Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read!


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/29/2007 8:10:05 PM   
Sicarius


Posts: 180
Joined: 2/26/2007
From: New Orleans
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
Ok, that clarifies it so I am no longer puzzled by what you wrote.

What exactly would prove to you that human activity over the past 25,000 years has caused extensive climate changes which will ultimately result in our inability to survive as a species?

Sinergy


Well ... to be honest, I don't necessarily know as though I really "need" to be won over, as it were.  I posted a lot of information over near the top of page 5 that details some of the other information that plays into my indecision ... not that I vehemently support any of those contrary positions, but I do think there is substantial evidence to keep asking questions and remain skeptical.  I really can't venture a guess as to "what" thing would ultimately convince me that humans are "primarily" to blame.  I think we're adding to it ... you'd have to be pretty irrational not to think that we're at least putting CO2 in the atmosphere, but I don't know as though we're really sure what that truly means yet.  The current projections look grim, but I'll be honest with you ... I really do see a lot of merit in Ruddiman's suggestions that I commented on over on page 5.  I think that for our survival as a species, there is probably a margin of greenhouse gases that we would ideally like to keep in the atmosphere so that we don't cook ourselves yet at the same time avoiding an ice age.  The biggest thing I want to find out is exactly "what" that magic number might be that we should shoot for.  If I had to stab at a guess, I think that anywhere between 300ppm - 350ppm CO2 is about where we want to be as a species ... but that's a total shot in the dark.

I assume you agree with what I'm about to say, but ... simply *having* CO2 in the atmosphere isn't a bad thing.  One of the biggest parts of the plan for hypothetically terraforming Mars involves skyrocketing that planet's greenhouse gases in order to create a habitat suitable to human comfort.  I think that a lot of the time, people get distracted by the hype and sensationalism into thinking that CO2 is a poison that we're killing the planet with, or something ... and that's just not the case.  I think that having too much is a problem, but too little would also be catastrophic.  As a species, our grandest accomplishment would be the ability to control our climate ... and to be honest, I think that that probably will happen one day.  I believe we probably will see atmosphere processing plants like the kinds in science fiction that will one day work to maintain our ideal balance of atmospheric concentration.

I just don't want to see the proponents of global warming get tunnel vision.  I want politics to butt out of science, and I want the media to knock this culture of fear crap off for a while.  We need to all be thinking practically ... and right now both sides seem like they're doing nothing but screaming at each other.

-Sicarius



_____________________________

"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; ... Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him." -Sun Tzu, "The Art of War"

(in reply to Sinergy)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/29/2007 8:40:53 PM   
Sinergy


Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline
 
Fair enough, Sicarius.

The problem I have with your approach is that it violates the methodology I learned as a software engineer.

This methodology is known as "chunking."  One has a big problem.  One breaks it down into manageable "chunks" and deals with each of these individually.

What most of the anti-global warming people seem to think is that we should all just ignore and study the problem until it goes away.

You made a comment about what the proper amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.  The problem I have with that sort of statement is that it seems idiotic considering human beings do not understand climate conditions (a true chaotic system) enough to be able to judge or control it.  I could read tea leaves and say we need X amount of CO2, and it would have pretty much the same scientific relevance as your statements about how much CO2 we should have in the atmosphere.

In other words, we dont know.

What we do know is...

We know how much CO2 has been present in the atmosphere during the entire time that humans have been alive on this planet, based on ice cores going back 10s of thousands of years.

CO2 is rising.  We know that from the same empirical data.

The climate is warming.

This appears to be bad, at least for glaciers, currents, crop levels, weather patterns, etc.

Climate appears to warm up because of CO2, methane, solar patterns, whatever.

Chunking indicates we pick the larger problem apart into smaller, manageable chunks and handle each one.

The chunks we can control are CO2, methane, blah, blah, blah.

So we do things about what we can control, and accept the ones we cannot control.

Any "wait and see" or "it needs more study" response denigrates the things we do know about
the climate on the planet.

Sinergy


_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle


(in reply to Sicarius)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/29/2007 8:54:43 PM   
Sicarius


Posts: 180
Joined: 2/26/2007
From: New Orleans
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
Fair enough, Sicarius.

The problem I have with your approach is that it violates the methodology I learned as a software engineer.

