Global Warming, Mk.2. (in Debates)


Marlfox [Cult of the Valaraukar] May 8 2009 7:49 PM EDT

So, apparently some new research has come out showing that the Earth has not warmed up in the past ten years, and in fact, our temperature is decreasing. (Interesting link: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10783)
Thoughts?

QBRanger May 8 2009 7:52 PM EDT

Article not available.

You trying to put Al Gore out of a job?

Marlfox [Cult of the Valaraukar] May 8 2009 7:52 PM EDT

Apparently the ")" was added to the end... here it is:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10783

RedWolf May 9 2009 12:06 AM EDT

I stopped believing in global warming after I read Michael Crichton's "State of Fear."

ceslis May 9 2009 12:10 AM EDT

That is a great book one of my favorites =)

QBOddBird May 9 2009 12:12 AM EDT

I stopped believing in global warming when I considered that the sample we're drawing conclusions from is a couple hundred years out of millions...

QBBast [Hidden Agenda] May 9 2009 6:20 AM EDT


I stopped believing when I realized how much easier and cheaper it would be to eschew all sense of personal responsibility.

Marlfox [Cult of the Valaraukar] May 9 2009 6:47 AM EDT

Not seem especially sarcastic, but, you (Bast) would still believe in global warming (and screw the capitals!) even after science would prove that none is happening? Aren't you enforcing upon yourself an unnecessary "punishment"?

Brakke Bres [Ow man] May 9 2009 6:54 AM EDT

You Americans and your limited views of the world

Canibus May 9 2009 7:30 AM EDT

Jumps on the small train with Henk.

o_O

three4thsforsaken May 9 2009 7:50 AM EDT

I don't know what to believe quite frankly.

But don't act like this article is "proof". It provides evidence but this by no means destroys the possiblity of Global warming.

This scientific debate is so laced with politics it's hard to be sure of anything.

QBRanger May 9 2009 8:01 AM EDT

There is certainly a difference between doing what is right for the environment and making millions of dollars scaring people by telling them the end is near.

Including demanding that they drive what you want them to, live like you want them to, and act like you want them to.

Eurynome Bartleby [Bartleby's] May 9 2009 8:07 AM EDT

No global warming does not mean that we have to make no efforts to reduce the amount of crap we release in the atmosphere. It does not mean we have to continue to produce things we don't need at the expense of the environment.

As long as we're cool with that, believe what you wish, but don't think you can just start wasting valuable ressources like it's 1999 or that it's ok to continue buying freaking Hummers.

These things have other repercussions than warming, and too many people forget that.

Just don't throw your responsibilities away.

Demigod May 9 2009 8:29 AM EDT

"Just don't throw your responsibilities away."

Recycle, renew, reuse them?

QBRanger May 9 2009 8:54 AM EDT

You foreigners thinking you know the best for everyone else.

QBBast [Hidden Agenda] May 9 2009 8:59 AM EDT


And that's not even irony, folks!

Brakke Bres [Ow man] May 9 2009 9:02 AM EDT

No Ranger that is America actually.

Lefty May 9 2009 9:04 AM EDT

"Including demanding that they drive what you want them to, live like you want them to, and act like you want them to. "

This is exactly what I've been saying.

Global Warming is just one big international scam that everyone is taking the bait to, and it's allowing the government to choose how we do things as a race. If looked at some a different point of view, it's also contributing to the economic crisis the US is in right now because people aren't buying all the things they used to in fear of this.

$0.02

[P]Mitt May 9 2009 10:09 AM EDT

Well consider, for an instant, that global warming is real and is exacerbated by man-made means. Oh right, I forgot. Most of you can't even think about, let alone consider an instance when you are wrong.

Well consider it for a moment. Would you change your lifestyle to help save the planet, or would you go along your merry way, saying "screw the planet, I don't want anyone to tell me how to live my life"?

Now consider that it is a possibility. Would you still go about your merry way, saying "screw the planet, I don't want anyone to tell me how to live my life" knowing in the back of your head that global warming could be exacerbated by man-made means and you are running the risk of pushing it along? Of course not, how much damage could one leech do to the environment when everyone else is environmentally conscious? Oh wait. Ever heard of Nash Equilibrium? If not, go look it up. Go do your part and help the environment, even if what is going on is not man-made or man-caused. Do you want to run the risk that your kids will inherit a wasteland because you were too stubborn to listen to a possible warning?

