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.
The issue I have with the argument against global warming, among other things, is that we have all heard it before. Whether it was those opposing acid rain, CFCs or any other host of environmental rules, regulations or legislation, it was all the same argument:
1. Deny it Exists (What acid rain? It's good rain!) and when that fails,
2. Say it's minimal. (What's a couple of dead fish.) and when that fails,
3. Say the science is unsettled. (What proof do you have that acid rain is bad for the environment! You can't prove squat!) and when that fails,
4. Say it's too expensive to cure. (If we have install scrubbers on all coal plants, it will destroy jobs, cause huge spikes in costs, and bring down the coal industry!) and when that fails,
5. Say it's too late. (Lakes are already dead..c'est la vie.) and when that fails,
6. Blame it on your opponents. (It's a liberal conspiracy I tell ya!!!)
What all these controversies have in common is that the opponents of environment controls were all wrong and that the corrective action worked and was not the calamity that the opponents said these new laws and rules would be.
Opponents of climate change are wrong here as well. It is just unfortunate that many years ago when there were moderate Republicans, they were not all opposed to environmental laws. These laws were passed and they worked. Too bad these Republicans are no longer around, so the burden falls on the Democrats to do the right thing.
1. Deny it exists?
It is incumbent upon those promoting the hypothesis to disprove the null hypothesis, not the other way around. So......................................... can you do that please? (Obviously, no "study" has thus far shown this. So in actual science, "global warming" is considered unproved conjecture). To liberals (who have no clue about actual science), global warming is the gospel truth.
2. Acid rain does exist- that has been proven. Global warming has not been proven.
3. "Global warming" is mimimal because it doesn't exist. Acid rain does exist and has deleterious effects on the enviorment. Little things like pH changes are easily measured.
4. There is no proof of global warming. You are promoting THE OPPOSITE OF SCIENCE. One does not accept the hypothesis as true, then challenge others to disprove it. That is insane.
5. There is no reason to initiate expensive cures for something that does not exist. Further, these "cures" could have very damaging effects on the environment.
Wrong fossil fuels will not always be with us. Even the most optimistic estimates of the total amount of carbon based fossil fuels, give a total amount of about 5000 Gtons of such fuels (i.e coal all grades) peat , petroleum (including tar sands and oil shales) and natural gases. This also assumes 100% recovery,
At current consumption this will be all burned up roughly 2000 years from now (2000 years ago Rome was a great empire) . If we assume even modest increase in growth or assume all mankind will be using our current per capita consumption within this century . This amount of fossil carbon fuels may be used up in only 200-300 years (roughly the time frame the fictional Star Trek series) and 200-300 years isn't that long of a time historically speaking . So the age of fossil fuels has a finite bound and after the fuels are used up we will not be having this debate over putting more carbon in the environment. We wll just have to live with the consequences of the world which we as a species made.
What consequences?
All these wailing liberals talk about "consequences" and if we don't "do something now" a "catastrophe" will result.
What consequences, and do what? now, and what catastrophe are you talking about?
I hear all those doom messages with no substance of anything backing it up.
Oil is not going to run out. Coal is not going to run out. All these fools project something will run out in some year, yet new technology for extracting more comes around the corner. New fields are constantly being discovered. Bakken was discovered 30-40 years ago. Technology then said it couldn't be extracted. Yet here we are with new technology getting that oil out and the field turns out to be bigger than estimated.
Liberal whiners say ANWAR is a minimal field. Bet your wrong. And I will further bet we will extract that oil in the future as well as in the arctic.
We will not run out of anything anytime in the foreseeable future.
And? When you take a very low percentage from Republicans and a percentage in the 60-70 percent from Democrats, you are given a low number because of Republicans and their lack of care for climate change. This is nothing surprising to anyone.
How about Obama using an armada of aircraft to fly nearly halfway around the world each year to sit on that beach he likes?
Let me guess, you believe he either bicycles to Hawaii or that the only concern your actually have about climate change is talking about it.
How about you use an argument just a tad disconnected from insanity?
How about you actually hold some of these hypocrites accountable?
Tell us specifically why President Obama can't put his Hawaiian vacations on hold while he's president and have his vacations at Camp David?
Is it that you believe those 747's and heavy lift cargo jets are solar powered?
I guess you are one of these "environmentalists" who believes that "taxes save the planet, we don't need to actually do things like not upgrade our iPhones, computer and tv's every couple of years."
Yes, the whole world is very much aware of that.
Americans comprise only 5% of the global population, and yet gobble up almost a third of the global resources.
So basically Republicans really, really don't care about climate change....color me shocked.
And liberals really really don't care about the middle class.....color me shocked.
How many of you morally self righteous leftists who think you're saving the world for future generations have thought through how you're going to power people's homes and fuel their cars and get food transported to their supermarkets in the present generation with green technology not advanced enough yet to handle the load?
And how are you going to control the carbon emissions in all the nations of all the globe? How much does it matter if we fight global warming in America while China, India, and Russia have 1,200 new coal power plants either proposed or currently under construction? They are planning on producing 60% more coal energy than is produced in America.
Most Americans couldn't care less about the AGW hoax. We have much bigger issues to address and we are tired of the lies we hear from Obama and Al Gore. We know they only want to increase our taxes and increase government control of our lives. Give it up. We don't care about your AGW hoax anymore.
O Observed
B Barametric
A Atmospheric
M Modified Weather
A Admin
And so now you know the truth to global warming BS LOL
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.
