Global Warming going to get us?

[SK-1]

Is he an opportunist or really serious?

http://www.citizensugar.com/1609388

If Al gets constipated, will he blame global warming?

[panchoman]

well not all of the global warming is from us, the sun is actually expanding and getting slightly closer to our planet, which is normal, as the sun will expand overtime till it swallows most if not all of our planets, and then boom with a super nova blow up and then possibly give birth to the solar system

but yeah, many scientists attribute global warming to the sun quite a bit too, though we have helped speed it up a bit.

[hat]

We aren't causing global warming. Earth used to be a huge ass ice ball at one point. And it went through phases where it was pretty much desert all around.

GL saving the pandas, you won't beat nature.

[WhiteLotus]

We aren't causing global warming.

Disagree, we aren't exactly prolonging the earth for as long as possible as we? We are pretty much raping it for all its worth

Earth used to be a huge ass ice ball at one point. And it went through phases where it was pretty much desert all around.

GL saving the pandas, you won't beat nature.

That i do agree with - even without our help the earth would warm up anyway and we are overdue an ice age anyway.

[hat]

Why try to stop the inevitable? It's like trying to find a way to escape death. No matter what you do your body will die someday, and everyone agrees. The Earth will heat up like a mofo, then cool down to a point where you would be reaching 10GHz overclocks on stock air cooling... at the equator. If you can survive the horrible temps that is. That, and our sun will die. Wether a new one will be made for us is very debatable.

[Nitro-Max]

We have never done the earth any good all we do is take away the good and feed it the bad from what i can see.

[hat]

It's gonna kill us anyway. Even if we all went back to the days before the industrial era we as humans are going to get pr0ned by mother nature.

[Nitro-Max]

We are set for destruction this is true our ways and technology and money our comforts theres no going back really all this bs about cutting down green house gases well thats still not going to stop it just slow it down by a very small amount.

Its like saying i am not a smoker if i only have 2 a day instead of 10 fact is i still smoke.

To stop what we are doing to the world the planet needs to come first before money and that will never ever happen money is a powerfull addiction the leaders of the world knows what is needed to stop global warming but life as we know it willl never be the same it would mean giving up our technology like cars planes power sations industry even money that fuels it all the world will slow to a stand still.

[Error 404]

Cure for global warming:

Step 1) Keep doing what we've been doing, and use up as much oil as possible, so that later on we can't go back to our nasty ways...

Step 2) Let the antarctic ice melt into the Gulf Stream.

Step 3) Wait for the Gulf Stream to shut down.

Step 4) Enjoy an Ice-age for the next few hundred/thousand years.

Step 5) Begin anew, and since we don't have any oil we have to use sustainable energy!

See? We're not completely screwed.

[DaedalusHelios]

Is he an opportunist or really serious?

http://www.citizensugar.com/1609388

If Al gets constipated, will he blame global warming?

Nice republican propaganda. Before long you will believe the Iraq war was about "weapons of mass destruction".


Why try to stop the inevitable? It's like trying to find a way to escape death. No matter what you do your body will die someday, and everyone agrees. The Earth will heat up like a mofo, then cool down to a point where you would be reaching 10GHz overclocks on stock air cooling... at the equator. If you can survive the horrible temps that is. That, and our sun will die. Wether a new one will be made for us is very debatable.

I use seatbelts, and I am careful when cleaning my gun, and so on. Being safe is important. Reducing emissions makes a huge difference locally and that has little to do with global warming, but its still connected. Your apathy isn't productive.;)

You have to trust the scientists that they are right because they are smarter than you. Over 96% of the scientific community believes in global warming.:)

[Seany1212]

The Earth will heat up like a mofo, then cool down to a point where you would be reaching 10GHz overclocks on stock air cooling... at the equator.

I laughed :laugh:

[Nitro-Max]

There will always be lots of talk and little action till its too late.
As i said the smart people and world leaders know what needs to be done but its just way too much to comprehend if you think about the middle ages thats more or less how we need to live again and only proceed with clean safe technologies like wind farms and the power of the sea to power homes etc cleaner cars alternative green friendly fuels.

[Nitro-Max]

I watched a thing on tv about polution they said a single avarage car would have to travel around the world about 640 times to reach the level of polution a plane would cause flying from paris to new york. An aeroplane uses thousands of litres of fuel just navigating getting to the run way richard branson and easy jet uses veichles to tug them to the runway to save money and cut polution.

[lemonadesoda]

Why try to stop the inevitable? It's like trying to find a way to escape death. No matter what you do your body will die someday, and everyone agrees.

#1. Save time, and money, and earths resources... dig a 6 foot hole now and jump in! :roll:

(joking... :) )

[candle_86]

well i absolutly call global warming a farce made to scare people. As for enviromentalism, god gave the earth to man do with it as they will, along with the Animals. We are getting from it what the human race needs to continue to progress and tree huggers be damed.

[Nitro-Max]

well i absolutly call global warming a farce made to scare people. As for enviromentalism, god gave the earth to man do with it as they will, along with the Animals. We are getting from it what the human race needs to continue to progress and tree huggers be damed.

So why have we seen mass flooding and freak weather conditions in the last 10 years last year britain had a really wet summer due to a freak weather pattern.we also had a tornado in birmingham somthing we dont see in these parts.

[SK-1]

So why have we seen mass flooding and freak weather conditions in the last 10 years last year britain had a really wet summer due to a freak weather pattern.we also had a tornado in birmingham somthing we dont see in these parts.

The Earth is a living thing. There has ALWAYS been extreme weather. I know the LIBERAL media would love for us to believe that there has only been bad weather for the last 10 years to help out there alarmist cause, but when you figure the real temperature increase in the LAST 10 YEARS has been less than 1 tenth of a degree, and now the experts are saying that global warming is going to "take a break" for another 5-10 years, then SCAM really comes to mind.

[SK-1]

[QUOTE=DaedalusHelios;783729]Nice republican propaganda. Before long you will believe the Iraq war was about "weapons of mass destruction".


I was wondering how long before a defensive liberal would inject bush hate into this thread.

Propaganda??,...look at the source Helios,... not really a republican web site by a long shot.
You say no weapons of mass destruction (Dude, I thought we sold them to him????).
He had months to rid his little war machine of the weapons of mass destruction because of the lame ass UN inspectors.Have you forgotten the runaround the inspectors?

Politicians use all sorts of bullshit to scare voters into their corner.You say Bush used Weapons of Mass destruction,...I say Gore is using this bullshit Global Warming scam.

We cant predict the weather for 1 week accurately, we can only go back a few thousand years to accurately track temperatures,(<---FACT btw) but I am suppose to believe that the Earth is going to Hell and I am the cause???? LOL!!
I am afraid more of the laws that are going to be made up to "stop" this global warming than of global warming itself!

[Deusxmachina]

The Earth is a living thing. There has ALWAYS been extreme weather. I know the LIBERAL media would love for us to believe that there has only been bad weather for the last 10 years to help out there alarmist cause, but when you figure the real temperature increase in the LAST 10 YEARS has been less than 1 tenth of a degree, and now the experts are saying that global warming is going to "take a break" for another 5-10 years, then SCAM really comes to mind.

Indeed. If people check their history books, there's a heck of a lot of natural disasters from past centuries, and there was no Industrial Age back then to blame them on.

Someone compared car pollution to an airplane. Yep. They keep wanting to make cars more and more enviro-friendly, but they're already very clean. Last I read, it's basically impossible to die in an enclosed area like a garage with a car running anymore. I always wonder if Al Gore keeps the air-conditioning turned off to protect the environment when riding around in his limo.

How come many scientists say global warming is a myth and how come many scientists say we're headed for an ice age? If nothing else, people should at least be able to agree that there isn't much of an agreement one way or the other on the issue of global warming.

Re: Iraq. Saddam disregarded I think 17 UN resolutions. Remember that part in "Team America" where the guy says, "If you don't do what we say, we will get very, very mad at you and write you another letter!"? Kind of the same thing. Since the resolutions weren't abided by, the original Iraq war never actually ended. The UN is a worthless waste of space anyway, though.

I think Bush2 was pretty much damned if he did and damned if he didn't. He's not my favorite guy, but he certainly had a lot of crap dumped into his lap.

[panchoman]

i think global warming is just an excuse for hurricane katrina

[Morgoth]

why dont we just leave the earth and live in huge spacy colonie's :)

[Steevo]

We are changing the face of the earth, however not to the extent we think. The Sahara used to be a torpical paradise, but due to changes beyond human control, it changed, and now serves as a global fertilizer facility. Without it, the rain forests of South America would not exist as they do now, they would be much more barren. Wihtout the flooding of most rivers and streams the banks loose their fertility.


However no one wants flooding, so dykes, and dams go up, and when they fail they blame the weather, not the idiots building them of those who live next to them. New Orleans is below sea level, and a swamp, but through the use of pumps, dykes, and dams they were able to stay dry for a long time. But when that failed they blamed global warming, not themselves and poor management.


What about the dust bowl era here in the US? Was that caused by global warming?



Unfortunately this is all a excersize in mass media control of the population. Get us all wrapped up in things so we don't watch the real issues.

[DaedalusHelios]

Nice republican propaganda. Before long you will believe the Iraq war was about "weapons of mass destruction".


I was wondering how long before a defensive liberal would inject bush hate into this thread.

Propaganda??,...look at the source Helios,... not really a republican web site by a long shot.
You say no weapons of mass destruction (Dude, I thought we sold them to him????).
He had months to rid his little war machine of the weapons of mass destruction because of the lame ass UN inspectors.Have you forgotten the runaround the inspectors?

Politicians use all sorts of bullshit to scare voters into their corner.You say Bush used Weapons of Mass destruction,...I say Gore is using this bullshit Global Warming scam.

