quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zensee

And just how much more do our terrestrial and marine ecosystems have to give before they collapse do you figure CD? An infinite amount? How many species extinctons per year are acceptable? How many fisheries is it ok to decimate? How vast a desert is acceptable? How many mercury drenched watersheds do we need to fill our vaults with gold that will never see the light of the sun? We are even polluting the global gene pool with our engineering. How toxic do we have to get before we wake up?

It's not just about CO2.

You don't have to buy it. It's already in the mail.

Z.

That's the problem with you people. Global warming and pollution are two different issues. This thread is about global warming. I dont believe anyone in here or any scientist for that matter has said they think pollution or rain forest destruction is OK for the ecosystem.
But global warming is a different issue. That is an issue that claims that humans are putting greenhouse gasses into the air which is causing the planet's temperature to rise to a point that will destroy life and flood the world within 100 years. And that right there is the dispute.

You are using global warming to push an environmentalist agenda. I agree we need to clean up the pollution. But I am against creating a fear machine of lies to push through your own agendas.

And you take a look at the list of the most polluted areas in the world, and guess what...its not the US that is polluted. It is mostly developing countries or the 3rd world. One organization did a study and compiled research of the 10 most polluted cities in the world. None are located in the US...
1. Chernobyl, Ukraine
2. Dzerzhinsk, Russia
3. Haina, Dominican Republic
4. Kabwe, Zambia
5. La Oroya, Peru
6. Linfen, China
7. Maiuu Suu, Kyrgyzstan
8. Norilsk, Russia
9. Ranipet, India
10. Rudnaya Pristan/Dalnegorsk, Russia

So the US can elect the most green candidates on the ticket. But it won't make any difference unless these other countries decide to start cleaning up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

The world is 4.5 billion years old. We have data of only the past 150 years.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zensee

Denying that human's have a measurable impact on global temperatures is code for justifying the continued use and production of petrochemicals. If fossil fuels have no impact then why divert present subsidies to the oil industry towards alternative, renewable energy? You call advocating a reduction in CO2 emissions fear mongering - I call it awareness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zensee

Sad thing is, in the case of a global extinction, along with the cockroaches and microbes, one of the few surviving large life forms will probably be humans. Then we can forget the lessons of the past and do it all over again.


Z.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

The magazine published a collection of articles called Global Warning in September 2004.

Here is a key paragraph from one of the pieces:

Human activity almost certainly drove most of the past century's warming, a landmark report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) declared in 2001. Global temperatures are shooting up faster than at any other time in the past thousand years. And climate models show that natural forces, such as volcanic eruptions and the slow flickers of the sun, can't explain all that warming.

dcnovice and DomKen,

Not really wanting to get into a drag down fight about global warming in this post, but I did want to point out a couple of things that tends to bother me about how the "global warming" crowd says and frames things.

First, DomKen used the words "warming deniers". 

To me, this term seems to be intentionally loaded in order to stir up negative emotions about global warming skeptics.  In what other common situation is the term "denier" used?

The Holocaust, of course, as in "Holocaust deniers".

This congruence in thought processes is framing the skeptics in a morally indefensible position, and attacks their skepticism as something almost evil and reprehensible.  I don't think it should be used in a reasoned debate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

yeh like   "Tin Hat Conspiracy Theorist"
         or Conspiracy Nut
         or Tax Evaders

yeh.....

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

Another liberal hipocrit. What a bunch of crap..

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

yeh like   "Tin Hat Conspiracy Theorist"
      or Conspiracy Nut
      or Tax Evaders

yeh.....

Is this just a general comment to the forums, or are you particularly addressing my use of such terms?

FirmKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says
Kate Ravilious
for National Geographic News
February 28, 2007Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human- induced—cause, according to one scientist's controversial theory.
Earth is currently experiencing rapid warming, which the vast majority of climate scientists says is due to humans pumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. (Get an overview: "Global Warming Fast Facts".)

<image deleted>

RELATED

Photo Gallery: Global Warming

New Mars Pictures Show Signs of Watery "Aquifers" (February 16, 2007)

Climate Change Predictions Not Exaggerated, Analysis Says (February 1, 2007)

Mars, too, appears to be enjoying more mild and balmy temperatures.
In 2005 data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps" near Mars's south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row.
Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun.
"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars," he said.
Solar Cycles
Abdussamatov believes that changes in the sun's heat output can account for almost all the climate changes we see on both planets.
Mars and Earth, for instance, have experienced periodic ice ages throughout their histories.
"Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance," Abdussamatov said.
By studying fluctuations in the warmth of the sun, Abdussamatov believes he can see a pattern that fits with the ups and downs in climate we see on Earth and Mars.
Abdussamatov's work, however, has not been well received by other climate scientists.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

quote:


We need a Manhattan project style solution to this problem, and we could produce the energy we need without pollution or greenhouse gases if we had the leadership and public will to do it.