You mean, the sky isnt falling!?

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Thu May 22, 2008 12:49 am

If you won the lottery today, would you buy a gas guzzler, buy a huge freakin house that emits more emissions than your old puny house? Well if the answer is yes, then basically your saying you don't give a ****!

I'd give up my job and buy more beer!

In Bangladesh people are dying from drought one minute, then floods the next. None of them own cars and none of them are wealthy. But as long as your part of the Western world and part of the Western worlds system, its best to make sure your getting one over your neighbor. Drive a Hummer or SUV, you made enough money, you earnt it. Respect!

Well thats one way of looking at it.

jpj · Post by **jpj** » Thu May 22, 2008 1:10 am

Emperor Fossil wrote:"Everything's cool guys. There's no need to be concerned."

if you interpreted that as my point of view, then i've misrepresented myself

my point is that even if humans didn't exist there are many factors that contribute to the planets temperature, many of which we can't do anything about. we could massively reduce our carbon emissions and still experience dramatic warming or cooling at some point in the future. maybe i'm just a nihilist?

Twiddle · Post by **Twiddle** » Thu May 22, 2008 1:57 am

how about the fact that we are fishing beyond sustainable levels

Post by **BulletMagnet** » Thu May 22, 2008 2:04 am

jpj wrote:my point is that even if humans didn't exist there are many factors that contribute to the planets temperature, many of which we can't do anything about.

Nobody's arguing that point, or ever has - obviously not everything that happens as far as climate change is concerned is "within our control" or however you care to put it. However, to use this fact as an argument against taking (long overdue, thanks to the endless innovation encouraged by the unrestrained free market, though that's a whole other topic) action to ensure that we're messing with things as little as possible indicates that you either believe that anyone who's in favor of such action is a ranting, raving "Chicken Little" type, or else simply favor short-term personal convenience over the long-term common good.

Seriously, you might as well say "There's no reason to make sure my car's brakes are operating properly - even though every mechanic in my garage (except the one who doesn't believe in brake pads) is telling me to check them out, a) they haven't failed as of yet, b) there's no irrefutable proof that anything bad will happen if I put off the maintenance, and c) besides, I can't control if another car hits me anyway." All of those things might be at least technically true, but if you don't do the sensible thing and get off your duff for safety's sake, you're still being selfish, lazy, and irresponsible.

jpj · Post by **jpj** » Thu May 22, 2008 7:40 am

i don't think that's a fair analogy, as car brakes are something you can fix. the amount that china's carbon emissions increase by per year are greater than the UK's total emissions per year. has america even signed up to the kyoto protocol yet?

also, with the climate being a "chaotic" system, who is to say that the scientists predictions of the effect of global warming are accurate?

Twiddle · Post by **Twiddle** » Thu May 22, 2008 7:45 am

not doing anything about it "just because" is pretty foolish as the same processes that generate carbon dioxide also generate poisons of more immediate concern

trivial · Post by **trivial** » Thu May 22, 2008 12:39 pm

Twiddle wrote:not doing anything about it "just because" is pretty foolish as the same processes that generate carbon dioxide also generate poisons of more immediate concern

Yeah. Oxygen, ozone, and oleum are all essential Vitamins O. And like Reich said, your body machine needs Vitamin O to keep the free radicals of the subconscious in check.

Twiddle · Post by **Twiddle** » Thu May 22, 2008 6:30 pm

trivial wrote:Groundwater lead builds character!

jpj · Post by **jpj** » Thu May 22, 2008 6:57 pm

Twiddle wrote:not doing anything about it "just because" is pretty foolish as the same processes that generate carbon dioxide also generate poisons of more immediate concern

yeah, i see what you're saying. my main beef with global warming/al gore/etc is two fold: it wants to keep the poor countries poor; and it's trying to impose guilt on the everyman by talking about "carbon footprints". now, i don't drive a car, and does the total amount of carbon i produce in my lifetime equal even just one 12-hour flight of an airliner? and considering the effects are presumed to be amplified greatly at high altitudes the answer is probably not. rather than tell people about their "carbon footprint", i think more time and money should be put into getting people to recycle.

doodude · Post by **doodude** » Thu May 22, 2008 9:42 pm

See, I knew if we all put down our anger & just shared our heartfelt opinions in a calm respectful manner that we could share ideas & learn from one another.

