Page 56 of 111 FirstFirst ... 646515253545556575859606166106 ... LastLast
Results 1,101 to 1,120 of 2209
  1. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1101  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Terrorists target civilians.
    What a myopic explanation of the US's comprehension of this 'war'.

    Bad guys who target our uniformed troops with IEDs aren't terrorists. They're just using guerilla tactics.
    The same homegrown 'insurgents' that even the US DoD has confirmed make up 90-95% of the 'enemy' in Iraq? With 51% of the Iraqi people who support insurgent attacks on the US, as of Feb '07, in what direction are we going 4+ years after the invasion of this sovereign nation?

    Until they get their hands on WMD.
    The US has clearly created the perfect lab environment to exacerbate this potential. Thanks George, ****, Rummy, Condi, Powell, Wolfowitz, Perl, et al.

    But the "war on terror" label describes our actions, not theirs.
    The US has no understanding of why it has this enemy. Sales is everything, afterall, and you can't mass-sell without a quaint slogan.
  2. #1102  
    Do you think that Gore and other Global Warming professional activists will take on China or only concentrate their efforts on the soon to be number 2 offender?

    China to top USA in greenhouse emissions

    SHANGHAI (AP) China will overtake the USA as the world's biggest source of greenhouse gasses this year, a news report cited the International Energy Agency as saying.

    -------------------------

    China maintains that richer countries are responsible for the accumulated greenhouse emissions and should take the lead in cleaning up the problem.

    However, Birol's remarks reflect rising concern both internationally and domestically over the environmental costs of China's soaring growth. Beijing last week said the economy grew by 11.1% in the first three months from the same period last year, defying attempts to slow down growth and ensure money is invested wisely.

    China's heavy reliance on highly polluting coal for electricity generation have made it a major contributor to greenhouse gasses, mainly carbon dioxide, which are blamed for damaging the ozone layer and causing global warming.

    Industries and urban buildings are far less energy efficient than those in developed countries and the massive growth of private car ownership has helped turn air in cities such as Shanghai and Beijing into a toxic soup.

    In an article in the U.S. magazine The Nation this week, Elizabeth Economy of the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations wrote that Chinese officials are either unwilling or powerless to enforce environmental standards as a consequence of the regime's emphasis on development.

    If current trends hold, China's greenhouse gas emissions will likely exceed that of all industrialized countries combined over the next 25 years, wrote Economy.

    ---------------------

    However, Birol said Beijing's refusal to place restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions undermines attempts to draft a new international treaty against greenhouse gasses to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012, he said.

    "Without having China on board, without having them play a significant role, all these efforts, none of it, will make any sense," Birol was quoted as saying.

    SOURCE
  3. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1103  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Do you think that Gore and other Global Warming professional activists will take on China or only concentrate their efforts on the soon to be number 2 offender?
    One first bears responsibility for themselves before they can stand as an example to others. However, I believe Gore will address China's rate of emission escalation responsibly and appropriately.

    On an aside - Your characterization of 'professional activists' is a bit jaded, IMO.
  4. #1104  
    Gore is an amateur?
  5. #1105  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Gore is an amateur?
    lol
  6. #1106  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    One first bears responsibility for themselves before they can stand as an example to others.
    A true universal statement that could be applied to nearly any debate. But "If current trends hold, China's greenhouse gas emissions will likely exceed that of all industrialized countries combined over the next 25 years" will make it challenging to make much of a difference, no matter how great of an example we personally set .

    However, I believe Gore will address China's rate of emission escalation responsibly and appropriately.
    Has Gore already addressed this? If not, what indications has he given that he will.

    On an aside - Your characterization of 'professional activists' is a bit jaded, IMO.
    professional
    1. following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain
    2. making a business or constant practice of something not properly to be regarded as a business
    3. undertaken or engaged in as a means of livelihood or for gain
    4. done by a professional; expert
    I didn't mean anything by it beyond those who are engaged in the fight against global warming in a full time capacity, for profit ventures, full / part time employed by a global warming affiliated organization, etc... Are they willing to take on China? And if so, how?






    backbeat: What is your opinion or perspective on China's role with global warming? How should we address them?
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 04/26/2007 at 10:14 PM.
  7. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1107  
    The US has very little direct leverage with China, due to it being the US's financier. China is, however, making some significant progress in energy conservation. What would accelerate their progress greatly would be a multi-lateral effort to changing China's reliance upon coal to lower emission power, especially efficient electric and hydro coops. Create value in trade incentives tied to carbon emission reduction.

    China recently enacted new laws in part setting a goal of reducing the energy peak demand per dollar of GDP by 4% per year through 2010. The US? 1.8%. Their new priorities also include rapid growth in renewable energies. China, in my opinion, recognizes their position in the world today regarding Global Climate Change as a unique opportunity to advance well beyond most industrialized nations. Also, China's plan for expanding their aggregated efficiency power plants to deliver the same demands by saving electricity instead of producing it is a real paradigm shift. A concept the US could use more of.

    What does this have to do with Al Gore? Beats me why it needs to. He isn't setting today's US Energy or Environmental policies and as I said earlier, America must look itself in the mirror before pointing fingers elsewhere. Politics, here and otherwise, could learn the same lesson. The days of Lee Atwater/Carl Rove-designed irresponsibly manipulative campaigns are universally known for what they are. This nation is moving on.
  8. #1108  
    Just thought I'd pop in and add some interesting information. Al Gore is not the poster boy for environmentalism everything thinks.

