PDA

View Full Version : Capt Shady



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Dochter
6/03/2004 3:54pm,
Originally posted by CaptShady
Go start your global warming thread now. The

I really am not looking to discuss this but please tell me that, as this comment would indicate, that you think that global warming is a) false, b) if occuring a natural event, and/or c) completely unrelated to human activities.

kismasher
6/03/2004 4:03pm,
Dochter,

I would think that your education would have revealed the fact to you that the "earth" functions in a vaccuum independent of what we as a people do in our daily lives.

Subtle climate changes, such as clear-cutting brazil, certainly don't affect the local wildlife nor the overall ecology of the planet.

Pfisteria is a figment of your imagination and rising levels of mercury in fish in almost every body of water is completely coincidental and in no way related to the dumping of harmless chemical and toxic waste into our water supply.

Please remove your head from lab, go outside, and get a good whiff of that clean desert air.

[sarcasm]

garbanzo
6/03/2004 4:05pm,
Yeah, and Rush Limbaugh says global warming is bullshit.

Glacier-melting dittos.

TaeBo_Master
6/03/2004 4:10pm,
Well, there is some scientific evidence pointing to the fact that extra-terrestrial causes, primarily the Sun, are a great deal more responsible for climate changes than we thought. Doesn't necessarily mean it's the ONLY cause, but certainly worthy of more credit than it's been given by some special interest groups..

garbanzo
6/03/2004 4:11pm,
Yeah, and Rush Limbaugh says global warming is bullshit.

Why is it that and organization or individual concerned about doing something to avoid or repair damage to the planet is a "special interest", and individuals and organizations that seek to profit at the expense of the global environment are not?

kismasher
6/03/2004 4:12pm,
what the sun effects our climate?

get outta here...

TaeBo_Master
6/03/2004 4:14pm,
Well, one DOES have to consider that the planet has natural climate cycles. Just because it's warming doesn't necessarily mean it's unnatural, or that there's anything we can do to stop it, for that matter. The Earth is anything but static, and expecting it to remain so is folly.

I am not trying to say that humans aren't contributing, but I'm saying we have to accept the fact that certain things are beyond our control, and we should look for ALL contributing factors, so we can udnerstand what we CAN control.

TaeBo_Master
6/03/2004 4:15pm,
Why is it that and organization or individual concerned about doing something to avoid or repair damage to the planet is a "special interest", and individuals and organizations that seek to profit at the expense of the global environment are not?

Everyone looking to gain political sway in one direction or the other can be considered a "special interest"

kismasher
6/03/2004 4:17pm,
we know what we can control, but who actually takes the time.

TaeBo_Master
6/03/2004 4:22pm,
Well, my comments are more directed at people who seem to take up the position that human-made pollutants are either a) by far and away the largest factor contributing to climate change or b) the ONLY contributing factor to climate change. The point is, that's not true.

I don't deny that pollutants are a contributing factor, but I do think more research needs to be done to see just how much of an effect they really have, and what reasonable measures would be to control the problem.

Dochter
6/03/2004 4:23pm,
parsimony TaeBo.

Certainly the earth has cyclical changes. However, if the changes are occuring far more rapidly than evidence says they ever have and the major difference is human caused carbon outputs, what is most likely to be causing some of the change and responsible for that difference?

We're all fucked when the ocean's reach their limit for carbon absorption, though its a bit of a crap shoot when that's going to happen (no one claims to know with any amount of certainty).

Dochter
6/03/2004 4:27pm,
How much is enough research? When it is too late to have effective change? We know human pollutants have a significant impact.

It really is only the media that makes it seem like there is some controversy. The only real difference between the different competing climate models is based on what are effectively abstractions when discussing if there is or isn't a problem. They all agree there is.

TaeBo_Master
6/03/2004 4:28pm,
I'm not particularly on either side of the debate. I don't think manmade pollutants are entirely to blame, but I don't think they have nothing to do with it either. I accept the evidence that there is most definitely a global climate change, but there always is to some degree or another. All I'm saying is that extensive and detailed research needs to be done, and soon, to find out exactly how influential each factor is, and what can be done to effect changes on our part.

garbanzo
6/03/2004 4:32pm,
Did you guys know that nicotene is not addictive?

A whole group of doctors on the payroll of tobacco companies swore before congress that such is the case.

Smoke 'em if ya got 'em.

Dochter
6/03/2004 4:36pm,
(edit: reply to "extensive and detailed research needs to be done, and soon, to find out exactly how influential each factor is, and what can be done to effect changes on our part")
Why do you think it hasn't?

There's tons of articles and reports examining the issue, pretty much all say we're fucking things up. The biggest problem is that people want some conclusive, percentage broken down report that says exactly what to do. Scientists don't, won't and can't produce that.

Here's a very brief synopsis, these things are bad and need to be reduced:
-Fossil fuel burning
-Interruption of carbon cycles
Failure to reduce the impacts of these things will lead to a far less habitable world.

kismasher
6/03/2004 4:42pm,
**** posterity