobin and mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase are thought to be compromised, too. Carboxy-haemoglobin can revert to haemoglobin, but the recovery takes time because HbCO is fairly stable. Treatment largely consists of administering 100% oxygen or hyperbaric oxygen therapy, although the optimum treatment remains controversial.[3] Domestic carbon monoxide poisoning can be prevented by early detection with the use of household carbon monoxide detectors.

[DocGonzo]

CO2 is not poisonous...

go back up to my experiment and try it out

or, if you want to eliminate everything else (carbon monoxide for example), then lock yourself into an airtight room and set off 30 or 40 fire extinguishers and get back to us

[Milo Hobgoblin]

you are making assumptions without reading, or perhaps without thinking about what you read

read it again

as for my "experiment", it's deadly serious...

i cannot say for certain that what Man has spewed is the only cause..i wouldn't say it without definitive proof...which there is none, afaik....but my little "experiment" does point out one very real fact

we throw shit into the air that's poisonous, and the quantity/quality of which does not happen just by nature alone...

my thinking is that whatever we can do to decrease the shitting in our own beds, so to speak, is a good thing for the long term health of Humanity and our environs...so how about putting less poisonous shit in our air?

so we don't wind up like the person in the garage of my little "experiment"

simple enough?

Its not a closed system... you garage doesnt have millions of square miles of green belts absorbing and processing the waste.. millions of square miles of desert absorbing Carbon by products vast oceans filled with algae etc..

Your experiment is a joke that in no way resembles our biosphere.

I dont know what you're trying to sell.. but come up with a better experiment to make your example.

[Silverhandorder]

Carbon monoxide poisoning occurs after the inhalation of carbon monoxide (CO). Carbon monoxide is a significantly toxic gas, but, being colorless, odorless, tasteless, and non-irritating, it is very difficult for people to detect.[1] Exposures at 100 ppm can be life-threatening. In the United States, OSHA limits long-term workplace exposure levels to 50 ppm.

Carbon monoxide is a product of combustion of organic matter with insufficient oxygen supply, and is often produced in domestic or industrial settings by vehicles and other gasoline-powered tools, heaters, and cooking equipment. As a result, carbon monoxide poisoning is the most common type of fatal poisoning in many countries.[2] Symptoms of mild poisoning include headaches, vertigo, and flu-like effects; larger exposures can lead to significant toxicity of the central nervous system, heart, and even death. Following poisoning, long-term sequelae often occur. Carbon monoxide can also have severe effects on the fetus of a pregnant woman.

Carbon monoxide combines with hemoglobin to form carboxyhemoglobin (HbCO) in the blood and prevents binding of oxygen, so causing anoxemia. Myoglobin and mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase are thought to be compromised, too. Carboxy-haemoglobin can revert to haemoglobin, but the recovery takes time because HbCO is fairly stable. Treatment largely consists of administering 100% oxygen or hyperbaric oxygen therapy, although the optimum treatment remains controversial.[3] Domestic carbon monoxide poisoning can be prevented by early detection with the use of household carbon monoxide detectors.
Moron the CO is a reducing agent. It protect our ozone layer by getting rid of other peroxiradicals before they can reach it. Ofcourse it is poisonous if inhaled. Smokers get it several thousand fold more then present in the atmosphere and they are fine. We will never have that much CO in our atmosphere.
go back up to my experiment and try it out

or, if you want to eliminate everything else (carbon monoxide for example), then lock yourself into an airtight room and set off 30 or 40 fire extinguishers and get back to us
Yeah the experiment proves nothing. You can poison your self on water.

[jonyak]

Moron the CO is a reducing agent. It protect our ozone layer by getting rid of other peroxiradicals before they can reach it. Ofcourse it is poisonous if inhaled. Smokers get it several thousand fold more then present in the atmosphere and they are fine. We will never have that much CO in our atmosphere.


Not a moron, you said it was not poisonous, science disagrees with you.

doesn't matter if we will ever have the concentrations needed to kill us. You should have said:

CO2 will never be present in concentrations great enough to produce harmful effect on a human subject.

[Silverhandorder]

Not a moron, you said it was not poisonous, science disagrees with you.

doesn't matter if we will ever have the concentrations needed to kill us. You should have said:

CO2 will never be present in concentrations great enough to produce harmful effect on a human subject.

CO2 is not CO. As I said anything is poisonous. If we are talking scientifically CO2 is not poisonous because it is not realistic that you will ever encounter those concentrations. You will die of a lack of oxygen before you die of CO2 poisoning.

[DocGonzo]

Its not a closed system... you garage doesnt have millions of square miles of green belts absorbing and processing the waste.. millions of square miles of desert absorbing Carbon by products vast oceans filled with algae etc..

Your experiment is a joke that in no way resembles our biosphere.

