Global Warming - It's going to freeze us all to death (John Kerry, Kerry)
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.
You really need to do yourself and the rest of us a favor. Before embarking on yet another campaign to debunk Climate Change and Global Warming, learn what these these terms mean and the difference between the two. There are hundreds of these types of threads on CD alone to fill the Grand Canyon. It is quite tedious to go over this again and again. Yes, there is corporate and industry greed surrounding every issue, but in the long run doing things that will "green" the planet, will eventualy be of benefit to us and future generations regardless of which controversy it stems from.
Really? Will capping the energy (read=reducing SUPPLY, causing huge rate hikes IF the demand remains unchanged) be better for us in the long run? I guess those of us who are unemployed due to manufacturing companies shutting plants off (to reduce carbon emissions, of course) should be glad they are contributing to the planet being green.
When will people finally learn that " Global Warming " is just a catch-phrase? Not a literal or definitive defintion of what is happening.
This planet is going through some drastic, intense climate change. Climate change all over, in different regions and areas. That could be excessive heat, excessive rain...flooding, or extended droughts, or excessive...extended cold weather.
" Global Warming " is a very misleading catch-phrase that has done more damage, than good. Because people seem to take everything literally, all the time.
That became the new spin, when the girls at NOAA realized that the short-term warming trend was over, and cooling was starting, a few years ago.
Suddenly, they began to prefer the catch phrase "climate change" over "global warming", so that they could continue to scare people for profit whether the temperature was naturally wandering up or down.
Really? Will capping the energy (read=reducing SUPPLY, causing huge rate hikes IF the demand remains unchanged) be better for us in the long run? I guess those of us who are unemployed due to manufacturing companies shutting plants off (to reduce carbon emissions, of course) should be glad they are contributing to the planet being green.
Your pain is al Gore's gain. Maybe not him personally, but someone, somewhere is going to benefit from your pain, even if its just some liberal tree huger who is happy the Janesville GM plant was shut down, or the pickup truck plant in Oshawa, Ontario, or the mid-size SUV plant in Moraine, Ohio.
Closing down a coal plant not only brings a smile to the lips of a lib, but it makes the federally subsidized wind and solar farms richer. It also makes all the manufacturers and businesses that coal plant supplied cheaper energy to, feel the pain as well. Somewhere in China, India, Brazil or where ever, is a manufacturer or businesses that benefit from the failed US companies that used to receive cheap energy from that coal plant.
But after all this pain and suffering, the al Gore types claim the world climate temps may go down by 0.06 degrees by 2130.
Global weather is not climate. It may be hotter or colder than normal all over the globe today. In fact it almost certainly is hotter or colder than normal all over the globe today, and tomorrow and the day after that. Climate is when those averages begin to change over long periods of time, as is currently happening.
It's not stupid, it leadership. China is already changing their approach to energy, but their per capita consumption and production of GHG is way below ours. We have to take the leadership position.
Too bad the Supreme Court has already ruled that they must.
the USA is not the world policeman, and should have never been in the 1st place. the USA should never have gotten involved in other countries politics and never gotten in the UN as well.
the SCOTUS might have ruled that way, but it should have never ruled that way, after all the SCOTUS is not there to legislate or make law, they are there to just make laws constitutional or unconstitutional.
the USA is not the world policeman, and should have never been in the 1st place. the USA should never have gotten involved in other countries politics and never gotten in the UN as well.
We are not policing the Chinese. That's the silliest suggestion I've heard in many years. We are working the the Chinese to transition out two economies from a 19th to a 21st century energy supply
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching
the SCOTUS might have ruled that way, but it should have never ruled that way, after all the SCOTUS is not there to legislate or make law, they are there to just make laws constitutional or unconstitutional.
Right the Bush Supreme Court ruled that the EPA must enforce the Clean Air Act, which covers CO2. The Bush Administration was breaking the law by not enforcing the law -- surprise surprise.
Thank you Chicken Little. The sky is not falling. You can come out from under the bed now.
The "sky falling" is the Waxman-Markey bill, it already passed the house, it is definitely not safe, it will bring ruin to this country, and maybe a smile to the lips of people like you.
We are not policing the Chinese. That's the silliest suggestion I've heard in many years. We are working the the Chinese to transition out two economies from a 19th to a 21st century energy supply
what would that be? Wind? Solar?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch
Right the Bush Supreme Court ruled that the EPA must enforce the Clean Air Act, which covers CO2. The Bush Administration was breaking the law by not enforcing the law -- surprise surprise.
Then the EPA should be abolished, if the SCOTUS will use it to help bring ruin to the country by making it law, to regulate the air I exhale.
The "sky falling" is the Waxman-Markey bill, it already passed the house, it is definitely not safe, it will bring ruin to this country, and maybe a smile to the lips of people like you.
LOL Thank you for your sage and considered advice Chicken Little.
Then the EPA should be abolished, if the SCOTUS will use it to help bring ruin to the country by making it law, to regulate the air I exhale.
Write your congressman..... Oh wait the Republicans no longer govern. LOL. You lose, again.
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.