We cant predict the weather for 1 week accurately, we can only go back a few thousand years to accurately track temperatures,(<---FACT btw) but I am suppose to believe that the Earth is going to Hell and I am the cause???? LOL!!
I am afraid more of the laws that are going to be made up to "stop" this global warming than of global warming itself!

Ever heard of the American Petroleum Institute. Read into where they put their money to misinform the gullable people that don't believe something unless it hits them in the face.

Why are gas prices so high and Exxon is on top of the fortune 500?? Exxon has the highest growth, and growth percentage wise of any fortune 500 company. Why is that? The oil connections of the president and that enables price fixing when you have somebody that powerful backing you up.


Cheney was on the board at Halliburton until becoming Vice President ,and passed "no bid" contracts to them and KBR and many other companies, so they could charge the government a "cost plus arrangement". If you don't know about this I am not surprised.

By the way, the guy that coined the term liberal news media was originally joking and then places like Fox/Newscorp ran with the idea. They are run by Rupert Murdoch which is a republican extremist from Australia(and a first class asshole).

Global warming is happening. You are obviously not very well educated on the matter. But don't worry, tons of other people share your same beliefs when it comes to this thanks to Fox News and the propaganda machine. You can't argue against scientists that are vastly more educated on the matter unless you are that self righteous. I guess somebody else is going to come out and insist that "New Earth Creationism" is correct.:rolleyes:

[farlex85]

I agree Daedalus, its science. There's no point arguing whether global warming exists or not because its a scientific fact. Now, you can debate the extent to which humans are causing the climate shift (to an degree), and you can debate the extent to which humans are able to control it (to some degree). Global climate shifts can vastly affect our way of life, and if we want to enjoy our stay on this planet, it would behoove us to do everything possible to be prepared and councientious about what we are doing.

[flashstar]

"And remember the Arctic Sea ice? The ice we were told so hysterically last fall had melted to its "lowest levels on record? Never mind that those records only date back as far as 1972 and that there is anthropological and geological evidence of much greater melts in the past.

The ice is back.

Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, says the Arctic winter has been so severe the ice has not only recovered, it is actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than at this time last year."

"The last time the sun was this inactive, Earth suffered the Little Ice Age that lasted about five centuries and ended in 1850. Crops failed through killer frosts and drought. Famine, plague and war were widespread. Harbours froze, so did rivers, and trade ceased."

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=332289

Clearly man is not causing "global warming". In fact, cows produce much more green house gas than man ever did through combustion.

If we go back to a medieval world, the world's top economies will be severally damaged. When this happens, we will be less able to protect ourselves from possible ice ages and warmings in the future. In addition, China and other developing nations will likely not agree to go back to a Medieval life style and will continue dumping smog into the atmosphere....

Edit: We should be focusing less on combatting "global warming" and more on developing the world economy!

[farlex85]

It seems rather ignorant to say that humans have no impact on global climate. We have vastly changed the way nature is able to play out. Why are there so many cows, for instance.

Of course we need to work on the economy, but theres no reason to not attempt to affect the global climate in a more favorable way for our species simultaneously.

[DaedalusHelios]

"And remember the Arctic Sea ice? The ice we were told so hysterically last fall had melted to its "lowest levels on record? Never mind that those records only date back as far as 1972 and that there is anthropological and geological evidence of much greater melts in the past.

The ice is back.

Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, says the Arctic winter has been so severe the ice has not only recovered, it is actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than at this time last year."

"The last time the sun was this inactive, Earth suffered the Little Ice Age that lasted about five centuries and ended in 1850. Crops failed through killer frosts and drought. Famine, plague and war were widespread. Harbours froze, so did rivers, and trade ceased."

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=332289

Clearly man is not causing "global warming". In fact, cows produce much more green house gas than man ever did through combustion.

If we go back to a medieval world, the world's top economies will be severally damaged. When this happens, we will be less able to protect ourselves from possible ice ages and warmings in the future. In addition, China and other developing nations will likely not agree to go back to a Medieval life style and will continue dumping smog into the atmosphere....

Edit: We should be focusing less on combatting "global warming" and more on developing the world economy!

Your a Libertarian obviously. Free trade isn't free.;)

Letting the market control itself is far to dangerous as an absolute. Its naive to trust corporations to do the right thing. They are just like the average person. Power= Corruption, and the only way to help prevent and fight corruption is through checks and balances. Libertarianism is very Ann Rand. :(

I am sure the fabolously wealthy don't want us to tell them to spend a little extra money for us to not have our children born with Asthma or chronic bronchitus like I have.:shadedshu

The extra money is the measures to prevent extreme pollution. Lead pollution causes a drop in IQ when people drink it from ground water. There are many reasons to try to not pollute the environment. But it takes foresight, and Libertarianism has always lacked it.

[russianboy]

well not all of the global warming is from us, the sun is actually expanding and getting slightly closer to our planet, which is normal, as the sun will expand overtime till it swallows most if not all of our planets, and then boom with a super nova blow up and then possibly give birth to the solar system

but yeah, many scientists attribute global warming to the sun quite a bit too, though we have helped speed it up a bit.

nah, not supernova.

The sun has to little mass to die with a bang, most likely it will become a dwarf. I hate dwarfs.


But anyways, of course all the cars and shit contribute to the CO2 levels in the atmosphere, which has effects on messing other things up.

Earth is very finely tuned, it has it's cycles and moments, at times it's happy and puts out for us, other times it's bitchy and showering us with it's nasty fluids. Much like a woman.

But mankind HAS messed with the planet, and it has upset some of the cycles and balances, to what degree I don't know, but I'm sure it can by plenty worse. I'm glad I won't be around when us humans really screw up our only home.

[WhiteLotus]

well i absolutly call global warming a farce made to scare people. As for enviromentalism, god gave the earth to man do with it as they will, along with the Animals. We are getting from it what the human race needs to continue to progress and tree huggers be damed.

you HAVE to be kidding...right? :shadedshu

[russianboy]

you HAVE to be kidding...right? :shadedshu

Ignore him, there is always an ignorant person on a forum.

[DaedalusHelios]

you HAVE to be kidding...right? :shadedshu

Many people in the United States are told that global warming doesn't exist, and do not think to question it by looking at real data provided by scientists that aren't funded by the petroleum institute.

[Morgoth]

screw earth, space is where we belonge

[DaedalusHelios]

screw earth, space is where we belonge


:roll:

Halo, Star Trek, and Star Wars aren't real.

The "Star Wars" defense system is though. It was designed to shoot down ICBM's. :laugh:

[Steevo]

But only 50% of the time.

[DaedalusHelios]

But only 50% of the time.

Huh?:confused:

I thought it was like 30%?

But they aren't even using that anymore. As soon as they would see one now they would probably use Thor's hammer or something even more advanced. :)

[WhiteLotus]

screw earth, space is where we belonge

to be honest with you - that's how it will eventually become. The Earth simply cannot sustain the human race for ever. If you've read Red Dwarf then you can see my view - Earth will eventually become a landfill planet and we would have migrated into the solar system by them

[DaedalusHelios]

to be honest with you - that's how it will eventually become. The Earth simply cannot sustain the human race for ever. If you've read Red Dwarf then you can see my view - Earth will eventually become a landfill planet and we would have migrated into the solar system by them

Not in our lifetime.;)

[Morgoth]

:roll:

Halo, Star Trek, and Star Wars aren't real.

The "Star Wars" defense system is though. It was designed to shoot down ICBM's. :laugh:

i'm more into gundam wing colony concept

[farlex85]

Not any time in the near future. The costs are astronomical. I saw somewhere there is the form of propulsion that stems from combining anti-matter w/ matter, and the resulting explosions within. This form of propulsion could send us into space at near the speed of light, allowing us to travel much further quicker than our current highly inefficient form of propulsion (most of the energy to get a shuttle into space is spent carrying the vast amounts of fuel needed, equivalent of driving cross-country with a huge tank of gas on your car). The problem is anti-matter does not occur naturally, at least not anywhere we've looked, and creating a gram or so of it would be enough to "bankrupt" the world. If we could only work together and take economics out of the equation........

And the sun will not likely explode, however before it becomes a red dwarf it will expand to a much greater size, and will indeed engulf the earth. Thats so far in the future though, humans will likely destroy themselves first.

[Morgoth]

why dont we use Nuclear fusion? and recreat the sun and tap the engery from that i saw on discovery channel that the are building would be running in 30 years and is 100% safe and unlimited ammount of engery

[DaedalusHelios]

why dont we use Nuclear fusion? and recreat the sun and tap the engery from that i saw on discovery channel that the are building would be running in 30 years and is 100% safe and unlimited ammount of engery

There is always a way. Good point.;)

[farlex85]

why dont we use Nuclear fusion? and recreat the sun and tap the engery from that i saw on discovery channel that the are building would be running in 30 years and is 100% safe and unlimited ammount of engery

That's probably the way it will go next. I believe that is still far more expensive than our current methods, and scientists have yet to find a way to properly harness the inordinate amount of energy released in nuclear fusion. They know how to start it, but not control it. Also, although this does release immense amounts of energy, I believe the reactions are still not nearly as powerful as matter v.s. anti-matter. However, we are much closer to achieving the former.

[Morgoth]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDAZsPkTkMM
^^

[farlex85]

Nice, looks like they're quite close indeed. :)

[flashstar]

Your a Libertarian obviously. Free trade isn't free.;)

Letting the market control itself is far to dangerous as an absolute. Its naive to trust corporations to do the right thing. They are just like the average person. Power= Corruption, and the only way to help prevent and fight corruption is through checks and balances. Libertarianism is very Ann Rand. :(

I am sure the fabolously wealthy don't want us to tell them to spend a little extra money for us to not have our children born with Asthma or chronic bronchitus like I have.:shadedshu

The extra money is the measures to prevent extreme pollution. Lead pollution causes a drop in IQ when people drink it from ground water. There are many reasons to try to not pollute the environment. But it takes foresight, and Libertarianism has always lacked it.