I dont know what you're trying to sell.. but come up with a better experiment to make your example.

our biosphere is indeed a closed loop system...just a larger one than you are thinking of

do try and keep up

NONE of our earthly resources are infinite, but we have been treating it that way for as long as Man has existed, because we never thought we could influence anything due to scale

how many lands were lush during a period of history , but are desert now, because sheep overgrazed or poor farming techniques destroyed the topsoil?

how many species of fish/whales are gone forever because everyone thought it was an infinite supply?

hell, the forest on Manhattan island was thought to be infinite...nwo there is just Central Park

my point is that when does something overwhelm the feedback loop and cause either runaway or an out of paradigm shift?

Murphy was an optimist, and the only Law not to have an exception so far is the one concerning unintended consequences

but you knew that, right?

[NewRage]

So if I seal a jar airtight right now, and humans continue to pump shit in the air than 10 years down the road that jar will be 3 degree cooler than the rest of the atmosphere?

[DocGonzo]

So if I seal a jar airtight right now, and humans continue to pump shit in the air than 10 years down the road that jar will be 3 degree cooler than the rest of the atmosphere?

look up "room temperature" plz...kk...tnx

;)

[Milo Hobgoblin]

our biosphere is indeed a closed loop system...just a larger one than you are thinking of

do try and keep up

NONE of our earthly resources are infinite, but we have been treating it that way for as long as Man has existed, because we never thought we could influence anything due to scale

how many lands were lush during a period of history , but are desert now, because sheep overgrazed or poor farming techniques destroyed the topsoil?

how many species of fish/whales are gone forever because everyone thought it was an infinite supply?

hell, the forest on Manhattan island was thought to be infinite...nwo there is just Central Park

my point is that when does something overwhelm the feedback loop and cause either runaway or an out of paradigm shift?

Murphy was an optimist, and the only Law not to have an exception so far is the one concerning unintended consequences

but you knew that, right?

and my point is the we humans are not overwhelming the loop to anywhere near the degree clamied by these global warming nuts..

and certainly not to the degree that it justifies buttfucking our economy to correct something the Chinese will immediately offset to gain a competitive advantage.

As far as a closed loop.. its not in the sense that you're referring too in that it self corrects unlike your garage.

[DocGonzo]

and my point is the we humans are not overwhelming the loop to anywhere near the degree clamied by these global warming nuts..

and certainly not to the degree that it justifies buttfucking our economy to correct something the Chinese will immediately offset to gain a competitive advantage.

As far as a closed loop.. its not in the sense that you're referring too in that it self corrects unlike your garage.

show your proof?

those who say it's not enough to effect the system have even less "evidence" than the idiots who say it's all people's fault...imo, it flies in the face of Reason to think it has no effect....

your second assertion is also flawed based on the facts ( such as China spending much more than we are working to "get green" after the embarrassment of air quality in Beijing for the Olympics, as well as rivers, topsoil erosion and others things they are taking seriously)

as for self correcting, there are indeed positive and negative feedback loops in our ecosystem....can you show definitive figures on how much or little any bit of the systemics can take before cascade failure?

i highly doubt it, we are barely aware of most of the variables involved yet, but we are lightyears ahead of where we were 100 years ago in understanding it

now, back in the garage with you until Enlightenment is achieved...

[Silverhandorder]

show your proof?

those who say it's not enough to effect the system have even less "evidence" than the idiots who say it's all people's fault...imo, it flies in the face of Reason to think it has no effect....

your second assertion is also flawed based on the facts ( such as China spending much more than we are working to "get green" after the embarrassment of air quality in Beijing for the Olympics, as well as rivers, topsoil erosion and others things they are taking seriously)

as for self correcting, there are indeed positive and negative feedback loops in our ecosystem....can you show definitive figures on how much or little any bit of the systemics can take before cascade failure?

i highly doubt it, we are barely aware of most of the variables involved yet, but we are lightyears ahead of where we were 100 years ago in understanding it

now, back in the garage with you until Enlightenment is achieved...

So why not ban all pollution right away? That makes sense. That is how it worked until EPA. The business is not going to leave they will just pass on the costs.

[Bissen]

and certainly not to the degree that it justifies buttfucking our economy to correct something the Chinese will immediately offset to gain a competitive advantage.

Go fuck your economy. And anyways. Going green might end up saving said economy's ass. So stfu.

As far as a closed loop.. its not in the sense that you're referring too in that it self corrects unlike your garage.

Ive argumented on closed loop in many a global warming thread. And I would like to once again point towards the history regarding the rise and fall of Rapa Nui aka Easter Island.

Go play look see at what massive deforestation did to their little tropical paradise. All because their stupid religion made them build huge ass idols.

Today the economy has become the religion. Thou shalt worship paper.

GG bank cartels!