If global warming IS a scam, what do you lose by recycling, installing solar panels (if you have the money), driving a hybrid or a (gasp!) non gas-guzzling car? Oh wait. You save money doing those things. Oh wait. You'd rather run the possibility to let the world burn because you don't want to give up your "freedoms".

Screw the science mumbo-jumbo from both sides. Nobody has "proven" anything. It is still up in the air whether or not Global Warming exists, If it is man-caused, or If it a natural process that we can not stop. But there still is the possibility that it is caused in part by man, and while there is this possibility, do you really want to run the risk of destroying the earth because you are too stubborn and indifferent to even consider a possibility outside the scope of your political ideas?

Cube May 9 2009 10:13 AM EDT

Woo, Go Mitt!

QBRanger May 9 2009 10:25 AM EDT

Certainly,

And when Al Gore, among others, stops using a private plane to fly to speaking engagements to make money, I will stop driving my "gas guzzler".

When Pelosi starts to fly commercial I will do my part. Well more than I already do.

I have no idea if it is real or not, but there is a difference between letting people have choices in how they want to live, vs telling them what they have to do, what to drive, how to act.

AdminShade May 9 2009 10:38 AM EDT

Moved to debates :)

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 9 2009 10:47 AM EDT

the global warming debate is a ruse. petroleum is a finite resource. respiratory disorders are on the rise in most developed nations. the oil that is still around is predominantly in less than stable areas of the world.

regardless of the specific reasons, we should all be able to agree that we need to find cleaner, renewable energy sources and reduce consumption until such time and probably even afterward.

it is a travesty that global warming has given naysayers another opportunity to consume like our parents generation without guilt and thus leave less for the next and actually gloat about it to boot!

QBRanger May 9 2009 11:09 AM EDT

Quite a few times, I find myself thinking the global warming debate is a ruse by socialists.

Designed to try and get people to accept their views on doing what they want you to, drive what they want you to, act like they want you to.

This is not to state recycling is not good. I recycle as much as possible. I am looking to solar panels for my house, although at 15k, they are too expensive right now. My newest SUV gets the best MPG in class aside from the Highlander Hybrid. Which was too expensive to make up the differences in gas costs within 10 years.

However, to use Global Warming as an excuse to get me to not buy a specific type of automobile, or get me to not take trips, or not add on to my house is wrong.

When Jon Edwards, Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi etc.. all show me they are doing their part, I will ratchet up my part.

One could think of it is that great liberal/socialist conspiracy.

Some good reading on it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_conspiracy_theory

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 9 2009 11:17 AM EDT

couldn't it also have been perpetrated by someone else though? the petroleum and automobile industry would be a good suspect. make a good case for it and then seemingly debunk that case. as a society we breathe a collective sigh of relief and go back to our old ways guilt-free.

couldn't it also be just as valid though that it is a true debate with honest people believing different things? perhpaps it says more about our own paranoid delusions that we see conspiracies rather than human tendencies.

cb forums is a good example, most of us want the game to be better and can agree on that, the agreement often stops there though!

the main point is energy wasted on believing or not believing global warming or pointing fingers at shadow conspirators is all energy taken away from doing what we all know we should be doing which is just a little more each day, week, month or year.

support what is right, don't fight over the reasons for doing it is the best way i can sum it up.

QBRanger May 9 2009 11:27 AM EDT

I agree doing what is right is the proper thing.

However to get all worked up, saying that unless we change everything we do right this second or the world will end is wrong.

Baby steps instead of a radical reorientation of things.

Cry wolf one too many times and people stop listening.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 9 2009 11:42 AM EDT

"When Jon Edwards, Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi etc.. all show me they are doing their part, I will ratchet up my part."

what exactly do you want to see from them and i assume from their more conservative counterparts as well?

as for the crying wolf i can relate to that, if i have to listen to you threaten to quit unless things get fixed one more time i will start putting "or else ranger will quit" at the end of all known issues posts! ; )

QBRanger May 9 2009 11:46 AM EDT

Jon Edwards- building a 15k sq foot home.

Al Gore- not flying on a private plane to speak making over 50k a pop.

Nancy Pelosi- not using Air Force planes for private matters. Or even public ones when public transportation is good for the common people.

And yes, crying wolf in CB is much different than doing it when millions of Americans take what you say as gospel.

But I knew someone would call me on that one. Took only 15 min, longer than I expected.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 9 2009 12:05 PM EDT

is this the pelosi incident to which you refer?