This methodology is known as "chunking."  One has a big problem.  One breaks it down into manageable "chunks" and deals with each of these individually.

What most of the anti-global warming people seem to think is that we should all just ignore and study the problem until it goes away.

You made a comment about what the proper amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.  The problem I have with that sort of statement is that it seems idiotic considering human beings do not understand climate conditions (a true chaotic system) enough to be able to judge or control it.  I could read tea leaves and say we need X amount of CO2, and it would have pretty much the same scientific relevance as your statements about how much CO2 we should have in the atmosphere.

In other words, we dont know.

What we do know is...

We know how much CO2 has been present in the atmosphere during the entire time that humans have been alive on this planet, based on ice cores going back 10s of thousands of years.

CO2 is rising.  We know that from the same empirical data.

The climate is warming.

This appears to be bad, at least for glaciers, currents, crop levels, weather patterns, etc.

Climate appears to warm up because of CO2, methane, solar patterns, whatever.

Chunking indicates we pick the larger problem apart into smaller, manageable chunks and handle each one.

The chunks we can control are CO2, methane, blah, blah, blah.

So we do things about what we can control, and accept the ones we cannot control.

Any "wait and see" or "it needs more study" response denigrates the things we do know about
the climate on the planet.

Sinergy


To be honest, I don't really disagree with anything you just said there.  I would point out for the record, however, that this is actually the crux of what I am saying:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
You made a comment about what the proper amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.  The problem I have with that sort of statement is that it seems idiotic considering human beings do not understand climate conditions (a true chaotic system) enough to be able to judge or control it.


As I said, that was a stab in the dark simply based on what we've seen.  The ultimate point I'm making is that there is almost definitely a range of CO2, Methane, etc. that we want to keep in the atmosphere to ensure that we don't get too hot and that we don't get too cold.  I'm not claiming we know the number ... that's the whole point of what I'm saying.  That number, or fluctuating range of numbers, is the "holy grail" that we ought to all be looking for.  Diminishing CO2 right now is probably fine.  I don't think tearing down our CO2 by 20-30ppm stands any real chance of doing anything negative and there's pretty good reason to suspect that it would help.  What I don't want to see, however, is a game developing where we're constantly chasing around the carrot that keeps getting dragged by the string and lose track of what we really ought to be focusing on.

-Sicarius



_____________________________

"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; ... Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him." -Sun Tzu, "The Art of War"

(in reply to Sinergy)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/29/2007 9:20:18 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
The global warming people need to hook up with the flying saucer people. They both see things that aren't there!
They could have Conventions every year and wear some type of foolish costumes!
You'd see the global warming people running up and down the hallways with lampshades on their heads in the hotel stealing all the ice from the ice machines; "See! Global Warming!!! It's melting all the ice!"
They'd put the ice in the sinks in their rooms and let it all melt just to "prove" their case but the flying saucer people wouldn't be fooled!
"Ok guys, the 'warmers are stealing all the ice from the ice machines again this year so you'll have to bring your own from the 7/11."
"Hotel management says if they don't stop it "there'll be no ice next year!"

(in reply to Sicarius)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 3:46:48 AM   
Daughtry


Posts: 81
Joined: 10/8/2006
Status: offline
Half our states are on fire.  The other half are flooded.  And we're still debating whether climate change exists?  Really? 

It reminds me of that scene in Erik the Viking where the island is sinking and its residents are denying its happening as they drown. 

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 3:58:37 AM   
Daughtry


Posts: 81
Joined: 10/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

The global warming people need to hook up with the flying saucer people. They both see things that aren't there!
They could have Conventions every year and wear some type of foolish costumes!
You'd see the global warming people running up and down the hallways with lampshades on their heads in the hotel stealing all the ice from the ice machines; "See! Global Warming!!! It's melting all the ice!"
They'd put the ice in the sinks in their rooms and let it all melt just to "prove" their case but the flying saucer people wouldn't be fooled!
"Ok guys, the 'warmers are stealing all the ice from the ice machines again this year so you'll have to bring your own from the 7/11."
"Hotel management says if they don't stop it "there'll be no ice next year!"


Yes, it is sad when someone completely buys the false flag hype, hook line and sinker, to the point of sounding like an obsessed broken record.  When they get misdirected into blaming one single cause for absolutely everything and sound like a paranoid madman...