[ltankhsd]

Carbon monoxide poisoning occurs after the inhalation of carbon monoxide (CO). Carbon monoxide is a significantly toxic gas, but, being colorless, odorless, tasteless, and non-irritating, it is very difficult for people to detect.[1] Exposures at 100 ppm can be life-threatening. In the United States, OSHA limits long-term workplace exposure levels to 50 ppm.

Carbon monoxide is a product of combustion of organic matter with insufficient oxygen supply, and is often produced in domestic or industrial settings by vehicles and other gasoline-powered tools, heaters, and cooking equipment. As a result, carbon monoxide poisoning is the most common type of fatal poisoning in many countries.[2] Symptoms of mild poisoning include headaches, vertigo, and flu-like effects; larger exposures can lead to significant toxicity of the central nervous system, heart, and even death. Following poisoning, long-term sequelae often occur. Carbon monoxide can also have severe effects on the fetus of a pregnant woman.

Carbon monoxide combines with hemoglobin to form carboxyhemoglobin (HbCO) in the blood and prevents binding of oxygen, so causing anoxemia. Myoglobin and mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase are thought to be compromised, too. Carboxy-haemoglobin can revert to haemoglobin, but the recovery takes time because HbCO is fairly stable. Treatment largely consists of administering 100% oxygen or hyperbaric oxygen therapy, although the optimum treatment remains controversial.[3] Domestic carbon monoxide poisoning can be prevented by early detection with the use of household carbon monoxide detectors.

He said CO2, not CO. L2Chemistry

[Gloomrender]

Just like Doc to hang over one side of the fence while claiming no preference for either side. :lmao: All for the ego baby! :rolleyes:

[DocGonzo]

Just like Doc to hang over one side of the fence while claiming no preference for either side. :lmao:

actually i said there was no definitive proof for either side, but i am leaning towards the fact that the shit we put into our biosphere is adversely affecting it...how much is not quantifiable currently


just like you to be such a fanboi , yet still not be able to read what was typed correctly

;)

[Gloomrender]

actually i said there was no definitive proof for either side, but i am leaning towards the fact that the shit we put into our biosphere is adversely affecting it...how much is not quantifiable currently

:lmao: So you're hanging over one side exactly like I said you are. I lust for how you're going to try to spin this one off with total bullshit...


just like you to be such a fanboi , yet still not be able to read what was typed correctly

If thinking that your obvious, ego-driven, hypocritical bias is funny makes me a "fanboi", then I'm guilty. You're hilariously absurd.



Geese...must be a massive wall of text incoming. I'm sure it will be bullshit at It's finest. Can't wait.

[DocGonzo]

So why not ban all pollution right away? That makes sense. That is how it worked until EPA. The business is not going to leave they will just pass on the costs.

sorry i missed this earlier....

banning pollution right away would shut down a huge percentage of all businesses, all cars and trucks would stop, the coal fired electricity plants, all chemical plants, all refineries and a shit ton of other things immediately

as far as "that is how it worked until the EPA"? what the fuck are you talking about?

just to clear things up, have a look at the air and water pollution figures prior to or just at the beginning of the EPA...both LA and NYC have LESS smog now thna they did before EPA, the Great Lakes and almost every other major waterway are LESS polluted now than they were then

while i can agree the EPA is far from perfect, it is infinitely better than the nothing that was there before hand

@Gloomrender - what's so hard to understand?

that i don't think what Man has done is the only factor involved, but that it is part of the overall problem? is that difficult for you?

that i am not in the Gore camp of "emergency"! nor in the camp of "nothing's wrong"...but rather think that we should be more careful, examine the actual impact and correct behavior accordingly?

do point out the spin, because that's all i've said on the subject...ever

as for your nutsack riding fanboi-ism...it's ok, i'm used to it...you'll get over it as soon as you find another binky to put in your mouth instead of my balls

[Jezrith]

No. There are people who lie about believing in man made global warming to push their political agenda, or gain access to funding for their research projects.

Everyone should believe in it! Man made global warming is the truth! BTW, if I'm starting a business converting cars over to bio-diesel hybrid engines, which you all should be very interested in doing. If you aren't, then you obviously want to kill children and eat live puppy dogs...

[Floyd]

everyone should believe in it! Man made global warming is the truth! Btw, if anyone is i'm starting a business converting cars over to bio-diesel hybrid engines, which you all should be very interested in doing. If you aren't, then you obviously want to kill children and eat live puppy dogs...

ill take 4 of them!