I...I love you guys...

Zebra Airforce · Post by **Zebra Airforce** » Fri May 23, 2008 12:22 am

jpj wrote:rather than tell people about their "carbon footprint", i think more time and money should be put into getting people to recycle.

Or, god forbid, public transportation. Of course, the way most american cities are built makes public transportation almost impossible. Fucking worthless city planners. The best part is that no one ever gets fired for being a total idiot (<- every person in the AZ state gov't), instead they get lifetime health insurance and a tidy sum of cash. "Sheriff Joe" needs a kick in his fat wrinkly nutsack.

JoshF · Post by **JoshF** » Fri May 23, 2008 6:48 am

it wants to keep the poor countries poor;

No, you're thinking of globalism.

And fuck Al Gore he's not the one doing the research.

CMoon · Post by **CMoon** » Fri May 23, 2008 9:39 am

Twiddle wrote:how about the fact that we are fishing beyond sustainable levels

Even sharks!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7413948.stm

Super Laydock · Post by **Super Laydock** » Fri May 23, 2008 10:12 am

CMoon wrote:
Twiddle wrote:how about the fact that we are fishing beyond sustainable levels
Even sharks!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7413948.stm

Sharks are my fave fish (even more than tuna or salmon). Let's keep 'em.

CMoon · Post by **CMoon** » Sat May 24, 2008 12:23 pm

No global warming eh?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7417123.stm

doodude · Post by **doodude** » Sat May 24, 2008 1:09 pm

CMoon wrote:No global warming eh?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7417123.stm

Intersting...

But I dont think anyone has claimed there is NO global warming.

IMO the debate is how much of the Global Waring that is occurring is man made & how much is simply a very complicated earth cycling.

Quote:

According to another scientist on the expedition, Dr Luke Copland of the University of Ottawa, the new cracks fit into a pattern of change in the Arctic.

"We're seeing very dramatic changes; from the retreat of the glaciers, to the melting of the sea ice.

"We had 23% less (sea ice) last year than we've ever had, and what's happening to the ice shelves is part of that picture."

Theres no mention of the 'Sky Falling' just a 'more dramatic change in the climate than WEVE ever had.'

So again, I agree the earth is warming & I agree that man has & always will have an unnatural effect on a natural earth, which to me will always be negative, but how much of what is happening right now is natural itself.

Im no scientist but it just seems to me the worldwide debate is far from a definitive answer & claims that its all mans fault is driven by speculation, money & hysteria.

Post by **BulletMagnet** » Sat May 24, 2008 1:54 pm

doodude wrote:So again, I agree the earth is warming & I agree that man has & always will have an unnatural effect on a natural earth, which to me will always be negative, but how much of what is happening right now is natural itself.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if memory serves no "natural" temperature shift that we're aware of has ever occurred nearly as suddenly and/or rapidly as the shift we've seen in (comparatively) recent years. When left to its own processes, the Earth doesn't kick its current crop of species (and the temperatures/conditions they need to survive) to the curb with nearly as much suddenness as the skeptics seem to assume it does - if it did, I doubt that many species (if any) would have had the chance to evolve/adapt to the changes, and the planet would be pretty much uninhabitable. Sorry, but this is the only life-supporting planet we're aware of for a reason.

doodude · Post by **doodude** » Sat May 24, 2008 3:38 pm

I cant answer you BM for as I stated, Im no scientist.
I also said man has had a negative effect & is at least partly responsible & for all I know ( and it seems as far as anyone knows ) man may be totally responsible.
All Im trying to say is that there still 'seems' to be doubt among so many. And yet there seems to be absolutely NO DOUBT among others. People who leave no room for the possibility that they could be wrong are a bit over zealous for me.

Im all for bringing pollution to a dead stop. Its difficult for me to believe that mankind cant do something about this. I see that as a lie.
But as I wrote earlier, if doing something about it means things like the USA has to stop its pollution but that China can just pollute away or that France can sell its carbon shares to India so that they can pollute beyond their limits, then that dosent really seem like we're doing anything about it.
That just seems like we're redistributing the 'pollution quotas' & that is not solving the problem.

