Intersting News Regarding the Global Warming Debate

Of course you don't- just label it "madness" and call it good. Or you might want to use one of the more effective labels like- "right wing", "conspiracy theorist", "tin foil hat", "birther", "holocaust denier", "kook", "racist", "capitalist" ad infinitum. Those usually work best with the "everyone knows" argument.

 

I'm just going to leave this alone. The fact that you used "so called Scientists" in your response says it all.

 

Oh you mean like "left wing", "jewish controlled media", "anti-religious left", "muslim", "anti-usa" or one of the many other terms being thrown around right now?

 

This thread is going to go on forever, and without any real debate. I for one think "for myself" and have come to my own conclusions. Whether you agree with them or not is inconsequential.

Therefore I will give you guys two opposing arguements, to me they both have valid points and I have read both of them entirely. I dont think you guys will to read the ones you disagree with because I think all of you are closed minded to anything that refutes what you believe in. And god forbid a liberal(s) is behind it. Remember that some scientists are conservative too.


http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Warming_Proxies.html

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2007/

Now I know that only the last 200 years of data is being presented here, but what if the guys who think GW is bogus are wrong? Honestly I hope you guys arent wrong but just what if?

Whats the harm in trying to do a little more to help the planet become cleaner. I m not trying to change anyones mind, just open them a tiny it more. Take this anyway you want. Im done

 

I'm all for "trying to do a little more" but it has gotten out of hand. Punishing companies who make products that make this world go around is taking it too far. Telling me what I can drive, what kind of TV I can buy, etc. is taking it too far...the examples go on and on and will just get worse, especially when it will have little impact if the rest of the world doesn't give a shiat.

 

Something we can all agree On.

Let's stop the madness and try and make something good come out of this. Something that would benefit the Mountain Biking community!

Let's go into business and start selling Carbon Credits to all the folks that are being made to feel guilty for being out there driving their cars back and forth to work.

Riding my back is good, green, clean and in harmony with the planet.
Driving a car is bad, internal combustion engine, etc., etc.

For every mile I ride my bike, I sell you a carbon credit and you get to drive your car guilt free for 10 miles. I line my pocket and you are guilt free!, mission accomplished!

Is the planet any better off????

It's a scam!!!! folks.:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

Correction!

Correction!

 

Run Forest, Run!

Of course you're going to leave it alone, because you can't argue with it. You can't form your own opinion about it. Just like you "don't know where to start with this madness"? Chuckie stated a bunch of facts and since you can't address them you run away.

If you look at all the posts in this thread, the people that believe in G/W have mostly all cut and pasted their information. The people that question it have mostly written in their responses, which in my opinion means they can think for themselves.

We can all agree to disagree, but I'll be damned if I'm going to let a bunch of people scare me into thinking this is a real threat when they are all making money off of it.

When I stated about the so called Scientists, there are Scientist that support both sides, they can't both be right. I tend to believe the ones that say there is no legitimate threat.

I'm not a tree hugger but I do my part (like Dino stated) to leave this Earth a better place than when I first entered it.

I have the week off... I going to go ride my bike!

 

Blah,Blah,Blah, The sky is falling, The sky is falling!!!! But for a price I'll put it back...:lol:

 

Although I enjoyed the Dead Kennedys musically, I could care less what they, or Jello, were saying. Plus most was so subjective as to be irrelevant and outdated immediately, but to use a quote to support a point in a debate. Bad choice and point lost.

Using Seth Borenstein opinion on global warming? He is the equivalent of asking James Carville his opinion about President Clinton or Ann Coulter hers on either President Bush.

This debate is nothing more than a left vs. right waste of time. Neither is correct and neither has my, or your, best interest at heart.

The fact is all of the scientific studies supporting global warming come from "scientific" institutes or others directly supported by grants to study it or profiting in other indirect ways. Personally, I make part of my living from the study of global warming. CO2 was far more prevalent prehistoric times and there were no Suburbans, cows, or people.

The Earth is spinning ever slower, the Sun is getting bigger, and Mars is a lot hotter than ever before??? (We've been closely studying it for almost 40 years now.)

Does the human race produce more "greenhouse gases" than before, well yes. Would that be the major cause if the Earth was warming? Unfortunately we really can't tell yet.

But I'll accept that it is a factor and let’s move to the next stage:

Why are we still spending billions every year to study this?
Shouldn't we be into the cure stage yet?
The answer is sadly no, because the people doing the studying are making a lot of money, studying it and that cow hasn't dried up yet.

Nothing real is happening, except meaningless debate.

Remember the Kyoto protocol?

Why didn't President Clinton and Green Al push the U.S. Senate to agree to it when they had the chance?