[StainlessSteelRat]

try a real source, plz...glad to listen then

the top guy at this website is -

President: Robert Ferguson has 26 years of Capitol Hill experience, having worked in both the House and Senate. He served in the House Republican Study Committee, the Senate Republican Policy Committee; as Chief of Staff to Congressman Jack Fields (R-TX) from 1981-1997, Chief of Staff to Congressman John E. Peterson (R-PA) from 1997-2002 and Chief of Staff to Congressman Rick Renzi (R-AZ) in 2002. He has considerable policy experience in climate change science, mercury science, energy and mining, forests and resources, clean air and the environment. His undergraduate and advanced degrees were taken at Brigham Young University and George Washington University, respectively. Ferguson served active duty in the US Army from 1966-1970.


a partisan hack and lobbyist...look him up, the rest of the "top" folks there also wither under even casual scrutiny

not that they don't raise some decent points, but i would bet if you follow their money you would find out all you need to about their real motivations...same as with Gore

try not to be so naive as to be so gullible

The source is just as good as any other. They guy you mention isn't the author.

There's a good debate (back to back radio show interviews) between a pro warmer Brooks and the author of that link Evans here:

http://blogs.abc.net.au/sa/2008/07/climate-change.html?program=adelaide_mornings

On a side note, Brooks talks about the temps of the Stratos and Tropospheres as being indicative of man made warming (one cooling and one warming). However, if you look at the NASA data, the Low & Mid Tropospheres and the Stratosphere tend to mirror each other from 1979 on. If a warming troposhere and cooling stratosphere was evidence of man made global warming due to CO2 emissions as Brooks claims, the data should be linear from 1979 on since CO2 has been increasing steadily since that time. The actual data fluctuates through periods of warming and cooling w/ each sphere mirroring the other and the Mid sphere showing insignificant change.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/msu.html

Honestly, they are all full of shit in my opinion. They don't know and they profess to know based on who pays them.

So I'm a cynic and in case anyone links or has linked this:

http://bravenewclimate.com/2008/08/10/dr-david-evans-born-again-alarmist/

What is claimed here is not actually accurate w/ regards to Evans' claims being refuted. He links the podcast I linked above as proof of his claimes being refuted but Brooks fails to do this imo.

[Gloomrender]

@Gloomrender - what's so hard to understand?

that i don't think what Man has done is the only factor involved, but that it is part of the overall problem? is that difficult for you?

that i am not in the Gore camp of "emergency"! nor in the camp of "nothing's wrong"...but rather think that we should be more careful, examine the actual impact and correct behavior accordingly?

do point out the spin, because that's all i've said on the subject...ever

You just said It's a fact "that the shit we put into our biosphere is adversely affecting it...", when there is, in fact, no proof of that. And now you vaguely say that we need to "correct our behavior accordingly", which could mean taking vastly expensive or extreme measures. And you expect anyone to believe that you're not hanging over one side of the issue...OBVIOUSLY you ARE. Even if you yourself are so fucking stupid that you do not even realize it you are doing it, which would make sense since this is all ego-driven anyway. Whatever the reason, It's easy for anyone to see that you're totally biased here, and It's comical.

as for your fanboi-ism, der der der...

:rolleyes: Get over your stupid little self. Pointing out what an obvious jackass you are in multiple threads is not "fanboi-ism"; It's ridicule. I in no way admire what a weak minded, philosophically schizophrenic moron you are. You're nothing more than a clueless clown for me to criticize, mock, and laugh at.

[Ankh]

Global warming stole my pizza!

[Jezrith]

ill take 4 of them!

Bio-diesel hybrids or puppy dogs?

Either way, I'm making a killing! Hey-oh!

[DocGonzo]

You just said It's a fact "that the shit we put into our biosphere is adversely affecting it...", when there is, in fact, no proof of that. And now you vaguely say that we need to "correct our behavior accordingly", which could mean taking vastly expensive or extreme measures. And you expect anyone to believe that you're not hanging over one side of the issue...OBVIOUSLY you ARE. Even if you yourself are so fucking stupid that you do not even realize it you are doing it, which would make sense since this is all ego-driven anyway. Whatever the reason, It's easy for anyone to see that you're totally biased here, and It's comical.

funny...so you don't think polluting is adversely affecting anything and that we should not take appropriate action to correct the behavior?

you appear to erroneously think that merely because i state that defective actions should be properly corrected i am on the extremeists side, does this mean you missed the part where i clearly state that Gore and his ilk are just as bad as those in complete denial?

how can you miss the obvious...that all i am saying is that i think it's proper to clean the fuck up after ourselves and not shit where we eat?

no matter, i've stated my point, multiple times since your ability to comprehend basic English appears to be lacking



:rolleyes: Get over your stupid little self. Pointing out what an obvious jackass you are in multiple threads is not "fanboi-ism"; It's ridicule. I in no way admire what a weak minded, philosophically schizophrenic moron you are. You're nothing more than a clueless clown for me to criticize, mock, and laugh at.

glad you admit to cyber stalking me just like a good fanboi should, it's ok...i'll send you some fingernail clipping to keep under your pillow along with an autographed used anal plug for your new pacifier

enjoy your day

[Silverhandorder]

sorry i missed this earlier....