Oh no, look out, behind you.  Its an illegal immigrant!

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 5:32:58 AM   
NavyDDG54


Posts: 203
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Daughtry

Oh no, look out, behind you.  Its an illegal immigrant!



Please dont confuse a real problem(illegal immigrants) with a fake one(Global warming)

Here is some science for all of ya:

Global warming alarmists may want to expedite their efforts to hamstring the global economy with greenhouse gas regulation. A new study touted as showing that we?re not sufficiently panicky about manmade carbon dioxide emissions actually supports the exact opposite conclusion.
?Warnings about global warming may not be dire enough, according to a climate study that describes a runaway-train acceleration of industrial carbon dioxide emissions,? USA Today shrieked this week.
The study authors reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that the rate of manmade carbon dioxide emissions was three times greater during 2000 to 2004 than during the 1990s.
Since increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide levels allegedly are causing global warming, the new study must mean that global temperatures are soaring even faster now than they did during the 1990s, right?
Wrong, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Department of Commerce?s National Climatic Data Center.
By overlaying the atmospheric carbon dioxide trend onto graphs of near-surface temperatures, surface temperatures and ocean temperatures, it is readily apparent that ever-changing global temperatures aren?t keeping pace with ever-increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.
The bottom line is that while we may be burning more fossil fuels than ever before ? relatively inexpensive coal, oil and gas are facilitating steady global economic expansion ? that activity isn?t having any sort of discernible or proportionate impact on global temperatures.
Not surprisingly, the study authors don?t seem to want you to know that fact since nowhere in their study do they even mention the word ?temperature,? let alone do they present a graph comparing trends in atmospheric carbon dioxide with global temperature.
Are such increasing rates of carbon dioxide emissions grounds for future worry?
Study author Michael Raupach of the Center for Marine and Atmospheric Research in Canberra, Australia, told the Orange County Register that, ?If emissions continue to increase at the rate of 3.1 percent a year, carbon dioxide concentration would rise to 560 parts per million in 2050 and soar to 1,390 parts per million in 2100.?
That sure sounds scary, but what would such increases really mean for global temperatures?
No one knows for sure. But it could easily be a non-event and there?s no scientific basis for pressing the panic-button.
First, despite all the carbon dioxide emitted by man since the industrial revolution, manmade carbon dioxide is an exceedingly small part of the total greenhouse effect ? on the order of about 0.11 percent.
Remember that we?re talking about atmospheric carbon dioxide levels in parts per million. You may choose to believe that a 3 percent annual increase in manmade carbon dioxide emissions ? releases that represent way less than 1 percent of total carbon dioxide emissions ? is something to worry about, but the numbers seem to speak for themselves.
Next, we?re not even really sure of the true relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide and temperature. While the alarmists want us to believe that rising carbon dioxide levels necessarily increase global temperatures, scientific data from Antarctic ice cores indicate the exact opposite ? increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide appear hundreds of years after increases in global temperature.
If the temperature-carbon dioxide relationship indicated by the ice cores is correct, then Raupach?s concern is entirely backwards and misplaced.
On the other hand, even if it were true that rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels discernibly increased global temperatures, temperatures wouldn?t likely increase by very much.
Based on the physics of the greenhouse effect, a doubling of carbon dioxide levels from the pre-industrial period (supposedly around 280 parts per million) to 560 parts per million (about 48 percent higher than present levels), might lead to an increase in average global temperature on the order of less than 1 degree centigrade ? and we?ve already experienced about 60 percent of that increase.
A further doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide to 1,120 parts per million would result in even less of an increase in temperature because of the energy absorption properties of carbon dioxide.
Essentially, the Earth only radiates so much energy back into the atmosphere that is available to be absorbed by carbon dioxide. Once all that energy is absorbed, superfluous carbon dioxide will not add to the greenhouse effect.
Study author Chris Field of the Carnegie Institution made the bizarre comment in the press release that we must ?shift more of the economy toward activities like service industries and information technology? ? as if the ever-expanding global population won?t require even more goods like food, energy, housing, clothing and transportation in the future.
We should, of course, strive for energy efficiency and new energy technologies to an extent that?s reasonable. But we shouldn?t condemn conventional energy sources based on dubious reasoning, risk harming the global economy for no good reason and deprive poor nations of their right to develop ? all in the misguided hope of manually adjusting the global thermostat.