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_nancy_pelosi_order_up_a_200-seat.html

QBRanger May 9 2009 12:10 PM EDT

No this:

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/jetgate_nancy_pelosi/2009/03/11/190748.html?s=al&promo_code=7BFA-1

And

http://www.wowowow.com/politics/nancy-pelosi-under-fire-personal-use-scheduling-demands-military-planes-234213

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 9 2009 12:15 PM EDT

as for gore's transportation issues. do you work at a hospital or clinic? do you use public transportation? if not, why do you not use public transportation?

what it really comes down to though ranger is do you really want to do what is right for the right reasons or do you want an excuse for continuing to do what is wrong?

giving you credit though, i think you were just making another political jab with that statement and that you probably don't really base your environmental conscience on politicians actions.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 9 2009 12:22 PM EDT

could you also justify marital infidelity to your wife based on the faithfulness of politicians? would your wife accept that excuse?

QBRanger May 9 2009 1:14 PM EDT

I work at a hospital.

In S. Fl we do not have public transportation as do a lot of Europe and the bigger US cities that are less spread out.

My hours are very random, depending on the business, so carpooling is not possible.

But Gore can use public transportation as can Pelosi. Most of the Senators can Congresspeople do it.

As to infidelity...

That is a fact, you cheat which is morally wrong. Global warming is not a fact. But I would never cheat on my wife. You are comparing 2 radically different things.

Marlfox [Cult of the Valaraukar] May 9 2009 1:16 PM EDT

Mitt, I assume you mean CO2 emissions? If so, then, the atmosphere is only made of 5% of CO2, which we require to live.
There is also no firm science to support the evidence that CO2 is contributing to global warming.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 9 2009 1:18 PM EDT

no, i was hoping to make you see that basing your own moral actions on the actions of others (whose morality is in question) is probably not the wisest course of action. this was spawned by your comment that you would do better when the politicians did better. again, i am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that this was just another opportunity to make a political jab rather than actually being a statement describing your activism or lack thereof.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 9 2009 1:26 PM EDT

"My hours are very random, depending on the business, so carpooling is not possible."

i am sure al gore's speaking engagement hours are just as random. he likely needs to run a tighter schedule than most of us since his speaking engagements are attracting many people who expect him to be on time.





QBRanger May 9 2009 1:27 PM EDT

Certainly at over 50k per speaking engagement he should show up on time.

I guess.

BluBBen May 12 2009 4:22 PM EDT

"When Jon Edwards, Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi etc.. all show me they are doing their part, I will ratchet up my part."

That was a mature argument...

QBRanger May 12 2009 4:30 PM EDT

Thanks BB,

I tried to give as mature a debate as possible.

Appreciate the kudos.

Colonel Custard May 12 2009 4:41 PM EDT

"No global warming does not mean that we have to make no efforts to reduce the amount of crap we release in the atmosphere. It does not mean we have to continue to produce things we don't need at the expense of the environment."

Yup.

"Well consider it for a moment. Would you change your lifestyle to help save the planet, or would you go along your merry way, saying "screw the planet, I don't want anyone to tell me how to live my life"?

Now consider that it is a possibility. Would you still go about your merry way, saying "screw the planet, I don't want anyone to tell me how to live my life" knowing in the back of your head that global warming could be exacerbated by man-made means and you are running the risk of pushing it along?"
Reading this reminded me of Zoolander:
"Do you understand that the world does not revolve around you and your "do whatever it takes, ruin as many people's lives, so long as you can make a name for yourself as an investigatory journalist, no matter how many friends you lose or people you leave dead and bloodied along the way, just so long so you can make a name for yourself as an investigatory journalist, no matter how many friends you lose or people you leave dead and bloodied and dying along the way"?"

"regardless of the specific reasons, we should all be able to agree that we need to find cleaner, renewable energy sources and reduce consumption until such time and probably even afterward."

I think dude has been pretty spot-on on this. I also like what he said about supporting what is right and not fighting about the reasons for doing so.

QBRanger May 12 2009 4:48 PM EDT

There certainly is doing what is right.

And then there is doing things that are just way out of whack.

Like everyone driving a Prius. Or everyone living in a 1200 sq foot home. Or everyone donating 80% of their income to the government. Going green is not cheap. A lot of people cannot afford it. Should be look down on them?

What is good for one person may not be good for the other. There is no one size fits all.

But when the politicians who spew about global warming fail live up to their "expectations", what example does that show?
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002kfl">Global Warming, Mk.2.</a>