banning pollution right away would shut down a huge percentage of all businesses, all cars and trucks would stop, the coal fired electricity plants, all chemical plants, all refineries and a shit ton of other things immediately
Perhaps you are right. I suspect a better solution would be to pass on the cost of filtering the pollution to the consumer. Why would an owner of a factory close down. No one has a competitive edge over him, everyone else also must avoid emitting pollution. So all the pollution emitters will simply raise their rates to compensate for the filtering. We achieve the same results without doing a lot of unintended bs.


as far as "that is how it worked until the EPA"? what the fuck are you talking about?

just to clear things up, have a look at the air and water pollution figures prior to or just at the beginning of the EPA...both LA and NYC have LESS smog now thna they did before EPA, the Great Lakes and almost every other major waterway are LESS polluted now than they were then

What about you complaining how corporations exploit the law by opting to pay fines and dump? Before EPA their operation would be shut down and everyone involved arrested. I am not familiar with the situation completely but to me it seems hardly required for a regulator to exist to limit pollution.

while i can agree the EPA is far from perfect, it is infinitely better than the nothing that was there before hand
We did have something before EPA. We had people go to the courts and on individual basis take on the polluters. Many types of pollution were eliminated during that time. Just because the public was not aware/concerned about specific pollution effecting NYC and LA does not mean that EPA has done away with it faster.

[DocGonzo]

Perhaps you are right. I suspect a better solution would be to pass on the cost of filtering the pollution to the consumer. Why would an owner of a factory close down. No one has a competitive edge over him, everyone else also must avoid emitting pollution. So all the pollution emitters will simply raise their rates to compensate for the filtering. We achieve the same results without doing a lot of unintended bs.

passing along the cost to allow the Market to function is the theory behind "cap and trade", exactly as you are suggesting here

i'm ambivalent about it, but many think it is a good way to go...



What about you complaining how corporations exploit the law by opting to pay fines and dump? Before EPA their operation would be shut down and everyone involved arrested. I am not familiar with the situation completely but to me it seems hardly required for a regulator to exist to limit pollution.

do check your history...those places didn't get shut down, or even slow down polluting...hence the examples i told you to go and check for yourself...i think you are misinformed on what it was like before the EPA was established, yoru contentions do not match the facts or history in these matters


We did have something before EPA. We had people go to the courts and on individual basis take on the polluters. Many types of pollution were eliminated during that time. Just because the public was not aware/concerned about specific pollution effecting NYC and LA does not mean that EPA has done away with it faster.

in a perfect world it might work that way, but it didn't

private individuals that tried to take these corps to court got beaten up by teams of high priced lawyers and companies who bribed the courts...

as for the smog in NYC and LA...again, look it up for yourself and compare the figures to before the EPA /clean air act and after...it tells the whole tale by itself with the empirical results

this is NOT to say the EPA is any kind of perfect...just that it is a shit ton better than what was there before it, show me a viable alternative that woudl work and i'll be glad to sign up

[Gunther TheBlack]

so far this has been the coldest summer in like 4 years. hmmm


It's been the hottest here since the measurements started.

Global warming is as it says "global" you know. :ohno:


Anyway, Hubbell is just being the opposite of Gore here, which is equally pathetic.

[Gloomrender]

funny...so you don't think polluting is adversely affecting anything and that we should not take appropriate action to correct the behavior?

you appear to erroneously think that merely because i state that defective actions should be properly corrected i am on the extremeists side, does this mean you missed the part where i clearly state that Gore and his ilk are just as bad as those in complete denial?

how can you miss the obvious...that all i am saying is that i think it's proper to clean the fuck up after ourselves and not shit where we eat?

no matter, i've stated my point, multiple times since your ability to comprehend basic English appears to be lacking

Oh, so the strategy is to be as vague as possible now after I expose your obvious bias, real cute. We both know you were referring to global warming directly. And that there is no proof of it. And that "properly correcting" things, which is basically what the Gore folk also propose, could be incredibly wasteful and damaging to society. You're just spinning it so you can say "Well both sides are wrong! But I'm right!"...while really you're not hardly any different than the "gore fanatics" you proudly denounce.


glad you admit to cyber stalking me just like a good fanboi should,

Oh yeahhhhhh Well you can eat my toenails mixed with my steaming hot green bloody shit with a spoon fresh from my assy ass asshole after I microwave it and mail it to you! Oh look, I'm super cool now too! :rolleyes:. Your 16 year old insults aren't impressing anyone, if anything they make you look even more intellectually retarded. Furthermore, calling you a hypocritical idiot in two different threads I happen to read isn't "cyber-stalking", It's highlighting what a consistent dumb ass you are. You're just a clueless ego stroking moron with no legitimate viewpoint on any subject; you prove when you comment on anything that "both/all sides are utterly wrong but I'm not!", like the totally unthoughtful jackass ignoramus you really are.

