Printable View
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...or-censorship/Quote:
On the Discovery Channel last week, Tom Brokaw hosted a special called "Global Warming: The New Challenge." While promoting the piece, Mr. Brokaw declared: "There is a growing consensus that global warming is real and getting worse." Actually, there is a growing body of opinion that global warming is a fraud perpetrated by liberal politicians and their scientific acolytes who want more control over our lives.
Blue Man Group on Global Warming
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...42377878175440
Al Goregasm's global warming again huh?
Looks like the Goreman's will never give up on this. The Goreman's & the Church of the Latter Day Climatologists should ban beans & energy drinks so we all won't phart so much!
Global warming is a fact, but it is how you interpret that fact that matters.
If you look at geological and paleontological evidence you will see that we are between ice ages. Global warming has taken place when human influence was either non-existent or negligible. Perhaps we would be better employed considering how we are going to continue feeding the World's population given its current growth rate and what to do about areas that will probably get flooded.
If you examine the evidence you will see that we have had ice ages and extinction events..............point is we haven't had one with a population in excess of 6 billion :eek:
I think that we delude ourselves if we believe that cutting carbon emissions will reverse a far more powerful cyclical process.
I've heard one theory that says that, even assuming globalQuote:
areas that will probably get flooded
warming, there would be no flooding. An average
temp increase of a few degrees would not be enough to melt
polar ice. What's the functional difference between minus 60
and minus 57?
On the other hand afew degrees warmer in tropical regions may
result in significantly more evaporation from the oceans.
Some of the resulting precip would fall on polar regions as
snow, offsetting any melting at the margins. No net change.
it's so sad how badly we want to justify this type of consumerism that even facing our own deaths we don't want to take steps to help curb the problem because "it might not work," or "might not be the cause." That is the exact same mentality an alcoholic has, or a cigarette smoker when trying to quit.. sad and hilarious at the same time.
Cutting carbon emissions may not "reverse" the cycle, but it may slow it down and give us more time to either get off the rock or figure out what could reverse it, but there is absolutely NOTHING good for the environment about the degradation we impel onto it. there is no argument for why we should keep driving cars and **** like we do other than capitalist addiction and ideology, in which case it's funny, because such ideology could still exist, just without the same Ford F-350's on the road..
err on the side of caution? isn't that the best way to look at potential GLOBAL catastrophes? come on.
Its a fraud. You can colonize the moon and Mars all you want but when GOD decides to turn off the sun....there goes everything. Starts with the food chain and ends trying to recycle nuclear waste in the dark. Forget about the other 12 planets. We are all gonna die; live everyday like your last.
By this logic, if I claim that the Jews are poisoning all the wells,Quote:
err on the side of caution? isn't that the best way to look at potential GLOBAL catastrophes? come on.
and this is a potential global catastrophe, we should go ahead
and take action against them whether we have proof or not.
There's too much at stake here to sit around and "do nothing"
Global warming is a false threat whose purpose is to panic the
people into accepting a fascist takeover.
rc - no, it's not the same, at all, or even close.
We are horribly damaging the environment in a multitude of ways.
The earth's carrying capacity isn't infinite.
Even if fossil fuel emissions do not directly cause global warming, the adverse effects of our current lifestyles outweigh the need for constant, perpetual, hedonistic destruction.
Yeah, cause this is more likely than humans causing global warming. Don't critique me with "logic" and then assert some bullshit like this. It's fine if you think this is true, but the two don't really go hand-in-hand, i.e. this and logic.Quote:
Global warming is a false threat whose purpose is to panic the
people into accepting a fascist takeover.
http://www.heatisonline.org/science.cfm
Argue with Gelbspan and all the actual relevant scientists around the world if you truly believe what you are saying, otherwise you are just as much a part of the problem in promoting such a fascist takeover. Oh wait, you can't, because it's you... george bush, michael chrichton (rip), and bill o'reilly... against smart people. that sucks.
I'll wait for your list of sciency articles to counter mine. But spare me the ridiculousness if you can.
I've always had a problem with smart people. they are often so naive.Quote:
it's you... george bush, michael chrichton (rip), and bill o'reilly... against smart people.