The fact is they didn't even present it to them to give them a chance.
There are many political reasons why, most don't hold any water from a green stand point and only have to do with what's better for the political power of their party.

The CCM do show a change, but the problem is the science is far from proven. And the amount of error involved also shows a decrease in temps. Do you remember the mini-ice age in the 80’s? The same math was involved.

If people would just say, "Hey I'm on the right so I don't believe GW exists or I'm on the left and it's as real as the sky is blue in Montana" then I could understand why one would misrepresent "facts" so badly.

Oh yeah, it was the left that doomed the Hetch Hetchy valley and still does to this day, specifically our two “green” state senators. How embarrassing and inexcusable stand against one of our states great natural resources… Talk about off subject…

I only enjoy this kind of debate for so long because it’s not unlike talking to Raider fans, and how they are the greatest ever and always will be…

 

I can have my own opinion and decide it's not worth trying to be Billy the internet Bad Ass so I can tell people how they are wrong or how cool I am. You obviously can only see one side of the issue as do some others so I would be better of having a conversation with a rock, it makes no sense. Evidence of something you disagree with could slap you in the face and you would still deny it existed if it didn't fit with your beliefs. There is no debating with that kind of mind set. Instead of going that route I decided to just leave it alone but since you want to continue............... There weren't many facts in that post you mentioned but there were a ton of opinions. If by bunch you mean 1 or 2 I guess you are right. Oddly you mention people cutting and pasting things and then go on a tirade defending a post written by someone else. I find that pretty amusing.

No one is trying to scare you but you seem mighty aggressive for someone who isn't afraid of something.

 

I don't necessarily think the debate is Left vs Right. I think it's more of, thinking for yourself and asking questions vs believing what you are told to think and letting some one else do your thinking for you.

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/24/hiding-evidence-of-global-cooling/

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....2188feb3-802a-23ad-4de4-3fbc0a92e126&Issue_id

Big surprise.

 

The main street media is trying to ignore this, but the momentum is still building. Hopefully one day, justice will be served.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17183

 

f0ck, i so want to have that as my username:bang:

too bad im mo like wally the web wanker #-o

 

I just have a couple questions. Weren't the greenest periods in the geological history of the Earth also the warmest? Won't a warming trend cause more evaporation of the oceans and greater humidity leading to a greener planet? Look at a map of the world. Aren't the greenest parts of the Earth on the equator?

I don't disagree that the earth is getting warmer. I'm just not so sure that's a bad thing.

But then again, the sun will go supernova in a billion years and none of this will have mattered. Though I'll probably be dead by then.

 

I believe that moniker was meant for me, but his post was so confusing I'm not really sure what he was talking about. :?:

On a side note, I wanted to change my user name to Hoof Hearted. That would tie into your post with the cow.

 

The whole temperature / CO2 debate misses the point. Our DESTRUCTION OF HABITAT, the very environs we depend on for our existence, is the issue. Using the average global temperature as a cause for alarm is ineffective. An increase of a few degrees doesn't attract peoples attention because it doesn't seem like a big deal.

You don't have to be a highly educated scientist to see the effects we have on our environment. Just look out your window. I can't see the mountains, 15 miles away because of the air pollution. The rivers don't support life anymore because they have been canalized and lined with concrete. The ocean waters are no longer clear because we dump our waste at sea. Once vast expanses of grasslands and forests have been transformed into a barren landscape of tract homes and shopping centers. Our communities are designed to make us dependent on the automobile at the expense of our health and welfare. I could go on and on...

The bottom line is this; as long as we measure our success by our growth we are doomed. A planet of finite resources cannot support exponentially increasing consumption. Our economic model must change. Capitalism is broken.

A lot of people are going to have to die to bring the world back into balance since we are currently exceeding its carrying capacity. Those who survive are going to have to live differently than those in the past.

This is not all doom and gloom though. The new model of existence will be based on love and compassion, being happy with what we have, working together towards creative win-win solutions, minimizing our energy use, living in harmony with natural systems, not making them bend to our will. The future is bright but it will take massive demolition to get there....

 

Yeah I think your on to something. It has been proven there have been several ice ages. On the opposite end of the spectrum one can conclude since the earth is known to freeze periodically than shouldn't it naturally get warm periodically as well? As I stated before, I believe man does contribute to gw. How significant mans contribution to gw really is an x factor. But gw imo is part of the earth's natural cycle. If gw is a natural occurrence than there really is nothing man can do to stop it. People living at or below sea level should be prepared if the sea levels change. It's not like gw is happening over night. Sea levels have been rising slowly. It's like standing 100 ft in front of a steam roller and screaming its gonna hit you.

 

Pretty simple to follow actually. If you were confused by that surely the Global Warming debate is too much.