Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hope they follow through with it though, and declare by statute that CO2 is NOT a pollutant and will not be regulated in the United States of America. I don't have much confidence that the GOP will finally declare the global warming movement dead in the USA, but I have some hope that I do
good, the agw crowd needs to be taken to task for once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by henrjam
Who needs scientists in the first place.
we need scientists that will publish true raw data, not adjusted data to fit their theories or beliefs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
1. There is a large amount of proof that there is global warming.
2. There is almost 0 proof that we can do anything about it.
These are the two points that everyone must understand when we talk about climate change.
I'm all for getting off of non renewable forms of energy. If its a finite resource, we need to move to something that has no end. Whether thats solar, wind, or whatever, we need to move off of oil.
BUT.....
We should not bankrupt the economy and the country on some silly crusade to end all carbon emissions overnight. We should work on the problems in a well thought out matter. Energy independence is a national security issue, IMO, and it should be attacked in such a matter.
well said. even the agw alarmists will tell you, if they are willing to tell the truth, even if we eliminated all CO2 emissions from the planet, there would be no change in the climate for at least 100 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
You know what the AGW fanatics don't realize? WE breathe out MORE CO2 than the intended targets are for reducing CO2 output. I forget the exact numbers, someone can correct me on them but let's say, hypothetically, the AGW crows wants to limit CO2 output to no more than 150ppm. How is that gonna be accomplished, when the average human breathes out 200ppm?? This is a problem that is physically impossible to solve and it's meant to be that way. If it was all about reducing CO2 emissions, why are we still playing around with a bankrupting cap-and-trade system?? This is a scam and the liberals don't want to realize they are being taken for a ride! The globalists know that reducing our factories and moving our wealth to the 3rd World will make them develop and prosper at our expense? But why? Because they KNOW, when a nation and people develop the population starts to SHRINK. Ever wonder why the birthrates among the world's most successful nations are so low, yet the birthrate for 3rd world countries is really high? The population of the developed world is shrinking, and the 3rd world's is growing every year. Forced sterilizations, Chinese style limits, and genocides are not in vogue anymore. So the only way to shrink the population, and make them easier to control, is to do what the globalists have not wanted. And that is to develop the 3rd World.
This sounds like a nice lofty goal to the left, but what the left doesn't know, is that our standard of living will not go up or stay the same. It will continue to go down, until we are all equally miserable across the world. This is what happened in socialist countries like the USSR. They all start out with the worker is king, and it always ends with unaccountable government bureaucrats at the top and the worker always ends up scraping the bottom of the barrel for what's left. The same thing is going to happen with the carbon trading scheme!
also well said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by subsound
So you are saying we should subjugate people's jobs that are based on scientific facts and figures to the whim of elected officials pandering for votes to what is popular? Argumentum ad populum is a very old fallacy.
that is what is happening now. if a scientist does not agree with the agw alarmist crowd, they dont get any grants from governments to continue their research. science needs to be based on real facts, not doctored ones that fit an agenda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis
god created all the rivers, lakes, oceans, forests, etc so that industry would have many places to dump waste.
stop being a troll.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohKnip
The AGW "fanatics" want to reduce it to 350, not 150 ppm. 350.org
wow, a drop from 380ppm to 350ppm. yeah thats going to do a lot.
Irrelevant, what I'm asking you is does some bureaucrat control this country or do we the people control it? If we are gong to allow one bureaucracy make it's own rules we might as well allow them all to make them up as they go along?
It's very relevant. Let's say an industrial chemical causes severe health problems (EPA regulates toxins as well). Would you rather base your health on people's opinions you will get sick and how it should be regulated (exposure levels, contamination procedures), or the scientific data that proves that you will and how to deal with it?
we need scientists that will publish true raw data, not adjusted data to fit their theories or beliefs.
I'm sure a lot of people don't realize it's adjusted but they have to adjust it. If you have reading in Alaska that shows temperatures closer to what you expect in Florida it needs to be adjusted because obviously there is a mistake. What a lot of research has shown as you have suggested it's aadjusted to benefit the AGW theory more often than not. This fact is well documented.
There's been so many problems shown with this research it's ridiculous, the stations themselves gathering the temperature data have been shown to be flawed in alot of cases let alone getting into analyzing the data. Garbage in, garbage out.
You've obviously never heard the saying "one step at a time" have you?
yes i have heard of one step at a time. it is called incrementalism and the progressives practice it all the time. oh, just this one little law, it wont do much. 59 laws later and the thing they wanted eliminated, is.
It's very relevant. Let's say an industrial chemical causes severe health problems (EPA regulates toxins as well). Would you rather base your health on people's opinions you will get sick and how it should be regulated (exposure levels, contamination procedures), or the scientific data that proves that you will and how to deal with it?
Poor comparison, is the toxicity of this chemical in dispute? Will it's regulation devastate our economy? Will China's accelerated use of this chemical make what we do pointless?
-----edit------
Most importantly do the people of this country want it eliminated? While I'm sure you can find agreement on a truly toxic agent you wont find the same agreement on something that is being disputed and certainly we're not going to put the control over the entire economy into the hands of the EPA to regulate it.
yes i have heard of one step at a time. it is called incrementalism and the progressives practice it all the time. oh, just this one little law, it wont do much. 59 laws later and the thing they wanted eliminated, is.
You really think people who are concerned about climate change want or are expecting all carbon to be eliminated completely? Everyone knows that isn't possible.
we need scientists that will publish true raw data, not adjusted data to fit their theories or beliefs.
True raw data don't mean anything if they are not "translated".
Do you think that the amazing pictures from space just come up the way they are shown to us.
Why do the AGW people continue to want to push carbon regulations in the U.S., when China and India will happily accept those job losses? And in fact the result is that there is a neutral amount of CO2 but given the lack of regulations in China, there will be a net gain of CO2. That's not a problem but, surely the AGW crowd would have realized that by now?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
