Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
OT To bad someone in our congress doesnt have the guts to saythis.
On 1/23/2010 7:53 PM, Wildbilly wrote:
In , wrote: On 1/22/2010 10:18 PM, Wildbilly wrote: In , wrote: On 1/22/2010 4:14 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote: Frank wrote: On 1/21/2010 11:04 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote: aluckyguess wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TOFe85cmAE I am not a voter for your congress but I would hope that my elected representatives were more perceptive and informed than the speaker in this clip. Being unable to distinguish between climate and weather does not fill me with confidence that the speaker understands anything about climate change. David That's the knee jerk argument. I don 't understand that comment. What is knee-jerk about saying a person who doesn't understand the difference between weather and climate is ignorant? What is knee-jerk about wanting my representatives to be perceptive and informed? My skepticism comes in as to how much weather change is man made vs just what mother nature does. Weather does change all the time. We need to consider if the earth's climate is changing and if so why. These are two different issues. We hear other planets in our solar system are also warming and I don't think anybody there are driving SUV's. Where did you hear that? Assuming for moment that the climate was changing on other planets from natural causes why would that show that climate is not changing on earth from human causes? We know that the earth's climate has changed in the past naturally and it may well do so again. That by itself says nothing about whether it *is* doing so naturally this time. This question has been much studied and there is considerable evidence available that points to the cause this time being human activity. David Weather vs climate is what I call knee jerk reaction as that is always the reason given. I understand it. Do some research on the other planets warming. See what you find on the internet. Heartland Institute, which is anti, has a very intriguing study on US earth bound temperature measurement stations where about 90% are out of specs, e.g. originally out in a field, away from buildings and now surrounded by them. Also see what they say about the carbon dioxide correlation. Satellite data has been showing cooling. Look it up. Funny you should mention that, Frank. Read the paper today? http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0121170717.htm If you want to see the mindset that drives the global warming crowd, read Michael Crichton's novel, "State of Fear". There are those that profit from the "crisis." If I were a straw man, I would be terrified of you, Frank, but not to worry. Donald Trump and his shock economists are ready to do for Haiti, what they did to New Orleans. I'm sure that the gentrification of Port au Prince will make him a richer man, Frank. If your going to make an assertion Frank, give us a cite. Don't waste our time on a snipe hunt. "According to a September 20 NASA news release, "for three Mars summers in a row, deposits of frozen carbon dioxide near Mars' south pole have shrunk from the previous year's size . . ." Three data points, Frank? Three? A real "tea-bagger" should only need one. If you want to have some fun, read http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1130192921.htm or http://eesc.columbia.edu/courses/w49...olden.1993.pdf Go get real facts, Frank, like http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/ , or http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1130192921.htm . OK, Frank, let's say that the majority of scientists are wrong. We spend all this money for nothing, and we look dumb. The other alternative is that they are right, we do nothing, and then we are screwed. Which way would you have it, Frank, looking silly, or screwed? Personally, I just wish that one of our Congresspeople would have the guts to stand up and admit that Congress works for the corporations, not the citizens. Corporations are the ones that are fighting regulations on greenhouse gases. Wake up, Frank. You are dead wrong about corporations. They always go where the money is. When the money is with government, they go for it. I can cite examples with DuPont and GE. Yet, you never do. Good example: http://lookinferlearnin.wordpress.co...w-light-bulbs/ Three corporations supporting and profiting from environmental legislation. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
OT To bad someone in our congress doesnt have the guts to say this.
In article ,
Frank wrote: On 1/23/2010 7:53 PM, Wildbilly wrote: In , wrote: On 1/22/2010 10:18 PM, Wildbilly wrote: In , wrote: On 1/22/2010 4:14 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote: Frank wrote: On 1/21/2010 11:04 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote: aluckyguess wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TOFe85cmAE I am not a voter for your congress but I would hope that my elected representatives were more perceptive and informed than the speaker in this clip. Being unable to distinguish between climate and weather does not fill me with confidence that the speaker understands anything about climate change. David That's the knee jerk argument. I don 't understand that comment. What is knee-jerk about saying a person who doesn't understand the difference between weather and climate is ignorant? What is knee-jerk about wanting my representatives to be perceptive and informed? My skepticism comes in as to how much weather change is man made vs just what mother nature does. Weather does change all the time. We need to consider if the earth's climate is changing and if so why. These are two different issues. We hear other planets in our solar system are also warming and I don't think anybody there are driving SUV's. Where did you hear that? Assuming for moment that the climate was changing on other planets from natural causes why would that show that climate is not changing on earth from human causes? We know that the earth's climate has changed in the past naturally and it may well do so again. That by itself says nothing about whether it *is* doing so naturally this time. This question has been much studied and there is considerable evidence available that points to the cause this time being human activity. David Weather vs climate is what I call knee jerk reaction as that is always the reason given. I understand it. Do some research on the other planets warming. See what you find on the internet. Heartland Institute, which is anti, has a very intriguing study on US earth bound temperature measurement stations where about 90% are out of specs, e.g. originally out in a field, away from buildings and now surrounded by them. Also see what they say about the carbon dioxide correlation. Satellite data has been showing cooling. Look it up. Funny you should mention that, Frank. Read the paper today? http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0121170717.htm If you want to see the mindset that drives the global warming crowd, read Michael Crichton's novel, "State of Fear". There are those that profit from the "crisis." If I were a straw man, I would be terrified of you, Frank, but not to worry. Donald Trump and his shock economists are ready to do for Haiti, what they did to New Orleans. I'm sure that the gentrification of Port au Prince will make him a richer man, Frank. If your going to make an assertion Frank, give us a cite. Don't waste our time on a snipe hunt. "According to a September 20 NASA news release, "for three Mars summers in a row, deposits of frozen carbon dioxide near Mars' south pole have shrunk from the previous year's size . . ." Three data points, Frank? Three? A real "tea-bagger" should only need one. If you want to have some fun, read http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1130192921.htm or http://eesc.columbia.edu/courses/w49...olden.1993.pdf Go get real facts, Frank, like http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/ , or http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1130192921.htm . OK, Frank, let's say that the majority of scientists are wrong. We spend all this money for nothing, and we look dumb. The other alternative is that they are right, we do nothing, and then we are screwed. Which way would you have it, Frank, looking silly, or screwed? Personally, I just wish that one of our Congresspeople would have the guts to stand up and admit that Congress works for the corporations, not the citizens. Corporations are the ones that are fighting regulations on greenhouse gases. Wake up, Frank. You are dead wrong about corporations. They always go where the money is. When the money is with government, they go for it. I can cite examples with DuPont and GE. Yet, you never do. Good example: http://lookinferlearnin.wordpress.co...china-monopoly -on-new-light-bulbs/ Three corporations supporting and profiting from environmental legislation. Do you even read this crap before you get a vision of what you think it means? Corporations aren't supporting the bill, they wrote the damn thing. Spreading mercury into the environment is environmental? When did you learn "double speak", Frank? Can we get back to the discussion, Frank? Given the choices of (1) looking dumb, because we spent to protect ourselves from a perceived threat that doesn't materialize, or (2) we allow death and mayhem to billions of people, because we refused to listen to the warnings of our best and brightest. Which choice would you make, Frank, looking silly, or screwed? -- "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100119/...ting_activists http://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/19/headlines |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
OT To bad someone in our congress doesnt have the guts to say this. | Edible Gardening |