[DocGonzo]

Oh, so the strategy is to be as vague as possible now after I expose your obvious bias, real cute. We both know you were referring to global warming directly. And that there is no proof of it. And that "properly correcting" things, which is basically what the Gore folk also propose, could be incredibly wasteful and damaging to society. You're just spinning it so you can say "Well both sides are wrong! But I'm right!"...while really you're not hardly any different than the "gore fanatics" you proudly denounce.

again, you appear to think, in your little fanboi fantasy world, that you can read my mind, and that you think such an ESP experience is more informative than what i actually typed

check again, hell check ANY time in all of Forumfall when i have typed something on the topic...my position has not changed

i think Gore and the alarmists are idiots, and i think the outright deniers are idiots...because the data shows we have some effect, but nothing as conclusive to the disaster scenarios the alarmists paint

but i understand your fervent desire to try and spin shit to fit your preconceived views rather than dealing with the reality of what is, it's ok...you'll grow out of it eventually...right after you realize there is no easter bunny or santa claus



Oh yeahhhhhh Well you can eat my toenails mixed with my steaming hot green bloody shit with a spoon fresh from my assy ass asshole after I microwave it and mail it to you! Oh look, I'm super cool now too! :rolleyes:. Your 16 year old insults aren't impressing anyone, if anything they make you look even more intellectually retarded. Furthermore, calling you a hypocritical idiot in two different threads I happen read isn't cyber-stalking, It's highlighting what a dumb ass you are. You're just a clueless ego stroking moron with no legitimate viewpoint on any subject; you prove when you comment on anything that "both/all sides are utterly wrong but I'm not!", like the total unthoughtful jackass ignoramus you are.

you are trying to hard and just not doing it right, but i am not taking in any troll padawans right now, leave your application at the door

you keep making all these unfounded statements in threads where the actual record is right there for all to read...just who do you think you are trying to deceive here?

doesn't matter...i should know better than to expect Reason from such a rabid fanboi...but do continue, your blatant nerdrage is almost amusing

[Bosemann]

My issue with papers like this is that its not peer-reviewed. I mean, why isn't this guy submitting his 'discoveries' via the normal accepted method of any scientific research paper. Putting aside his questionable credentials on climatology, why hasn't he put these ideas to the test via peer review?

* I did note that he's at least changed his stance that the Earth is actually warming. A few years ago, he kept saying it was cooling.

[StainlessSteelRat]

My issue with papers like this is that its not peer-reviewed. I mean, why isn't this guy submitting his 'discoveries' via the normal accepted method of any scientific research paper. Putting aside his questionable credentials on climatology, why hasn't he put these ideas to the test via peer review?

* I did note that he's at least changed his stance that the Earth is actually warming. A few years ago, he kept saying it was cooling.

He's not really presenting any scientific view. He's debunking the 'scientific' claims of the alarmists as not being real science.

But even so, the real problem w/ this debate is that even a peer review wouldn't mean shit. The reviews would be b(i)ased upon who funds their research.

[Gloomrender]

again, you appear to think, in your little fanboi fantasy world, that you can read my mind, and that you think such an ESP experience is more informative than what i actually typed

I've only quoted exactly what you've said, dipshit.

check again, hell check ANY time in all of Forumfall when i have typed something on the topic...my position has not changed

Of course not, you're consistently going to fashion yourself as "more right than either side" while clearly swinging on the balls of one side.

i think Gore and the alarmists are idiots, and i think the outright deniers are idiots...

Of course...

because the data shows we have some effect, but nothing as conclusive to the disaster scenarios the alarmists paint

Yeah, therefore "the shit we pump into the biosphere clearly affects it", and "we need to make proper corrective measures which could be extreme". "And of course Al Gore is full of shit"-oh wait, that's totally hypocritical and you're obviously biased towards Global Warming Theory.


but i understand your fervent desire to try and spin shit to fit your preconceived views rather than dealing with the reality of what is, it's ok...you'll grow out of it eventually...right after you realize there is no easter bunny or santa claus

It's painfully evident that you're exactly the way I describe you. And It's funny how obviously weak your arguments are, and how lamely you defend them with pure sophistry and BS that doesn't fool anyone with a brain.


you are trying to hard and just not doing it right

You're the one trying too hard to impress the kiddies on this forum by making whatever reference to asses you can after every post like that's clever or original or something. Grow the fuck up...Oh wait, you're the guy that feigns a better understanding than either side of any issue, trying to look superior, while at once essentially adopting one side. You indeed immaturely "try too hard" to be perceived as different somehow, when you're really not. You're a pathetic poseur with no intellectual credibility whatsoever.

[Bosemann]

He's not really presenting any scientific view. He's debunking the 'scientific' claims of the alarmists as not being real science.

