Is global warming bad?
- Thread starter shadeau
- Start date
Doing nothing at great cost is worse than doing nothing at no cost. Economics 101 dude ...
Drunken Master said:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/climate.htmlPeeping Tom said:
Enjoy.
How about some sites that back up YOUR point of view?
Junk logic. Always good for a laugh.
Yep, the big bad bogeyman is at work again, kicking bunnies and killing babies ... chinstraps, girls. Always tighten the chinstrap on the ole foil hat.
Ranger68 said:
"Increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases are likely to accelerate the rate of climate change."
So, I guess a GLOBAL accord that attempt to restrict the emission of greenhouse gases is somehow "doing nothing".
LOL
Junk logic.
Since this was obviously a UNANIMOUS Senate decision, what does the mighty US Senate propose be done about greenhouse gas emissions?
As always, ignore the rest of the world. Anything else?
So, I guess a GLOBAL accord that attempt to restrict the emission of greenhouse gases is somehow "doing nothing".
LOL
Junk logic.
Since this was obviously a UNANIMOUS Senate decision, what does the mighty US Senate propose be done about greenhouse gas emissions?
As always, ignore the rest of the world. Anything else?
Right back at you. From your link:
I want some proof, not suggestions. And no, I don't have to disprove what you are attemting to prove - the onus is on you.
What does this have to do with anything? The US has, over the last decade, almost inexplicably, removed itself from the playing table on almost EVERYTHING - Kyoto, the ICC, Iraq.Peeping Tom said:
To quote Gwynn Dyer, the US has become a rogue state.
The sooner they're defeated in Iraq, the better.
It's time for them to come back to the UN and try to make things work again.
Not that the US empire has much time left. Perhaps a few decades at most. If the rest of us can avoid them dragging us into a world war before the end, we'd be happy.
Well, here a thought, it might not be eloquent but here goes: wouldn't doing something be better than doing AB-SO-FUCKING-LUTELY NOTHING, whatever the cost?Peeping Tom said:
Oh, and I love the fact that your confidence about the stability of our environment comes from some "scientist" your company hired to pat you on the head and tell you everything is fine.
Uh, this is proving my point.Peeping Tom said:
What are you saying?
We're increasing the average surface temperature of the earth - thus, the name GLOBAL WARMING.
The majority of the world's scientific opinion is on my side, pal.
You have nothing.
Other than snide remarks about "junk science".
LOL
I put the onus on you. Otherwise, this debate is OVAH.
The Senate never set out to fix the problem. It voted on a bill which did not treat the US the same as the other parties. So, they did the right thing.
If the rest of the world is serious, let them come forth and talk. Since it is not serious, as shown by pushing measures which discriminate against the US, it is getting the treatment it deserves: dismissal with a contemptuos wave of the hand.
If the rest of the world is serious, let them come forth and talk. Since it is not serious, as shown by pushing measures which discriminate against the US, it is getting the treatment it deserves: dismissal with a contemptuos wave of the hand.
Ranger68 said:
Look closely at the graph in that link.
It's pretty flat until - when? Not too long after the industrial revolution.
No, don't worry. Go back in your hole. I'm sure everything will be okay.
In fact, everything will. The US military empire will soon devolve into the nothingness it's based on, and the rest of the world will go forward.
It's pretty flat until - when? Not too long after the industrial revolution.
No, don't worry. Go back in your hole. I'm sure everything will be okay.
In fact, everything will. The US military empire will soon devolve into the nothingness it's based on, and the rest of the world will go forward.
They ARE serious. Thus, Kyoto.Peeping Tom said:
If the US doesn't wish to address the problem, fine. Clearly, they don't, since you admit the Senate has nothing to say about it.
As I said - keep living in the past. The rest of the world will survive without you.
Forget it, Ranger. This just about sums it up.Peeping Tom said:
"Until God himself comes down from Heaven and tells me I'm wrong, I'll assume I'm right. Shall I shovel a little coal and old tires onto the campfire?"
Yeah, well I tried to stir up a little intellectual debate.
Whatcha gonna do?
*shrug*
Regardless, it provides the PERFECT example of the attitude of the US government - screw you, we're doin' it ourselves - done with a "contemptuous wave of the hand".
The American people, proud, generous, and just, deserve better than this.
Oh, BTW, the EPA is an AMERICAN institution - so, despite the Senate's unanimous decision, clearly not all Americans are onboard.
Whatcha gonna do?
