Global Warming...Some like it Hot, Some don't

Matthew 10:16

Matthew 10:16

Member # 003
Location (City)
Bethalto, IL.
First Name
David
Last Name
Virgin
OK call me a sado masochist or a sadistic _________. I guess I'll start this back up & probably regret it. And Puleeeeeeeeeeeze don't tar & feather me. :D

Here's my question: Which is more risky to believe the "crazys" that believe Global Warming is truth or the "naysayers" who think they're nuts? I'm one of those NUTS that would error on the side of caution on this one cause I hate to think of the consequences for us if we error the other way. :eek:

And Craig I was thinking about the volcano thing & was thinking this way (yeah I know I'm dangerous when I think:D). Granted that a volcano is a catastrophic event that spews LOTS of ash & gases(?) into the atmosphere, it only happens very rarely correct? And doesn't the hypothesis for global warming have to to do with the daily pollution of the atmosphere by man? See where I'm going here? I'm not a scientist by any means. Help me out here guys.
 
I think more of a concern is our streams, rivers and oceans. Yes the salt in the ocean breaks down alot of polution. But to see the damage to some of the rivers I used to fish when i was in my teens makes me sad - one of my favorite was the big river between browns ford crossing and downstream to morris mill ( 18 mile and 6 mile by the way the crow flys ) this stream was at 1 time loaded full of ( my fav ) small mouth bass norm was 2 1/2 lb and now your lucky if you catch any and not that size or even close to it. I kept very few a 4 lb small mouth took at least 10 years to make that size - mostly kept crappie - this concerns me very much and is no hoax
 
Dave,
I never got into the other thread, but I'll take a shot at some of my thoughts on Global warming.
In My Opinion----

I'll go on record that I don't believe in the "Science" that has been used to prove this point. When NASA points out that other planets in our solar system are also losing some of their ice caps, then to me the common denominator is that big gaseous fireball at the center of our system. I also think the earth is a living thing and it goes through cycles that man, in our concieted wisdom, thinks we understand it all. There are too many multitude of variables.

At any point in time there are dozens of active volcanoes going around the world. They are constantly emitting gases, they just aren't all "Spewing" massive amounts that capture the media attention.

Do I think we need to do what we can to clean up our rivers and streams, and do what we can to help our environment? YES! Do I think our goverment has the right to mandate things to the people and take our funds to fost off these unproven schemes. Absolutely not. Our goverment has proven time and again that they can't manage money and after a time is just a play thing to them. The more they spend the more they need, but it's not being all used for the purpose it was originally intended. Private groups do more than the efforts of our goverment with way less funds.

I haven't taken classes like Craig, but the science that I've looked into wouldn't hold up for "Proof" that man is causing "Global Warming". BTW have you noticed how they are gradually shifting away from the "Global Warming" phrase to "Climate Change". The climate is always changing, much like a politician's views on what's right. Even before the damaging emails came out I didn't believe in the Global Warming scam, but they did help explain some of the dissenting views on the blogs. I've never trusted Al Gore in Anything, but that again is my opinion and it's just a gut check. I don't like him. I believe they should show all the data with hard evidence backing it up. Collect all the data and display it for everyone, not just those that follow your hypothesis. If the facts are there, proponents and dissenters can't logically discussthe findings. I think that's how we staged on the "Age of Enlightenment".

See - My Opinion, no harsh language. See you soon at the Tuesday meeting! ;)
 
Last edited:
I agree that cooking books has been happening..when you are given grant money(as most of the scientists do, thru university's or what ever) you prety well know what the grantor wants the answer to be. So guess what? They move to present the results that they recieved the grant for.
Just remember:figures don't lie...liars figure.
Pay me enough money, give me the numbers and I make the numbers work in your favor.
Once again it is about control...remember don't ever waste a good crisis(progressive's creed)
 
Sorry to say I had to do this but I was at a salvage yard about 15 years ago and purchased a 9 inch ford center section for a bronco I had and could not beleive my eyes when I saw the owner dumping oil on the ground next to a creek and walked over took a look and you could see the oil from prior dumping on the surface. Yep you guessed it I did turn his butt in - I felt that kind of stupidity deserved what he got - surprising the EPA was there 3 days later and shut him down - I managed to get a copy of the charges - stolen striped cars - no storage of hazardous waste - waste batteries improperly stored ( acid dumped on the ground ) and every soil test they did showed oil gas and benzine. never did hear the outcome but this kind of thing was and may be wide spread still.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Bull. My favorite thing that you said was: "man, in our conceited wisdom, thinks we understand it all. There are too many multitude of variables." Couldn't agree more on that one Bull, whether we are talkin about this issue or a lot of others for that matter.