But even so, the real problem w/ this debate is that even a peer review wouldn't mean shit. The reviews would be b(i)ased upon who funds their research.

Eh, the guy is making specific claims about how things are in climatology. So, yes the proper channel is peer review.

You're suggesting that peer review has no place in climatology whatsoever do to bias? Who are you to make that claim? Sure, its a wildly debated area, that doesn't change that there are appropriate ways for presenting claims.

[StainlessSteelRat]

Eh, the guy is making specific claims about how things are in climatology. So, yes the proper channel is peer review.

You're suggesting that peer review has no place in climatology whatsoever do to bias? Who are you to make that claim? Sure, its a wildly debated area, that doesn't change that there are appropriate ways for presenting claims.

No, he's citing the methodology used by climatologists and their models as well as the data used as evidence for those claims and methodologies and he is citing his sources. He then goes on to debunk the idea that correlation = causation which is how the alarmists present the data. In other words, there's no evidence for man made global warming. What's to review? His argument is based on logic and the scientific method; not new research and new data.

I'm suggesting that peer review wouldn't amount to anything. Scientists are going to say what they are being paid to say. Who am I to say? Someone who's read a decent amount of papers on the subject where each author is preaching to his paycheck.

For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lindzen

Everything looks peachy until you get to the last section. And it doesn't make him right or wrong; just seems anyone and everyone who gets heard on the subject has $$ at stake.

I happen to agree w/ this guy btw, but the money trail casts doubt on his claims.

[DocGonzo]

I've only quoted exactly what you've said, dipshit.

yes, but you are making up what you assume i meant, rather than just reading the actual words typed...look at your own bits...you quote me but then say "we know what you mean is...", which is the bullshit i am calling you on...stick to just what i typed rather than what you believe i mean...we will get much further that way...just like i take you literally for what you type...no more, no less


Of course not, you're consistently going to fashion yourself as "more right than either side" while clearly swinging on the balls of one side.

again, i clearly state my position, and as clearly state that both side's extremist appear to be full of shit and partisan hacks looking to cash in...my position is to find the correct answer for the situation rather than speculation or ignorant denials of what little actual facts are available

i know nuanced positions are beyond the false dichotomy of your apparent Manichean binary thinking...but it really is that simple...and of course i am going to advocate my position as more correct than the ones i oppose...pretty stupid not to, don't know why you expect otherwise, don't care either



Yeah, therefore "the shit we pump into the biosphere clearly affects it", and "we need to make proper corrective measures which could be extreme". "And of course Al Gore is full of shit"-oh wait, that's totally hypocritical and you're obviously biased towards Global Warming Theory. EDIT: for a missed tag

you misquoted...where do i use the word "extreme" in my position...i don't, rather i contrast my own thoughts AGAINST either extremist position...makes a BIG difference, and shows once again either you can't read, or you are deliberately being a dumbass...or you just can't get past your own prejudices caused by your rabid nerdraged fueled fanboiism...

i am "biased" towards thinking that putting tons and tons of shit into the air and water is probably not good for either air or water (when it comes to being useful to humans)...how much does it take to cause catastrophe?

fuck if i know, but if we can sanely reduce the amount of shit we pollute our environment with, i think that's a good thing...i think it's even better if we take NO chances and stop shitting where we eat

how long would you wait if every evening after the bars close, a bunch of idiots come by and piss in your well? is 3 guys doing the pissing acceptable, but 5 guys is not? 10?

that's my point, i know it's not realistic to stop all such pollution, a Sissyphean feat to even try...but well within our ability to cut it down a lot, to allow the mechanisms that Nature provides to clean up the mess...that's all, really

but it just doesn't matter what the reality is when it concerns what i type...you appear unable to read what's there, and rather infer what your preconceived notion believe is there instead



It's painfully evident that you're exactly the way I describe you. And It's funny how obviously weak your arguments are, and how lamely you defend them with pure sophistry and BS that doesn't fool anyone with a brain.

i'm quite happy to let the Record speak for itself, all of my typings on Forumfall stand on their own merits...never tried to deceive at any time as any in OT can attest....hell, there have been times when someone shows me info that proved me wrong on something...i have done the mea culpa and corrected myself each and every time, try it sometime, you might find the honesty refreshing


You're the one trying too hard to impress the kiddies on this forum by making whatever reference to asses you can after every post like that's clever or original or something. Grow the fuck up...Oh wait, you're the guy that feigns a better understanding than either side of any issue, trying to look superior, while at once essentially adopting one side. You indeed immaturely "try too hard" to be perceived as different somehow, when you're really not. You're a pathetic poseur with no intellectual credibility whatsoever.