Thursday, May 24, 2007
By Steven Milloy
Steven Milloy publishes JunkScience.com and CSRWatch.com. He is a junk science expert, and advocate of free enterprise and an adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275267,00.html

(in reply to Daughtry)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 7:38:18 AM   
FatDomDaddy


Posts: 3183
Joined: 1/31/2004
Status: offline
There are some major benifits to Global warming specifically in increased crop yeilds around the world and a more temperate climate will also cut down on energy use. If the option is, millions more fed or rich people lose water front property, is it not a no brainer!

(in reply to Sicarius)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 7:48:36 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Daughtry

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

The global warming people need to hook up with the flying saucer people. They both see things that aren't there!
They could have Conventions every year and wear some type of foolish costumes!
You'd see the global warming people running up and down the hallways with lampshades on their heads in the hotel stealing all the ice from the ice machines; "See! Global Warming!!! It's melting all the ice!"
They'd put the ice in the sinks in their rooms and let it all melt just to "prove" their case but the flying saucer people wouldn't be fooled!
"Ok guys, the 'warmers are stealing all the ice from the ice machines again this year so you'll have to bring your own from the 7/11."
"Hotel management says if they don't stop it "there'll be no ice next year!"


Yes, it is sad when someone completely buys the false flag hype, hook line and sinker, to the point of sounding like an obsessed broken record.  When they get misdirected into blaming one single cause for absolutely everything and sound like a paranoid madman...

Oh no, look out, behind you.  Its an illegal immigrant!



Hey, maybe the trekkies would want to join them too!
They could use all the Chewbacca guys for security around the ice machines.

(in reply to Daughtry)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 8:03:51 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

There are some major benefits to Global warming specifically in increased crop yields around the world and a more temperate climate will also cut down on energy use. If the option is, millions more fed or rich people lose water front property, is it not a no brainer.
The last global warming saw the end of the Dark Ages and ushered in the Renaissance, and grapes growing in northern UK. Maybe we will get the same beneficial social revolution this time around.

The arrogance of man in the face of nature is incredible. Termites and cows contribute more significantly than humans. Unlike the messiah or his minions they can't buy "Carbon Offsets" to rationalize putting 19,000 tons of carbon emissions in the air for each coast to coast trip on their private jet. Nor can they make millions selling snake oil to their flock of followers.

I say, let them buy it, just don't force me to.

There is a big difference between predicting the weather for next week versus predicting climate on a global scale. However there is also similarity - both predictions originate from the same school of science. When they build a model that is consistent with recorded history concerning the 15th Century I'll consider their prediction for the 21st.

quote:

Livestock are responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse-gas emissions as measured in carbon dioxide equivalent, reports the FAO. This includes 9 percent of all CO2 emissions, 37 percent of methane, and 65 percent of nitrous oxide. Altogether, that's more than the emissions caused by transportation.
The latter two gases are particularly troubling – even though they represent far smaller concentrations in atmosphere than CO2, which remains the main global warming culprit. But methane has 23 times the global warming potential (GWP) of CO2 and nitrous oxide has 296 times the warming potential of carbon dioxide.
Source: http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0220/p03s01-ussc.html 


quote:

In order to focus on you and what you are doing to increase the CO2 in the atmosphere, which, as everyone knows will destroy the globe, we do not discuss the activities of termites. Fifteen years ago it was estimated that the digestive tracts of termites produce about 50 billion tons of CO2 and methane annually. That was more than the world's production from burning fossil fuel. Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20070218-100445-1207r_page2.htm 

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 8:03:59 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
Milloy? The corporate shill? Do you honestly think anyone will take this sleazebag seriously?

Back when the first studies on secondhand smoke were being printed Milloy started taking money from Phillip Moris and RJR to attack the studies. When the Surgeon General's report on secondhand smoke came out last year Milloy didn't even admit to being wrong although it does appear he shut up on the topic.

On global warming and other enviromental issues, Milloy only started criticizing them in 1998 which unsurprisingly corresponds to when he beame a lobbyist for the gas and oil industry. This includes criticizing the 1970 Clean Air act.

