Page 48 of 111 FirstFirst ... 3843444546474849505152535898 ... LastLast
Results 941 to 960 of 2209
  1. #941  
    Anyone who would still thinks that global warming is not harmful and that man does not contribute to it, your opinion has been overruled by the Supreme Court.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/bonds...00675720070402
  2. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #942  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    One can be aware and still not understand that of which one is aware.

    While this White House may be more disciplined than most, it is difficult to believe that it could exercise that kind of control over staffers, much less a cabinet officer. However, what I do not understand is why they would want to. The problem was there when they arrived and will be there when they leave. It is as difficult to ignore as the pink elephant in the corner. Not acknowledging it will not make it go away or change its color.
    How you can maintain this unique perspective at this point in their history, despite this administration's depraved indifference, is simply beyond reason.
    Last edited by backbeat; 04/03/2007 at 10:50 AM. Reason: personal attack, my arse
  3. #943  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    Anyone who would still thinks that global warming is not harmful and that man does not contribute to it, your opinion has been overruled by the Supreme Court.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/bonds...00675720070402
    I'd say that conclusion is stretching it a bit, but at least they concluded it is polution...
    Its a start..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  4. #944  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT View Post
    I'd say that conclusion is stretching it a bit, but at least they concluded it is polution...
    Its a start..
    pollution: (undesirable state of the natural environment being contaminated with harmful substances as a consequence of human activities
    http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=pollution
  5. #945  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    How you can maintain this unique perspective at this point in their history, despite this administration's depraved indifference, is simply beyond reason.
    I prefer not to attribute to "depravity" that which is as easily explained by stupidity. While this White House is well disciplined, few have suggested that they are even smart, let alone, brilliant. (Karl Rove may be a genius of a sort. Here I am a little more likely to grant depravity.)
  6. #946  
    I'm so grateful that to pass the bar and be considered for membership in the Supreame Court, lawyers now have to become climatologists.

    I produce CO2 when I Breathe...

    CO2 is a "Greenhouse Gas"...

    Therefore I should stop Breathing.

    But so should all of you, too- so don't get any snide ideas.
    Of course, those in developing countries, according to Kyoto, do not have to adjust their brething-habits, just us in the evil, old west.


    Why is CO2 a Greenhouse gas?
    Greenhouses are filled with plants.
    Plants take in CO2 and produce Oxygen.
    Wouldn't that make Oxygen a Greenhouse Gas?

    It's so confusing...

    I'm still not convinced that some slight global warming isn't a good thing.
    Except that those on the equator would have to buy more CFC-free air conditioners. Ski lodges wouldn't be too happy either, I guess.
    Last edited by duanedude1; 04/03/2007 at 11:04 AM.
    "Everybody Palm!"

    Palm III/IIIC, Palm Vx, Verizon: Treo 650, Centro, Pre+.
    Leo killed my future Pre 3 & Opal, dagnabitt!
    Should I buy a Handspring Visor instead?
    Got a Pre2! "It eats iPhones for Breakfast"!
  7. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #947  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    I prefer not to attribute to "depravity" that which is as easily explained by stupidity. While this White House is well disciplined, few have suggested that they are even smart, let alone, brilliant. (Karl Rove may be a genius of a sort. Here I am a little more likely to grant depravity.)
    The persona of this administration is discipline. The actions of this administration are self-serving manipulation.

    Familiarity with Rove's professional background gives one an inside clue as to the manipulative nature of this administration, and on virtually every conceivable level of the Executive branch, leaching it's will into the Judicial. No genius involved, unless you would equate his genius to the disciplined Joseph Goebbels.
  8. #948  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    The persona of this administration is discipline. The actions of this administration are self-serving manipulation.

    Familiarity with Rove's professional background gives one an inside clue as to the manipulative nature of this administration, and on virtually every conceivable level of the Executive branch, leaching it's will into the Judicial. No genius involved, unless you would equate his genius to the disciplined Joseph Goebbels.
    I said, "of a sort." I did not specify what sort. Your view is consistent with what I said.
  9. #949  
    Quote Originally Posted by duanedude1 View Post
    I'm so grateful that to pass the bar and be considered for membership in the Supreame Court, lawyers now have to become climatologists.

    I produce CO2 when I Breathe...

    CO2 is a "Greenhouse Gas"...

