Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-29-2011, 08:46 PM
 
Location: Rational World Park
4,991 posts, read 4,505,203 times
Reputation: 2375

Advertisements

It's so hilarious that conservatives have been so conned by big oil companies that they ignore factual scientific evidence..It's actually not hilarious, it's embarrassing and these same oil companies leading the con job are about to smack em with 5 dollar a gallon gas..But conservatives will continue to be their loyal sheeple parotting nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-29-2011, 08:47 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,670,280 times
Reputation: 7943
It's silly to ascribe a few storms to climate change theories. It's also silly when right-wingers use snowstorms to try to debunk them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2011, 08:48 PM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,823 posts, read 23,452,578 times
Reputation: 6541
Quote:
Originally Posted by janelle144 View Post
There were big storms in the 70s before we heard of climate change. The climate changes all the time anyway. We are just back in another round of the 70s with unstable weather. It goes in cycles as any weather man will tell you.
During the 1970s it was the Global Cooling scam the wacky left was trying to pull off. It is the original reason why the EPA exists. Time Magazine in 1974 went so far as to predict another ice age.

Another Ice Age? - TIME
Newsweek on the cooling world
Study debunks 'global cooling' concern of '70s - USATODAY.com
Before Global Warming There Was Global Cooling (Wizbang)

Obviously the liberal media has been complicit with the grab for power by the fascist left. Both during the 1970s Global Cooling hoax and the 1990s Global Warming hoax. Now they are trying to pull off the same stunt with Climate Change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2011, 09:43 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,944,793 times
Reputation: 7118
NOAA Scientist Rejects Global Warming Link to Tornadoes - FoxNews.com

Quote:
A top official at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) rejected claims by environmental activists that the outbreak of tornadoes ravaging the American South is related to climate change brought on by global warming.
Of course, that won't stop the warmist cult in trying to connect every weather phenomenon or lack thereof to "climate change".

Hey, what happened to those record breaking hurricanes we never had over the last 3-4 years?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2011, 01:41 AM
 
1,081 posts, read 916,078 times
Reputation: 551
I am glad Al invented the internet for us though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2011, 03:04 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,914,172 times
Reputation: 4459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenyo View Post
It's so hilarious that conservatives have been so conned by big oil companies that they ignore factual scientific evidence..It's actually not hilarious, it's embarrassing and these same oil companies leading the con job are about to smack em with 5 dollar a gallon gas..But conservatives will continue to be their loyal sheeple parotting nonsense.
yeah, rolling out the printing presses and degrading the bejesus out of your currency has nothing to do with it.....

of course, there is really nothing funny about that~


japan is rolling out the printing presses and firing up again.

i see more debt people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2011, 04:27 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,914,172 times
Reputation: 4459
let me add another thing.

on the issue of being "conned" by the big oil companies, the federal government makes more profit on gas than the oil companies do.

here is a breakdown by state on how much is collected in taxes by the federal government. clearly, some states are hammered more by the government, particularly new york, california, illinois, michigan, and nevada.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...show/1054.html

for some real surprising numbers we have this:

Indeed, since 1981, when the failed wind*fall profits tax was first enacted, federal, state, and local governments in the U.S. have col*lected more in taxes from the oil industry than the industry has earned in actual profits for its shareholders. For example, after adjusting for inflation, the combined net earnings (net of taxes and expenses) for the largest petroleum companies between 1981 and 2008 totaled $1.4 trillion. By contrast, the total amount of taxes collected by U.S. governments from the oil companies topped $1.95 trillion, roughly 40 percent more than the industry's combined profits. Tax collections exceeded company prof*its in 23 of the 27 years surveyed.

Last edited by floridasandy; 04-30-2011 at 04:40 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2011, 04:47 AM
 
1,081 posts, read 916,078 times
Reputation: 551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenyo View Post
It's so hilarious that conservatives have been so conned by big oil companies that they ignore factual scientific evidence..It's actually not hilarious, it's embarrassing and these same oil companies leading the con job are about to smack em with 5 dollar a gallon gas..But conservatives will continue to be their loyal sheeple parotting nonsense.
Whats hilarious is seeing misfits like this guy^^^scraping dropped change from under his floormats to buy a gallon of gas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2011, 05:16 AM
 
Location: state of procrastination
3,485 posts, read 7,311,060 times
Reputation: 2913
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
The problem with a blanket "going green" approach is that most "going green" initiatives are all about CO2, not pollution. So yes, you can "go wrong" by going green since it takes resources and money from effective pollution clean up initiatives.
CO2 effect on global climate isn't something that we can predict with accuracy. But often CO2 and other pollutants are produced from similar industrial activities and CO2 enhances deleterious effects of other toxic compounds, so effectively they do go hand in hand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
Actually, you can "go wrong", and we have. The increase in beef, pork, and chicken prices is directly related to the increase in grain prices due to ethanol production.

When we are spending more and more on what amounts to a hoax by the loony left, it needs to be exposed and stopped. We are wasting billions attempting to solve a problem that does not exist.

Going green costs everyone, and does far more economic damage than all the tornadoes and hurricanes combined.
Mass production of beef, pork, and chicken by feeding them pure grains leads to high energy consumption, pollutes the environment, degrades soil quality, and causes human disease from alteration of natural animal fats from anti-inflammatory fat to highly inflammatory fats (thus causing coronary artery disease, stroke, etc). Healthcare-wise this is way more financially costly per capita than increased cost of meat products. I don't agree with ethanol production as a long-term solution either but we need to reduce our meat production/consumption and energy consumption. That's what going green is partially about -- being smart about interpreting economic cause and effect, and being financially savvy. Sure, you can feed grains and mass produce animal meats but overall people will eat up the savings at least 10 fold in future healthcare costs. Neither mass ethanol production nor mass meat production is smart.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2011, 05:16 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,771 posts, read 104,739,062 times
Reputation: 49248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenyo View Post
It's so hilarious that conservatives have been so conned by big oil companies that they ignore factual scientific evidence..It's actually not hilarious, it's embarrassing and these same oil companies leading the con job are about to smack em with 5 dollar a gallon gas..But conservatives will continue to be their loyal sheeple parotting nonsense.
Gee, it is hilarious to you and maybe some other libs, but embarrassing to whom? I am not embarrassed.

Nita
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:33 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top