I consider myself a progressive republican. Actually though it is the government which creates monopolies through legislation. By altering the delicate balance of supply and demand, the government in effect creates economic problems which otherwise wouldn't exist. It then tries to fix these problems with yet more legislation. :shadedshu

Additionally, there is no proof that the minute levels of lead in nearly all of America's water supply result in a noticeable decrease in IQ. Furthermore, chronic bronchitis and asthma are not directly related to green house gases. We're actually cleaner today than we were 100 years as a whole.

What many liberals don't understand is that government should work for the people. It shouldn't regulate everything that we do (banning incandescent light bulbs :twitch: etc.). Theodore Roosevelt probably summed it up best:

"We must treat each man on his worth and merits as a man. We must see that each is given a square deal, because he is entitled to no more and should receive no less.
- New York
State Fair
September 3, 1903- TR"

"If an American is to amount to anything he must rely upon himself, and not upon the State; he must take pride in his own work, instead of sitting idle to envy the luck of others. He must face life with resolute courage, win victory if he can, and accept defeat if he must, without seeking to place on his fellow man a responsibility which is not theirs.
- Review of Reviews
January 1897- Theodore Roosevelt"

Finally, I don't want to pollute the environment. There are just more important things to be focusing on (which will allow us the freedom to protect the environment and stop pollution in the future). We need to get there first. We simply do not have the resources necessary to stop pollution at this moment.

[ShadowFold]

http://img.techpowerup.org/080508/algorewtf.jpg

Who can take that face seriously? Seriously?

[AphexDreamer]

Ah, none of this matters anyways guys. The poles are going to shift and we are all going to die by 2012.

[hat]

If the poles shift in 2012 what's that gonna do to us? North becomes South and Sount becomes North. So what? It's happened plenty of times in the past and guess what... there's still loads of life on this planet.

[AsRock]

Why try to stop the inevitable? It's like trying to find a way to escape death. No matter what you do your body will die someday, and everyone agrees. The Earth will heat up like a mofo, then cool down to a point where you would be reaching 10GHz overclocks on stock air cooling... at the equator. If you can survive the horrible temps that is. That, and our sun will die. Wether a new one will be made for us is very debatable.


It's humans who are at fault think they can do what they want all the time...... We don't even like to think of our selfs as animals which we are.

We too cocky and it will bite us in the ass sooner or later..

I don't really believe were in total blame. Like i think we do help it a long but there's other things that are happening which are natural.

[AsRock]

If the poles shift in 2012 what's that gonna do to us? North becomes South and Sount becomes North. So what? It's happened plenty of times in the past and guess what... there's still loads of life on this planet.


Yeah there is but it's a shame were here.

[DaedalusHelios]

Eh, republicans. At least war kills them. They bring it on themselves. :laugh:

The Republican tax policies only benefit the rich. So what you are saying is exactly the opposite of the truth. :shadedshu

My brother is an economist, and we have gone through the tax policies before. The tax rebates are a cheap ploy to try to gain support during a failing economy due to bad legislation from a republican congress and republican president for so many years. ;)

Current Neocons are for big government and overspending until we reach a crazy deficit. George Bush did it, George W. Bush did it, and so did Reagan. They break their own records when it comes to incompetence.

[AphexDreamer]

If the poles shift in 2012 what's that gonna do to us? North becomes South and Sount becomes North. So what? It's happened plenty of times in the past and guess what... there's still loads of life on this planet.


Are you for real.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_shift_theory#New_Age_Theories

"Regardless of speed, the results of a shift occurring results in major climate changes for most of the earth's surface, as areas that were formerly equatorial become temperate, and areas that were temperate become either more equatorial or more arctic."

Also read this to see exactly what it is.

http://www.dailycommonsense.com/what-is-that-polar-shift-thing/

"A pole reversal would have terrible impact on our planet. "

[farlex85]

It wouldn't be a pole reversal, but a pole shift. And its hypothetical. The poles have shifted in the past, and in 2012 the Earth will be perfectly aligned with the black hole at the center of our galaxy. Some say this could cause a pole shift (not a pole reversal), which, if rapid enough, would have drastic effects on our climate. However, like the article aphex posted said, pole shifts are usually very gradual and would not be rapid enough to catch us completely off gaurd.

Interestingly, around this same time the sun will be in its hyper-active phase, when it is far more violent and it produces many solar storms. Our magnetic field usually deflects much of the radiation from the sun, but if it was disrupted the solar storms would have some severe effects on our everyday life.

Also, there is a particularly nasty ray that is emmitted from black holes, the gamma ray. These pack so much wallop, that we can see evidence of them from trillions of light years away. If we were in path of one of these, well, thats the end of the planet Earth.

Of course, all this doomsday stuff can get out of hand. However, there are a million different astronomical or planetary events that could totally and completely change our way of life or destroy us. All of them happen fairly regularly in space, but regularity in space is of course quite a significant amount of time to our feeble selves. But it still seems to me, our doom will most likely come from our own design, be it from carelessly squandering our resources or killing one another. But hey, what can ya do, right?

[Dangle]

The Republican tax policies only benefit the rich. So what you are saying is exactly the opposite of the truth.You tard. Do you get all of your info from The Daily Show on comedy central??? The Bush tax cuts help every single person who makes money by raising the limit for your particular tax bracket.

For example, let me show you how this helps the uber poor lazy asses who are a leech to societey.

In 2002, to pay only have to pay a 10% income tax, you can make no more than $6,000.

In 2008, to pay only have to pay a 10% income tax, you're now allowed to make up to $8,025 before jumping up to the next tax bracket of 15%.

Thanks to the Bush tax cuts, all of the trailer trash coke addicts have over a $2000 (33%) margin before they have to jump up to the next bracket.

For the highest tax bracket (35% income tax) there's only about a 15% margin, going from ~300k to the now ~350k.



Here's some nice facts for you liberal whiners:
>86% of all federal income taxes are paid by the top 25% of wage earners.
>The top 50% of wage earners pay 97% of ALL income taxes.
>the top 1% of wage earners pay 39% of ALL income taxes - which is up 2% from 2000 after george W took office.



If you really believed algore's powerpoint presentation, watch this, then develop your own opinion.
Man Made Global Warming is a theory. Belief in man made global warming requires faith, as does my religion, as does any theory that has not been proven.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI

[farlex85]

Here's some nice facts for you liberal whiners:
>86% of all federal income taxes are paid by the top 25% of wage earners.
>The top 50% of wage earners pay 97% of ALL income taxes.
>the top 1% of wage earners pay 39% of ALL income taxes - which is up 2% from 2000 after george W took office.




Thats because the top 1% own 38% of ALL the wealth.
The top 10% own 71% of ALL the wealth.
The bottom 40% own less than 1% of ALL the wealth.

But those bottom 40% are all lazy trailer trash coke fiends right?:shadedshu

[DaedalusHelios]

He is to out of touch with reality to understand that teachers in public school sometimes fit around the poverty line. White trailer trash huh? Wow. :slap:


Coke is the drug of choice for the upper 10% actually. That along with prescription drug abuse. Trailer trash would use Meth, Crack, heroin, inhalents and marijuana. If you wanna refer to trailer trash addicts, get the drug right at least. :laugh:

[farlex85]

Man Made Global Warming is a theory. Belief in man made global warming requires faith, as does my religion, as does any theory that has not been proven.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI

Evolution is a theory. Gravity is a theory. Relativity is a theory. They do not ask for faith, they ask for facts. That was an interesting video, however did not provide enough in depth analysis for me, I will look into it more. Just b/c its a theory does not mean it takes blind faith.

[farlex85]

He is to out of touch with reality to understand that teachers in public school sometimes fit around the poverty line. White trailer trash huh? Wow. :slap:

Yeah it takes a special kind of ignorance to make a statement like that, further evidence to me the end of man will be their fellow men.

[DaedalusHelios]

Yeah it takes a special kind of ignorance to make a statement like that, further evidence to me the end of man will be their fellow men.

He is probably some snotty rich kid that thinks all people under the poverty line are lazy.

The people with multiple jobs just to make ends meet are often found under the poverty line and they could be working 60+ hours a week. I am sure they would appreciate being called bottom feeders as they feed your family in a restaurant, or run the register at your local grocery store. Your a real man of the people Dangle.:shadedshu

[Dangle]

Trailer trash would use Meth, Crack, heroin, inhalents and marijuana. If you wanna refer to trailer trash addicts, get the drug right at least. :laugh:You would know:laugh:

You guys aren't very analytical, are you? When I was referring to trailer trash, I was obviously speaking of those who make less than $8,025 per year in 2008. I found it particularly amusing how you fascists got offended. Show me an adult who makes <$8,025 and I'll show you a 1960 Winnebago. ;)

BTW, we're getting off topic here so let me remind you:If you really believed algore's powerpoint presentation, watch this, then develop your own opinion.
Man Made Global Warming is a theory. Belief in man made global warming requires faith, as does my religion, as does any theory that has not been proven.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI

[DaedalusHelios]

You would know:laugh:

LOL, I am actually pretty straight edge, minus the gun I carry around. I don't drink, smoke, or do drug in any way. ;)

My opinion has always been that if you want to do somehing to feel good, you either do a random act of kindness, or fuck your girlfriend. If you do it like a pro, it can be both at the same time. :pimp:

[hat]

Who needs drugs? I have my fun by doing stuff available to me in metal shop, so far welding has been the most fun.

[DaedalusHelios]

You would know:laugh:

You guys aren't very analytical, are you? When I was referring to trailer trash, I was obviously speaking of those who make less than $8,025 per year in 2008. I found it particularly amusing how you fascists got offended.

Oh ok, so you meant students, retirees, and disabled veterans? :laugh:

[farlex85]

You would know:laugh:

You guys aren't very analytical, are you? When I was referring to trailer trash, I was obviously speaking of those who make less than $8,025 per year in 2008. I found it particularly amusing how you fascists got offended.

