Page 87 of 111 FirstFirst ... 3777828384858687888990919297 ... LastLast
Results 1,721 to 1,740 of 2209
  1. Jaer57's Avatar
    Posts
    160 Posts
    Global Posts
    165 Global Posts
    #1721  
    Quote Originally Posted by kabamm View Post
    I am SICK and TIRED of this lie. Senator Gore was deeply involved in the original development - enabling legislation and funding. He never claimed to have invented the internet, but we would not have the internet as we know it without him. Yet you all blindly hate and mock him, which simply illustrates your gross ignorance *sigh*
    The strange irony in all this is the carbon footprint of the Internet, so to speak. If you think about all the power consumption and pollution created to create the power to drive every computer, network, and connected device worldwide, it might be shown to be one of the largest contributors to pollution out there. As a matter of fact, I think TIME did an article on the contributions of computers to pollution. Oh the irony...
    Current device: Palm Pre
    Former devices: Treo 755p, Treo 650
  2. #1722  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaer57 View Post
    The strange irony in all this is the carbon footprint of the Internet, so to speak. If you think about all the power consumption and pollution created to create the power to drive every computer, network, and connected device worldwide, it might be shown to be one of the largest contributors to pollution out there. As a matter of fact, I think TIME did an article on the contributions of computers to pollution. Oh the irony...
    Never thought of it that way....but in thinking it through in that manner, it becomes more likely that Al Gore did invent the internet.....it'a all making sense now. Well.....thanks Jaer57 for pointing this out.
  3. yurgon's Avatar
    Posts
    27 Posts
    Global Posts
    28 Global Posts
    #1723  
    I agree global warming is part of mother nature. Nature will run it's course. Isn't this within norm anyways seeing as the earth has a tilt cycle of 41,000 years?
  4. #1724  
    Quote Originally Posted by yurgon View Post
    I agree global warming is part of mother nature. Nature will run it's course. Isn't this within norm anyways seeing as the earth has a tilt cycle of 41,000 years?
    The scientific community doesn't agree, however, and believes that human progress has impacted the earth in a way that is different that the usual cycle of the planet.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  5. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #1725  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Glaciers a canary in the coal mine of global warming - CNN.com

    Of course, it's only the US Geological Survey, so they probably have a liberal bias and can thus be discounted.
    What's the point of posting this article?
  6. #1726  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    The scientific community doesn't agree, however, and believes that human progress has impacted the earth in a way that is different that the usual cycle of the planet.
    Heavy sigh....you are wrong...again....the scientific community does NOT agree. That is just the left scare tactics when they say that every scientist agrees. Most agree to the warmng, but to say all scientist agree that it is human caused is just irresponsible as a teacher such as yourself. Is this what you teach your children? Oh geeez.....these left wing/Al Gore scare tactics are just getting old.
  7. #1727  
    Looks like another thread that should be renamed the liberal hater thread.
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  8. #1728  
    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    Looks like another thread that should be renamed the liberal hater thread.
    So if I say I disagree with the liberal thinking on this, then I hate them? Really? I admit I might not want to hang out with most liberals, but to say that if you disagree with liberals you hate them is a bit harsh. Okay, let's hold hands and sing Kumbayah....again....to show that at least this Conservative doesn't hate the liberals.

    I am curious....do you liberals hate us Conservatives? If you think Conservatives hate liberals, I'm guessing it goes the other way?
  9. #1729  
    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    Looks like another thread that should be renamed the liberal hater thread.
    Are you really that blind that you don't notice a comparable amount of 'conservative hating' going on? That's the way most of these sorts of threads go. Perhaps since I don't pigeon-hole so easily into 'one side' or the 'other' it's easier for me to notice.
    ‎"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...
  10. #1730  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    So if I say I disagree with the liberal thinking on this, then I hate them? Really? I admit I might not want to hang out with most liberals, but to say that if you disagree with liberals you hate them is a bit harsh. Okay, let's hold hands and sing Kumbayah....again....to show that at least this Conservative doesn't hate the liberals.

    I am curious....do you liberals hate us Conservatives? If you think Conservatives hate liberals, I'm guessing it goes the other way?
    Sad, but true, perception is reality.
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  11. #1731  
    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    Sad, but true, perception is reality.
    That response doesn't really make sense in context. And no, reality is reality. Perception is an interpretation of reality. You can't change reality, but you can change your perception if you're willing.
    ‎"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...
  12. #1732  
    What's the point of posting this article?
    I'm starting to ask myself the same question. Why should a 50-year study by the US Geological Survey have any impact on the discussion? Or the opinions of 99% of the scientific community? This discussion is not at all based upon science anyway.

    But really, is that a surprise? We have a conservative ideology that in large part still doesn't believe in the science behind evolution, so why should they believe in climate change science?

    It's part of the ongoing anti-intellectual, anti-science populism of the current conservative movement. Here's an interesting column by conservative David Brooks on the subject:

    http://current.com/items/89395384_an...ican-party.htm

    He writes "Republican political tacticians decided to mobilize their coalition with a form of social class warfare...What had been a disdain for liberal intellectuals slipped into a disdain for the educated class as a whole....The Republicans have alienated whole professions. Lawyers now donate to the Democratic Party over the Republican Party at 4-to-1 rates. With doctors, it’s 2-to-1. With tech executives, it’s 5-to-1."

