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 will start believing in human's effecting the earth's climate when:
1) All yachts are confiscated and recycled, they have an outrageous carbon footprint.
2) All Private & Corporate aircrafts (Lears Jets, Gulf Streams, etc) are confiscated and recycled, they have an outrageous carbon footprint.
3) All Private property within 1 mile of a sea / ocean coastline is confiscated by the government and all the RICH ELITE are required to move at least one mile inland ......OBVIOUSLY to protect the naive owners from the rising sea levels.
4) Equitable / Equal distribution of energy. Why should rich elites get as much energy as they want to heat and cool multiple mansions while the rest of us are being warned of rationing of energy?
Notice my couple of examples highlight the hypocrisy of the ELITE LEFTIST that want to control the rest of us.
We are either in a crisis or we are not.
Would like to hear from others on what they see as blatant hypocrisy.
LOL. This is like saying you will not protect your daughter from rape because alcohol, high-heels and violent movies still exist.
And you want the government to confiscate coastline properties?
Tackling big, crucial problems are never simple and easy. Hope you don't shrink on all your personal challenges because you get caught up naval-gazing for hypocrisy. It's not fair!! It's not fair!!
I will start believing in human's effecting the earth's climate when:
1) All yachts are confiscated and recycled, they have an outrageous carbon footprint.
2) All Private & Corporate aircrafts (Lears Jets, Gulf Streams, etc) are confiscated and recycled, they have an outrageous carbon footprint.
3) All Private property within 1 mile of a sea / ocean coastline is confiscated by the government and all the RICH ELITE are required to move at least one mile inland ......OBVIOUSLY to protect the naive owners from the rising sea levels.
4) Equitable / Equal distribution of energy. Why should rich elites get as much energy as they want to heat and cool multiple mansions while the rest of us are being warned of rationing of energy?
Notice my couple of examples highlight the hypocrisy of the ELITE LEFTIST that want to control the rest of us.
We are either in a crisis or we are not.
Would like to hear from others on what they see as blatant hypocrisy.
You just set up a straw man argument. Your points have nothing to do with whether humans are affecting (and it's affecting not effecting) the climate. Your points are political, the climate is not.
Well at least the OP opened our eyes to the illogical reasonings of why they haven't started in believing that humans are effecting climate change. Yes, those are examples of issues that don't help with lowering the impact of climate change, but it also is the world we live in with personal property and freedoms/rights of ownership. Those items will hopefully be addressed without some so oppressive as a confiscation and seizure as the OP proposes before they consider climate change.
On the bright side of progress, we're starting to see electric taxi planes/helicopters (ranges below 200mi), sails used on large container ships, electric yachts with active hydrofoils, sustainable architecture based on regional natural disaster resilience, and insurers reconsidering coverage in danger-prone areas.
Well at least the OP opened our eyes to the illogical reasonings of why they haven't started in believing that humans are effecting climate change. Yes, those are examples of issues that don't help with lowering the impact of climate change, but it also is the world we live in with personal property and freedoms/rights of ownership. Those items will hopefully be addressed without some so oppressive as a confiscation and seizure as the OP proposes before they consider climate change.
On the bright side of progress, we're starting to see electric taxi planes/helicopters (ranges below 200mi), sails used on large container ships, electric yachts with active hydrofoils, sustainable architecture based on regional natural disaster resilience, and insurers reconsidering coverage in danger-prone areas.
There's progress even when people make up every excuse to not consider their alternatives or the nature of their reality.
I think you mean humans Affecting climate change? Humans probably do affect it but I don't believe they effect it (as in, bring it about.) Humans the world over use an enormous amount of fuel and have made huge changes to the earth as it was. So I think they have affected it. But they did not Effect it. Climate changes have occurred throughout the history of the earth, even before humans existed.
The climate is probably in a warming stage anyway but humans have contributed to it. Little campfires that natives used to use for cooking and keeping warm probably didn't have much effect, but when you look at the vast cities of today and the amount of energy we use, we can't help but have some effect.
I think you mean humans Affecting climate change? Humans probably do affect it but I don't believe they effect it (as in, bring it about.) Humans the world over use an enormous amount of fuel and have made huge changes to the earth as it was. So I think they have affected it. But they did not Effect it. Climate changes have occurred throughout the history of the earth, even before humans existed.
The climate is probably in a warming stage anyway but humans have contributed to it. Little campfires that natives used to use for cooking and keeping warm probably didn't have much effect, but when you look at the vast cities of today and the amount of energy we use, we can't help but have some effect.
You have made some finer points concerning the terms affect/effect. The thing is the OP apparently did not believe that humans have anything to do with climate change even though numbers of scientists have studied the facts and proven otherwise. This is not about belief, it's about science.
I'm worried about the people in Florida who actually think that very strong hurricanes will still be a rare occurrence in future when scientists are telling them differently. I have zero patience for people who don't heed warnings.
I will start believing in human's effecting the earth's climate when:
1) All yachts are confiscated and recycled, they have an outrageous carbon footprint.
2) All Private & Corporate aircrafts (Lears Jets, Gulf Streams, etc) are confiscated and recycled, they have an outrageous carbon footprint.
3) All Private property within 1 mile of a sea / ocean coastline is confiscated by the government and all the RICH ELITE are required to move at least one mile inland ......OBVIOUSLY to protect the naive owners from the rising sea levels.
4) Equitable / Equal distribution of energy. Why should rich elites get as much energy as they want to heat and cool multiple mansions while the rest of us are being warned of rationing of energy?
Notice my couple of examples highlight the hypocrisy of the ELITE LEFTIST that want to control the rest of us.
We are either in a crisis or we are not.
Would like to hear from others on what they see as blatant hypocrisy.
So you want government to have huge powers, able to confiscate anything it wants, and mostly from rich people?
I.e. you are one of the typical fanatic-left people we see so often in this forum?
Blasphemy is not allowed in the Church of the Warming Planet. Don't dare question the inconsistencies, fabricated data, and outright fraud behind the "climate science" hoax.
Remember to scream "Climate denier" while omitting "anthropogenic". Because climate does change, but there's little evidence that humans are actually driving that change.
Climate is what you expect - weather is what you get.
But blaming every weather anomaly on "anthropogenic climate change" is obviously based on belief, not science.
Many snide remarks here without anyone addressing the real point of the OP-- Hypocrisy.
He should have stated his examples and then said "Maybe it would be easier to accept that AGW is the truth if the loudest mouths on the subject were practicing what they preached.
The fact remains, the only thing the Warmists have in their favor are some shaky correlations in the short term, some very inaccurate computer models, and a naive public willing to accept what politicians tell them.
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.
It's not fair!! 