Strangely enough when asked about the junkiest of junk science, creationionsim, he has refrained from attacking it. Instead he had this to say on the subject:
"Explanations of human evolution are not likely to move beyond the stage of hypothesis or conjecture. There is no scientific way - i.e., no experiment or other means of reliable study - for explaining how humans developed. Without a valid scientific method for proving a hypothesis, no indisputable explanation can exist. "
http://www.cato.org/askourscholars/milloy/milloy-020115-2.html

Although his other endeavour is the worst, CSRwatch.com. The CSR stands for Corporate Social Responsibility which is the movement trying to get corporations to behave better which Milloy has somehow twisted into his claim of it being anti business. He seems to have a particular bee in his bonnet over Sarbox. I guess he really liked how Enron was run.

(in reply to NavyDDG54)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 9:07:45 AM   
NavyDDG54


Posts: 203
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Daughtry

Half our states are on fire.  The other half are flooded.  And we're still debating whether climate change exists?  Really? 


The argument is not whether or not the climate is changing. it clearly is, the northern ice caps are shrinking, the southern ones are growing. among other signs. the debate is the cause.

the answer is plainly simple for those who see beyond the scare tactics employed by the left. Our orbit is changing, the northern hemisphere is tilting more towards the sun, and we are moving closer to it. hence climate shifts. it has happened numerous times in the past....does the Ice Age ring a bell?

(in reply to Daughtry)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 10:01:08 AM   
Despayre


Posts: 6
Joined: 5/27/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I keep asking these questions of so called global warming skeptics and I never get a response.

1) Do you deny that human activity has caused the change in atmospheric CO2 levels that has happened in the last 200 years? If so what do you claim is the source of the cO2?

2) Do you deny that the present air mix is capable of retaining more thermal energy than the air mix of 200 years ago? Do you deny that the change in CO2 concentration is the primary factor in this?

I probably missed someone else's answer to this already, and I do not know if the original author will even see this, but, as a partial answer(that doesn't answer the questions) from 1000 ad to at least 1300 ad, the Vikings maintained farms in Greenland. Greenland is typically thought of as covered in glacial ice. So, if the worlds climate was that warm that long ago, how can we then say that humanity is the cause of the current warming trend? Let us not forget that prior to humanity appearing on the planet, most of it was subtropical rainforest, as evidenced by the fossil record.
Then take into consideration that most , if not all, of the scientists, named on the first congressional report on global warming, had never known one was being written. Also consider that several of them(especially a noted MIT proffessor) are now arguing against humanity's role in global warming.  There is also a third camp claiming that a new ice age is coming, and the warming trend is a precursor to that. Realistically with the small amount of data being used to prove global warming, I have to ask myself if it is not a form of enviromental terrorism to get research dollars. Even the people doing the studies have changed their stories several times since the debate started.
So, the question becomes, can you prove that CO2 levels have changed in the last 200 years? Or better yet, are they all that significantly higher than they were 1000 years ago? If CO2 levels are to blame for warming trends, then where did all of it come from during the prior warming periods? Finally, couldn't the upswing in volcanic activity in the last few decades be a contributing factor?
I have other questions to ask all the global warming crusaders, but I think I have gone on long enough

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 10:17:21 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
I saw the WCVB Channel 5 Boston interview with that MIT scientist when he discovered that the Clinton Administration had added his name to a list of scientists who agreed with their position on "global warming" *without even contacting him or getting his permission to use his name!*
He called "global warming" Junk Science right on t.v.

(in reply to Despayre)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 5:01:05 PM   
Sinergy


Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sicarius

What I don't want to see, however, is a game developing where we're constantly chasing around the carrot that keeps getting dragged by the string and lose track of what we really ought to be focusing on.



Which is pretty much the entire modus operandi of those arguing against global warming.  They have this need drag the carrot around until American Idol starts up and the teeming masses have something to pay attention to.

Sinergy

p.s.  Your post basically made similar statements, so I responded to it.  I understand you dont disagree with what I wrote, but your post made it sound as if you are an uneducated global warming naysayer.


_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle


(in reply to Sicarius)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 7:02:05 PM   
Sicarius


Posts: 180
Joined: 2/26/2007
From: New Orleans
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
Which is pretty much the entire modus operandi of those arguing against global warming.  They have this need drag the carrot around until American Idol starts up and the teeming masses have something to pay attention to.