    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    Heavy sigh....you are wrong...again....the scientific community does NOT agree. That is just the left scare tactics when they say that every scientist agrees. Most agree to the warmng, but to say all scientist agree that it is human caused is just irresponsible as a teacher such as yourself. Is this what you teach your children? Oh geeez.....these left wing/Al Gore scare tactics are just getting old.
    Please look up the term "scientific consensus". It doesn't mean every scientist agrees. It means that, while there may be individuals who disagree, the community as a whole is in agreement. That's why it's called consensus and not unanimity. You can disagree with the politics of the issue, but the science of the issue is settled.

    No amount of snarky comments will change that. And if you look at the sheer volume of scientific opinion on the issue, you might realize that conservative talk radio can't change the scientific consensus, just try to get non-scientists to discount it. As this thread illustrates.

    Either way, I'm done trying to use logic to confront ideology.
    Last edited by Bujin; 08/09/2009 at 10:09 AM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  13. #1733  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Please look up the term "scientific consensus". It doesn't mean every scientist agrees. It means that, while there may be individuals who disagree, the community as a whole is in agreement. That's why it's called consensus and not unanimity. You can disagree with the politics of the issue, but the science of the issue is settled.

    No amount of snarky comments will change that. And if you look at the sheer volume of scientific opinion on the issue, you might realize that conservative talk radio can't change the scientific consensus, just try to get non-scientists to discount it. As this thread illustrates.

    Either way, I'm done trying to use logic to confront ideology.
    Here's a study of Japanese scientists done back in January 09, where of the 5scientists, only 1 agreed that global climate change was a direct connection to humans. Apparently they didn't get the memo that "scientific consensus" showed that humans were the main cause:

    DailyTech - Japanese Report Disputes Human Cause for Global Warming

    Oh I know you can counter with one saying the opposite, and then I could counter with another, but just saying, this BS of the discussion is over, humans are causing the catastrophic rise in temperatures and we will not be able to live unless we all drive a smart car is just nutty. By the way, the only way I would get a smart car is if everyone were forced to get one, those are death traps. Oh geez, hope I didn't just give Obama and his goons an idea....make everyone drive a smart car. If you are really a teacher of young people, I hope you allow them to disagree with you....or is teacher always right?
  14. #1734  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    ...Obama and his goons...

    ...and you wondered why I thought this thread should be renamed, "the liberal hater thread".
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  15. #1735  
    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    ...and you wondered why I thought this thread should be renamed, "the liberal hater thread".
    I said "goons" in only the most respectful, non hating, manner
    Last edited by clemgrad85; 08/09/2009 at 05:15 PM.
  16. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #1736  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    I'm starting to ask myself the same question. Why should a 50-year study by the US Geological Survey have any impact on the discussion?
    Exactly why I asked the question. Your link was about the effects of global warming. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't see anyone here denying that.
  17. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1737  
    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    Looks like another thread that should be renamed the liberal hater thread.
    I gotta admit. I was shocked to see this post.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  18. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1738  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    Exactly why I asked the question. Your link was about the effects of global warming. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't see anyone here denying that.
    The only truth in the discussion is that the globe is warming..... it's the little "and we caused it" thing at the end that's the point of contention.

    But they love to drawl on about how the nay sayers "ignore the massive reams (made from old growth trees, no doubt) of evidence", draw correlations to non-evolutionists, etc. Silly silly arguments, really.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  19. #1739  
    I would just like it stated for the record, that I do not hate liberals. And just to lighten the mood, here's some entertainment from two of my fellow 'third-party' nuts (Jello's a Green and Mojo's a Libertarian).

    ‎"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...
  20. kabamm's Avatar
    Posts
    54 Posts
    Global Posts
    62 Global Posts
    #1740  
    Micael - it's not a "little and we caused it" - it's a BIG "and we caused it", and we're making it worse - and soon it will be calamitous. Buh bye Bangladesh.

    There is unimpeachable evidence all around us.

    Just one piece here from NASA:

    NASA - Earth Impacts Linked to Human-Caused Climate Change

    Rigorously studied and peer-reviewed:

    World Meteorological Organization (WMO)

    Solidly confirmed by the International Panel on Climate Change:

    Evidence For Human-caused Global Warming Is Now 'Unequivocal'

    For which the IPCC shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with
    - the devil himself to a lot of folks in this discussion -
    Al Gore: Peace 2007

    Al's an easy scapegoat, don't be so cowardly. If you want to argue, argue with this:

    EIA - Energy Emissions Data & Environmental Analysis of Energy Data

    and this:

    World Energy Use and Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 1980-2001: Table of Contents
    Last edited by kabamm; 08/14/2009 at 10:16 PM.
    "I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization." Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes.
    __________________
    BB 850 -> BB 957 -> BB 7230 -> Treo 600 -> Treo 700p -> BB 8330 -> Palm Pre -> ?

Posting Permissions