*shrug*
Regardless, it provides the PERFECT example of the attitude of the US government - screw you, we're doin' it ourselves - done with a "contemptuous wave of the hand".
The American people, proud, generous, and just, deserve better than this.
Oh, BTW, the EPA is an AMERICAN institution - so, despite the Senate's unanimous decision, clearly not all Americans are onboard.
Just to rub it in a bit more 
From the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html
Some quotes:
"Are greenhouse gases increasing?
Human activity has been increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (mostly carbon dioxide from combustion of coal, oil, and gas; plus a few other trace gases). There is no scientific debate on this point. Pre-industrial levels of carbon dioxide (prior to the start of the Industrial Revolution) were about 280 parts per million by volume (ppmv), and current levels are about 370 ppmv. The concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere today, has not been exceeded in the last 420,000 years, and likely not in the last 20 million years. According to the IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES), by the end of the 21st century, we could expect to see carbon dioxide concentrations of anywhere from 490 to 1260 ppm (75-350% above the pre-industrial concentration). "
"Is the climate warming?
Yes. Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.6°C (plus or minus 0.2°C) since the late-19th century, and about 0.4°F (0.2 to 0.3°C) over the past 25 years (the period with the most credible data). "
"For the Northern Hemisphere summer temperature, recent decades appear to be the warmest since at least about 1000AD, and the warming since the late 19th century is unprecedented over the last 1000 years."
I think I'll just leave it at that.
Is this topic debated? Yes, to the extent that since we don't have great data for all that long, it's not clear what's a normally cyclic trend, and what's due to our influence. Again, to conclude therefore that we have no affect is idiotic. There is MUCH evidence to conclude that we CERTAINLY have an affect, and there is much reason to be concerned about changes in the global climate in any case - whether cyclic or man-made.
From the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html
Some quotes:
"Are greenhouse gases increasing?
Human activity has been increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (mostly carbon dioxide from combustion of coal, oil, and gas; plus a few other trace gases). There is no scientific debate on this point. Pre-industrial levels of carbon dioxide (prior to the start of the Industrial Revolution) were about 280 parts per million by volume (ppmv), and current levels are about 370 ppmv. The concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere today, has not been exceeded in the last 420,000 years, and likely not in the last 20 million years. According to the IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES), by the end of the 21st century, we could expect to see carbon dioxide concentrations of anywhere from 490 to 1260 ppm (75-350% above the pre-industrial concentration). "
"Is the climate warming?
Yes. Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.6°C (plus or minus 0.2°C) since the late-19th century, and about 0.4°F (0.2 to 0.3°C) over the past 25 years (the period with the most credible data). "
"For the Northern Hemisphere summer temperature, recent decades appear to be the warmest since at least about 1000AD, and the warming since the late 19th century is unprecedented over the last 1000 years."
I think I'll just leave it at that.
Is this topic debated? Yes, to the extent that since we don't have great data for all that long, it's not clear what's a normally cyclic trend, and what's due to our influence. Again, to conclude therefore that we have no affect is idiotic. There is MUCH evidence to conclude that we CERTAINLY have an affect, and there is much reason to be concerned about changes in the global climate in any case - whether cyclic or man-made.
ok Ranger68, then talk.
My point: continued growth in the release of CO2 is what might initiate a problem.
Kyoto doesn't address this.
How can the production of CO2 be reduced? Remember, it's not just America burning oil, wood, coal, propane etc. Places Like China, India, Russia et al. have aspirations to become like America and burn even more oil.
Notice how Kyoto allows them but not us? That's why I slagged it as bunk.
So, we stop the rise of the third world? Going to be messy. That would be the appropriate policy. Pollute like we did in bygone days and get Saddamed. Unfortunately, not going to happen.
If you're serious, start talking nuclear. And what to do about the NIMBY crowd
My point: continued growth in the release of CO2 is what might initiate a problem.
Kyoto doesn't address this.
How can the production of CO2 be reduced? Remember, it's not just America burning oil, wood, coal, propane etc. Places Like China, India, Russia et al. have aspirations to become like America and burn even more oil.
Notice how Kyoto allows them but not us? That's why I slagged it as bunk.
So, we stop the rise of the third world? Going to be messy. That would be the appropriate policy. Pollute like we did in bygone days and get Saddamed. Unfortunately, not going to happen.
If you're serious, start talking nuclear. And what to do about the NIMBY crowd