Michaelm · Post by **Michaelm** » Sat May 24, 2008 4:38 pm

doodude wrote:That just seems like we're redistributing the 'pollution quotas' & that is not solving the problem.

You're absolutely right but that's how it works in the magical land of business inside the countries too.

doodude · Post by **doodude** » Sat May 24, 2008 4:52 pm

Michaelm wrote:
doodude wrote:That just seems like we're redistributing the 'pollution quotas' & that is not solving the problem.
You're absolutely right but that's how it works in the magical land of business inside the countries too.

Im not sure where youre comment is going.

Are you saying:

"yeah youre right, its an idea that wont work or dosent make sense."

or

"Yeah youre right, but tough noogies, we gotta do something even if it wont work or dosent make sense."

jpj · Post by **jpj** » Sat May 24, 2008 5:36 pm

BulletMagnet wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong [...] no "natural" temperature shift that we're aware of [...]

well, this is a bit of a problem in istelf. have you seen the techniques scientists use to try and calculate temperatures from thousands (and even hundreds of thousands) of years ago? that's not a criticism to the scientists. but they raise the question of accuracy...

Twiddle · Post by **Twiddle** » Sat May 24, 2008 5:37 pm

I like how everyone looks at global warming as an environmental benchmark when irresponsible manufacturing wastes all over the world are just poured all over the land or water like it's nothing

Michaelm · Post by **Michaelm** » Sat May 24, 2008 6:10 pm

doodude wrote:"Yeah youre right, but tough noogies, we gotta do something even if it wont work or dosent make sense."

More like this but preferably with making sense.
I mean more like blaming 3rd world countries doesn't make sense as in our own developed countries a lot is based on pure make believe too.
Sure the environment laws helps somewhat, but in effect they have just created new legally and illegally markets and it's not the environment that gains the most out of this.

Post by **BulletMagnet** » Sun May 25, 2008 1:34 am

doodude wrote:People who leave no room for the possibility that they could be wrong are a bit over zealous for me.

I agree, though I think you're conflating the mindset of "I'm sticking to this no matter what happens" with that of "I'm sticking to this until the evidence says otherwise." One never knows what might be discovered at some point and how that might change the way we perceive something, but until that happens all you can do is go by what the available evidence supports. Humanity being imperfect as it is, if everyone refused to take action on anything that didn't have everyone agreeing 100 percent on it, nothing would ever get done.

I'm also with you on the "pollution quotas" thing, as most any environmentally-minded person should be, IMO.

well, this is a bit of a problem in istelf. have you seen the techniques scientists use to try and calculate temperatures from thousands (and even hundreds of thousands) of years ago? that's not a criticism to the scientists. but they raise the question of accuracy...

On the same lines as I said to doo, it's obviously not perfect, especially seeing as it's relatively new techniques and technology, but as far as tangible scientific approaches to this stuff go, it's the best we've got. And as I've said before, I'm weary of being told not to react to any of this information until market forces goad the scientific community into coming up with something better (I'm sure I've mentioned Who Killed the Electric Car? on here at least once).

I like how everyone looks at global warming as an environmental benchmark when irresponsible manufacturing wastes all over the world are just poured all over the land or water like it's nothing

Also very true - elsewhere online I've exchanged words with "inactivists" who claim that nuclear power is the solution to all these problems - yeah, let's just ignore the fact that it creates perhaps the most dangerous and hardest to dispose of waste of any energy source. Just because it's not pumped into the air doesn't make it any more desirable to have on our hands on a wider scale.

That said, though, at least the climate change debate has people thinking in at least SOME capacity about environmental issues...between 9-11 and An Inconvenient Truth I think that a lot of people would have refrained from complaining about toxic waste flowing from their faucets if they were told that it somehow helped to fight terrorism. At least something else is finally on the agenda.

CMoon · Post by **CMoon** » Sun May 25, 2008 11:05 am

BulletMagnet wrote: That said, though, at least the climate change debate has people thinking in at least SOME capacity about environmental issues...between 9-11 and An Inconvenient Truth I think that a lot of people would have refrained from complaining about toxic waste flowing from their faucets if they were told that it somehow helped to fight terrorism. At least something else is finally on the agenda.

Awesome post BM.