I am analytical to a fault, and when someone makes a sweeping genralization about those who are less fortunate, I tend to make the analysis they are ignorant, and usually hypocritical. I think your post above strikes a far more fascist tone than I could possibly achieve.

[hat]

Isn't this supposed to be about global warming anyway?

[DaedalusHelios]

Isn't this supposed to be about global warming anyway?

The reason for global warming is rich, powerful people, deciding to not let things evolve into being safe for the environment and less energy dependent.;)

What happened to the electric car designs?:(

So we started to talk about the rich and how they care little about the people on the bottom with the exception of a few.

Warren Buffet is a smart man. Lets hope his ideas catch on. I hope he sticks around for a long time. :)

[Dangle]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI

Let me explain something I've learned about liberals. They get all of their knowledge and talking points from Hollywood flicks and Comedy Central.

In 1970, there was an anti-nuclear power propaganda Hollywood flick. After that, everyone decided they were environmentalists and imposed coal-fired power plants.

35 years later, those same lemmings see 'an inconvenient truth' and they try to ban coal power plants...

in 2008 they complain about our foreign dependence on oil... yet they're the ones who prevent us from drilling our own oil off the coast of Florida, California, ANWR, and the continental shelf.

Thanks a lot, dems.

France is 80% nuclear, and they reprocess their waste. We can't even invest money in the tech because of you Hollywood sheeps.

[hat]

The production of electricity causes pollution too, at least with some meathods. Take nuclear power for instance. Yeah... critters just LOVE nuclear byproducts!

[farlex85]

The reason for global warming is rich, powerful people, deciding to not let things evolve into being safe for the environment and less energy dependent.;)

What happened to the electric car designs?:(

They've actually got hydrogen cars in development now, run on pure hydrogen and emmit only water. Don't expect them to take over anytime soon though, there is way too much money in oil. When they do hit the market, they will likely be so expensive only the top 1% or so will be able to enjoy them. Even economics, is not without a sense of irony.

[hat]

How do you reprocess nuclear waste? That shit remains harmful for billions of years...

[Dangle]

I am analytical to a fault, and when someone makes a sweeping genralization about those who are less fortunate, I tend to make the analysis they are ignorant, and usually hypocritical. I think your post above strikes a far more fascist tone than I could possibly achieve.What's unfortunate about living in the most free, prosperous state in the history of civilization? People in africa are living off of less than 1 dollar per day. You've got people here bitching because they're too lazy to ask for a raise at their fast food job because they know that if they do, they'll have to give up some of that free welfare check they're receiving.

My dream life is to just sit in a room and play video games... I could do this if I wanted. I could quit my job, collect unemployment and welfare, get my social medicine, and have the gov buy me a house. Pay me extra for food. pay me extra for how many kids I can make. Give them free school and food. Shit i've got it made. World of Warcraft... here I come!!!

[farlex85]

How do you reprocess nuclear waste? That shit remains harmful for billions of years...

Shoot it into space. :)

[Dangle]

Oh yea, and this one's for you Obama supporters... Let's not forget that increasing the Gas tax and the capital gains tax hurts the poor WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more than it hurts the rich.

[Dangle]

Shoot it into space. :)

Bombs, duh. I'm going to bed. Good night. It was fun pwning all of you liberal fascist socialists, and straight edgers.

[farlex85]

What's unfortunate about living in the most free, prosperous state in the history of civilization? People in africa are living off of less than 1 dollar per day. You've got people here bitching because they're too lazy to ask for a raise at their fast food job because they know that if they do, they'll have to give up some of that free welfare check they're receiving.

My dream life is to just sit in a room and play video games... I could do this if I wanted. I could quit my job, collect unemployment and welfare, get my social medicine, and have the gov buy me a house. Pay me extra for food. pay me extra for how many kids I can make. Give them free school and food. Shit i've got it made. World of Warcraft... here I come!!!

I'm not saying there are not those who are lazy and take advantage of a system to help those who are truly unfortunate. But not everyone who is unable to make $8000/ year is lazy.

[DaedalusHelios]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI

Let me explain something I've learned about liberals. They get all of their knowledge and talking points from Hollywood flicks and Comedy Central.

In 1970, there was an anti-nuclear power propaganda Hollywood flick. After that, everyone decided they were environmentalists and imposed coal-fired power plants.

35 years later, those same lemmings see 'an inconvenient truth' and they try to ban coal power plants...

in 2008 they complain about our foreign dependence on oil... yet they're the ones who prevent us from drilling our own oil off the coast of Florida, California, ANWR, and the continental shelf.

Thanks a lot, dems.

France is 80% nuclear, and they reprocess their waste. We can't even invest money in the tech because of you Hollywood sheeps.

The french are very liberal. They are the most liberal, in the entire continent.

So thank liberalism for that. :laugh:

Environmentalists have been fighting the use of coal since the early industrial age in the UK. Remember literature that came out around that time talking about black rain.

They were originally afraid of a Chernobyl like event would take place during the early developemental stages of nuclear power. That was back before the modern failsafes that are found in todays nuclear power plants. So yes, early on nuclear power wasn't as advanced or safe as it is today thanks to technology progressing. Alot of technology has come out since 1970.:laugh:

You also must not understand what drilling for oil does to the environment. If you are using well water in the area it suddenly has tasty crude oil in it.:shadedshu

Also drilling for oil on the continental shelf destroys the entire local ecosystem with crude oil which poisons all plant life and animal life.:(

I don't pull my scientific information from hollywood movies. Liberals like myself know alot about ecology from these cool things called books and scientific journals.:cool:

[magibeg]

Man you people go wayyyy off topic. This is not an issue of whose liberal and whose republican. Global warming or 'climate change' is not an AMERICAN issue its a WORLD issue. Of course the USA is pretty much the only developed nation NOT to accept the global warming theory. Now as a quick science lesson do you guys actually know what a scientific THEORY is. The way most of you throw around the word shows a huge lack of understanding the scientific process.

In a nutshell a theory is a collaboration of a series of FACTS. The theory only EXPLAINS what the facts seem to point to. Evolution(please don't discuss this it's just an example) for example is a THEORY due to the FACTs of what evidence is presented. ie fossil records, changes in genetics based on natural selection etc etc. Like wise the periodic table is a THEORY based on the FACTs of the various elements we can create and observe.

So when it comes to the THEORY of global warming its explaining the FACT that the earth is warming. As for how its warming theres the THEORY of man made global warming. The FACT that the earth is warming is not in scientific debate. The only thing that is in debate is HOW the earth is warming.

For the most part all of the developed nations are not arguing that global warming is a man-made issue its just debated how MUCH of it is man made. If you actually fact check a lot of the groups which are against man made global warming you will quickly find out a pattern. The makers of the great global warming swindle for example can be traced back to exxon mobil. The same media company responsible for that 'documentary' is also the one from the 70's who created the videos for the tobacco industry on how smoking doesn't cause cancer.

I would go into more depth on the subject but i know no ones minds are actually going to be changed on the matter but all i will ask is that America joins the rest of the world and atleast accepts that we play some part of this warming process. Everyone however is equally guilty for the abysmal conditions we're having on the environment and lack of actual progress being made towards green energy.

[farlex85]

Man you people go wayyyy off topic. This is not an issue of whose liberal and whose republican. Global warming or 'climate change' is not an AMERICAN issue its a WORLD issue. Of course the USA is pretty much the only developed nation NOT to accept the global warming theory. Now as a quick science lesson do you guys actually know what a scientific THEORY is. The way most of you throw around the word shows a huge lack of understanding the scientific process.

In a nutshell a theory is a collaboration of a series of FACTS. The theory only EXPLAINS what the facts seem to point to. Evolution(please don't discuss this it's just an example) for example is a THEORY due to the FACTs of what evidence is presented. ie fossil records, changes in genetics based on natural selection etc etc. Like wise the periodic table is a THEORY based on the FACTs of the various elements we can create and observe.

So when it comes to the THEORY of global warming its explaining the FACT that the earth is warming. As for how its warming theres the THEORY of man made global warming. The FACT that the earth is warming is not in scientific debate. The only thing that is in debate is HOW the earth is warming.

For the most part all of the developed nations are not arguing that global warming is a man-made issue its just debated how MUCH of it is man made. If you actually fact check a lot of the groups which are against man made global warming you will quickly find out a pattern. The makers of the great global warming swindle for example can be traced back to exxon mobil. The same media company responsible for that 'documentary' is also the one from the 70's who created the videos for the tobacco industry on how smoking doesn't cause cancer.

I would go into more depth on the subject but i know no ones minds are actually going to be changed on the matter but all i will ask is that America joins the rest of the world and atleast accepts that we play some part of this warming process. Everyone however is equally guilty for the abysmal conditions we're having on the environment and lack of actual progress being made towards green energy.

I made points similar to these (or at least tried to), however you did it in a much clearer fashion.

[Deusxmachina]

In 2002, to pay only have to pay a 10% income tax, you can make no more than $6,000.

In 2008, to pay only have to pay a 10% income tax, you're now allowed to make up to $8,025 before jumping up to the next tax bracket of 15%.

Thanks to the Bush tax cuts, all of the trailer trash coke addicts have over a $2000 (33%) margin before they have to jump up to the next bracket.


You noted this, but then someone says, "But 'the rich' are bad!" and then everyone runs with that. People can argue if the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, if all rich people are evil, etc, but if people are going to argue that tax cuts only help the rich, then they should stay on topic.

EVERYONE got a tax cut with those cuts. "But, the rich got a bigger cut!" People can argue that one both ways too if they like, but it still doesn't take away from the fact that not "only" rich people got a cut. Drug users aside, those low-end cuts also affect a whole lot of students who aren't working full-time. Or how about stay-at-home moms (or dads) who also work part-time? They got a tax cut, too. Either all of these people who got a tax cut are secretly rich, or people who say those tax cuts only help the rich are at the least misinformed or at the worst blatantly lying.

An amsuing part of cuts like that are when people who make less than the minimum say no fair really poor people didn't get a cut. They didn't get a cut because they already don't pay any (income) taxes. Thanks to things like the EIC, they get paid to be poor and paid to have kids, actually.

I'm trying to remember when a Democrat ever championed for lowering everyone's taxes.

[flashstar]

Just because there is a consensus in the world community doesn't mean that there is fact in global warming. If there was a 4 degree temperature increase in the past 200 years, I would be more inclined to believe it. The 1 degree F increase in temperatures that we saw (which was cancelled out by the 1 degree drop in temperatures last year) isn't enough to convince me or the majority of the American population that global warming is a fact. So far there has been selective picking of data (an inconvenient truth). Global cooling can be argued by selecting other just as valid data (some glaciers are getting much thicker). There is no reason to damage the American economy at the moment... :shadedshu

[farlex85]

Just because there is a consensus in the world community doesn't mean that there is fact in global warming. If there was a 4 degree temperature increase in the past 200 years, I would be more inclined to believe it. The 1 degree F increase in temperatures that we saw (which was cancelled out by the 1 degree drop in temperatures last year) isn't enough to convince me or the majority of the American population that global warming is a fact. So far there has been selective picking of data (an inconvenient truth). Global cooling can be argued by selecting other just as valid data (some glaciers are getting much thicker). There is no reason to damage the American economy at the moment... :shadedshu

A global rise in temperature by 1 degree F is a huge move. That is not the case, it is somewhat less than that. If the global temperature rose or fell that much in a year, we would see much more significant climate changes, catastrophe level changes.

The actual change was about .75 degrees F over about 100 years. Double check your facts before making an argument like that. :shadedshu

[Morgoth]

what has tax to do with global warming?

[farlex85]

what has tax to do with global warming?

Economics are an inevitable issue when discussing what we as humans should do to lower gas emmissions. Got a little far off topic due to some blatently ignorant and insulting comments......

[flashstar]

A global rise in temperature by 1 degree F is a huge move. That is not the case, it is somewhat less than that. If the global temperature rose or fell that much in a year, we would see much more significant climate changes, catastrophe level changes.

The actual change was about .75 degrees F over about 100 years. Double check your facts before making an argument like that. :shadedshu

There has been a .75 degree F increase over the past 100 years but a .6 degree drop over the last year.

[thoughtdisorder]

I choose not add any opinion about global warming other than it's definitely positive to see such passion about the issue on this thread. Whether you all agree with each other or not, at least you are displaying your awareness. This is not about who's right or wrong, please don't take it there guys, you're all too intelligent for that.

[btarunr]

Not in our lifetime.;)

That's why the earth is becoming a big round screwup, because everyone thinks nothing is going to go terribly wrong in their lifetimes. Not a bad idea if one vows not to have kids ever.

oh wait...you weren't talking about global warming/pollution/<insert gorespeek here> :o my bad.

but yeah, most people aren't 'eco-friendly' because they think nothing is.........(read above).

[farlex85]

There has been a .75 degree F increase over the past 100 years but a .6 degree drop over the last year.

No it didn't. Perhaps you are referring to a particular area, like a state, or possibly the land on the US, but I assure you a .6 degree drop did not happen in one year. .06 maybe.

Also, although you can argue all day that particular glaciers are getting thicker, overall glacial ice in the world has been dramatically decreasing, and it still is.

[thoughtdisorder]

Here's some good reading..<Facts (http://www.ecoworld.com/home/articles2.cfm?tid=404)>

[Kreij]

The #1 cause of global warming is from people overclocking their computer hardware. :p

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[farlex85]

Here's some good reading..<Facts (http://www.ecoworld.com/home/articles2.cfm?tid=404)>

Thats a good read, interesting stuff. And its true, when one looks over a planetary timeline, it would be virtually impossible to make an assumption that the last 20 years have been out of the ordinary. Still, in my view, "greenhouse" gases have other negative effects besides global warming, and it is possible they are indeed causing global warming. The doomsday predictions can take it to the extreme, but conservation is still critical.

[AphexDreamer]

Watch this, this guy brings up a Very Very Very Very Good point. Turst me. Just watch it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zORv8wwiadQ&feature=related

He brings up a very simple solution by introducing a simple argument that I think no logical person can disagree with and if you find something wrong with it. Let both me and him know.

[farlex85]

Watch this, this guy brings up a Very Very Very Very Good point. Turst me. Just watch it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zORv8wwiadQ&feature=related

Yeah I've seen that before. Good philosophy argument break down. That was exactly my point above. Although he lays it out much better of course. :)

[hat]

The ocean produces way more greenhouse gas than we do with our machines.

[farlex85]

The ocean produces way more greenhouse gas than we do with our machines.

Are you referring to water vapor? That argument is brought up in the comments from that video aphex posted. However, the maker of that video points out that water vapor has been part of the equation of global climate for quite some time, while the massive amounts of CO2 put into the air by humans has not.

[Kreij]

The gentleman in the video makes some valid points, but he does not cover the real worst-case scenario.
What if we pour trillions of dollars into efforts to reduce climate change and the potential global warming catastophe happens anyway?
Then you would have a global catastrophic event, and destitute economies.

If we take a "wait and see" attitude, at least the countries who are ecomonically stable can assist in mitigating the effects of the climate change for others.

[Morgoth]

so how do you guys think to stop globale warming?
i would say stop using fosilefuel and start using nuclear fusion power

[farlex85]

The gentleman in the video makes some valid points, but he does not cover the real worst-case scenario.
What if we pour trillions of dollars into efforts to reduce climate change and the potential global warming catastophe happens anyway?
Then you would have a global catastrophic event, and destitute economies.

If we take a "wait and see" attitude, at least the countries who are ecomonically stable can assist in mitigating the effects of the climate change for others.

Good point. I can't speak for how he would argue that, you seem to have made a good argument against his grid. However, should a global climate catastrophe happen, the world economy will be down the drain regardless. At least for a little while. Really though, extremes are rarely the way to go. I would say it would be fairly blind to put all your eggs in one basket, and economic spending should not be all out balls to the walls lets stop the heat.

However, awareness and a determined effort to shift the economy itself towards favoring ecologically friendly practices is a very good idea imo. It will not destroy the economy to make "green" shifts, it will simply require change.

[Morgoth]

have you guys hever heard of Geothermal power plants

[farlex85]

Yes, not highly efficient, but fairly good in some situations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_power_plants

A combination of hydrollic, wind, geothermal, and nuclear (fission and fusion) seem to be the best ways for generating energy.

[Morgoth]

i was thinkign why is there no animater powerplant?
i know we can make it but the say it cost allot, but why? is it the Electrisity ? is it the people we need to pay to maintain it?

[farlex85]

i was thinkign why is there no animater powerplant?
i know we can make it but the say it cost allot, but why? is it the Electrisity ? is it the people we need to pay to maintain it?

What is an animater power plant? I've never heard of that. :confused:

[Kreij]

I am all for doing everything we can to clean up our environment.
Not to defend against a theoretical disaster, but because keeping our planet and atmosphere clean is the right thing to do.
The fear-mongering about climate change just draws lines in the sand and people take sides.
Instead we should just all try to not trash where we live.

People are becoming more eco-aware and I think you will see manufacturers responding to this as it will make them money through increased sales.
But if someone needs a big-ass truck to haul stuff around, I think they should be able to get one.
We have to look at it realistically, and not through "green-tinted" glasses.
It's the people who need to realistally assess their needs and make their purchases accordingly. Not by government regulation.

Just my 2 cents.

[flashstar]

The most important point to make is that temperature readings even 60 years ago were not accurate to less than a degree. Therefore, all data before that time should be taken with a grain of salt. Plus, countries in Africa and places like China and Mongolia didn't even take regular temperature readings! How can we accurately trace the temperature of the entire earth back 200 years?

"Al Gore says global warming is a planetary emergency. It is difficult to see how this can be so when record low temperatures are being set all over the world. In 2007, hundreds of people died, not from global warming, but from cold weather hazards.

Since the mid-19th century, the mean global temperature has increased by 0.7 degrees Celsius. This slight warming is not unusual, and lies well within the range of natural variation. Carbon dioxide continues to build in the atmosphere, but the mean planetary temperature hasn't increased significantly for nearly nine years. Antarctica is getting colder. Neither the intensity nor the frequency of hurricanes has increased. The 2007 season was the third-quietest since 1966. In 2006 not a single hurricane made landfall in the U.S."

"Global warming has long since passed from scientific hypothesis to the realm of pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo."

David Deming is a geophysicist, an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis, and associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071219/COMMENTARY/10575140

http://robertd.wordpress.com/2008/04/28/the-real-cost-of-global-warming/

interesting articles

[Morgoth]

What is an animater power plant? I've never heard of that. :confused:

i did not said there is 1 i asked my self why dont we make 1 we can make antimater and mater

[farlex85]

I am all for doing everything we can to clean up our environment.
Not to defend against a theoretical disaster, but because keeping our planet and atmosphere clean is the right thing to do.
The fear-mongering about climate change just draws lines in the sand and people take sides.
Instead we should just all try to not trash where we live.

People are becoming more eco-aware and I think you will see manufacturers responding to this as it will make them money through increased sales.
But if someone needs a big-ass truck to haul stuff around, I think they should be able to get one.
We have to look at it realistically, and not through "green-tinted" glasses.
It's the people who need to realistally assess their needs and make their purchases accordingly. Not by government regulation.

Just my 2 cents.

I agree almost completely. I do think government intervention is needed to some degree to check the top dogs who only worry about their own pockets (not all of them obviously). And those big-ass trucks to not need to be powered by petroleum, although it is unlikely that will change for quite some time.

