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've got a radical idea to help stop global warming. This is a 10-year plan because it would be impossible to implement all these overnight. What does everybody think? Does anybody think this would solve the problem?
-Phase out the legality of private automobile ownership. This would go into effect at the end of the 10 years, allowing time to build a high speed rail infrastructure to replace the Interstate Highway System and other forms of public transit to be developed.
-A law passed to limit how far a person can legally live from their place of employment
-At the end of the 10 years, it will be a felony offense to drive a fossil-fuel powered vehicle without a commercial or agricultural drivers license.
-Require dense, urban environments to be built to absorb people who can no longer live in the suburbs. Retrofit our urban areas to be more like those in Europe
-In the meantime, raise taxes on gasoline so that gas prices are no lower than $6/gallon at the 3 year mark, $8/gallon at the 6 year mark, and $12 gallon at the 9 year mark
-Outlaw all coal power plants. Require all electricity to be generated from renewable sources by the end of the 10 years
-Fund a national public transit initiative to connect America's large cities and also the smaller towns by rail. High speed rail will replace the Interstate Highway System and light rail will connect communities out from there
-Close all airports that at the time of the passage of the law have less than 30 million passengers per year
-Give tax credits to people who move to an area serviced by public transit
-Have strict, national zoning laws the put an end to suburbia. Bulldoze over suburban development no longer livable at the end of the 10-year period. Outlaw suburban and rural living unless one has an agriculture license in which they would be required to live in rural areas.
The OP's plan has at it's root the basic (but unstated) desire of all Liberial enviromentilists. The decrease of the surplus population on Mother Earth. The ideas as stated would not, could not be implemented without the shedding of blood, lots of blood...............
I've got a radical idea to help stop global warming. This is a 10-year plan because it would be impossible to implement all these overnight. What does everybody think? Does anybody think this would solve the problem?.
You are a decade too late. Al Gore stopped global warming 15 years ago.
Do you really believe that "expressed no position" means that they don't have one? Or, is it just more likely that those who chose not to reveal their opinion were simply keeping their mouths shut to avoid the dogmatic backlash from the consensus fanatics?
It's more likely that the vast majority of these papers are focused on some narrow, specialized aspect of climate study. There is no reason to expect that such papers would make a pronouncement on the very broad question of man's impact on the climate.
Quote:
You see, today's "science" is fragmented into two very different camps .... you
have a very small element of independent scientists truly devoted to science and
the scientific method, wherein data is collected on any given subject first, and
that data is then used as the basis for forming a theory or supposition or
speculation. On the other hand, there is the mainstream consensus scientific
community who now, more often than not, spend most of their time sifting through
and data mining to collect evidence to support preconceived theories and
speculations, which is the complete reverse of the scientific method. This is
really junk science .... or "paid for science" of the variety that the
pharmaceutical establishment relies on to claim how safe and effective their
poisonous, ineffective and dangerous drugs are.
This is nonsense. I work with doctors and others who organize clinical trials for new drugs. And I know just how careful they are to collect good data and avoid making unwarrented claims about efficacy.
Quote:
The bottom line reality is that anthropogenic global warming is just another of
the many con-jobs too numerous to list, who's reason for existence is to extract
money from the easily deceived. Snake oil salesmen is what these types used to
be referred to. Unfortunately, the greater portion of science in so many
fields today have been corrupted by money and self interests, relegating
independent science as the exception rather than the rule.
The bottom line is that scientific journals and associations are more credible than the random internet guys in Texas who criticize them. Why would anyone take your word for any of that?
This is nonsense. I work with doctors and others who organize clinical trials for new drugs. And I know just how careful they are to collect good data and avoid making unwarrented claims about efficacy.
Here's interesting read if you have the technical knowledge to understand what is going on:
OH **** THIS. It's Sunday evening, I've worked all weekend, and just when I thought it was done I'm hitting yet another problem that's based on the hopeless state of our databases. There is no uniform data integrity, it's just a catalogue of issues that continues to grow as they're found.
Here's a good example, the blue line is the raw data, something happens around 1940 and there is distinct shift downwards. The red line is the adjustment they made for this:
This would be funny, except for the fact that you actually believe it.
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.