    Therefore I should stop Breathing.

    But so should all of you, too- so don't get any snide ideas.
    Of course, those in developing countries, according to Kyoto, do not have to adjust their brething-habits, just us in the evil, old west.


    Why is CO2 a Greenhouse gas?
    Greenhouses are filled with plants.
    Plants take in CO2 and produce Oxygen.
    Wouldn't that make Oxygen a Greenhouse Gas?

    It's so confusing...

    I'm still not convinced that some slight global warming isn't a good thing.
    Except that those on the equator would have to buy more CFC-free air conditioners. Ski lodges wouldn't be too happy either, I guess.
    Isn't it scary how those who know the least about a thing have the strongest convictions? Clearly you don't have a clue even about the most basic issues of global warming, and yet you claim to know how good or bad "slight" (whatever that means) global warming will be. Where ignorance is bliss...
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  10. #950  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    Anyone who would still thinks that global warming is not harmful and that man does not contribute to it, your opinion has been overruled by the Supreme Court.
    Yeah, but they also said George Bush won the 2000 election.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  11. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #951  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Yeah, but they also said George Bush won the 2000 election.
    Actually, the Supremes declared King George to be the winner by disallowing votes.
  12. #952  
    Quote Originally Posted by duanedude1 View Post
    Why is CO2 a Greenhouse gas?
    Greenhouses are filled with plants.
    Plants take in CO2 and produce Oxygen.
    Wouldn't that make Oxygen a Greenhouse Gas?

    It's so confusing...
    Sure is .. If you don't know what you are talking about.

    Greenhouse glass allows long (heat) and short wavelength (visible, UV) radiation in but blocks the long wavelength (heat) from escaping. That's how it warms the greenhouse, even in winters .. by trapping the heat in.

    CO2 (and some other gases like methane but not O2) work the same way. They allow full spectrum in and block heat from radiating out. That's how atmospheric greenhouse gases raise the temperature of the hearth .. the greenhouse effect.
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  13. #953  
    "The available evidence for global warming (which is continuously being corroborated with new data) is beyond reasonable doubt (or virtually certain as some scientists like to say).

    It is highly likely (i.e. preponderance of evidence) that these trends will continue in the near future and it is also reasonable to believe that these continued trends would cause some kind of global climatic shift though it is uncertain as to what kind of climate changes will occur or as to the magnitude of such changes.

    This is the general consensus of the scientific community studying the global climate - and of course there is a significant effort to try and improve the level of certainty as much as possible."

    After reading almost all the posts in this thread, I would have to agree most with the above post. My Issues are:

    1) If it is "reasonable" to believe that these continued trends would cause some kind of global climatic shift in the future, then it must also be "reasonable" to believe that they will not result in some kind of disastrous global climate shift.

    2) I'm all for limiting greenhouse gasses (even if there is a chance that it won't effect the climate.... i.e. won't work), so long as it is achieved through capitalism rather than through raising taxes and limiting freedoms. That being said.....I will be more willing to give up certain freedoms and taxes...as I become more convinced that a disaster is imenent. At this point, I'm not convinced enough that I (or my children's children) are in enough danger to give up anything more then a couple incandescent light bulbs and maybe purchase a hybrid vehicle (provided it competes well with regular cars.)

    I believe that this opinion is "at least" reasonable.
  14. #954  
    Quote Originally Posted by duanedude1 View Post
    .........
    Why is CO2 a Greenhouse gas?
    Greenhouses are filled with plants.
    Plants take in CO2 and produce Oxygen.
    Wouldn't that make Oxygen a Greenhouse Gas?

    It's so confusing........
    Indeed. I am not quite sure whether you are asking for clarification or simply being facetious. While I suspect the latter, I will respond to the former.

    CO2 is called a "greenhouse" gas not because of its role within the traditional glass house but because it plays the same role as the glass. It forms the global greenhouse as the glass forms the local one. That is to say, it traps heat.
  15. #955  
    Quote Originally Posted by aairman23 View Post
    ..............I'm all for limiting greenhouse gasses (even if there is a chance that it won't effect the climate.... i.e. won't work), so long as it is achieved through capitalism rather than through raising taxes and limiting freedoms. That being said.....I will be more willing to give up certain freedoms and taxes...as I become more convinced that a disaster is imenent. At this point, I'm not convinced enough that I (or my children's children) are in enough danger to give up anything more then a couple incandescent light bulbs and maybe purchase a hybrid vehicle (provided it competes well with regular cars.)