[Deusxmachina]

The #1 cause of global warming is from people overclocking their computer hardware. :p


Good point. I also read an article on how people in colder areas prefer 2900XTs over other video cards. Turn the computer around and you have a nice handwarmer.

Global economy is indeed a part of saving the globe. A handful of countries may recycle and limit themselves in certain ways to be more enviro-friendly and all that, but if other countries don't do the same, it is all of limited value. Not worthless value, but limited. And then on top of that the enviro-friendly countries are now economically competing with their hands tied.

[Kreij]

I agree almost completely. I do think government intervention is needed to some degree to check the top dogs who only worry about their own pockets (not all of them obviously).

The top dogs are driven by the bottom line. Money.
If the consumers show (by purchasing decisions) that what the manufacturers are doing is not to their liking, they will change so as not to effect their profit margins.
In a free market economy (like the US), these thing will work themselves out without government regulation.

[farlex85]

The most important point to make is that temperature readings even 60 years ago were not accurate to less than a degree. Therefore, all data before that time should be taken with a grain of salt. Plus, countries in Africa and places like China and Mongolia didn't even take regular temperature readings! How can we accurately trace the temperature of the entire earth back 200 years?

"Al Gore says global warming is a planetary emergency. It is difficult to see how this can be so when record low temperatures are being set all over the world. In 2007, hundreds of people died, not from global warming, but from cold weather hazards.

Since the mid-19th century, the mean global temperature has increased by 0.7 degrees Celsius. This slight warming is not unusual, and lies well within the range of natural variation. Carbon dioxide continues to build in the atmosphere, but the mean planetary temperature hasn't increased significantly for nearly nine years. Antarctica is getting colder. Neither the intensity nor the frequency of hurricanes has increased. The 2007 season was the third-quietest since 1966. In 2006 not a single hurricane made landfall in the U.S."

"Global warming has long since passed from scientific hypothesis to the realm of pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo."

David Deming is a geophysicist, an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis, and associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071219/COMMENTARY/10575140

http://robertd.wordpress.com/2008/04/28/the-real-cost-of-global-warming/

interesting articles


Those do have some interesting points, however they seem to take extremes also. CO2 is not pollutant they say because plants require it. Well, it is not a pollutant in levels natural to the Earth's needs. It is a pollutant to humans of course (sit in a garage w/ co2?), and at extreme levels it is harmful to all animals.

[Morgoth]

soon earth wil be pruducing more co2 and other accid gases then venus does XD

[farlex85]

The top dogs are driven by the bottom line. Money.
If the consumers show (by purchasing decisions) that what the manufacturers are doing is not to their liking, they will change so as not to effect their profit margins.
In a free market economy (like the US), these thing will work themselves out without government regulation.

The free market is great when things are equal, however, it does not work so well when things are on different playing fields. People will not just go out and buy green products without some personal incentive to do so, and the good feeling just doesn't cut it. If somebody has a choice to buy a green product that costs more than a regular one, they will buy the less economically friendly product as it holds more benefit for them. Then it will hold more benefit for the distributor to continue production of the harmful products.

The government already does have incentives in place, to stimulate growth in this respect, and it is a step in the right direction. More penalties will need to be implemented, and more incentives as well, if the change is to be an effective one.

A free market works fine, except too often the invariable human trait of greed influences it for the worse of all (and no, this doesn't make me a socialist:laugh:).

[Kreij]

The free market is great when things are equal, however, it does not work so well when things are on different playing fields. People will not just go out and buy green products without some personal incentive to do so, and the good feeling just doesn't cut it. If somebody has a choice to buy a green product that costs more than a regular one, they will buy the less economically friendly product as it holds more benefit for them.

The government already does have incentives in place, to stimulate growth in this respect, and it is a step in the right direction. More penalties will need to be implemented, and more incentives as well, if the change is to be an effective one.

A free market works fine, except too often the invariable human trait of greed influences it for the worse of all.

It's not just greed, it is economic reality. If I have X dollars to spend and a "green" product is out of my price range, then I have little choice.

I would love to power my home with solar power, but it is financially unviable for me at the moment.

This is were the free economy comes into play. When companies develop low cost, efficient solar panels that the average home owner can afford without a 30 year return on investment, you will see a huge surge in the market. It does not need government regulation.

[farlex85]

It's not just greed, it is economic reality. If I have X dollars to spend and a "green" product is out of my price range, then I have little choice.

I would love to power my home with solar power, but it is financially unviable for me at the moment.

This is were the free economy comes into play. When companies develop low cost, efficient solar panels that the average home owner can afford without a 30 year return on investment, you will see a huge surge in the market. It does not need government regulation.

But why would companies develop low cost efficient solar panels if it does not hold as much advantage for them as other sources of power? Things like that don't just get cheaper b/c they are better for the enviornment. Without incentives or penalties, there would be no reason for companies to develop such panels. The market needs to be adjusted a tad for this to become a feasible possibility.

[flashstar]

The free market is great when things are equal, however, it does not work so well when things are on different playing fields. People will not just go out and buy green products without some personal incentive to do so, and the good feeling just doesn't cut it. If somebody has a choice to buy a green product that costs more than a regular one, they will buy the less economically friendly product as it holds more benefit for them.

The government already does have incentives in place, to stimulate growth in this respect, and it is a step in the right direction. More penalties will need to be implemented, and more incentives as well, if the change is to be an effective one.

A free market works fine, except too often the invariable human trait of greed influences it for the worse of all.

I think that you don't understand economics.

Adam Smith, who pioneered the concept of a free market said "Greed is good". The free market operates off of the concept that everyone is greedy. Therefore, people will always buy what is best for them. That is why that unless the government turns into a dictatorship, people will not purchase "green" products just because they're supposed to be good for the environment. Eventually technology will progress so that very little byproduct like carbon dioxide is produced but for now people who still have a choice will buy the cheapest, highest quality goods available. "Greenness" will never factor into the equation unless it provides something tangible for consumers.

By the way, this isn't kindergarten! I'm not going to pay penalties because I'm participating in the free market and buying what's best for me. :shadedshu

[candle_86]

actully Corbon Dioxide buildup is normal, ice sheets confirm that the planet does this, it leads to an ice age, the thing is thats still thousands of years off, sure it may not be here in 100 thousand years but honestly is 50,000 years sooner a problem? The chances of man kind still being here that long are nill

[candle_86]

I think that you don't understand economics.

Adam Smith, who pioneered the concept of a free market said "Greed is good". The free market operates off of the concept that everyone is greedy. Therefore, people will always buy what is best for them. That is why that unless the government turns into a dictatorship, people will not purchase "green" products just because they're supposed to be good for the environment. Eventually technology will progress so that very little byproduct like carbon dioxide is produced but for now people who still have a choice will buy the cheapest, highest quality goods available. "Greenness" will never factor into the equation unless it provides something tangible for consumers.

By the way, this isn't kindergarten! I'm not going to pay penalties because I'm participating in the free market and buying what's best for me. :shadedshu

I personally have no interest in green cars, i love Old school muscle, give me a hybrid thats affordable that can give me 500HP or electric and ill care. When i get the money saved im fixing my Challanger and its 318 while i look for a 440. Thats just how i feel, its personal taste.

[farlex85]

I think that you don't understand economics.

Adam Smith, who pioneered the concept of a free market said "Greed is good". The free market operates off of the concept that everyone is greedy. Therefore, people will always buy what is best for them. That is why that unless the government turns into a dictatorship, people will not purchase "green" products just because they're supposed to be good for the environment. Eventually technology will progress so that very little byproduct like carbon dioxide is produced but for now people who still have a choice will buy the cheapest, highest quality goods available. "Greenness" will never factor into the equation unless it provides something tangible for consumers.

By the way, this isn't kindergarten! I'm not going to pay penalties because I'm participating in the free market and buying what's best for me. :shadedshu

People lack the foresight to do what is good for the future of humanity. Sure, you could say that you get and do what you want b/c it benefits you and thats the proper way to go. You would not be alone. However, I tend to think the big picture is more important, but perhaps I am a foolish idealist.

You prove my point, '"Greeness" will never factor into the equation unless it provides something tangible for consumers.' Indeed, which is why we need regulations, otherwise, future generations will be screwed. But hey, it doesn't affect you, so what do you care? (it might, you never know....)

Also, I don't claim to know much about economics, however, you have already stated a few things as fact that I have found immidiately to be false. Please don't resort to insults. And the penalties are implemented at the distributor level usually, so you need not worry.

[flashstar]

People lack the foresight to do what is good for the future of humanity. Sure, you could say that you get and do what you want b/c it benefits you and thats the proper way to go. You would not be alone. However, I tend to think the big picture is more important, but perhaps I am a foolish idealist.

You prove my point, '"Greeness" will never factor into the equation unless it provides something tangible for consumers.' Indeed, which is why we need regulations, otherwise, future generations will be screwed. But hey, it doesn't affect you, so what do you care?

Also, I don't claim to know much about economics, however, you have already stated a few things as fact that I have found immidiately to be false. Please don't resort to insults. And the penalties are implemented at the distributor level usually, so you need not worry.

You're assuming that global warming even exists. How can you know what's good for the future of humanity if there's little to back your arguments? For all you know, I might be correct. I also concede that we might have global warming. It will take thousands of years to accurately determine that though.

Penalties also get transferred to the consumer. If businesses have to pay another 20% in penalties, the consumer will eventually have to pay another 20% for the end product because the businesses still have to make a profit. That's part of the reason why gas is so expensive. Gas tax in the US was 47 cents per gallon in 2007 when gas cost $2.50

[farlex85]

You're assuming that global warming even exists. How can you know what's good for the future of humanity if there's little to back your arguments? For all you know, I might be correct. I also concede that we might have global warming. It will take thousands of years to accurately determine that though.

Penalties also get transferred to the consumer. They're comparable to tariffs. While business prospers temporarily with a large tariff, the consumer is hurt in the end. Say that you have a 20% tariff on cpu's that are imported from China. So, a $100 cpu will cost $120. Politicians used to think that this helped domestic business because it forces consumers to purchase domestic goods. However, these local businesses will raises their prices to $119 because they can. There is no reason to keep selling cpu's at $100 when you can sell just as many for $119 since it's still less than $120.

Its true penalties can hurt the consumer, unless they are used properly. If a company is penalized for producing say a petroleum using car as opposed to being rewarded for producing an electric car, that electric car will end up being cheaper than the petroleum car (this is highly simplified of course). This allows the consumer to purchase the electric car at cheaper prices, and everybody wins. Of course, this is merely a simplified example and could not work currently with all the money that is in petroleum, and electric cars are not very efficient, but it is what I'm talking about when I say government intervention.

And I'm not assuming global warming is the end all be all, or for the sake of argument that it even exists. I am assuming that if we as humans do not act conservatively with the planet we live on we will surely drastically affect the way we live on it, if we can live on it at all.

[flashstar]

Its true penalties can hurt the consumer, unless they are used properly. If a company is penalized for producing say a petroleum using car as opposed to being rewarded for producing an electric car, that electric car will end up being cheaper than the petroleum car (this is highly simplified of course). This allows the consumer to purchase the electric car at cheaper prices, and everybody wins. Of course, this is merely a simplified example and could not work currently with all the money that is in petroleum, and electric cars are not very efficient, but it is what I'm talking about when I say government intervention.

And I'm not assuming global warming is the end all be all, or for the sake of argument that it even exists. I am assuming that if we as humans do not act conservatively with the planet we live on we will surely drastically affect the way we live on it, if we can live on it at all.

One thing to remember is that economics is about unlimited wants and limited resources. Where does the money for the rewards come from? Increasing taxes only hurts the consumer. According to the laffer curve, a 17% flat tax on everything is the ideal solution because people will be able to make more for themselves and therefore pay more into the government in total. Income taxes alone are already 25%+ for the upper middle class citizen. When there are no more petroleum cars, is the government going to continue to subsidize the car manufacturers who produce electric cars? Also, maybe electric cars aren't the way of the future? What if we get fusion-powered vehicles and the government continues to subsidize people who produce electric cars?

On the subject of cars though, people will switch to another energy source once gas gets more expensive than other competing resources. Electric cars are currently more expensive than gas-powered cars even at the sky-high oil prices due not only to their electric power requirements but to the simple raw cost of the parts. Biodeisel and hydrogen are much more expensive than petroleum. If the government then subsidizes parts, it will have to raise taxes which will hurt the economy.

[farlex85]

Well, that all sounds good. I will say that I am arguing for only the government to get involved to invoke change, once the move is made to cleaner industry, the need for government intervention will not be there.

And I agree, raising taxes is not necessarily the answer. I don't have the answer. I've gotten too deep into the argument and I'm afraid I no longer have anything worthwhile to add to it. You make some good points in that last post flashstar, but I don't think unregulated free market is the answer right now. Maybe I'm right, or maybe I'm an idealist without enough understanding of economics to propose a good solution. Maybe there isn't a good solution. At least for the time being, I will have to leave it at that, I got to go sustain myself (eat). :laugh:

[tkpenalty]

Sorry you must be utterly blind to say global warming does not exist. Read whats going on in Antarctica, with many of the ice sheets breaking up well before scientists predicted-sometimes more than a few decades off. Moreover, a lot of the glaciers that existed now don't. 1*C difference in temperatures in those regions means a lot. It means a reduction of the strength in ice; that difference could easily cause glaciers/icebergs/icesheets to break up.

Global flooding anyone?

Sky-high oil prices, yes, but thats going off topic, its not a valid argument against global warming. It is indeed good in a way that we will rely less on petrol. You only care about the economies of the world now. You only care about how much money you have...its greedy.

A Buddhist saying (i think) is greed is suffering. This can be interpreted in many ways. Either: 1. You want more money. 2. You will suffer due to ignoring the environment due to greed in the future.

[thoughtdisorder]

Alright damn it, I wasn't going to way in on this with my opinion, but here goes:

1) I am not convinced that scientists are correct that global warming is "man made" entirely. I surmise that the warming is part of a planetary evolution that occurs regardless of mankind. Looking at the composite make up of other planets, it seems planets go through changes due to their make up. The Ice age, global warming, etc.

With that said, mankind certainly isn't helping things. Hell, we're like a cancer on the planet robbing every vital component we possibly can, all in the name of greed and self indulgence.

2) No government will force changes because the people in power are mostly corrupt and have ties to oil. Look at Chavez. Say what you want about Chavez, he rules a country that produces oil, yet he to date has instituted one of the most aggressive energy policies in the world that does not include oil. Chavez has rapidly fallen from grace with the world powers, wonder why?

3) While capitalism and free markets are healthy, I as an American who has served his country in some capacity now for over 24 years am repulsed by the blatant arrogance of the general American population to embracing reality. We have an important situation globally with energy and global warming, and yet as the price of petrol rises the "haves" continue to buy their monstrous over sized SUV's that consume massive amounts of petrol, and to hell with the rest of us. Supply and demand is at the core of all products and they are essentially saying screw the facts, I'll do what I want. I personally am not sure their is a fix unless there is a fair mixture of government regulation along with a healthy dose of PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. A lot of municipalities are discontinuing their recycling programs because they cost too much. I live in one of those cities that no longer recycles due to the costs.

So what is the answer? Who the hell knows, but at least we're all talking about it, and that is a healthy start.

Rant over, sorry. :twitch:

[farlex85]

Don't be sorry, that is a more condensed version of the things I have tried to point out, along with some points from tk. I was doing it by myself for a while, and I don't have enough knowledge in certain areas to sustain the argument, so please, chime in with some input. The answer is there, but it will take change, and many simply say that is not realistic, but I am not convinced.......

[thoughtdisorder]

The answer is there, but it will take change, and many simply say that is not realistic, but I am not convinced.......

Nor am I, thanks. :toast:

[DaedalusHelios]

That's why the earth is becoming a big round screwup, because everyone thinks nothing is going to go terribly wrong in their lifetimes. Not a bad idea if one vows not to have kids ever.

oh wait...you weren't talking about global warming/pollution/<insert gorespeek here> :o my bad.

but yeah, most people aren't 'eco-friendly' because they think nothing is.........(read above).

I was saying that its important not to feel like we don't have the ability to turn it around(we shouldn't lose hope in cleaning up our practices). You just twisted my words.:laugh:

[thoughtdisorder]

I was saying that its important not to feel like we don't have the ability to turn it around(we shouldn't lose hope in cleaning up our practices). You just twisted my words.:laugh:

Never lose hope, for then all is lost.

[Xolair]

The whole global warming thingy might be a ''natural'' course of events towards a new ice-age or something that we don't (necessarily) know of just yet. Or, then in about 100-200 years the whole planet will be brown, incredibly warm and full of deserts and no water in sight, thanks to the vanity of people. We'll see...

... oh wait, most of us won't live by then. Hey, let's just spend all the electricity and strain the environment as much as we can! :toast: (:shadedshu)

[Morgoth]

its not us its those who make electricity...

[imperialreign]

just a thought:


we keep seeing a steady rise in worldwide temperatures, the glaciers are continuing to recede, the oceans are very slowly rising . . .

but, we've only been recording daily temperatures for a little over 150 years, and we've been seeing a very steady increase since we started recording; and the glaciers have been slowly receding for thousands of years at this point . . .


now, we have to stop thinking like humans tend to do with concern to our time now and look at the big picture - we're still coming out of an ice age . . . and what generally happens in between ice ages? The earth warms up a bit, then the poles shift, and we start heading into another ice age as the earth cools back down. The last ice age ended about 10,000 years or so ago, and human history can only be traced back on written record for about 5,000-6,000 years ago . . . although we've found human remains that have been dated from before the last ice age. Geologists also tend to place that there is about a 50,000 year interval or so between ice ages, it's happened before, it'll happen again . . . and what generally happens between ice ages? The glaciers recede and global temperatures slowly climb.


Now, I'm not saying that human interference hasn't accelerated the steady rise in global temperatures, but I don't think we've had as big of an impact as some "experts" would have us believe. TBH, I feel a lot of these campaigns to "stop global warming" are more about getting the donated funds to be filtered into other pointless projects and campaigns. Really, how would one STOP global warming? You can't, it wil slowly continue. We've become too focused on our current time (now +/- 100 years) instead of trying to think on a geological scale (in which case, a 200 hundred year expanse of time is nothing, repeat, nothing compared to a 50,000 to 100,000 year expanse).


Just another thought in the bucket . . .

[farlex85]

I mean, you could completely ignore global warming, and humans are still drastically changing the planet. Deforestation, landfills, more co2 in the air, these are just a few things that humans do on a massive scale, which of course this will affect the eco-system. Global warming has more or less become a symbol these days for the detrimental effect man has on his home. You can completely ignore the fact that it exists, and the argument that conservation needs to be practiced far more often still remains.

[flashstar]

I'm not interested in getting into another drawn out argument, but who's to say that we can't change our planet? What makes earth so much better 200 years ago than it is now? As long as we don't recklessly dump smog everywhere *cough, China* we don't have much to worry about. Sure, we might technically be animals but unlike every other animal that has ever lived humans have the unique ability of rational thought and reasoning. In other words, we are able to grasp the big picture. If you don't want to keep changing our environment, get off your computer, go into the woods, and live with nothing but a loin cloth.

