Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 89
Results 121 to 129 of 129
  1. #121
    1000+
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,054

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Desperado[1G] View Post
    Tell that to the tax payers in DC who shelled out 4 million dollars to replace all of the city's light bulbs with "green" light bulbs.

    After a couple months of inquiring about what kind of progress they've made, climatologists discovered that the impact would be "negligible".


    I am not some nature-hating asshole. If we are damaging the world we live in, we should make efforts to lessen it, but there is so much hyperbole being thrown around about how our planet is going to end and it's irritating as all hell. It doesn't help when our scumbag politicians blow this out of proportion to further their agenda. Gore and his legion of quacks make $100 million a year in "carbon offsets".

    Yea, he's doing it for the environment
    The tax costs for carbon trading and reduced emissions are peanuts compared to the cost of the current financial meltdown as a result of bad banking practice (regardless of wether it was due to too much or too little regulation). $700 Billion dollar US bail out and a host of other countries with equally massive (compared to GDP) bailouts. Obama's new deal to buy his way out with big infastructure investments is going to be equally expensive.

    So when the financial market fails due to human missmanagement everyone sucks it up and shells out the cash. But when the global environment is failing noone gives a shit because its dollar value is harder to quantify and because nobody "owns" the environment.

    Shit for the cost of the war in Iraq america could have converted most of its energy dependance to renewables.

  2. #122
    12,000+
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NYC, Beta Tester
    Posts
    12,845

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slisk View Post
    The tax costs for carbon trading and reduced emissions are peanuts compared to the cost of the current financial meltdown as a result of bad banking practice (regardless of wether it was due to too much or too little regulation). $700 Billion dollar US bail out and a host of other countries with equally massive (compared to GDP) bailouts. Obama's new deal to buy his way out with big infastructure investments is going to be equally expensive.

    So when the financial market fails due to human missmanagement everyone sucks it up and shells out the cash. But when the global environment is failing noone gives a shit because its dollar value is harder to quantify and because nobody "owns" the environment.

    Shit for the cost of the war in Iraq america could have converted most of its energy dependance to renewables.
    Don't get me wrong and I think I speack for a lot of people who are gainst GW, we do care abou environment. The problem is that there is a right way to do things and a wrong way. The wrong way brings more harm then good often times. Making a hysteria over CO2 is the wrong way to handle the problem.

    You have a beuracracy either way, either in the courts or in the executive. At least this way there is a preventative measure, rather than only a reactionary measure to the problem.
    They still have to go through courts often times so all that these regulatory bodies ammount to is extra expenses and more red tape.
    "What, you think just because you need it means you have a right to take mine?"


    Breakdown: Achiever 20.00%, Explorer 26.67%, Killer 93.33%, Socializer 60.00%

    Quote Originally Posted by Methuselah View Post
    I should get ahead of the curve and ban you now then...

  3. #123
    1000+
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,054

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StainlessSteelRat View Post
    "Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures
    since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the
    observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations.8
    This is an advance since the TAR’s conclusion that “most
    of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to
    have been due to the increase in GHG concentrations”
    (Figure
    2.5). {WGI 9.4, SPM}

    8 Consideration of remaining uncertainty is based on current methodologies."

    Assumption is the mother of all fuck ups. This basically says that our model is built on the premise that GHG is responsible and when we plug in the 'data', it confirms that it is the case. That's like me telling my comp that I think 2 is really 3 and when I plug in 3 + 3 and the computer gives me 4; I have shown that 2 is really 3 in reality.

    "It is likely that there has been significant anthropogenic
    warming over the past 50 years averaged over each continent
    (except Antarctica) (Figure 2.5). {WGI 3.2, 9.4, SPM}
    The observed patterns of warming, including greater warming
    over land than over the ocean, and their changes over time, are
    simulated only by models that include anthropogenic forcing. No
    coupled global climate model that has used natural forcing only
    has reproduced the continental mean warming trends in individual
    continents (except Antarctica) over the second half of the 20th century.
    {WGI 3.2, 9.4, TS.4.2, SPM}"

    So, the one location that isn't warming is the same location used to provide the CO2 level data. Does that seem like proper scientific due diligence to you?

    And again, the whole basis for the claim is that CO2 causes increased temp and this is pure theory. The opposite is, according to many, more likely the case.

    The only factual data I've seen so far is that the Earth is warming which is not in dispute. Most of the charts etc. in that report are based on models, models built to factor in man-made CO2 emissions as a factor. The model is going to show whatever you want based on the formulas and causal relationships you tell it to use. The issue or problem the naysayers have is that these formulas and causal relationships are theory and not proven.

    Attributing causality in any complex system is a tough task. This is why there is no 100% sure announcement. Just a "very likely" (which equates to >90% likely).

    This isn't just one model or one data set we are talking about. This is a collation of the worlds scientific data on climate change. The synthesis of this data has indicated that human GHG's are very likely to be causing the climate change that is observed. GLOBAL DATA. not one data pool. GLOBAL.

    Sure there is a margin for error and perhaps global warming is more likely to be caused by natural phenomena such as solar fluctuations. That having been said it is clear that Humans are having a profound effect on the planet with the highest rates of extinction in 65 million years, profound impact on local and global ecological systems. There is plenty of data showing strong correlation between CO2 and Global temperature and the majority of climate moddeling which attributes a causal link.

    Truth is that you will never have a 100% guarentee of causality with something as complex as the global climate. I feel you have to act with the best information you are given and keep questioning and searching. I applaude those who do genuine research that counters conventional wisdom. The sad truth is that a lot of the anti-global warming crew are reactionary conservatives who don't like the idea of taxes or government interferrance and will do anything to "prove" that global warming isn't man made.

  4. #124
    Normal User
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA, NC
    Posts
    251

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverhandorder View Post
    Can anyone show me how CO2 released by humans causes GW?
    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...xplanation.jpg

    and thats how it happens.
    Quote Originally Posted by Chernobog View Post
    We are actually planning to make Christian Bale one of the future gods in dark fall. The god of magic rape and dwarf porn.

  5. #125

    Default

    Global warming is a symptom of overpopulation. Once human cloning goes mainstream we can start harvesting bodies to feed the growing masses. Animals will be gone and all the survivors will be wearing life support on their backs connected to their insides via tube.

  6. #126
    Normal User
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA, NC
    Posts
    251

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ungraylessness View Post
    Global warming is a symptom of overpopulation. Once human cloning goes mainstream we can start harvesting bodies to feed the growing masses. Animals will be gone and all the survivors will be wearing life support on their backs connected to their insides via tube.
    Too much matrix and fallout 3
    Quote Originally Posted by Chernobog View Post
    We are actually planning to make Christian Bale one of the future gods in dark fall. The god of magic rape and dwarf porn.

  7. #127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tehghost132 View Post
    Too much matrix and fallout 3
    You forgot "THE ISLAND" and "SOYLENT GREEN", because it's not possible that I have a thought of my own.

  8. #128
    Normal User
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA, NC
    Posts
    251

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ungraylessness View Post
    You forgot "THE ISLAND" and "SOYLENT GREEN", because it's not possible that I have a thought of my own.
    pretty much.
    Quote Originally Posted by Chernobog View Post
    We are actually planning to make Christian Bale one of the future gods in dark fall. The god of magic rape and dwarf porn.

  9. #129
    Normal User
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tehghost132 View Post
    zLULz!!!! that's Lovely

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •