Screw Al Gore

[the Paradox]

Nation's 'Icebox' hits record 40 below zero - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/02/11/minnesota.cold.ap/index.html)


RTR

[Sabanocchio]

Yes, screw one of the only politicians that's gives a damn about what happens to our children and our children's children. Screw someone that is actually doing something productive instead of throwing millions of taxpayer dollars and young people's lives at a problem that he created. Ignore the facts and buy into what Big Oil and Haliburton are spending millions of dollars to spew at you.

I actually care about my legacy. I want to know that my grandchildren are going to live in a world that isn't under 3 feet of water. Call me crazy.

[the Paradox]

My, aren't we a tad testy tonight.



RTR

[PuddingTime]

It's about 13* here, and covered in snow. We're getting about 3-6 inches on the ground right now.

[Sabanocchio]

And one of my uncles was good friends with Al Jr. before he died. I've met him a few times and he's a really nice guy.

[azamugg]

Yes, screw one of the only politicians that's gives a damn about what happens to our children and our children's children. Screw someone that is actually doing something productive instead of throwing millions of taxpayer dollars and young people's lives at a problem that he created. Ignore the facts and buy into what Big Oil and Haliburton are spending millions of dollars to spew at you.

I actually care about my legacy. I want to know that my grandchildren are going to live in a world that isn't under 3 feet of water. Call me crazy.


Sabo, we're cool..............but this post made me snicker a little

I appreciate idealism but come'on dude, you think Gore's propaganda equates to caring about our children and so on?......then you mixed Big Oil and Haliburton up in there?

get laid and quick and then don't let her influence your politics

[the Paradox]

LOL. Just tired of indifference. And I haven't gotten laid in about 3 weeks. :laugh:

As for the former, the next time your lights flicker, look out your door to the East for the answer. Gore's compound in Carthage uses more energy per month than the average 8 homes combined in that county. I am not indifferent to the woes of the environment, I am angry that this ass clown is making millions talking about about how bad the average American is , while being a hypocrite.


RTR

[Sabanocchio]

Yes, it was a mesh of issues thrown clumsily into a single post. I can debate you on each of them individually sometime if you like.

And yes, I do think Al Jr. gives a damn, and I'm sick of people that don't.

As to your reference to Mr. Gore's energy bill, TP, The reason it was so high is because he and his wife chose to receive "green power," which costs them $4 more per kilowatt-hour than the regular plan. Furthermore, Al Gore's house has 20 rooms due to offices, security, etc.

[the Paradox]

Green power costs several pennies more per hour, not $4. As for Gore using green power, I'm sure he says he uses it but then again he said he invented the internet. But according to public records, there is no evidence that Gore has signed up to use green energy in either of his large residences in Tennessee.

Gore has held these apocalyptic views about the environment for some time. So why, then, didn't Gore dump his family's large stock holdings in Occidental (Oxy) Petroleum? As executor of his family's trust, over the years Gore has controlled hundreds of thousands of dollars in Oxy stock. Oxy has been mired in controversy over oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas.

Living carbon-neutral apparently doesn't mean living oil-stock free. Nor does it necessarily mean giving up a mining royalty either.

Humanity might be "sitting on a ticking time bomb," but Gore's home in Carthage is sitting on a zinc mine. Gore receives $20,000 a year in royalties from Pasminco Zinc, which operates a zinc concession on his property. Tennessee has cited the company for adding large quantities of barium, iron and zinc to the nearby Caney Fork River.

The issue here is not simply Gore's hypocrisy; it's a question of credibility. If he genuinely believes the apocalyptic vision he has put forth and calls for radical changes in the way other people live, why hasn't he made any radical change in his life? Giving up the zinc mine or one of his homes is not asking much, given that he wants the rest of us to radically change our lives.

The above was taken from an article that ran in USA Today.


RTR

[Bburton86]

So you don't believe in global warming or you just hate the guy, which is it?

Why don't we talk about Dubya, he's done a few more negative things in his life. Or does he get a pass?

[Sabanocchio]

Green power costs several pennies more per hour, not $4. As for Gore using green power, I'm sure he says he uses it but then again he said he invented the internet. But according to public records, there is no evidence that Gore has signed up to use green energy in either of his large residences in Tennessee.

Gore has held these apocalyptic views about the environment for some time. So why, then, didn't Gore dump his family's large stock holdings in Occidental (Oxy) Petroleum? As executor of his family's trust, over the years Gore has controlled hundreds of thousands of dollars in Oxy stock. Oxy has been mired in controversy over oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas.

Living carbon-neutral apparently doesn't mean living oil-stock free. Nor does it necessarily mean giving up a mining royalty either.

Humanity might be "sitting on a ticking time bomb," but Gore's home in Carthage is sitting on a zinc mine. Gore receives $20,000 a year in royalties from Pasminco Zinc, which operates a zinc concession on his property. Tennessee has cited the company for adding large quantities of barium, iron and zinc to the nearby Caney Fork River.

The issue here is not simply Gore's hypocrisy; it's a question of credibility. If he genuinely believes the apocalyptic vision he has put forth and calls for radical changes in the way other people live, why hasn't he made any radical change in his life? Giving up the zinc mine or one of his homes is not asking much, given that he wants the rest of us to radically change our lives.

The above was taken from an article that ran in USA Today.


RTR
It's amazing to me that people try to pick apart the character ect. of someone who actually gives a damn in a day and age where that is so rare, while you casually abide transgressions from others who don't even have the true interests of the people of this great nation at heart.

You sit there and call the man a hypocrite for doing things which you have no problem with when they are done by those who aren't even attempting to do something about the problem.

Fact is you know far less about the man, his beliefs, and his personal habits and investments than you profess. And again, even more blatant violations escape the same criticisms that you lay on this man - who is doing good in the world - because they happen to be committed by someone who you agree with politically or morally.

This makes you out to be the very thing you accuse your enemy of, a hypocrite.

[the Paradox]

It's amazing to me that people try to pick apart the character ect. of someone who actually gives a damn in a day and age where that is so rare, while you casually abide transgressions from others who don't even have the true interests of the people of this great nation at heart.

You sit there and call the man a hypocrite for doing things which you have no problem with when they are done by those who aren't even attempting to do something about the problem.

Fact is you know far less about the man, his beliefs, and his personal habits and investments than you profess. And again, even more blatant violations escape the same criticisms that you lay on this man - who is doing good in the world - because they happen to be committed by someone who you agree with politically or morally.

This makes you out to be the very thing you accuse your enemy of, a hypocrite.

You are now making no sense and cannot see past those blinders. Did I ever say that I do not care about the environment? Have you ever read a post where I professed such? The answer to both is no, but that does not stop you from character assassination. How do you know what I have a problem with? The main point is that you idol is the one who says one thing and does another, I merely pointed that out to you.

If the truth hurts, maybe you can stop by Al's main house in Nashville and use one of his 8 bathrooms to cry in sometime. Just make sure to use as little T.P. as possible, anything less would be yet another inconvenient truth that Mr Gore would have to explain.


RTR

[the Paradox]

So you don't believe in global warming or you just hate the guy, which is it?

Why don't we talk about Dubya, he's done a few more negative things in his life. Or does he get a pass?

Does the thread title mention Bush? As for your first question, does it matter? Facts are facts.


RTR

[timNem]

As for the former, the next time your lights flicker, look out your door to the East for the answer. Gore's compound in Carthage uses more energy per month than the average 8 homes combined in that county. I am not indifferent to the woes of the environment, I am angry that this ass clown is making millions talking about about how bad the average American is , while being a hypocrite.


RTR:thumpsup::thumpsup: :thumpsup::thumpsup:

[BamaFanNKy]

And one of my uncles was good friends with Al Jr. before he died. I've met him a few times and he's a really nice guy.

You want to pick that name up. Liar. :laugh:

[timNem]

Al Gore is a great american, just lke his communist father.....

[RW13]

Screw Republicans.

[Bburton86]

Does the thread title mention Bush? As for your first question, does it matter? Facts are facts.


No, but I brought him into the discussion. Are facts only facts for your arguments or do they apply to everyone else's?

[BamaFanNKy]

Screw Republicans.

I hope only the hot women will. I've seen what Bill's been pullin'.

[the Paradox]

No, but I brought him into the discussion. Are facts only facts for your arguments or do they apply to everyone else's?

Feel free to start a thread, just don't come in to this one and drag me into your private hell.


RTR

[Bburton86]

Eh, I'll do what I want in this thread.

[the Paradox]

Eh, I'll do what I want in this thread.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a348/wahpuh/hijack.jpg


RTR

[adamsputnik]

Seems as though someone went to the Sean Hannity School of If It's Cold In The Midwest, Then Global Warming Doesn't Exist.

Oh well.

And yes, Al Gore is a wanker. He doesn't do the environmental movement any favours at all with his pomposity and dodgy science.

[the Paradox]

Seems as though someone went to the Sean Hannity School of If It's Cold In The Midwest, Then Global Warming Doesn't Exist.

Oh well.

And yes, Al Gore is a wanker. He doesn't do the environmental movement any favours at all with his pomposity and dodgy science.

Most of you are missing the point of this thread. The world is getting warmer and we all need to to our part but Gore is a hypocrite.


RTR

[bigsexxxy]

Most of you are missing the point of this thread. The world is getting warmer and we all need to to our part but Gore is a hypocrite.


RTR

I don't understand, you lead off the thread with an article about it being cold in International Falls, then you call Al Gore a hypocrite, then you say the world is actually getting warmer? I don't get it.

I mean, wow, it's cold in Int'l Falls in February, thanks for the weather report. It's ALWAYS cold there!

I just don't get it, you posted that article that says how cold it is there, apparently to discredit global warming as a myth, then you say in your last post that it isn't.

[the Paradox]

I don't understand, you lead off the thread with an article about it being cold in International Falls, then you call Al Gore a hypocrite, then you say the world is actually getting warmer? I don't get it.

I mean, wow, it's cold in Int'l Falls in February, thanks for the weather report. It's ALWAYS cold there!

I just don't get it, you posted that article that says how cold it is there, apparently to discredit global warming as a myth, then you say in your last post that it isn't.

Fair enough. The original intent was to jab at Gore. Sabo's reply set me off about Gore and the double life he leads. Yes, I care about the environment but I do not think things are as bad as some lead us to believe.


RTR

[D^3]

Most of you are missing the point of this thread. The world is getting warmer and we all need to to our part but Gore is a hypocrite.


RTR



I'll echo this statement... there isn't anything wrong with trying to improve emissions and clean up the environment.... but Al Gore is an self-righteous hypocritical douchebag who only uses global warming as a vehicle to advance his selfish political career.

[sheluvsbama]

What is the old adage? Never discuss politics or religion in polite society. :happy:

[the Paradox]

What is the old adage? Never discuss politics or religion in polite society. :happy:

Who said we were polite?


RTR

[sheluvsbama]

Who said we were polite?


RTR

:laugh::laugh::laugh: Not me!:happy:

[fernandomike]

Trying to figure a person's motivation is tricky business. Some say it's the money. Some say political gain. Others say it's his life's passion. I honestly don't care whether Al Gore is a hypocrite or not. Last I checked, he was not running for political office. He is essentially a political has been. His time as an elected official has come and gone. In that role, some of you may argue that he did nothing to help the country at all, but what can't be reasonably argued is that he has turned our attention toward the environment. Whether you believe in global warming or not, the debate spurred by the Al Gore's of the world can't be a bad thing. The potential consequences are severe enough that we owe it to ourselves to take the discussion seriously. By pushing this discussion, I think he has done far more good than any bad results coming from his vehicles or mansions. If he got paid as a result, oh well. Al Gore's bank account shouldn't distract us for a second from considering man's impact on the planet.

[azamugg]

Trying to figure a person's motivation is tricky business. Some say it's the money. Some say political gain. Others say it's his life's passion. I honestly don't care whether Al Gore is a hypocrite or not. Last I checked, he was not running for political office. He is essentially a political has been. His time as an elected official has come and gone. In that role, some of you may argue that he did nothing to help the country at all, but what can't be reasonably argued is that he has turned our attention toward the environment. Whether you believe in global warming or not, the debate spurred by the Al Gore's of the world can't be a bad thing. The potential consequences are severe enough that we owe it to ourselves to take the discussion seriously. By pushing this discussion, I think he has done far more good than any bad results coming from his vehicles or mansions. If he got paid as a result, oh well. Al Gore's bank account shouldn't distract us for a second from considering man's impact on the planet.



nicely said................and you know Mike not alot of people have a problem acknowledging and ever so slight increase in temps, theres just alot of us skeptical over it being caused by man...........what if all this global warming stumping results in a carbon impact tax and costs of goods and services go up because of "global warming" mandated changes in the manufacturing process? there are people who can't see this as being political in such a way and then have the cojones to say they believe in a 9/11 conspiracy

[timNem]

No, but I brought him into the discussion. Are facts only facts for your arguments or do they apply to everyone else's?
Im going to bring in Bob Knight into this discussion, even though he has nothing to do with the thread topic. :blink:

[Tator]

I find it funny that the global warming crowd can say for certain that mankind is to blame for the earth getting .01 degrees warmer, but my local weather man can only give me a percentage on whether or not I'll get some rain. He uses alot of vague words like, "should", "could", and "might" to tell me what's going to happen tomorrow and we won't know for sure until the day after that.....seems fundamentally unreliable to me.

[WayzUp]

Fair enough. The original intent was to jab at Gore. Sabo's reply set me off about Gore and the double life he leads. Yes, I care about the environment but I do not think things are as bad as some lead us to believe.
RTR
I've grown up in Michigan all my life so I'm fairly familiar with cold weather. I could give a rip about Al Gore, his agendas and whether or not he's a hypocrite or good-faith messenger trying to argue for change. What I do know is global warming IS real, it IS as bad as they have led you to believe and it's effects aren't going to be something one day in the year 2008 is going to prove or disprove.

I'm a few weeks away from being 34. I've lived in SW Michigan (read: lake effect snow alley) for roughly 20 of those years and I can tell you this; the season changes and snow itself is different from when I was a child. We had a couple days in January where it hit 50 degrees. FIFTY! I never in my life can recall a day in January when it was that warm. Last winter, we barely had any snow at all for a vast majority of the winter....a lot of snowmobile shops went out of business because of it.

We're getting more snow this winter but it's still nothing compared to what we used to get when I was a kid. The lakes get so warm during the hotter summers so most of what we get in terms of snow now isn't so much from snow storms than it is lake effect snow. Domes of cold air come flying out of Canada, they're much colder than the lakes, moisture gets picked up by these clippers, freezes as the dome hits land & dumps it's snow on us. If we didn't get that, we'd have MAYBE 10 days of snow this year. See, Lake Michigan used to freeze over halfway or so through winter so it halted the lake effect machine. It doesn't freeze anymore cuz the water is damn near 80 degrees by the end of summer.

What Gore and the other global warming people are talking about isn't necessarily the temperature on any given day being hotter than the one before; they're saying the weather patterns, temperature swings, storms of all kinds and wind will all be more dramatic to go along with a gradual increase in temperature. I can't speak for everywhere else but I can listen to what they're saying and believe every word cuz I've seen the differences up here and they're glaring.

Our summers are much hotter than they used to be, the winters have crazy warm stretches, most of our snow is lake effect, the winds in both winter and summer storms are much stronger than I can remember. We now routinely get these things they call "micro-bursts" which are kinda like tornados only with no rotation....I would have to look them up but they're extremely dangerous and occur with a regularity up here to the point 'microburst' (or whatever) is a part of the vernacular. Again, we never had those when I was a kid...and I'd remember cuz these things do damage like only a tornado can do.

[Sabanocchio]

You are now making no sense and cannot see past those blinders. Did I ever say that I do not care about the environment? Have you ever read a post where I professed such? The answer to both is no, but that does not stop you from character assassination. How do you know what I have a problem with? The main point is that you idol is the one who says one thing and does another, I merely pointed that out to you. You've made no secret your support for the Bush and Cheney clan in the past. That is what I was referring to. And he isn't my idol. Just one of the few men that I have respect for in politics today.

If the truth hurts, maybe you can stop by Al's main house in Nashville and use one of his 8 bathrooms to cry in sometime. Just make sure to use as little T.P. as possible, anything less would be yet another inconvenient truth that Mr Gore would have to explain.
The truth depends on who you hear it from. Everyone tilts reality to agree with their point of view such as the writers you quoted in your post. I trust myself to be a pretty good judge of the truth and trust few else. I do my own research and don't leave my opinions up to radio and news to decide for me. And isn't it a shame when a man's TP use is coming under scrutiny to try and disprove facts that he chooses to share with the public for the greater good of man. The man didn't win a Nobel Peace Prize for nothing.

[lacene]

I find it funny that the global warming crowd can say for certain that mankind is to blame for the earth getting .01 degrees warmer, but my local weather man can only give me a percentage on whether or not I'll get some rain. He uses alot of vague words like, "should", "could", and "might" to tell me what's going to happen tomorrow and we won't know for sure until the day after that.....seems fundamentally unreliable to me.

Simple questions can be asked and answered here:

Has the proliferation of mankind helped or hurt the Earth?

Has mankind been responsible for the extinction of species of life on Earth?

Regardless of whether mankind had anything to do with harming the Earth, is mankind capable of helping the Earth? Is there any other species of life on Earth that's in a better position than mankind concerning this?

If mankind is capable of helping the Earth, when exactly would be the best time to start?

What role do you play in any of this?

[Sabanocchio]

Simple questions can be asked and answered here:

Has the proliferation of mankind helped or hurt the Earth?

Has mankind been responsible for the extinction of species of life on Earth?

Regardless of whether mankind had anything to do with harming the Earth, is mankind capable of helping the Earth? Is there any other species of life on Earth that's in a better position than mankind concerning this?

If mankind is capable of helping the Earth, when exactly would be the best time to start?

What role do you play in any of this?And possibly the most important question is the last. The problem is there aren't enough people in high positions that share our concern for the planet and make it difficult to participate in behavior that preserves our planet. We live in a society that depends on petroleum for just about everything, not just fuel, and there are better alternatives that are out there that are not being explored because they endanger the big business of the oil industry. What we need is more people in key positions in business and government that actually give a crap enough to try to make a change. It seems that these people are ridiculed more than supported and that pisses me off.

[Tator]

Simple questions can be asked and answered here:

Has the proliferation of mankind helped or hurt the Earth?

Has mankind been responsible for the extinction of species of life on Earth?

Regardless of whether mankind had anything to do with harming the Earth, is mankind capable of helping the Earth? Is there any other species of life on Earth that's in a better position than mankind concerning this?

If mankind is capable of helping the Earth, when exactly would be the best time to start?

What role do you play in any of this?


The role I play is a small one. Though, granted if pooled with others the impact is increased for better or worse. I turn off lights when not needed, don't litter, etc.

A few more questions can be asked and answered here.

Has the earth helped or hindered the proliferation of mankind?

Has the earth been responsible for the extinction of species?

We are capable of helping the earth in the same way we are able to damage the earth in small amounts over long periods of time. I am all for cleaner fuels and saving the environment, but not at the expense of my pocketbook or my life. I.E.- I will not pay more for organic tomatoes when I can buy cheaper, regular ones. And I refuse to get rid of my SUV for a rinky-dink coffin on wheels or (back to the pocketbook) an even more expensive hybrid SUV.

[Tator]

We live in a society that depends on petroleum for just about everything, not just fuel, and there are better alternatives that are out there that are not being explored because they endanger the big business of the oil industry. What we need is more people in key positions in business and government that actually give a crap enough to try to make a change. It seems that these people are ridiculed more than supported and that pisses me off.


Certainly Oil is our life's blood as a nation and we wouldn't be where we are without it. If there is a better alternative currently available, please bring it forward. Oil, as you say, is in every part of our life and I would challenge you to show me a single alternative that will accomplish the same feats as petroleum. There exists no such single alternative. It will take multitudes of alternatives to take oil's place and that won't come cheap.

The current alternatives are either too expensive to produce, are impractical for mass use, or are geographically isolated.Until such a time that we can produce one or many alternatives as cheap or cheaper than oil, and as readily available as oil is, we need to look harder at doing more with less oil.

But speaking of Oil's big business, its not just the oil companies that make billions off of oil, we must also remember the Government does too. In fact, they make more off of a gallon of gas than the oil companies that produce it. But that's not ALWAYS a bad thing. Those taxes fund road improvements and other such public works projects that make our lives easier and better.

Oh, and let's not forget about individuals that profit from the oil business too. They're not always bad people either. My dad worked in the Gulf oil field as a driller and tool pusher for 20 years, and thanks to oil, me and my brothers had a roof over our heads, clothes on our backs, food in our mouths, and we had a means of transportation.

Oil is not a bad thing. But neither is searching for alterntives that will eventually replace it.

[GetEmGamecocks]

I think global warming is natural and we're not really causing it, at least not right now. I don't really know if people are good for Earth or not. I'd like to think that we could deter (sp?) some asteroid and keep it from destroying the place. Other than that we've been eating, making babies, and killin just like every other animal.

I do know that a carbon tax would be the single worst thing people have agreed on in a long time, if its put in place. A tax on pollution? How and who the f*ck measures the pollution? Sounds like a government plot for $$$ to me.

[Sabanocchio]

I think global warming is natural and we're not really causing it, at least not right now. I don't really know if people are good for Earth or not. I'd like to think that we could deter (sp?) some asteroid and keep it from destroying the place. Other than that we've been eating, making babies, and killin just like every other animal.

I do know that a carbon tax would be the single worst thing people have agreed on in a long time, if its put in place. A tax on pollution? How and who the f*ck measures the pollution? Sounds like a government plot for $$$ to me.

Actually, Getem, the global climate is cyclical and we are supposed to be cooling, not warming. That is documented scientific fact - and one reason so many geologists are up-in-arms.

[azamugg]

Actually, Getem, the global climate is cyclical and we are supposed to be cooling, not warming. That is documented scientific fact - and one reason so many geologists are up-in-arms.

do huh??????? you didnt just type that did ya? who in the hell knows that the earth is supposed to be cooling.....you even mention that is a documented fact..........you have mentioned here Sabo that you don't form opinions from TV, articles in the paper, etc so tell me of the source of that documented fact please

[Sabanocchio]

do huh??????? you didnt just type that did ya? who in the hell knows that the earth is supposed to be cooling.....you even mention that is a documented fact..........you have mentioned here Sabo that you don't form opinions from TV, articles in the paper, etc so tell me of the source of that documented fact please

I said I do my own diligent research. Here, do yours: Climate on Earth is Cyclical (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/06/020607073439.htmhttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/06/020607073439.htm)

And: The Physical Evidence of Earth's unstoppable climate cycle (http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=2319)

[azamugg]

I said I do my own diligent research. Here, do yours: Climate on Earth is Cyclical (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/06/020607073439.htmhttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/06/020607073439.htm)

as far as due diligence, theres no need in this regard because you typed a falsehood, plain and simple.............NO SCIENTIST KNOWS WHAT THE EARTH IS SUPPOSED TO BE DOING RIGHT NOW IN RELATION TO WHETHER IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE COOLING OR NOT

could there be specualtion based on data, um hum, but Ive yet to even see a scientist step out and say something so ludicrous as to "the Earth is supposed to be cooling right now"

[Sabanocchio]

From the evidence, it is clear that global warming and climate change are occurring. Global climate change has happened for thousands of years but never this fast. Since the last ice age 18,00 to 20,000 years ago temperatures have risen five to nine degrees. In one hundred years we have done what it took a few thousand years to do. Ice core patterns show that our climate is supposed to be cooling now, not warming. Glaciers are melting, warming the earth more and releasing solidified ice to melt in the ocean. This raises the sea level flooding coastal areas during storms and eroding beaches. The IPCC predicts that if we continue at this pace, by 2100 the average temperature could be 2.5 at best to 10.4 degrees higher. more (http://theevidencebehindglobalclimatchange.blogspot.com/)

[Sabanocchio]

as far as due diligence, theres no need in this regard because you typed a falsehood, plain and simple.............NO SCIENTIST KNOWS WHAT THE EARTH IS SUPPOSED TO BE DOING RIGHT NOW IN RELATION TO WHETHER IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE COOLING OR NOT

could there be specualtion based on data, um hum, but Ive yet to even see a scientist step out and say something so ludicrous as to "the Earth is supposed to be cooling right now"

We can look at what has historically happened and the historical climate changes that the Earth has undergone and get an accurate representation of what the climate is supposed to be doing. The fact is that the warming that is taking place currently relates back to the birth of the industrial revolution. The effects of modern day pollution won't be felt for many more years. And that will obviously be even worse. How you can sit there and say no scientist knows is beyond me. How do you know so much more than the scientists that study this sh*t for a living?

[GetEmGamecocks]

Actually, Getem, the global climate is cyclical and we are supposed to be cooling, not warming. That is documented scientific fact - and one reason so many geologists are up-in-arms.

I've heard that before, though I don't know too much on the subject. I just think that any climate change is mostly the result of a 10 million degree star 93 millon miles away.

[Sabanocchio]

I can't believe that Bamafag called me a liar for saying that I have met Al Gore twice. What the hell! Why would I lie about that? It doesn't even matter other than that and his friendship with my uncle is one reason I am so defensive about the issue. It's nothing to brag about.It doesn't make me any better of a person because I exchanged words with someone more popular than myself. It was just relevant to the conversation so suck one.

There are a lot of famous people I've met that I don't bring up on this board. Why? Because I'm not a pompous blow-hard like you are...that's why.

[timNem]

We can look at what has historically happened and the historical climate changes that the Earth has undergone and get an accurate representation of what the climate is supposed to be doing. The fact is that the warming that is taking place currently relates back to the birth of the industrial revolution. The effects of modern day pollution won't be felt for many more years. And that will obviously be even worse. How you can sit there and say no scientist knows is beyond me. How do you know so much more than the scientists that study this sh*t for a living?
What Muggsy is saying is we have recorded scientific data for only a few decades versus the total time of the existance of the earth. That ratio could be something like 1/10,000,000 or much more. A cycle that the earth may go through could last up to 1000 -10000 years for all we know. So saying that we have done such and such destruction from the industrial revolution to this point is absolutley absurd. Those cycles are like the seasons but on a much larger scale, we don't freak out when it gets hot in the summer or cold in the winter, its self-preservation/regeneration. See the logic. You don't have to be a scientist to have common sense.

Example: A 99 year old man decides to put out a rain gauge for the first time in his 99 years on earth. After 2 days and zero rainfall, he panics and declares a drought is coming. He has to be right, since he has the data, right?

[Sabanocchio]

What Muggsy is saying is we have recorded scientific data for only a few decades versus the total time of the existance of the earth. That ratio could be something like 1/10,000,000 or much more. A cycle that the earth may go through could last up to 1000 -10000 years for all we know. So saying that we have done such and such destruction from the industrial revolution to this point is absolutley absurd. Those cycles are like the seasons but on a much larger scale, we don't freak out when it gets hot in the summer or cold in the winter, its self-preservation/regeneration. See the logic. You don't have to be a scientist to have common sense.

Example: A 99 year old man decides to put out a rain gauge for the first time in his 99 years on earth. After 2 days and zero rainfall, he panics and declares a drought is coming. He has to be right, since he has the data, right?

A lot of the research is based on core samples. They provide a glimpse into the past before recorded history. You should look into it. It's really quite fascinating.

We can gather an abundance of knowledge based on what has been happened historically. The cycles are based on constants and through data and research we can judge what the climate should look like now, and all of the research points toward the fact that the temperature should be declining at a very slow rate. Further scientific evidence points to the fact that it is in fact increasing.

Look up the documentary A Global Warning. It is a very factual documentary on the situation.

[Sabanocchio]

Of course we could just listen to this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5r6TqpOQGc

[timNem]

Global Warming, climate change facts, articles (http://canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm)

CFP: Need for a new climate change champion (http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/1696)

Global warming, Scientists, Al Gore climate change (http://canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm)

Are sunspots prime suspects in global warming? | csmonitor.com (http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0927/p13s03-sten.html)

The Wall Street Journal Online - Featured Article (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010607)

DailyTech - Survey: Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=8641) :ohmy:

Greenland ice yields hope on climate - The Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/07/06/greenland_ice_yields_hope_on_climate/)

Greenland Ice Find Debunks Al Gore’s Global Warming Theories | NewsBusters.org (http://newsbusters.org/node/13948) Gore Debunked

PROFILE: ESKE WILLERSLEV: Ancient DNA's Intrepid Explorer -- Curry 317 (5834): 36 -- Science (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/317/5834/36?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=eske+willerslev&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT)

Bloomberg.com: U.S. (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aWuWjvhiv8Y4&refer=us)

Challenge to Scientific Consensus on Global Warming: Analysis Finds Hundreds of Scientists Have Published Evidence Countering Man-Made Global Warming Fears - Press Release (http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,176495.shtml)

Global warming? It's natural, say experts | the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=481613&in_page_id=1811)


TCS Daily - Proliferation of Climate Scepticism in Europe (http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=110107A)

CNN Meteorologist: ‘Definitely Some Inaccuracies’ in Gore Film | NewsBusters.org (http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/cnn-meteorologist-definitely-some-inaccuracies-gore-film.html?q=blogs/paul-detrick/2007/10/04/cnn-meteorologist-definitely-some-inaccuracies-gore-film)

Weather Channel Founder: Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’ | NewsBusters.org (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/11/07/weather-channel-founder-global-warming-greatest-scam-history)

Mayor Compares Threat of Global Warming to Terrorism - February 12, 2008 - The New York Sun (http://www.nysun.com/article/71103)

[sheluvsbama]

It is an extremely frightening thing that we are being forced to address. We have been warned for a long, long time, but people have been reluctant to listen. No one wants to believe we could be in such trouble. The planet has always given us sanctuary. There is an end to that in the future. It is OUR turn to protect Earth. Will we let her down? We mustn't. We must fight for her protection and for our own survival.

[Sabanocchio]

A bunch of links to opinions of people who may or may not have an agenda doesn't change anything. I could provide the same amount of links to scientists and geologists that have proof of CO2 increasing the temperature of the earth. How can you think that all this crap that we are pumping into the atmosphere cannot have an effect? This is uncharted territory people. The earth has never been inhabited by as many people as it is today - constantly changing and having adverse effects on the environment. It's not like this is the first time the Earth has been faced with worldwide disaster. It's happened many times before and it will happen again. This time, it will be due to mankind's overpopulation and overpollution.

[RW13]

A bunch of links to opinions of people who may or may not have an agenda doesn't change anything. I could provide the same amount of links to scientists and geologists that have proof of CO2 increasing the temperature of the earth. How can you think that all this crap that we are pumping into the atmosphere cannot have an effect? This is uncharted territory people. The earth has never been inhabited by as many people as it is today - constantly changing and having adverse effects on the environment. It's not like this is the first time the Earth has been faced with worldwide disaster. It's happened many times before and it will happen again. This time, it will be due to mankind's overpopulation and overpollution.

Those links are all right-wingers have left. They remind me of the people who still thought the earth was flat a few centuries ago. Why sit there and argue what everyone knows to be true? I just don't see the advantage to pretending that Global Warming doesn't exist, it's going to affect everyone on this planet, not just liberals in Berkeley, California. This "put your head in the dirt" thing the very right wing is doing seems immature....

[BamaFanNKy]

I can't believe that Bamafag called me a liar for saying that I have met Al Gore twice. What the hell! Why would I lie about that? It doesn't even matter other than that and his friendship with my uncle is one reason I am so defensive about the issue. It's nothing to brag about.It doesn't make me any better of a person because I exchanged words with someone more popular than myself. It was just relevant to the conversation so suck one.

There are a lot of famous people I've met that I don't bring up on this board. Why? Because I'm not a pompous blow-hard like you are...that's why.

And the two people I've met I've mentioned......... Steve Spurrier (telling USC fans he was in town recruitting a kid) and that I actually know Mark Gottfried. WOW. Big name dropper here. :blink: Go work on your website. If you put as much effort in trying to troll me as that you may make something out of it.

This is when Sabo goes and negative reps me. hahahaha

[BamaFanNKy]

Hey Tim,

Do you remember this name Paul Ehrlich? He's the guy that had everyone going nuts about global cooling in the 1970's.

I thought even Wikipedia's explanation of the climate crisis was pretty unbiased. Love the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change quote: In the 1970s, there was increasing awareness that estimates of global temperatures showed cooling since 1945. The general public had little awareness of carbon dioxide's effects on climate, although Paul R. Ehrlich mentions climate change from the greenhouse gases in 1968. By the time the idea of global cooling reached the public press in the mid-1970s, the temperature trend had stopped going down, and there was concern in the climatological community about carbon dioxide's effects. It was known that both natural and man-made effects caused variations in global climate.

Currently, there are some concerns about the possible cooling effects of a slowdown or shutdown of the thermohaline circulation, which might be provoked by an increase of fresh water mixing into the North Atlantic due to glacial melting. The probability of this occurring is generally considered to be very low, and the IPCC notes, "However, even in models where the THC weakens, there is still a warming over Europe. For example, in all AOGCM integrations where the radiative forcing is increasing, the sign of the temperature change over north-west Europe is positive."The ceasing of thermohaline circulation in the world's oceans caused the rapid global cooling in the scientifically unfounded film The Day After Tomorrow.

[BamaFanNKy]

Nation's 'Icebox' hits record 40 below zero - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/02/11/minnesota.cold.ap/index.html)


RTR

Back to the intended point. S*** it's cold.

[WarEagle73]

I don't wish to offend anyone with this post, but for us to believe we actually can influence the global climate is the height of arrogance coupled with the depths of scientific ignorance. The best climatic minds will tell you that there is much more that we don't know about this subject than we do know. Only those with a political agenda are sounding the alarm bells that we are the main cause of global warming or climate change or whatever the latest catch phase of the moment happens to be. Thirty years ago these same groups were wailing away about the impending ice age we were facing due to our on folly.

The truth of the matter is that the global climate is something that science is just starting the process of attempting to understand. The total amount of "carbon" that we release into the air pales in comparison to the amount released naturally by volcanos or even the amount released daily by the ocean. Simply put, I do believe the climate is changing much as it has done time and again throughout the ages. However, to think that we can cause this change or even influence it borders on the insane.

I can understand the alarm in the general populace due to the amount of ruckus being raised by supposed experts. Couple this with the "awareness" being raised by celiberties and people such as Al Gore and you have a full fledged panic on your hands. I will refer this phenomenon back to an earlier post I had on the trend towards stupidity in our society. In other words we have a large segment of our population that will believe any drivel being espoused by the Hollywood types. I can somewhat excuse the general population for their ignorance. However, what I cannot and will not excuse are the scientists and world leaders that are attempting to further their own political agenda at the expense of scientific honesty.

[azamugg]

Those links are all right-wingers have left. They remind me of the people who still thought the earth was flat a few centuries ago. Why sit there and argue what everyone knows to be true? I just don't see the advantage to pretending that Global Warming doesn't exist, it's going to affect everyone on this planet, not just liberals in Berkeley, California. This "put your head in the dirt" thing the very right wing is doing seems immature....


is a fiscal conservative a right winger? if so, I don't feel the need to doubt that temps have increased minutely .........I just doubt that it is mankinds fault..........

now if all this hysteria merely caused people to live differently by their own choice great, but thats not what is gonna happen...........the Omniscient Government is gonna make us PAY for this hyped BS and of course piss away the money..........its called giving the Govt what is looked at as a legitimate reason to bilk us and then waste that money too, perpetuating govt malfeasance

[RW13]

is a fiscal conservative a right winger? if so, I don't feel the need to doubt that temps have increased minutely .........I just doubt that it is mankinds fault..........

now if all this hysteria merely caused people to live differently by their own choice great, but thats not what is gonna happen...........the Omniscient Government is gonna make us PAY for this hyped BS and of piss away the money..........its called giving the Govt what is looked at as a legitimate reason to bilk us and then waste that money too, perpetuating govt malfeasance

You tell me. Is a fiscal conservative a right winger? Did that come up in my post? I consider myself a very fiscal conservative, although, as President I could see myself spending way too much on toys, such as the F-22, I would even want my own personal one....

[azamugg]

You tell me. Is a fiscal conservative a right winger? Did that come up in my post? I consider myself a very fiscal conservative, although, as President I could see myself spending way too much on toys, such as the F-22, I would even want my own personal one....


you havent had your morning coffee yet have you?

[RW13]

you havent had your morning coffee yet have you?

If by morning coffee you mean my daily injection of heroin, then no, I have not had my morning "coffee" yet....

[fernandomike]

I don't wish to offend anyone with this post, but for us to believe we actually can influence the global climate is the height of arrogance coupled with the depths of scientific ignorance. The best climatic minds will tell you that there is much more that we don't know about this subject than we do know. Only those with a political agenda are sounding the alarm bells that we are the main cause of global warming or climate change or whatever the latest catch phase of the moment happens to be. Thirty years ago these same groups were wailing away about the impending ice age we were facing due to our on folly.

The truth of the matter is that the global climate is something that science is just starting the process of attempting to understand. The total amount of "carbon" that we release into the air pales in comparison to the amount released naturally by volcanos or even the amount released daily by the ocean. Simply put, I do believe the climate is changing much as it has done time and again throughout the ages. However, to think that we can cause this change or even influence it borders on the insane.

I can understand the alarm in the general populace due to the amount of ruckus being raised by supposed experts. Couple this with the "awareness" being raised by celiberties and people such as Al Gore and you have a full fledged panic on your hands. I will refer this phenomenon back to an earlier post I had on the trend towards stupidity in our society. In other words we have a large segment of our population that will believe any drivel being espoused by the Hollywood types. I can somewhat excuse the general population for their ignorance. However, what I cannot and will not excuse are the scientists and world leaders that are attempting to further their own political agenda at the expense of scientific honesty.

Since there isn't a whole lot we can do about carbon released by volcanoes and oceans, your statement that they are bigger sources is only an interesting sidenote. If we take those two sources as a given, since we pretty much have to, does it mean that man shouldn't do anything to thwart those sources which are controllable?
Further, do you really mean to suggest that all the scientists who believe that man has some negative impact on planetery temperatures are lying?
I wonder which is more "ignorant," the theory of global warming or the theory of a global conspiracy involving liberals, scientists, the media, and world leaders with the sole goal of further harming the US economy?
It would seem to me that the "politics" of this issue works both ways. You think that the liberals are lying while the conservatives are telling the truth. The liberals think that the other side is lying to protect our economic interests. We need the science, but not the politics no matter which side is eventually proven right.

[Cianne]

Is mankind's increasingly growing carbon footprint something that can affect the environment? Undoubtedly yes. It's folly to think that it isn't doing something.

Is said footprint going to result in the polar ice caps melting thus destroying coastal cities as well as causing tornadoes, hurricanes, El Nino's dad El Padre to come in and show us who is boss, and The Day After Tomorrow comes true? Probably not. But who knows? Fact of the matter is, nobody knows. With all our fancy computers we have now, we still cannot accurately predict weather on a day to day basis. It's just a statistical analysis of what is a minute period of time in the vastness of the existence of the planet. It's still opinions, albeit by very intelligent people who have very many years of experience and a whole lot of things hanging on the wall saying that they know it all.

The real question here is: Is the sensationalism spawned by Al Gore what the world needs? That's up to the individual to decide. I know people don't want to buy new cars. That's understandable. But is there actually a problem with going to alternative energy or trying to cut down on non-renewable resources known to cause cancer, etc? Are people adverse to it on a political level or is it something as simple as not wanting to be perceived as a hippie?

[WarEagle73]

Since there isn't a whole lot we can do about carbon released by volcanoes and oceans, your statement that they are bigger sources is only an interesting sidenote. If we take those two sources as a given, since we pretty much have to, does it mean that man shouldn't do anything to thwart those sources which are controllable?
Further, do you really mean to suggest that all the scientists who believe that man has some negative impact on planetery temperatures are lying?
I wonder which is more "ignorant," the theory of global warming or the theory of a global conspiracy involving liberals, scientists, the media, and world leaders with the sole goal of further harming the US economy?
It would seem to me that the "politics" of this issue works both ways. You think that the liberals are lying while the conservatives are telling the truth. The liberals think that the other side is lying to protect our economic interests. We need the science, but not the politics no matter which side is eventually proving right.


The problem is that this issue should have nothing to do with politics be they conservative or liberal. This is a scientific issue. As far as your statement about our release of carbon compared to the amount released by natural sources, you should look at it like this. If you took all of the carbon that is released naturally and compared that to what we as humans are releasing then you would be comparing a boulder to a grain of sand. In other words, our carbon release borders on the infinitesimal when compared to that released naturally.

[timNem]

Those links are all right-wingers have left. They remind me of the people who still thought the earth was flat a few centuries ago. Why sit there and argue what everyone knows to be true? I just don't see the advantage to pretending that Global Warming doesn't exist, it's going to affect everyone on this planet, not just liberals in Berkeley, California. This "put your head in the dirt" thing the very right wing is doing seems immature....
Why do you say those are right wing links?

[RW13]

Why do you say those are right wing links?

Because left wing people are way too into the environment

[azamugg]

Since there isn't a whole lot we can do about carbon released by volcanoes and oceans, your statement that they are bigger sources is only an interesting sidenote. If we take those two sources as a given, since we pretty much have to, does it mean that man shouldn't do anything to thwart those sources which are controllable?
Further, do you really mean to suggest that all the scientists who believe that man has some negative impact on planetery temperatures are lying?
I wonder which is more "ignorant," the theory of global warming or the theory of a global conspiracy involving liberals, scientists, the media, and world leaders with the sole goal of further harming the US economy?
It would seem to me that the "politics" of this issue works both ways. You think that the liberals are lying while the conservatives are telling the truth. The liberals think that the other side is lying to protect our economic interests. We need the science, but not the politics no matter which side is eventually proven right.



I initially didnt look at this subject through political eyes but libs being married to the environment couldnt have wished for a better happenstance.....I can see years ago some tiny article w/a scientist merely supposing global warming and then someone w/in the party taking it and running w/it, the issue morphs into a King Kong of environmental political spew

they want more money from us for their slush fund.......period

[timNem]

Hey Tim,

Do you remember this name Paul Ehrlich? He's the guy that had everyone going nuts about global cooling in the 1970's.

I thought even Wikipedia's explanation of the climate crisis was pretty unbiased. Love the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change quote: In the 1970s, there was increasing awareness that estimates of global temperatures showed cooling since 1945. The general public had little awareness of carbon dioxide's effects on climate, although Paul R. Ehrlich mentions climate change from the greenhouse gases in 1968. By the time the idea of global cooling reached the public press in the mid-1970s, the temperature trend had stopped going down, and there was concern in the climatological community about carbon dioxide's effects. It was known that both natural and man-made effects caused variations in global climate.

Currently, there are some concerns about the possible cooling effects of a slowdown or shutdown of the thermohaline circulation, which might be provoked by an increase of fresh water mixing into the North Atlantic due to glacial melting. The probability of this occurring is generally considered to be very low, and the IPCC notes, "However, even in models where the THC weakens, there is still a warming over Europe. For example, in all AOGCM integrations where the radiative forcing is increasing, the sign of the temperature change over north-west Europe is positive."The ceasing of thermohaline circulation in the world's oceans caused the rapid global cooling in the scientifically unfounded film The Day After Tomorrow.

whatever happened with Global Cooling?

I guess this would be a right wng video?


Io-Tb7vTamY

[Tator]

A breakdown of the Thermohaline system, coupled with an increase in volcanic eruptions and a lack of sun spots or any combination thereof, are what was thought to have caused the little ice age that started around 1450AD. The three centuries prior to this time (1100-1300AD) where unusually warm in Europe and it isn't understood why, we just know it was. This fact can be seen in the production of wine in Britain which ceased during the onset of the cooling. This cooling and the elimination of grape production ceased over a period of 50 to 100 years. Oddly, it did not take THOUSANDS of years to make a global change as some here has pointed to as the "natural" rate of climate change, it happened in roughly a century.

This "little ice age" lasted up until the late 1900's, and we are still enjoying temperatures just below the pre-1450AD mark today. What caused the rebound is as debated as what caused the initial temperature fall, but some have gone so far as to attribute the rebound to the start of the industrial revolution due to the increased burning of coal and wood. However, if we are to take this thought seriously, we have to believe that mankind produced more CO2 emissions at the beginning of the industrial revolution than we are today. Given that the population and distribution of fuel burning equipment is significantly higher today than at the beginning of the I.R., this is highly unlikely. Simply because we have not had the same, less than a century effect on global temperatures than what is noted at the end of the little ice age. So there must be another, more significant cause of the warming trend that we still see today.

What I take from these facts is that natural changes can and do occur, both warming and cooling, in less than the thousand to ten thousand year “norm”. Certainly the “norm” does fall within this time frame based on ice cores and other data, but we have to temper our panic mentality with reason when we see sudden changes. We can’t assume that simply because man exists and we produce, that we are to blame. The earth has been here and making changes, both sudden and subtle for billions of years before man first appeared.

What often is given as evidence of mankind being at fault for the increase in temperatures is the increase in CO2 levels in the atmosphere. However, we have to remember that we are not the only ones that produce CO2. The earth itself produces CO2 and other greenhouse gases on a scale that puts mankind in the “also ran” category. Some will counter this point by saying that the earth’s global ecosystem was a balancing act of emission and absorption of CO2. Basically, the CO2 that was produced naturally was scrub by plants and the oceans, in effect, creating a 1-for1 exchange system. In a perfect computer model, maybe this system exists. The real world, however, has widely changing variables that are not taken into consideration by those who would nail mankind to the cross of climate change. Two variables often purposefully overlooked in this “perfect before SUV’s system” are:

1. Volcanic activity. The amount of CO2, sulphur dioxide and other gases produced in inactive volcanoes’ emissions can range from 500 tons to 2000 tons per day, with active volcanoes producing upwards of 250,000 tons or higher per day. (per the USGS). I’ve pointed this out before and others have refuted it by saying, that volcanoes don’t erupt everyday. Fact is, it doesn’t take an eruption for there to be gas emissions as shown by the out-gassings of inactive volcanoes and how soon they forget that Kilauea has been erupting since 1983. Couple that with the fact that Stromboli, in the Mediterranean of Italy, has been erupting regularly for more than 2,000 years. I won’t fail to mention all the active volcanoes on the ocean floor that are currently erupting or out-gassing. When you put the two active and inactive categories together and realize that there are roughly 10,000 volcanoes or more on the planet, you get a massive influx of CO2 that puts mankind to shame.

2. Natural Methane sources. 190 million tons of methane is estimated to be released every year by natural methane sources. Such examples are wetlands, termites (yes termites), oceans, and methane hydrates – in that order. The latter of which has been suspected of causing mass extinctions due to large undersea eruptions by several scientists working in conjunction with major universities such as Michigan, Northwestern and others. A large eruption of which has also been implicated in the “little ice age”. However, since the measurement of naturally occurring methane emissions is not wholly accurate, and given the large portions of the earth’s surface they cover, it is safe to assume that the actual output is greater than the initial guesstimate would indicate.

Any natural variation in these two main natural sources can cause a dramatic increase in the amount of CO2, SO2, and Methane in the atmosphere that can and does overwhelm the natural scrubbing by oceans and plants. It has also been noted that volcanism has been on the rise since, oddly enough, the years just before the little ice age’s end and seems to have peaked in roughly 1998. TO be fair, I would point that some would argue that this increase is due to the increase in efficient communication systems and it proliferation. Basically, information from far-flung regions became more readily available. This, however, does not ring true when you see that the increase in still evident from 1970 to 1998.

In light of these issues, one has to wonder if we can outdo Mother Nature in any are of global competition. Certainly, we can add to the problem, but as I said before it is miniscule compared to what she can do all on her own. I think that we can impact the global ecology, but not on the scale and in the amount of time certain “experts” say its happening. Now, does this mean I think polluting as much as we want is fine, no harm no foul? Absolutely not! We should not be wasteful and should absolutely respect the world in which we live. But, as I understand the facts presented, radical, abrupt changes are caused by only one thing, natural occurrences. No other facts have been brought to bear that prove otherwise. It doesn’t take an advanced degree to put together the facts available and come to the realization that, yes, the earth is getting slightly warmer. And yes, mankind is producing CO2 and methane. And yes, we should do everything we can to reduce our pollution of the environment. But to say, unequivocally, that mankind is the only mechanism that is capable of changing the global climate either abruptly or gradually, is to reach the pinnacle of foolishness that other passionately misinformed people only dream of reaching.

[The Ramp]

I actually care about my legacy. I want to know that my grandchildren are going to live in a world that isn't under 3 feet of water. Call me crazy.

sabanocchio breeding?

*shivers*

[JerryBeeds]

Will someone please think of the children.

[WarEagle73]

Will someone please think of the children.



I hope that's not what you are doing when you are in the shower with your dog! :laugh:

Note: If you read this before seeing Beeds post on the dog bathing thread then you probably don't get this. If you are reading this after reading his post on the dog bathing thread you may still not get this. :mellow:

[nooneLT]

Actually, Getem, the global climate is cyclical and we are supposed to be cooling, not warming. That is documented scientific fact - and one reason so many geologists are up-in-arms.

you're kidding right? from the mid 1940's to the mid 1970's, the earth went through a cooling period. The same people screaming GLOBAL WARMING today were the same people screaming ICE AGE at this time period. Before the 1940's, it was a period of warming, like we have today. Remember the dust-bowl? Yep, period of warming.

Is there an increase in carbon dioxide emission? YES? Is it causing the temperature to rise? more and more research says no. How do you figure that while some of the ice caps in the north pole is breaking off but part of Antartica is getting thicker?

[BamaFanNKy]

Will someone please think of the children.

That's part of the problem. People live longer and breed more. So obviously more emissions and polution are going to happen. It's a population problem more than a big bad business. But no one wants to hear procreation responsibility or how living longer does have consequence on the planet. That's why I am in Kentucky. According to Al Gore my house will be beachfront one day!:thumpsup:

[JerryBeeds]

I hope that's not what you are doing when you are in the shower with your dog! :laugh:

Note: If you read this before seeing Beeds post on the dog bathing thread then you probably don't get this. If you are reading this after reading his post on the dog bathing thread you may still not get this. :mellow:

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

[azamugg]

man, Tator wrote that post you guys, that was not cut and pasted and I think he should get some type of prize.............Tator I can't rep you yet but that was impressive, hell you had to of graduated high school or sumpin

maybe the prize that SECTalk should send could be something like a, oh, a fish net stockinged leg lamp

[BamaFanNKy]

I repped him for it. Best thought out argument I've seen in ages around these parts. Must be an LSU exchange student. :) Or maybe a Saban recruit still there. Hahaa

[Sabanocchio]

It snowed here last night. I guess that debunks the whole "Global Warming" controversy. :D

[timNem]

Will someone please think of the children.
There is no need, Michael Jackson has a huge park where he thinks of all the children :laugh:

[BamaFanNKy]

The environment affects Michael. What do you not climb trees?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lQLfJG1hmcM

[azamugg]

It snowed here last night. I guess that debunks the whole "Global Warming" controversy. :D

no, but I hoped you viewed the vid that Tim provided plus the long post of Tators

[timNem]

Al Gore/Climate Change: The Bottom Line

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e27/arclighter/794f030f.gif

http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w162/timkndll/02282007.jpg

[BamaFanNKy]

Here was one of his graphs:
http://www.scienceandsupermodels.com/pictures/Global%20Warming%20Bikini.jpg

[Sabanocchio]

no, but I hoped you viewed the vid that Tim provided plus the long post of Tators

Oh, I did. I'm just sick of arguing on the side of reason. It seems people will either believe the lies or not. It's their choice. We need more people in high positions telling the truth about this, and less of the crap spilling out that is disguising it.

[azamugg]

Oh, I did. I'm just sick of arguing on the side of reason. It seems people will either believe the lies or not. It's their choice. We need more people in high positions telling the truth about this, and less of the crap spilling out that is disguising it.

I have waivered on alot of issues after seeing different sides..............but apparently you are locked in on this eh?

[fernandomike]

You either roll with Tator or you're Tator bait!

[crimsonnation713]

man, Tator wrote that post you guys, that was not cut and pasted and I think he should get some type of prize.............Tator I can't rep you yet but that was impressive, hell you had to of graduated high school or sumpin

maybe the prize that SECTalk should send could be something like a, oh, a fish net stockinged leg lamp

or a pink bunny suit :thumpsup:

[BamaFanNKy]

Well I guess the british court was wrong in pointing out 11 problems with Al Gore's movie. Seems they label it as political propaganda:
ABC News: Nobel for Al Gore, Did You Know About Factual Mistakes in His Movie? (http://abcnews.go.com/US/Story?id=3719791&page=1)

Damn british never are on the side of reason. Or when you said "It seems people will either believe the lies or not" were you refering to the lies and hype by your close friend Al Gore?

[Sabanocchio]

I have waivered on alot of issues after seeing different sides..............but apparently you are locked in on this eh?

I can see both sides of the issue. I think to clearly understand an issue, you must. I just choose to believe the geologists and scientists that have no agenda over the people paid by the Oil companies to disprove such research.

[azamugg]

lets all say it together and so often it becomes real and scary

BIG OIL MONEY



....it kilt my daddy, caused Katrina to strike LA, caused the sub-prime mortgage fiasco.......hell some wealthy people enjoy being wealthy so much they'll orchestrate a war killing hundreds of thousands, an orchestration that involves hundreds of people who have to keep a big bad secret...........aint no sense in enjoying my wealth and just doing my job and increasing my wealth through real estate, stocks, bonds...........naw, hell, I think Im gonna dupe the country, kill thousands, ignore potential world catastrophy.......might as well, I've been planning this since my children were born to me and their mother

[BamaFanNKy]

Anyone notice Oil prices and Gold have stayed almost even over the past few years. Yet the dollar has shrunk next to both of them. hmmmmmm...... can someone say collapsing dollar?

[timNem]

I can see both sides of the issue. I think to clearly understand an issue, you must. I just choose to believe the geologists and scientists that have no agenda over the people paid by the Oil companies to disprove such research.
or the Geologists and Scientists whose funding and paychecks are based on whether or not this is an issue or the company that was established by Gore just before he started this crusade that sells carbon credits for profit. Im not saying whether or not I believe Global Warming exists but I don't believe it is man-made if it does, based on the amount of CFCs in a single volcanic eruption. Unless these scientists and geologists can put a cork in all the volcanos on earth, there is nothing we can do to offset any global warming/cooling/climate change I don't have any stock in oil nor am I assocaited with any particular political party, I'm Independent and I can be convinced otherwise, but so far I have not been.

[Sabanocchio]

or the Geologists and Scientists whose funding and paychecks are based on whether or not this is an issue or the company that was established by Gore just before he started this crusade that sells carbon credits for profit. Im not saying whether or not I believe Global Warming exists but I don't believe it is man-made if it does, based on the amount of CFCs in a single volcanic eruption. Unless these scientists and geologists can put a cork in all the volcanos on earth, there is nothing we can do to offset any global warming/cooling/climate change I don't have any stock in oil nor am I assocaited with any particular political party, I'm Independent and I can be convinced otherwise, but so far I have not been.

Let's hope it doesn't take the flooding of the world's coastal communities to convince you.

[RW13]

Attention: Azamugg hates black people!!

[GatorBait15]

Attention: Azamugg hates black people!!

Tell me something I didn't know! :laugh:

[bigsexxxy]

or the Geologists and Scientists whose funding and paychecks are based on whether or not this is an issue or the company that was established by Gore just before he started this crusade that sells carbon credits for profit. Im not saying whether or not I believe Global Warming exists but I don't believe it is man-made if it does, based on the amount of CFCs in a single volcanic eruption. Unless these scientists and geologists can put a cork in all the volcanos on earth, there is nothing we can do to offset any global warming/cooling/climate change I don't have any stock in oil nor am I assocaited with any particular political party, I'm Independent and I can be convinced otherwise, but so far I have not been.

What are you talking about? If you're independent you need to quit repeating what Fox News spews out like a broken record. This is awful reasoning on so many levels.

Scientists and geologists who depend on the funding? They're trained professionals, they could go get a job doing a lot of things in their chosen field. I don't think you understand academia that well, the vast majority of academics would NOT sit there and orchestrate a vast conspiracy just so they could keep their funding going.

[azamugg]

What are you talking about? If you're independent you need to quit repeating what Fox News spews out like a broken record. This is awful reasoning on so many levels.

Scientists and geologists who depend on the funding? They're trained professionals, they could go get a job doing a lot of things in their chosen field. I don't think you understand academia that well, the vast majority of academics would NOT sit there and orchestrate a vast conspiracy just so they could keep their funding going.

humm, you talking about the same academia that will show Gores Nobel Peace winning prized movie to their students?

[Sabanocchio]

humm, you talking about the same academia that will show Gores Nobel Peace winning prized movie to their students?

Just out of curiosity, have you seen the movie, Aza?

[azamugg]

yes sir I have..............did you watch Tims vid, read Tators post and read about England trying at the last minute before the award of the peace prize trying to compell Gore to address 13 critical non truths in the movie?

[Sabanocchio]

yes sir I have..............did you watch Tims vid, read Tators post and read about England trying at the last minute before the award of the peace prize trying to compell Gore to address 13 critical non truths in the movie?

I already answered that question. Yes, I did. And I was just curious. Good for you. :thumpsup:

[The Ramp]

As the board's resident scientist, I and my cronies all believe in Global Warming but there is not enough scientific evidence to support it. And we all applaud Gore's intention (if it is in fact geniune) but we laugh at his "movie".

[timNem]

What are you talking about? If you're independent you need to quit repeating what Fox News spews out like a broken record. This is awful reasoning on so many levels.

Scientists and geologists who depend on the funding? They're trained professionals, they could go get a job doing a lot of things in their chosen field. I don't think you understand academia that well, the vast majority of academics would NOT sit there and orchestrate a vast conspiracy just so they could keep their funding going.Eaaaasy there. I have no idea what Fox news spews out because I don't watch Fox news. Im Independent because I don't feel urged to lean one way because a certain political group may. I despise George Bush as much as I despise Al Gore but for different reasons. I understand academia well enough and have enough common sense to know how research funding works and how it is abused everyday by academia. Don't think for a moment that I'm saying that all research is abused, Im just pointing out that it can be, even by supposed upstanding academia.

Now here is a question that is sure to ruffle some feathers: Its just a thought and not an insinuation The American Cancer Soceity does great things for people suffering from cancer but what if someone did find an absolute cure for it? Would it ever make the light of day since the ACS is one of the most funded organizations ever and employs thousands of researchers and a bureuacracy that doesn't do really..anything?

Research funding and govt contracts are very similiar and if you have ever been employed as part of a govt contract, you would know exactly how much fraud and waste is involved to insure future funding. If you have a balance left at the end of the fiscal year then you're funding is reduced. I have seen some sleazy practices that I won't go into.



Researchers would never abuse funding?????? (Just a few of the many)
Researcher admits fraud in grant data - The Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/03/18/researcher_admits_fraud_in_grant_data/)

That's Outrageous -- Research Grant Fraud | Michael Crowley | Reader's Digest (http://www.rd.com/columnists/michael-crowley/thats-outrageous-----research-grant-fraud/article.html)

#292: 05-26-05 PARENT ORGANIZATION OF MAYO CLINIC PAYS U.S. $6.5 MILLION TO SETTLE GRANT FRAUD INVESTIGATION (http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2005/May/05_civ_292.htm)

Research fraud, Eric Poehlman (http://www.mail-archive.com/sportscience@yahoogroups.com/msg00091.html)

United States, Government & Public Sector, Research Misconduct: New Enforcement Actions and Developments - Reed Smith - 02/09/2005, Federal Law, Government/ Statutory Law, Litigation and Arbitration, Fraud and White Collar Crime, Pharmaceutical, Heal (http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?article_id=34644)

[bigsexxxy]

Eaaaasy there. I have no idea what Fox news spews out because I don't watch Fox news. Im Independent because I don't feel urged to lean one way because a certain political group may. I despise George Bush as much as I despise Al Gore but for different reasons. I understand academia well enough and have enough common sense to know how research funding works and how it is abused everyday by academia. Don't think for a moment that I'm saying that all research is abused, Im just pointing out that it can be, even by supposed upstanding academia.

Now here is a question that is sure to ruffle some feathers: Its just a thought and not an insinuation The American Cancer Soceity does great things for people suffering from cancer but what if someone did find an absolute cure for it? Would it ever make the light of day since the ACS is one of the most funded organizations ever and employs thousands of researchers and a bureuacracy that doesn't do really..anything?

Research funding and govt contracts are very similiar and if you have ever been employed as part of a govt contract, you would know exactly how much fraud and waste is involved to insure future funding. If you have a balance left at the end of the fiscal year then you're funding is reduced. I have seen some sleazy practices that I won't go into.



Researchers would never abuse funding?????? (Just a few of the many)
Researcher admits fraud in grant data - The Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/03/18/researcher_admits_fraud_in_grant_data/)

That's Outrageous -- Research Grant Fraud | Michael Crowley | Reader's Digest (http://www.rd.com/columnists/michael-crowley/thats-outrageous-----research-grant-fraud/article.html)

#292: 05-26-05 PARENT ORGANIZATION OF MAYO CLINIC PAYS U.S. $6.5 MILLION TO SETTLE GRANT FRAUD INVESTIGATION (http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2005/May/05_civ_292.htm)

Research fraud, Eric Poehlman (http://www.mail-archive.com/sportscience@yahoogroups.com/msg00091.html)

United States, Government & Public Sector, Research Misconduct: New Enforcement Actions and Developments - Reed Smith - 02/09/2005, Federal Law, Government/ Statutory Law, Litigation and Arbitration, Fraud and White Collar Crime, Pharmaceutical, Heal (http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?article_id=34644)

In response to your ACS part: March of Dimes - Pregnancy, Babies, Prematurity (http://www.marchofdimes.com/)

They seem to be doing alright even though polio is no longer relevant. Although they don't exactly have polio in their name.