More global warming fraud

[Michchamp]

Well my response about smoking included the quote from tsmith with the link from the daily telegraph. It shouldn't be difficult to ascertain who I was referring to.

right. and then spartanhack/racist claimed you made it up.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Well my response about smoking included the quote from tsmith with the link from the daily telegraph. It shouldn't be difficult to ascertain who I was referring to.

Oh. I see. Sometimes I kind if skip by the tsmith stuff. His posts are blocked on my page, but it shows up when people quote him.

 

[Spartanmack]

Why bring China into this? I guess you can't read.

Because them "pichers" that won't convince the GOP are "pichers" from China...I didn't bring China into this - I'm not the one who posted them "pichers". So how about I talk slow for you. I...don't...need...proof...that...pollution...is...a...problem... I...know...pollution...is...a...problem. But...you...people...don't...like...that... everyone...is...not...a...MMCC...alarmist...so...when...conservatives...who...care...about...pollution...don't...want...to...put...the...US...and...American...jobs...at...risk...by...signing...an...international...treaty...that...liberals..are...all..too...happy...to...exempt...our...top...economic...competitor...and...the...world's...#1...polluter...from...you...say...stupid...stuff...like..."pichers...of...how...bad...the...problem...is...in...China...will...never...convince...the...GOP...because...they...believe...in...Jesus."

 

[Michchamp]

trying too hard

 

[Spartanmack]

Well my response about smoking included the quote from tsmith with the link from the daily telegraph. It shouldn't be difficult to ascertain who I was referring to.

That's my mistake. I thought you were talking about Burton. I don't really care about Booker, he's a journalist and he doesn't appear to be passing anything off as his original work/research.

 

[Spartanmack]

trying too hard

it's really not that difficult - you guys aren't nearly as smart as you think you are.

 

[Gulo Blue]

So if several posters want to do something about climate change and Spartanmack wants to do something about pollution and ocean acidification, what's the issue?

 

[zyxt9]

Why bring China into this? I guess you can't read. I'll talk slower. Proof....means....nothing....to you....people. Climate....change....(global warming)...is real.....and....humans....are....a big....contributor....to it. That....includes...China.

I'm pretty sure spartymack isn't opposed to cleaning up the environment, he has stated several times he is for it from what I have read.

He brought china into it because they are probably the biggest environmental threat currently. At this point, any efforts to curb pollution in the US, while valid, will result in only minimal impact on the environmental spectrum.

Again, not saying the US should not continue to improve their impact; however, when looking at where environmentalist should apply the greatest pressure in order to yield the greatest percentage improvement to the environment, china must be targeted.

Zoom's link to china shows where a huge global concern is, yet china is not being forced to clean up their shit. This planet is under attack by far worse places than the US. It is time to refocus and apply pressures where it matters most. Again, I'm not saying the US cannot improve its pollution levels, but I think most already are working toward those improvements. Meanwhile china and others literally don't try at all.

 

[zyxt9]

So if several posters want to do something about climate change and Spartanmack wants to do something about pollution and ocean acidification, what's the issue?

Exactly. Don't scream about climate change, that has too many non-human variables to promote confrontation which yields little progress.

Focusing on the entire world's pollution levels, that should be simple to agree upon. If the end result of that is improved ocean ph levels and other environmental variables which result in improvements in the global warming, even if just slowing it's increases, then great! That's a win/win and everyone is happy - except those who lost money by having to reduce their pollution levels but does anyone else care about their lower profit? No!

So instead of screaming 'global warming', just scream about pollution, deforestation, and restoring the oceans. Now I realize many pro-GWs will say that it is the exact same thing... but it really isn't due to other things scientists can easily point to as GW factors, such as volcanoes, natural forest fires, solar changes, and the fact that science cannot identify a true average temperature that the earth is currently above or below. Ice ages are easier to identify, but they are intermittent. How hot has earth been when not in an ice age? it is possible that natural global warming could still cause further increases in the temps and reduction in ice caps. There is little evidence if any to know for certain.

What we do understand is how bad pollution is and there are ways for us to counter it. That target is much easier to see and understand. The fact it is parallel to GW is immaterial, because while they appear to be going to the exact same destination, they never actually intersect.

 

[Michchamp]

I'm pretty sure spartymack isn't opposed to cleaning up the environment, he has stated several times he is for it from what I have read.

He brought china into it because they are probably the biggest environmental threat currently. At this point, any efforts to curb pollution in the US, while valid, will result in only minimal impact on the environmental spectrum.

Again, not saying the US should not continue to improve their impact; however, when looking at where environmentalist should apply the greatest pressure in order to yield the greatest percentage improvement to the environment, china must be targeted.