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/gorehome.asp

    Al Gore's Personal Energy Use Is His Own "Inconvenient Truth"
    Gore's home uses 20 times the national average.
    And how does he explain this? Easy. He buys Carbon Credits from his own company. So, what have we learned today? If you are rich and can pay for more energy, you can use more energy.

    On a side note, if Gore was really interested in reaching as many people as possible with his 'message' he should have just recorded his entire lecture and sent it out on DVD to all the nations in the world instead of flying to each place ("I've given this speech a thousand times. At least a thousand times" - from "An Inconvenient Truth") on a private jet, which uses more fuel than a fleet of SUVs.

    I don't know whether humans are responsible for global warming, or even if global warming exists, but if it does exist and humans are responsible in the way that Al Gore says, then why is he being such a hypocrite?

    P.S. - I'm sorry if this has been said before. I didn't see it in my cursory glance.
  9. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1109  
    ^ Retreaded garbage argument (within this same thread).
  10. #1110  
    It maybe retreaded but hardly garbage arguments when comparing to his own statements requesting sacrificial conservation.
  11. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1111  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    It maybe retreaded but hardly garbage arguments when comparing to his own statements requesting sacrificial conservation.
    Then you're not sufficiently informed. Sufficient info, free from the RNC-originated email this report is based upon, has been provided.
  12. #1112  
    Do you have sources? I am always willing to learn.
  13. #1113  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    Then you're not sufficiently informed. Sufficient info, free from the RNC-originated email this report is based upon, has been provided.
    You keep saying that this email originated from the RNC. I've asked you before. Is that based on fact, or did you just make it up?
  14. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1114  
    A reasoned conclusion, given the RNC/Faux News signature all over it, e.g. 'Yet another story you WON'T hear on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC or read about in the New York Times or the Washington Post' and journalistic double-standards throughout. Ask your brother.

    BTW - Besides your email's claims, what evidence supports such confirmed knowledge:
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    I know Gore consumes more fossil fuel than most people on the planet.
    Since he's no longer with the arch-conservative American Enterprise Institute, you can now reach Master Drew Johnson of the arch-conservative Tennessee Center for Policy Research at drew@tennesseepolicy.org
  15. #1115  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    A reasoned conclusion, given the RNC/Faux News signature all over it, e.g. 'Yet another story you WON'T hear on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC or read about in the New York Times or the Washington Post' and journalistic double-standards throughout. Ask your brother.
    Okay. You just made it up. No surprise.


    BTW - Besides your email's claims, what evidence supports such confirmed knowledge:
    We've gone over this. TCPR says his natural gas bills last year averaged $1080 per month.

    Also, he flies around the world in a private jet.
  16. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1116  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Okay. You just made it up. No surprise.
    The concept of informed reason is beyond you. Got it.

    TCPR says his natural gas bills last year averaged $1080 per month.
    Besides this urban-myth email ... Verifiable Source?
  17. #1117  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    The concept of informed reason is beyond you. Got it.
    Information is necessary for informed reason. You made a claim without facts. You have no source. You made it up. That's fine. That's what you do.


    Besides this urban-myth email ... Verifiable Source?
    Read more carefully. The source is TCPR, not the email. Snopes.com, which you respect enough to have quoted yourself, supported both the email and TCPR's claims.
  18. #1118  
    Interesting quote from an entomology listerv I am part of.

    It is illustrative of why
    many blanch at the zealotry over global warming, etc., etc. The same dire
    predictions were given for oil (we were supposed to be out of oil by 1990),
    population explosion leading to mass starvation, etc. Interestingly, the
    "global cooling" tirades of the '70s are spot on with the "global warming"
    tirades of today. Both are/were based on extrapolations, although the
    current bit has much more science behind it; in any event, both are based on
    extrapolations. A couple more Mt. Pinatubo's and Mt. St. Helens, and we
    will likely be screaming about how to avoid another ice age....but that is
    fodder for comment in future decades.
    In short, regardless of an concensus among scientist or what the available evidence tells us, it is when the media and politicians sensationalize issue and start making wild extrapolations and grand conclusions that we have problems.

    IMO, the concensus among scientists is that there is global warming. There is a concensus that humans MAY play a role, potentially along with other factors.

    This has been sensationalized by people to a great degree.

    Chris
  19. #1119  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    A reasoned conclusion, given the RNC/Faux News signature all over it, e.g. 'Yet another story you WON'T hear on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC or read about in the New York Times or the Washington Post' and journalistic double-standards throughout. Ask your brother.
    The lack of evidence of something does not equal evidence to the contrary.
  20. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #1120  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Information is necessary for informed reason. You made a claim without facts. You have no source. You made it up. That's fine. That's what you do.
    With your rationale, good thing our judicial system doesn't require your opinion. Go ask your bubba.

    The source is TCPR, not the email.
    No verified sources to cite? Check!

    Where did the ultra-Right TCPR obtain billing hx/usage hx?

    BTW - I purposely used the same reporting source you originally did. Does not add any weight one way or the other.

Posting Permissions