Sinergy

p.s.  Your post basically made similar statements, so I responded to it.  I understand you dont disagree with what I wrote, but your post made it sound as if you are an uneducated global warming naysayer.


One could very easily argue that in contrast, all that those in support of global warming are doing is screaming at those who oppose them ... and to be honest, the amount of screaming that I have endured so far on this thread as a mere skeptic of global warming (who doesn't even *disagree*) isn't speaking very well of the efforts of the global warming crowd to come across the aisle and try to win friends.

I'm not sure exactly which post you're referring to in which I "sounded as if I am an uneducated global warming naysayer."  I would also like to clarify something, though ... such a close association between "uneducated" and "global warming naysayer" comes across as being a dangerous assertion.  Are you saying that everyone who disagrees with you is uneducated, or are you saying that some are?

Anyway.

I think that one of the biggest things I don't understand about the global warming crowd is that you guys could be accomplishing a lot of your goals if you simply changed your tactics.  Take, for example, alternative energy technologies and limiting carbon footprints.  Your side of the argument wants people to stop driving as much, to be energy efficient in their homes, and to support research in alternative energy generation.  These are important issues to your side of the debate because you want to decrease the amount of fossil fuels that are being burned that are releasing more CO2 into the air.

What your side of the argument doesn't seem to understand is that there's a very easy (and not necessarily "dishonest") way to spin this to immediately make it a marketable strategy to the side of the aisle that you disagree with.  Instead of screaming at them about how everyone is going to burn and die (which sound strangely reminiscent to the tactics that the extreme "religious right" uses that you guys hate so much), why aren't you playing it more from these sorts of angles:

1.)  Fight Terrorism!  Do your part to stop funneling American dollars into the hands of states with a known history of supporting terrorists!  Help us to raise government expectations on the fuel efficiency of automakers!  Help us to pass research grants for alternative energy that will liberate America from the tyranny of OPEC!

2.)  Save the economy!  Gasoline prices are out of control and getting worse every day.  This constant bullying by foreign nations makes life difficult for middle class families and raises the prices of all consumer goods.  As companies are forced to pass their increased energy costs down onto consumers, economic growth suffers tremendously.  Help us fight to liberate the American economy and usher in a new age of prosperity!

Virtually every American is going to agree with one or both of those statements.  I know that those messages are out there, but I don't see them being adopted into the official "play book" of the global warming crowd.  To me it seems like a very easy way that you could at least begin accomplishing some of your preliminary goals without fighting and screaming.

-Sicarius

_____________________________

"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; ... Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him." -Sun Tzu, "The Art of War"

(in reply to Sinergy)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 7:23:14 PM   
Sinergy


Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline
 

I stand by what I said.  Here is why.

You are the one who made the comment about dragging the carrot around, creating doubt.

I am still wondering why you are a skeptic of global warming.  Considering 10 of the hottest years in recorded history have been in the past 15.  Considering CO2 levels are at a record high in the past 10000 years as verified by ice core samples.  Considering we have lost most of the planet's glaciers.  Considering we have lost umpteen metric miles of Antarctic ice, etc., etc., the "skeptics" tend to go "lets wait and see."

What do the skeptics need to convince them?

If you put a frog in a pot of cold water, turn the heat on underneath it, the frog will happily boil to death.  Throw a frog into hot water and it jumps out.

I see "skeptics" of global warming who argue we should "wait and see" as being the frog put in a pot of cold water.

quote:



Are you saying that everyone who disagrees with you is uneducated, or are you saying that some are?



I am not.  If skeptics of global warming would actually offer any sort of empirical evidence to support their skepticism, that would be one thing.  But they dont.  They spout their "wait and see" attitude, while the frog boils to death, as if it is the only rational thing to do.

quote:



you guys



Me guys?

What the fuck did I do?

Well, I did provide scientific sources to back up my assertions.

I apologize.  I guess.

Anyway.

quote:



What your side of the argument doesn't seem to understand is that there's a very easy (and not necessarily "dishonest") way to spin this to immediately make it a marketable strategy to the side of the aisle that you disagree with.  Instead of screaming at them about how everyone is going to burn and die (which sound strangely reminiscent to the tactics that the extreme "religious right" uses that you guys hate so much), why aren't you playing it more from these sorts of angles:



This is called "blaming the victim,"  you are suggesting that if global warming ends up boiling all of us in the pot it will be the people concerned about global warming's fault because they "phrased the problem wrong."