Love what you said too Snakey: "Just remember: figures don't lie....liars figure."
 
Last edited:
I wish the human race was as equally energized about curing diseases, ending poverty, improving education, ending chemical dependency, child labor, human trafficing, race wars, ethnic cleansing, cleaning the water, eliminating ghettos, and I could go on and on.

There are 100s of things we should solve first IMHO. But we won't.

Then you'll say - but none of those things will end the world for all of us. Really? Pretty nasty list right there. How many millions of people have died (actually died - not statistics or predictions) because of the things on that list? Solve some of those problems and you'll have a virtual Utopia.

But you say - it's the end of the world! We have to do SOMETHING !!!

B.S. ! This old globe can shrug off anything we throw at it. How arrogant are we? Sure we should pollute less, burn (and use) fewer fossil fuels, clean up the environment - but global warming? Please. If you think a Prius in your driveway, a full recycling bin, and a couple of solar panels on your house solves anything you are one messed up bird. (Not talking about anyone personally - just 3rd person).

You know for all of their "data" I have yet to hear how it ends (if we do everything that they say). I'm from the Show-Me state - so show me what happens if we all (every one on the planet) goes green. They say well - it's too big, too many variables, we can't know those conclusions it's just to big. AhHa - we can't know. It's so big we and our supercomputers can't wrap our little minds around it and figure it out - but we must do it anyway. You have to believe us (science). Folks - that's not science - that's faith. And it's going to take a bit more than a few tree rings and Al Gore to get me to visit that church.

How about this thought in exchange? There are natural process at work that we don't understand - yet. It wasn't all that long ago that science was sure the smallest thing in the universe was an atom. Then Einstein showed us how to split it. Why is it so hard to humble ourselves and admit that we don't know? That something else (other than "man") is in control and more powerful. Ask a question and discover the truth instead of launching into a global Chicken Little routine.

But for me the "Green" crusade is a marketing campaign. If it was really that bad the world would have clamped down already. Example? Remember a couple of decades ago when there was somebody spiking bottles of Tylenol? How long did it take until every single bottle of any sort of medication on the planet had a tamper-proof cap? About 3 weeks? After 9/11 how long did it take for every airline gate to become a secured area - 3 days. Think about it. If it was clear cut as bad as they say - end of the world stuff - we'd all be living like Daniel Boone right now.

Just MY rant on a record cold Friday night.
 
I agree that everyone must be good stewards of the land. We should all be concerned with polution and the environment. I think eveyone can agree dumping chemicals and not disposing properly is not acceptable, any more than allowing companies to dump in the river. I'm sure everyone here would agree the Exon Valdese was a horible environmental disastor, and it cannot be allowed happen.

One of the problems I have with the "Green" movement is exactly what Mark has said. It is a marketing tool. For example, there is a nationwide Architectural Firm that has a very large office downtown. They had an awsome office. When the green movement hit, they remodeled their office. Sure they recycled what they could. but you can't recycle everything. Not to mention all the fuel, electricity that was spent to accomplish this remodel and make the items used. All in an effort to call themselves "Green". To me there is nothing green about it.

Sustainable building design is something that every designer should have been incorporating anyway. When you look back at the buildings in the 40's, most had operable windows, and plenty of them and many had large overhangs. With the invention of modern air conditioning and flourscent lighting, people discovered that you didn't have to put in the expensive windows to have adequate lighting and comfort. Thus making the operating costs of the building enormus. With all of the modern convienences, people moved away from what should have been done, and I agree with going back "old school" on sustainability.

I grew up on a farm and some things kind of hit close to home. It was not long ago the government discussed taxing farmers on their livestock because of the amount of co2 gas they emit. This would devistate the farmer as we know it in the US. I know a guy who owns one of the largest port producing companys in the nation. This would have leveled his business, not to mention the small independant farmer.