again, you make false assumptions...i don't try and "impress" anyone, i do this purely for my own amusement and for the simple fact that there have been a few folks here who have earned my Respect...most of whom i rarely agree with...purely on the merits of their typing/thinking process

all the rest, is pretty amusing...do rage on more, venting might help

but in the end, your opinion matters, how?

edited for a missed tag

[Gloomrender]

yes, but you are making up what you assume i meant, rather than just reading the actual words typed...look at your own bits...you quote me but then say "we know what you mean is...", which is the bullshit i am calling you on...stick to just what i typed rather than what you believe i mean..

i am "biased" towards thinking that putting tons and tons of shit into the air and water is probably not good for either air or water (when it comes to being useful to humans)...how much does it take to cause catastrophe?

fuck if i know, but if we can sanely reduce the amount of shit we pollute our environment with, i think that's a good thing...i think it's even better if we take NO chances and stop shitting where we eat


At this point I wonder if you even realize what the words you use mean, or if you're just bullshitting shit city. Because there is a clear discrepancy between your claim that you don't agree with the Global Warming argument and "we shouldn't pollute and we should take necessary measures" (this includes extreme measures, by the way). If you don't realize it, or do and just won't recognize it, either way It's there to stay.


i'm quite happy to let the Record speak for itself, all of my typings on Forumfall stand on their own merits...

Well given the inherent hypocritical fallacies of your arguments, least the couple-few I've seen out of the corner of my eye's attention, this "record" isn't very veracious.

again, you make false assumptions...i don't try and "impress" anyone, i do this purely for my own amusement

I'm sure portraying oneself as superior than either side of every issue would be amusing. I find it dishonest and annoying, as I have no trouble recognizing the truths independently evident in even an over all faulty argument. Just wanted to point it out.

[DocGonzo]

At this point I wonder if you even realize what the words you use mean, or if you're just bullshitting shit city. Because there is a clear discrepancy between your claim that you don't agree with the Global Warming argument and "we shouldn't pollute and we should take necessary measures" (this includes extreme measures, by the way). If you don't realize it, or do and just won't recognize it, either way It's there to stay.

/sigh

do try and keep up, Gore and other extremists allude that catastrophe is nigh and it's ALL Man's fault, the other end's extremists deny ANYTHING bad is happening

still with me?

i say the data is inconclusive about the catastrophe part, nothing certain about how much is due to natural causes and how much due to Man but that it's not a good idea to shit where you eat and that it makes sense to negatively impact the environment as little as possible

simple? why the fuck is that so difficult for you to understand that i have to say it clearly over and over again...oh, that's right....because you are nto interested in the actuality of it, just your attempt at e-peen waving via cyber stalking fanboi behavior....gg indeed....


Well given the inherent hypocritical fallacies of your arguments, least the couple-few I've seen out of the corner of my eye's attention, this "record" isn't very veracious.

it's right here in this and other threads, i'm fine with it, methinks thou dost protest too much


I'm sure portraying oneself as superior than either side of every issue would be amusing. I find it dishonest and annoying, as I have no trouble recognizing the truths independently evident in even an over all faulty argument. Just wanted to point it out.

your worship is duly noted, my child...

[spurx]

again, you make false assumptions...i don't try and "impress" anyone, i do this purely for my own amusement and for the simple fact that there have been a few folks here who have earned my Respect...most of whom i rarely agree with...purely on the merits of their typing/thinking process


here's a typing/thinking process for you. *tugs crotch*

[DocGonzo]

here's a typing/thinking process for you. *tugs crotch*

here...you need your tweezers for that...

[Caffy]

Global warming is based on Junk Science (http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/).

They decided what their conclusion was going to be then went out and found anything they could to support it, while completely ignoring/silencing anything that didn't meet their conclusion.

In reality humans have very limited ability to affect global climate. The primary focus of environmentalists should be on the local level where humans can effect drastic change. We can't change the entire planet's climate in a few centuries, but we can change a forest into a dessert in that span. Go hug a tree and leave the coal plant alone.

As far as cap and tax, even global warming nuts say it's not going to do anything, and amounts to nothing more than a Ponzi Scheme, trading in fake assets.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/07/09/nasas-hansen-obamas-cap-trade-bill-less-worthless

[Bissen]

Of course not, you're consistently going to fashion yourself as "more right than either side" while clearly swinging on the balls of one side.


Get over your black and white mentality. It's awkwardly pathetic to bear witness to ignorance in these proportions.

Besides. The elections was last year. You will have to wait 3 more years to feel like given a choice...

[Tithan Natus]

Nobody is going to convince anybody of anything so why don't you just shut the fuck up? Do something more productive with your time. Instead of just talking about it in the OT section of a dead forum you could be doing things to make what you are talking about reality.

I didn't read any of what you guys were saying soo..

[dinkfall]

The only interesting thread in the OT is one started by Hubbell, what is the world coming to?
Where are all the religion and market analysis threads?