quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
"Blanketing deserts with a reflective material
Launching giant mirrors into space orbit
fertilizing the ocean with iron to grow CO2-eating plankton
brightening ocean clouds with sea-salt particles to reflect the sun
feeding sulfates into the atmosphere via a kilometers-long (miles-long) hose attached to a tethered balloon "

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, you people are all going to DIE !

Come on Man, tell me this came from Saturday night live or some shit.

T^T

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

Maybe someone should remind them that it was considerably warmer back in the days of the dinosours. It is most likely that we are only returning to our normal temperature after the last Ice Age ended. In fact, they have found evidence of fossilized forests above the arctic circle. It doesn't take an Einstein to figure out that mankind has accelerated it, but certainly we were headed in that direction to begin with.

If you want to help minimize global warming, first you have to go with nuclear power, and secondly you have to minimize the world's population and especially ours, since we are 6% of the world's population but we use 26% of the worlds energy. In fact, we could have been energy independent 20 years ago if it were not for unlimited immigration policies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

The reason, it is clear to me, is that AGW/climate change is not a science to many of its strongest proponent but a religion, with its roots in simple hatred of mankind.

[...]  And maybe you can also explain what Kurzweil has to do with climate change.

quote:

ORIGINAL Futurist Ray Kurzweil isn't worried about climate change, PBS need to know, The Daily Need, 16 Feb 2011
One of my primary theses is that information technologies grow exponentially in capability and power and bandwidth and so on. If you buy an iPhone today, it’s twice as good as two years ago for half that cost. That is happening with solar energy — it is doubling every two years. And it didn’t start two years ago, it started 20 years ago. Every two years we have twice as much solar energy in the world.

Today, solar is still more expensive than fossil fuels, and in most situations it still needs subsidies or special circumstances, but the costs are coming down rapidly — we are only a few years away from parity. And then it’s going to keep coming down, and people will be gravitating towards solar, even if they don’t care at all about the environment, because of the economics.

So right now it’s at half a percent of the world’s energy. People tend to dismiss technologies when they are half a percent of the solution. But doubling every two years means it’s only eight more doublings before it meets a hundred percent of the world’s energy needs. So that’s 16 years. We will increase our use of electricity during that period, so add another couple of doublings: In 20 years we’ll be meeting all of our energy needs with solar, based on this trend which has already been under way for 20 years.

People say we’re running out of energy. That’s only true if we stick with these old 19th century technologies. We are awash in energy from the sunlight...

2035 is 24 years. I am saying we can meet all our energy needs from solar in 20 years.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Yes, Popeye, but Gore has put out a press release since then, claiming he gave all that money away to a climate change alliance charity. He may be a slimy, charlatan whore, but he's their slimy charlatan whore, and his press release is gospel to them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin

As long as the meterologists cannot say for certain what will happen from day to day regards the weather, I have a lot of trouble believing in climate models, bearing in mind the base line used.

We do not know the history of this world, sure, we can get an idea from such sciences as dendrochronology and core samples taken in various parts of the world, but what does that show, anything other than the fact that the climate changes as it does in accordance with the nature of the planet.

As to man's influence sure I agree our need/greed for resources has perhaps created problems that cannot be corrected in our species lifespan, but who said our lifespan will prevail, we weren't here from year dot, maybe we won't be here at the full stop.

But the success of humanity is that we have learned to adapt to our enviroment, so if the world warms or cools, we will adapt and that is that.

Actually you should look into Paleoclimatology, there is a history of earth's climate in ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica, not to mention ocean corals, tree rings and other evidence from other sources.

The problem with an artificially accelerated climate change is that it impacts species that cannot adapt to the changing climate, like coral which have been dieing do to warmer ocean water. There is also a rise in CO2 in the ocean that is having an impact on it.

The human race, with its tendency to pollute has done a lot of harm, it will take generations to correct it.

quote:

those who are trying to save the environment hate mankind?

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

those who are trying to save the environment hate mankind?

You don't pick that up at the edges? The whiff of misanthropy is there- one of Tom Clancy's novels was based on carrying the eco-terrorism movement to its logical satirical conclusion.

Kurzweil has to do with the solution, not the cause.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Care to respond to the meat of the article, Ken, rather than sticking to your comfortable talking points?

What are your thoughts, for example, on a tethered balloon, with a miles long hose, spewing contaminants into the upper atmosphere to deflect sunlight?

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

In the days of the dinosaurs?

The Spanish grew oranges north of Savannah Ga for over a hundred years. Try that today.

quote:

ORIGINAL "The Truth, Still Inconvenient," by Paul Krugman, The New York Times, 3 April 2011
Prof. Richard Muller of Berkeley, a physicist who has gotten into the climate skeptic game, has been leading the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, an effort partially financed by none other than the Koch foundation. And climate deniers — who claim that researchers at NASA and other groups analyzing climate trends have massaged and distorted the data — had been hoping that the Berkeley project would conclude that global warming is a myth. Instead, however, Professor Muller reported that his group’s preliminary results find a global warming trend “very similar to that reported by the prior groups.” 

[...]
[Professor Muller's] climate-skeptic credentials are pretty strong: he has denounced both Al Gore and my colleague Tom Friedman as “exaggerators,” and he has participated in a number of attacks on climate research, including the witch hunt over innocuous e-mails from British climate researchers. Not surprisingly, then, climate deniers had high hopes that his new project would support their case.

You can guess what happened when those hopes were dashed...

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

So the GOP house called in one of the very few AGW skeptics with any cridibility left and lo and behold he confirmed AGW.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-climate-berkeley-20110404,0,772697.story

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

... and secondly you have to minimize the world's population and especially ours....

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

So the GOP house called in one of the very few AGW skeptics with any cridibility left and lo and behold he confirmed AGW.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-climate-berkeley-20110404,0,772697.story

I think they've looked at about 2% of the data so far, Ken. That's your normal standard of proof, isn't it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: eihwaz

FR

This just in.

quote:

ORIGINAL "The Truth, Still Inconvenient," by Paul Krugman, The New York Times, 3 April 2011
Prof. Richard Muller of Berkeley, a physicist who has gotten into the climate skeptic game, has been leading the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, an effort partially financed by none other than the Koch foundation. And climate deniers — who claim that researchers at NASA and other groups analyzing climate trends have massaged and distorted the data — had been hoping that the Berkeley project would conclude that global warming is a myth. Instead, however, Professor Muller reported that his group’s preliminary results find a global warming trend “very similar to that reported by the prior groups.” 

[...]
[Professor Muller's] climate-skeptic credentials are pretty strong: he has denounced both Al Gore and my colleague Tom Friedman as “exaggerators,” and he has participated in a number of attacks on climate research, including the witch hunt over innocuous e-mails from British climate researchers. Not surprisingly, then, climate deniers had high hopes that his new project would support their case.

You can guess what happened when those hopes were dashed...

See, also, "Republicans Get Inconvenient Replies at Climate Hearing," The New York Times, 31 March 2011

---

"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." -- Philip K. Dick