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 don't particularly understand the conservative agenda against Global Warming and Environmental protection. Regardless of whether or not Global Warming is reality (and I am not convinced of any opinion one way or another), it seems to me to be mostly a masturbatory exercise to do what has been done in opposition. American politics right now is not about accomplishment or moral justification. It's about winning. People want to win. From the guy in his basement posting links to evidence he hasn't read to the big guy in the White House.
Drilling and the purposeful disruption of the earth's biology for the sake of business is unnecessary. It's wasteful in the way that it makes something business that is not business. It sells sustainability and the lack of it equally. Get over it: There are ways to progress.
Global Warming advocates and dissenters alike are crazy-trapped on the wrong message.
If there are ways to make the Earth a better planet, regardless of whether or not it needs it, I find it to be a psychological and moral deficiency to not do so.
I don't particularly understand the conservative agenda against Global Warming and Environmental protection. Regardless of whether or not Global Warming is reality (and I am not convinced of any opinion one way or another), it seems to me to be mostly a masturbatory exercise to do what has been done in opposition. American politics right now is not about accomplishment or moral justification. It's about winning. People want to win. From the guy in his basement posting links to evidence he hasn't read to the big guy in the White House.
Drilling and the purposeful disruption of the earth's biology for the sake of business is unnecessary. It's wasteful in the way that it makes something business that is not business. It sells sustainability and the lack of it equally. Get over it: There are ways to progress.
Global Warming advocates and dissenters alike are crazy-trapped on the wrong message.
If there are ways to make the Earth a better planet, regardless of whether or not it needs it, I find it to be a psychological and moral deficiency to not do so.
you dont understand because it doesnt exist.
there is no 'AGENDA'
There is however, plenty of evidence that suggests there is a dead rat in the walls.
it stinks.
we dont like stink
We simply cant understand why folks are so angry that we have pointed out that there is a dead rat in the wall...
I don't particularly understand the conservative agenda against Global Warming and Environmental protection. Regardless of whether or not Global Warming is reality (and I am not convinced of any opinion one way or another), it seems to me to be mostly a masturbatory exercise to do what has been done in opposition. American politics right now is not about accomplishment or moral justification. It's about winning. People want to win. From the guy in his basement posting links to evidence he hasn't read to the big guy in the White House.
Drilling and the purposeful disruption of the earth's biology for the sake of business is unnecessary. It's wasteful in the way that it makes something business that is not business. It sells sustainability and the lack of it equally. Get over it: There are ways to progress.
Global Warming advocates and dissenters alike are crazy-trapped on the wrong message.
If there are ways to make the Earth a better planet, regardless of whether or not it needs it, I find it to be a psychological and moral deficiency to not do so.
Here is the problem. Your entire post is what we call a red herring.
It focuses on everything that is irrelevant to the issue being contested.
The problem is the science being used to come to the conclusion is invalid. It is at times massive speculation and at others outright fabrication. It is used in a political manner to promote support for the conclusion that this "science" comes to.
So, in essence, the position that draws support from it is using lies and deceit to promote it.
Your position seems to take the stance that as long as the end result is what is good, then how we get there is ok, because its a good cause.
Am I correct in that inference? Maybe you can clarify. Is it acceptable to manipulate findings, collude to roadblock opposition, and out right lie to justify a result that "may" be a good result? Does the end justify the means?
If I lie and cheat to get the people to donate money to a good cause, is that acceptable in your opinion?
The only reason I ask is that if it is, then anything you might have to say is absolutely not to be trusted by anyone here as you will be admitting that you have no problems supporting a lie if it results in something you consider to be "better" for mankind. It essentially invalidates any position you might have.
Here is the problem. Your entire post is what we call a red herring.
It focuses on everything that is irrelevant to the issue being contested.
The problem is the science being used to come to the conclusion is invalid. It is at times massive speculation and at others outright fabrication. It is used in a political manner to promote support for the conclusion that this "science" comes to.
So, in essence, the position that draws support from it is using lies and deceit to promote it.
Your position seems to take the stance that as long as the end result is what is good, then how we get there is ok, because its a good cause.
Am I correct in that inference? Maybe you can clarify. Is it acceptable to manipulate findings, collude to roadblock opposition, and out right lie to justify a result that "may" be a good result? Does the end justify the means?
If I lie and cheat to get the people to donate money to a good cause, is that acceptable in your opinion?
The only reason I ask is that if it is, then anything you might have to say is absolutely not to be trusted by anyone here as you will be admitting that you have no problems supporting a lie if it results in something you consider to be "better" for mankind. It essentially invalidates any position you might have.
No, the problem is, I asked "Why are you contesting something when it doesn't seem to particularly matter what the outcome is?"
And then proceeded to fall back in love with the sound of your own voice.
We simply cant understand why folks are so angry that we have pointed out that there is a dead rat in the wall...
In kind, I can not understand why folks are so angry as to say, "conservation is nice, but only after I begrudgingly and loudly dissent upon all of your reasons for conservation."
Which seems to be the central point and methodology of those opposing Global Warming.
It doesn't matter if Global Warming exists. I don't know if it does. I don't care. Someone get busy explaining to me some logical reason for not wanting to progress in this way: Making the earth a better place to live.
"BAH~!~ Facts!! Facts!! Look at all these links! By Jesus, look at all the holes in your argument! Stop being so angry~!~! Bah! Fallacy fallacy fallacy! I'll explain to you how this all works~!! Bahh!!"
No. Settle. I don't care if Global Warming exists. Let's operate under the assumption that it doesn't. Okay. Now, let's get back to making the earth a better place to live. Just because we can.
There are some things, my well read and conveniently snarky friends, that do not need reasons.
No, the problem is, I asked "Why are you contesting something when it doesn't seem to particularly matter what the outcome is?"
And then proceeded to fall back in love with the sound of your own voice.
The sound of one hand clapping.
I've tried to explain that point to Nomander on many occasions. He and others peg me as an "AGW cultist", but I'm not at all. If researchers start saying they were wrong in their fundamental conclusions, then I'll happily accept that and celebrate that the world isn't catastrophically changing. So far, every adjustment they make to the science is concluded with a statement by the authors that they do not feel it alters the overall warming trend.
So many on here keep trying to draw conversations down to a political battle for who's right rather than up to an opportunity for progress beyond ideology.
I couldn't agree more with your above post - and you even used "masturbatory" for the second time in a non-sexual thread!
I think those supposedly stolen e-mails opened a gate to something that the IPCC and UN just can't close without using this method of talking. Yep, they are losing their butts but don't seem to be ready to give in.
Of course, Obama is wanting Cap and Trade so he can further weaken the US economy for his own personal reasons.
Great post, Ferd.
Cap & Trade will be the ultimate fraud forced upon the people and an endless "slush fund" for an oversized central government.
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.