How can animals producing CO2, a natural element that plants need to survive be any more of a polutant than the O that the plants produce? My point on the volcano is that they are crying chicken little at something that has been produced naturally since the beginning of time.

No one, and I mean no one (not even a politician that uses hollywood movie clips in his movies) has any proof that this is not simply a natural occurance. Geoligists can look at rock formations and tell that there has been natural change in the climate before we could have ever had an impact.

If you really want to get into conspiracy theroies, I believe it was Carl Marx that wrote in one of his books, the quickest way to socializm (and/or one world gov.) is to create a global catastrophy (a.k.a Global warming)

If the G8 summit would have produced results, you quickly see the economy die completly. But this discussion could open up a whole other can of worms.

Did you notice that the nominclature changed from "Global warming" to "Climate change" when the temp's didn't meet their hypothesis? Follow the money trail.
 
the water problem in no hoax - west alton good example - wells around pitstop area the water can no longer be used for drinking - due to contamination - have freind that lives on old red school road - he told me well for church by the post office - can t be used that was of 2 years ago. this problem was not caused by floods - was caused by fuel leakage from tank into the ground. unclear of which station had the leaking tank and the water table their is high.
 
I think we all agree, that polution such as mike w stated, should not be tolerated. It is also very easy to prove that it happened, and can be prevented. It can be tested and a true resultant can be found. This is not the case with CO2 and carbon credits.

However I find this somewhat different from CO2. I remember my Grandpa telling me when I was little. Someday they are going to try and tax air. That is exactly what is happening.
 
Good To know where Stimulus money is going(went)

Washington, DC - In the face of rising unemployment and record-breaking deficits, policy experts at the National Center for Public Policy Research are criticizing the Obama Administration for awarding a half million dollar grant from the economic stimulus package to Penn State Professor Michael Mann, a key figure in the Climategate controversy.

"It's outrageous that economic stimulus money is being used to support research conducted by Michael Mann at the very time he’s under investigation by Penn State and is one of the key figures in the international Climategate scandal. Penn State should immediately return these funds to the U.S. Treasury," said Tom Borelli, Ph.D., director of the National Center's Free Enterprise Project.

Professor Mann is currently under investigation by Penn State University because of activities related to a closed circle of climate scientists who appear to have been engaged in agenda-driven science. Emails and documents mysteriously released from the previously-prestigious Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom revealed discussions of manipulation and destruction of research data, as well as efforts to interfere with the peer review process to stifle opposing views. The motivation underlying these efforts appears to be a coordinated strategy to support the belief that mankind's activities are causing global warming.

"It's no wonder that Obama's stimulus plan is failing to produce jobs. Taxpayer dollars aren't being used in the ways most likely to spur job creation. The stimulus was not sold to the public as a way to reward a loyalist in the climate change debate. Nor was the stimulus sold as a way to promote the Obama Administration's position on the global warming theory. This misuse of stimulus money illustrates why tax cuts are a better way to stimulate the economy than letting the government decide where to spend taxpayer dollars. As is often the case, political considerations corrupt the distribution of government funds," said Deneen Borelli, a fellow with the National Center's Project 21 black leadership network.

"Mann's credentials as a climate change alarmist seems to fit the political criteria for stimulus funds sometimes known as 'Obama money'," added Deneen Borelli.

Mann is a central and controversial figure in climate change research. Mann's so-called "hockey stick" graph depicting temperature changes over a 1000 year period was used as evidence in the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2001 report to demonstrate that carbon dioxide from industrial activity is causing global warming. Mimicking the shape of a hockey stick, the graph showed a long time period of stable temperatures (the shaft) followed by a rapid rise in temperatures (the blade) during the last hundred years.

Critics of the hockey stick claim Mann manipulated data to eliminate periods of time such as the medieval warming period and the little ice age to eradicate the visual impact of natural global temperature variation. The emails from Climategate reveal that the inner circle of climate scientists were troubled by the methods Mann used to produce the graph.

"It's shocking that taxpayer money is being used to support a researcher who seemingly showed little regard to the basic tenes of science - a dispassionate search for the truth," said Tom Borelli.

The $541,184 grant is for three years and was initiated in June 2009.

The National Center for Public Policy Research is a conservative, free-market think-tank established in 1982. It receives less than 1% of its revenue from corporations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top