[farlex85]

If you cut down all the trees, if you throw massive amounts of CO2 into the air, I could go on but I will leave it at those two, the Earth will be unable to sustain life. Period. If technology becomes quick enough to allow us to live on the moon, then we could live in a barren wasteland of the Earth. I personally, don't think I'd want to. Balance is the key, as always. Coexistence is usually the most advantageous route for all involved.

[SK-1]

I'm not interested in getting into another drawn out argument, but who's to say that we can't change our planet? What makes earth so much better 200 years ago than it is now? As long as we don't recklessly dump smog everywhere *cough, China* we don't have much to worry about. Sure, we might technically be animals but unlike every other animal that has ever lived humans have the unique ability of rational thought and reasoning. In other words, we are able to grasp the big picture. If you don't want to keep changing our environment, get off your computer, go into the woods, and live with nothing but a loin cloth.

Well stated:toast:

[AphexDreamer]

I'm not interested in getting into another drawn out argument, but who's to say that we can't change our planet? What makes earth so much better 200 years ago than it is now? As long as we don't recklessly dump smog everywhere *cough, China* we don't have much to worry about. Sure, we might technically be animals but unlike every other animal that has ever lived humans have the unique ability of rational thought and reasoning. In other words, we are able to grasp the big picture. If you don't want to keep changing our environment, get off your computer, go into the woods, and live with nothing but a loin cloth.

Or how about just turning off the lights and recyclying?

[DaedalusHelios]

There is a difference between living in a loin cloth in the woods and being environmentally responsible. :rolleyes:

Some people are willing to make no sacrifices for the well being of others, and the future of mankind. :shadedshu

[Nitro-Max]

We are doomed.

I think if the leaders of the world dont take action its up to the people but how many would give up there car etc.. i know i wouldnt unless it was made law so like i said we are doomed.

Its like this 95% of britain didnt want to go to war in iraq but did the government listen? NOPE!! it did what the hell it wanted. so if it wanted to stop british people from contributing to global warming it could but it will never happen the money loss would be massive.moneys the only importance to people in power not our kids or the planets future.

[hat]

That's why I'm not having kids lol.

[imperialreign]

I mean, you could completely ignore global warming, and humans are still drastically changing the planet. Deforestation, landfills, more co2 in the air, these are just a few things that humans do on a massive scale, which of course this will affect the eco-system. Global warming has more or less become a symbol these days for the detrimental effect man has on his home. You can completely ignore the fact that it exists, and the argument that conservation needs to be practiced far more often still remains.

I agree - but, I think "global warming" has been blown way out of proportion by the media.


I do believe, though, that human impact has drastically accelerated the issue, and I do believe that there is a lot that can be done to slow it back down to "normal" levels.

If for nothing else, humans can at the very least start practicing better coservation practices, recycling practices, and becoming more energy efficient; while also, instead of putting more money into pointless overseas conflicts, the federal government and EPA could put more money towards developing better alternatives instead of keeping us on fossil fuels, and enacting inane attempts to clean-up and curb use (i.e. making 10% ethanol mix in fuels is completely idiotic - to grow the "fuel" for ethanol, we need to use vast amounts of crop land, plus, ethanol is burnt quicker in a motor, meaning we're getting less miles to the gallon, so we're back at the gas station more often . . . completely defeating the purpose of putting ethanol in fuel in the first place).

Perhaps, also, if more companies started working together to address issues . . . especially the oil companies. There's a lot of power if they were to work together to solve things; only a couple of oil compaines have started trying to make a difference (I can think of BP and Texaco off the top of my head). GE is also trying to make a drastic change as well, as is GM.

But, too many other companies are too concerned about profits and competition to pay any head to global concerns

[SK-1]

Who needs drugs? I have my fun by doing stuff available to me in metal shop, so far welding has been the most fun.

Yea,..but have you tried welding while on drugs:roll:

[hat]

I have a prophesy omg!
The world will end on the next Friday the 13th (6/13/2008). Our planet, no, our entire solar system, will be vaporized. A black hole will pass at super-high speed, much faster than the speed of light. It won't suck us up, but it will drag us to Betelguese, where the gravity of Betelguese overwhelms that of the black hole (the black hole is really far away), and our solar system will orbit Betelguese. The black hole syphons the little remaining fuel Betelguese has as it screams by, causing the aging star to collapse, finally causing its death in spectacular supernova form. The supernova will engulf us, and the sheer heat will cause us to be vaporized...

What a pleasent birthday gift...

[farlex85]

I have a prophesy omg!
The world will end on the next Friday the 13th (6/13/2008). Our planet, no, our entire solar system, will be vaporized. A black hole will pass at super-high speed, much faster than the speed of light. It won't suck us up, but it will drag us to Betelguese, where the gravity of Betelguese overwhelms that of the black hole (the black hole is really far away), and our solar system will orbit Betelguese. The black hole syphons the little remaining fuel Betelguese has as it screams by, causing the aging star to collapse, finally causing its death in spectacular supernova form. The supernova will engulf us, and the sheer heat will cause us to be vaporized...

What a pleasent birthday gift...

:laugh: Now that one I haven't heard before.

[magibeg]

I have a prophesy omg!
The world will end on the next Friday the 13th (6/13/2008). Our planet, no, our entire solar system, will be vaporized. A black hole will pass at super-high speed, much faster than the speed of light. It won't suck us up, but it will drag us to Betelguese, where the gravity of Betelguese overwhelms that of the black hole (the black hole is really far away), and our solar system will orbit Betelguese. The black hole syphons the little remaining fuel Betelguese has as it screams by, causing the aging star to collapse, finally causing its death in spectacular supernova form. The supernova will engulf us, and the sheer heat will cause us to be vaporized...

What a pleasent birthday gift...

Er... well, for one Betelguese is 430 lightyears away so even if we do start heading in that direction we'll have some time to think about it. We would also notice the black hole ahead of time when it starts beating up on our larger siblings like the gas giants. Even before that though we would notice a new pull in the solar system. The black hole has a fairly small event horizon so its doubtful that it would be able to tow our solar system with it (at least in 1 piece anyway). Actually instead of going through all the trouble theres actually a documentary by BBC that highlights roughly what would happen if a blackhole were to travel to our solar system. It features Sam Neill and the episode is called "Staying Alive".

Not that any of this has to do with global warming of course.




And just a quick shot out to the whole global warming thing, the issue isn't that the earth is warming the issue is how quickly its warming.

The media does blow everything out of proportion however that doesn't change the fact this is still a serious issue. The medias job is to get your attention and hold it there so they do it with lots of doom and gloom. Unfortunately they give a disproportionate amount of time to skeptics on the subject to create more drama and imply that the science is less sound than it actually is, or that theres some sort of raging debate in the scientific community about it. The only debating thats going on is at a political level and a media level. Its the same idea with creationism vs evolution. Theres no debate in the scientific community over if creationism is a valid science, its just politics and media that make things complex.

Also not sure about this whole coming out of an ice age talk because that happened a long time ago now. However there was a slight cooling period about 300 years ago. However that is all explained scientifically.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/coming-out-of-ice-age.htm
It would also be hard to assume that climate scientists would not take that sort of information into account as its their job. Although this is probably the hardest thing for most people to understand, that most of these scientists live and breathe their work and they still don't have a complete grasp of whats going on.

Some of the most advanced computers in the world are used for this very research. Unfortunately this is also the down fall of the science because of its complexity. Neither you nor I have any true grasp on what exactly is happening from a science perspective. All we get is the tail end of the research and basic ideas of things and to think that they would miss something so obvious as that just seem pretty far fetched.

Also moving on to the economics standpoint of things i also find it fairly surprising that we have so many people with their doctorates in economics here at TPU. If we switch our economy away from fossil fuels and towards more clean energy its true there will probably be an increase in energy cost however it would also spur technological advance in those areas which would eventually drive costs down again. However when talking about the economy its all speculation.

And finally the conclusion:
What scares me the most about these debates is how mis-informed people are on the subject. In all honesty however it isn't really anyones fault except for the media which will often display articles in misleading ways and often contradict itself. If you want to really learn the 'truth' so to speak don't watch documentaries like "the great global warming swindle". You should immediately know that its propaganda when the first 15 minutes of it contain next to no science other than making claims to try and discredit the current science on the matter, and when the information they use is cherry picked and old. Instead read scientific journals that have been peer reviewed and have stood up to scrutiny. Stay away from a lot of independent groups as most of them have an alternative agenda.

From a peer review standpoint here is what is happening in the world of climate science.

1. The earth is warming, and warming faster than it has naturally in the past
http://www.science.psu.edu/journal/Fall2002/Globalwarming-FA02.htm
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr.pdf
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/technical-papers/paper-II-en.pdf

2. It is almost certain that this extra warming is being caused by man, not to say its entirely man made of course but we've disrupted the balance.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2023835.stm
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070202-global-warming.html

3. Inaction could cause the earth to experience a 'run-away' train effect when methane deposits from dead frozen vegetation in permafrost begins to thaw. Hence why action is needed sooner rather than later.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v351/n6324/abs/351304a0.html

A bit more on #3 would be the fact theres actually a lag on the effects of global warming as well due to the size of the earth.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/03/0317_050317_warming.html

In any event its late and I'm tired now. I'll work at finding some of the more hardcore science journals if any of you are interested but I'll probably have to go to the school for that to get access to their systems.

Sorry for overall ranting nature of this post but some of you need to cut through the politics of this and get straight to the cold hard facts... which are surprisingly hard to get to now.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

[farlex85]

Thats a ton of fantastic info right there, thanks magibeg :toast:. Peer reviewed is the way to go for any true scientific info, I'm glad you brought that up. The only problem is its often very heady, thick, highly statistical, and well, often boring. Some of those articles you just presented are incredibly long as well. Still, great links. I'll have to wade through them more thoroughly sometime when I'm less tired.

Also, I think hat was kind of joking, at least I hope so.........

[magibeg]

Thats a ton of info right there. Peer reviewed is the way to go for any true scientific info, I'm gla