    I believe that this opinion is "at least" reasonable.
    Well, reasonable or not, it is certainly popular.

    I suggest that the "global warming" rhetoric is somewhat over the top. It is so apocalyptic that it defeats itself. The rhetoric infantilizes and incapacitates, rather than motivating and empowering, us. The rhetoric says that we are way down on the steep part of the road to hell; we do not want to go forward and it is too late to turn back. If true, we are all dead anyway; we might as well relax and enjoy ourselves.

    I think that that is a large part of what so many people are resisting. They might gladly cooperate in a plan with promise but are not willing to go far out of their way for one that admits up front that all effort, no matter how well intentioned, is futile.
  16. #956  
    I agree. I feel like the far left makes such rediculous claims about how all the sudden all our cities are going to be underwater. The more fantastical the claims become, the more people will simply believe it is impossible to fix. Then moderates like me will quit trying to "pitch in" and "do our part".

    Would it be considered "reasonable" to believe that our technology will evolve along with climate change? (protecting us and maybe a polar bear or two

    Aaron
  17. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #957  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    Well, reasonable or not, it is certainly popular.

    I suggest that the "global warming" rhetoric is somewhat over the top. It is so apocalyptic that it defeats itself. The rhetoric infantilizes and incapacitates, rather than motivating and empowering, us. The rhetoric says that we are way down on the steep part of the road to hell; we do not want to go forward and it is too late to turn back. If true, we are all dead anyway; we might as well relax and enjoy ourselves.
    Over the top is when Okeechobee becomes beachfront. Yes, there are serious measures that can be taken, and it requires grassroots action, but the fire has to be seriously felt on the arse of the US government for those actions to take place. Given this administration's place in world history, they are a very large impediment to understanding the reality of the crisis and the need for timely resolution. It is up to those in positions of governmental leadership to rise to the challenge. And it is up to us to make them see the necessity for immediate action. This is a salvage job, not a job for creature comforts and carving out strategies of personal gain.

    I think that that is a large part of what so many people are resisting. They might gladly cooperate in a plan with promise but are not willing to go far out of their way for one that admits up front that all effort, no matter how well intentioned, is futile.
    'Admits'? Is it your position that "all effort is futile" or is this your impression of the mindset of those who are equivocal toward global climate change's reality?

    Once the self-righteous Right realize there is no escaping this issue's urgent reality, and can develop a ploy to make this issue about 'the children', they'll package this issue as their own. Just watch.

    Have you viewed An Inconvenient Truth? Most people, especially Americans are very typical frogs.

    Rather than expressing views about views, do you hold any position on this issue?
  18. #958  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    ..........'Admits'? Is it your position that "all effort is futile" or is this your impression of the mindset of those who are equivocal toward global climate change's reality?
    It is my impression from the rhetoric that the problem defies human initiative. I hear little to suggest that it is not already too late to do anything about global warming.

    That said, there are those that use fear of global warming to promote pet projects and ambitions; even they are too modest to suggest that a "solution" may be found in their proposals.
  19. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #959  
    If only we had an empowered (read: non-castrated) Cabinet-level EPA ...

    If only US Industry understood that $25-50B/year is a cheap investment VS the realistic alternative ...

    If only George Sr. had the Nanny to take Shrub out back just one more time ...
  20. #960  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    If only we had an empowered (read: non-castrated) Cabinet-level EPA ...

    If only US Industry understood that $25-50B/year is a cheap investment VS the realistic alternative ...

    If only George Sr. had the Nanny to take Shrub out back just one more time ...
    I give up. You win.

    Tell me one more time what you would do with the $50B.

    I was always a fan of Senator Everett Dirksen for pointing out that a billion dollars here and a billion dollars there pretty soon added up to real money. That said, for a country that can afford to fight the War in Iraq off-budget, $50B is not too much money to bet, even on the come. I would not have a problem with $50B a year if it would "solve the problem." Where would you spend the first dollar?

    I might be willing to thrash Shrub within an inch of his young life "if only" it promised a solution.

    Perhaps it is time to stop doing research on global warming and start doing research on what to do about it.

Posting Permissions