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.
For the scientists it is about grant money and recognition. Both are very important to universities and the ability to get either or both is personally beneficial for scientists. (It's worth noting that most university professors and researchers have political views left of center.)
For politicians it is about the excuse to regulate, tax, and feel important (and it makes them "feel good" to be doing something the "help" the earth).
There is also a third group of people involved - the Environmentalists. For them it is just the latest excuse to restrict our access to energy (why else sue over solar and oppose wind power), claim we are running out of resources and cry about there being too many people on the planet (ie Zero Population). They have been working on these three goals for decades and Global Warming is just a convenient fit with their agenda.
It's a sick, symbiotic relationship perpetrated by the Left who claim to care about the "little guy." In reality their "solutions" would doom billions of people to poverty and poor living conditions.
However the tide is turning against the Global Warming hypothesis. Someday the Global Warming scare will be studied as the first example of modern sustained mass hysteria fueled by the modern media and internet.
Honestly, with a government so dead set against doing anything about global warming, I find it odd that these scientists should utilize global warming to gain grants from the government. That would be like asking your enemy for a bat to hit him with.
Honestly, with a government so dead set against doing anything about global warming, I find it odd that these scientists should utilize global warming to gain grants from the government. That would be like asking your enemy for a bat to hit him with.
Which government are you talking about? The one that just listed the polar bear as endangered because of the "threat of global warming" on their habitat?
Which government are you talking about? The one that just listed the polar bear as endangered because of the "threat of global warming" on their habitat?
this reminds me, while they are adding the polar bear to the endangered species list, they are out having a party, the numbers went from just a few thousands in the 70's to well over 20,000 today. looks like they really are endangered.....
Honestly, with a government so dead set against doing anything about global warming, I find it odd that these scientists should utilize global warming to gain grants from the government. That would be like asking your enemy for a bat to hit him with.
Bush and both major candidates have folded on the utter disaster called Cap and Trade.
You have to believe in the global con job called global warming. It is a con, it is a feelgood method to loot the treasury of the US and other wealthy nations.
It's odd that people trust the UN to manage a huge and critical project like this, when just about everything they touch is a disaster already.
It's the same phenomenon of the Free Health Care Believers. While government can't keep the roads and bridges in repair, when 1/3 of most federal budgets go into the slipping transmission known as administrative costs, yet people clamor for more, more.
CO2 does not cause global warming because there is no global warming.
CO2 is required for plant life.
This argument is absurd.
It seems like the more technology and knowledge we have available, the more ignorant we become.
Bush and both major candidates have folded on the utter disaster called Cap and Trade.
You have to believe in the global con job called global warming. It is a con, it is a feelgood method to loot the treasury of the US and other wealthy nations.
It's odd that people trust the UN to manage a huge and critical project like this, when just about everything they touch is a disaster already.
It's the same phenomenon of the Free Health Care Believers. While government can't keep the roads and bridges in repair, when 1/3 of most federal budgets go into the slipping transmission known as administrative costs, yet people clamor for more, more.
CO2 does not cause global warming because there is no global warming.
CO2 is required for plant life.
This argument is absurd.
It seems like the more technology and knowledge we have available, the more ignorant we become.
While I can't agree or disagree per se on the global warming, I definitely agree that technology and supposed knowledge breed ignorance. I also agree that our "government" is a complete and total mess.
Which government are you talking about? The one that just listed the polar bear as endangered because of the "threat of global warming" on their habitat?
I am talking about the government that was incredibly opposed to the Kyoto Treaty and the one that denied global warming for the longest time until their ties with big oil made them look rather silly in their stand. This is also the same government that just made it possible to drill offshore. The Bush administration is most definitely not for global warming. He is leaving office and is attempting to look good and not completely corrupt.
this reminds me, while they are adding the polar bear to the endangered species list, they are out having a party, the numbers went from just a few thousands in the 70's to well over 20,000 today. looks like they really are endangered.....
There is a very good reason for this. There was a treaty in the 70's that cut down drastically on the harvesting of polar bears. It is quite natural that they would have gone up. Now, in fact, they are staying quite the same. Global warming or not, it is a fact that their environment is melting away. I fail to see how this is a benificial component to the rise in polar bear numbers.
Bush and both major candidates have folded on the utter disaster called Cap and Trade.
You have to believe in the global con job called global warming. It is a con, it is a feelgood method to loot the treasury of the US and other wealthy nations.
Too late the right wing war mongers already did that. And we'll be paying for it for decades.
Quote:
It's odd that people trust the UN to manage a huge and critical project like this, when just about everything they touch is a disaster already.
As opposed to the phenomenal job the US war mongers/corporate puppets have done the last 8 years?
Quote:
It's the same phenomenon of the Free Health Care Believers. While government can't keep the roads and bridges in repair, when 1/3 of most federal budgets go into the slipping transmission known as administrative costs, yet people clamor for more, more.
The government can't afford to take care of the elderly, the sick, children or keep the bridges & roads in repair or fund a "Manhattan Project" for alternative energy but they can afford to squander a TRILLION tax payer dollars butchering, slaughtering & maiming innocent people who did nothing to us. Gotta love these "compassionate conservatives".
Quote:
CO2 does not cause global warming because there is no global warming.
CO2 is required for plant life.
There's a direct link to global temps & CO2 as ice samples from the Antarctic have proven. The ecosystem is in a delicate balance a concept the right wing deniers have difficulty understanding. It can absorb lots of abuse but there comes a breaking point. Adding billions of tons of CO2 to the naturally occurring CO2 couldn't possibly disrupt the balance. Nah, just stick your head in the sand and it'll never happen. Let's just continue playing Russian Roulette and see what happens. Great strategy.
Quote:
This argument is absurd.
It seems like the more technology and knowledge we have available, the more ignorant we become.
Forgive me if this has already been mentioned in the thread (I've been keeping up with the thread, but did not go back to reread it all before posting this)...
How does everyone feel about the upcoming Stephen Susman and Steve Berman suit against 24 oil, coal and electric companies?
Berman is the one who brought down Big Tobacco. Remember when we used to be told cigarettes did not cause cancer ?
So if Susman-Berman wins, I'm thinking maybe the question will be settled once and for all (not for everyone, of course, some will always believe it to be a conspiracy).
Here's a link to an article about it. If you're not happy with my source for the link, you can always google "Kivalina" or any of the keywords, there are plenty of other sources for similar articles:
c02 and ozone layer are factors. population is 4 times its size of 50 years ago.
to say warming has nothing to do with these factors would be to thumb our nose at the world science community. but of course we like to do that.
changing our life style is not acceptable to many americans. we have kind of locked into a pattern. the indians evolved they got casinos but we did not.
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.
Big Oil the next Big Tobacco?