Fine.  Consider yourself absolved of responsibility for anything.  We people who care what kind of planet we are leaving to future generations are used to that kind of cynical blind avoidance of empirical reality that is employed by many skeptics.

Sinergy


_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle


(in reply to Sicarius)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 8:42:21 PM   
Daughtry


Posts: 81
Joined: 10/8/2006
Status: offline
Yikes, way to miss the joke there Navy.  See, Popeye got it. 

I can't really buy into the position that mass global industrialization in a few hundred short years has had no effect on the climate.  I would love to, and thereby absolve myself not only of any responsibility, but of the need to do something to change my habits to the detriment of my own comfort.  I would love to, but I just cant. 

I understand that there are people out there that still aren't on board with the whole global climate change.  It amazes me, it kind of frightens me, but it doesn't really surprise me.  There will always be those happily singing while the island sinks.

(in reply to NavyDDG54)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 5/30/2007 11:37:25 PM   
Sicarius


Posts: 180
Joined: 2/26/2007
From: New Orleans
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
You are the one who made the comment about dragging the carrot around, creating doubt.


Actually what I meant was that I don't want to see us fall into a situation where today we try to cool the planet, then tomorrow we try to warm the planet, then the next day we try to cool the planet, et cetera, et cetera, ad nauseum.  That's the same mentality as slapping a bandaid on the wound without exploring what may be infinitely more important.  The bandaid is fine, but that doesn't mean you get to immediately absolve yourself of responsibility, pat yourself on the back, and walk away.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
I am still wondering why you are a skeptic of global warming.  Considering 10 of the hottest years in recorded history have been in the past 15.  Considering CO2 levels are at a record high in the past 10000 years as verified by ice core samples.  Considering we have lost most of the planet's glaciers.  Considering we have lost umpteen metric miles of Antarctic ice, etc., etc., the "skeptics" tend to go "lets wait and see."


I would implore you to go and read my first post on page 5.  The amount of information I placed there is simply far too extensive to repeat here again ... the post was absolutely enormous and contains most of the information that you're seeking.  I think one very important thing to note is that I agree with you that most skeptics adopt a "wait and see" mentality, and I agree with you that that mentality is wrong.  I think we should start doing something just in case ... I just don't want to see us get tunnel vision in the process and I want to see the media stop trying to terrify everyone.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
Me guys?

What the fuck did I do?

Well, I did provide scientific sources to back up my assertions.

I apologize.  I guess.

Anyway.


I didn't really mean it as any sort of a slant, Sinergy ... I'm not sure why that upset you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
This is called "blaming the victim,"  you are suggesting that if global warming ends up boiling all of us in the pot it will be the people concerned about global warming's fault because they "phrased the problem wrong."


No, that's not what I'm saying at all.  I am not saying that if you are right and that that happens that it would be your *fault* ... I'm just saying that you win more flies with honey than with vinegar.  In a way, think of it as imploring your side of the argument to reason ... not claiming that you're "to blame."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
Fine.  Consider yourself absolved of responsibility for anything.  We people who care what kind of planet we are leaving to future generations are used to that kind of cynical blind avoidance of empirical reality that is employed by many skeptics.


It won't be my irresponsibility that causes it if that does end up being the case, Sinergy.  As I've repeated time and again, I use energy efficient equipment and lights in my home ... I limit my driving ... I carpool.  I am not your bullfrog.  What I am is the frog who assumes that just because I farted in the pot of cold water that that doesn't irrefutably mean that I'm the one causing it to boil.

-Sicarius

_____________________________

"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; ... Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him." -Sun Tzu, "The Art of War"

(in reply to Sinergy)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 6/11/2007 9:33:41 AM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
gen reply

so what amount of conservation would have prevented the earth from going to what was it a few hundred degrees that created the oil and gas we have now if it is mother nature like it was a million years ago?

Lots of people siting lots of tests, i persoanlly would like to see just one test that discriminates between man made and natural since it is a FACT that we are going through a sun cycle and NATURAL heating period right this second on this planet.

So whould you data thrower arounders please come up with a report that states how much is man made and how much is natural.

i hjave yet to find anything on it.   Otherwise throwing it all in one basket and claiming it is all manmade is laughable.


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109