Zoom's link to china shows where a huge global concern is, yet china is not being forced to clean up their shit. This planet is under attack by far worse places than the US. It is time to refocus and apply pressures where it matters most. Again, I'm not saying the US cannot improve its pollution levels, but I think most already are working toward those improvements. Meanwhile china and others literally don't try at all.

no question China is a mess, and needs to curb their pollution, but the US is bad, and close to all of the companies opposing doing anything about it (including the largest and most politically powerful of those companies) are based in the U.S., the massive amounts of CO2 they directly & indirectly pump into the atmosphere is the lion's share of the problem, and so to put forward any weaselly excuse not to curb CO2 emissions because "China" or "I think coral reefs dying is a bigger problem" is standing directly in the path of the solution to the problem.

but hey, at least now the deniers are acknowedging warming is occurring... for a while they were still claiming that wasn't happening. And they're also forced to bring up more and more ridiculous red herrings in their internet arguments, so... progress.

maybe we won't eventually hit the high end of those temperature predictions, and only like 70% of species will die off, instead of 90% or whatever... and our descendants will be able to mostly survive. mostly.

one can only hope.

 

[zyxt9]

it's really not that difficult - you guys aren't nearly as smart as you think you are.

Yeah, it's interesting how each side screams at the other, saying they don't think for themselves, they just recite the party line.

Time to stop pointing fingers and driving wedges deeper. It isn't hard to find common ground and accomplish similar goals when one makes an effort, but that's much harder than name calling, pushing opinions about religion, etc. Let's stick to what is easy, thereby making sure no one is happy and nothing gets done.

 

[Gulo Blue]

put forward any weaselly excuse not to curb CO2 emissions because "China" or "I think coral reefs dying is a bigger problem" is standing directly in the path of the solution to the problem.

CO2 emissions are a big deal with regard to killing coral reefs (since it drives acidity).

 

[zyxt9]

CO2 emissions are a big deal with regard to killing coral reefs (since it drives acidity).

Yeah, I always find it interesting when I see stories about how things are dumped into the ocean in order to build coral reefs.

It's a worthy effort, but not killing off reefs in the first place is even more noble, so...

Those huge regions of the Gulf that do not have enough oxygen to support life are astounding.

We need a way to scrub CO2 from the atmosphere and oceans, then use solar power to release the O2 and then take the carbon and make graphite, diamonds, buckyballs, etc. Can do similar with CO, yielding twice the amount of C for every O2 molecule produced.

Its just that producing carbon that way is far too cost prohibitive.

 

[Spartanmack]

Yeah, it's interesting how each side screams at the other, saying they don't think for themselves, they just recite the party line.

Time to stop pointing fingers and driving wedges deeper. It isn't hard to find common ground and accomplish similar goals when one makes an effort, but that's much harder than name calling, pushing opinions about religion, etc. Let's stick to what is easy, thereby making sure no one is happy and nothing gets done.

It's harder than you would think. I'm here saying pollution is a problem and we need to do something about it but because I'm not a MMCC alarmist and am instead more concerned about what we're doing to the land and bodies of water that produce or feed the things we eat and drink then I get labelled as a bible thumper puppet for Monsanto. It's the same thing every time - either toe the line on one extreme or get labelled as the opposite extreme - and a racist.

 

[Spartanmack]

He isn't making that strong an argument (and he isn't trying to). All he's saying is that the adjustments are significant. He doesn't actually claim the adjustments are wrong. He specifically says he doesn't know.

That's a fair point. But the alarmist response is a bit troublesome. It's interesting that first the MMCC camp tries to pass the adjustments off as minor and thus insignificant (I think the Booker piece said someone claimed the impact of the adjustments was <3%). Now we have a climate scientist saying that assessment is off by an order of magnitude - seems pretty big - but I haven't seen any specific responses that defend the adjustments (if they exist, I haven't seen them). Instead, the typical alarmist response is to shout these people down w/ the bogus consensus claims rather than justify the adjustments themselves. And they want to commit trillions of dollars, completely transform the economy and our way of life based on it.

The "why" matters. If they're selling these programs based on something that turns out not to be true because of some flawed adjustment or debunked theory, they can't just say "well, sorry about that but look, CO2 is also wreaking havoc in the ocean and killing ecosystems vital to many organisms on earth so let's still spend the money." Nobody will listen - the "97%" will be relegated to Brian Williams status...

 

[Monster]

I'm pretty sure spartymack isn't opposed to cleaning up the environment, he has stated several times he is for it from what I have read.

He brought china into it because they are probably the biggest environmental threat currently. At this point, any efforts to curb pollution in the US, while valid, will result in only minimal impact on the environmental spectrum.

Again, not saying the US should not continue to improve their impact; however, when looking at where environmentalist should apply the greatest pressure in order to yield the greatest percentage improvement to the environment, china must be targeted.

Zoom's link to china shows where a huge global concern is, yet china is not being forced to clean up their shit. This planet is under attack by far worse places than the US. It is time to refocus and apply pressures where it matters most. Again, I'm not saying the US cannot improve its pollution levels, but I think most already are working toward those improvements. Meanwhile china and others literally don't try at all.

It just gets a bit crazy when i see so many right wingers who are so against the idea of human made climate change. They look for every alternative theory and will hear nothing that goes against their belief. I don't get why people are so insane about this. They'll push the problem on China and talk about how much the U.S. has done. In reality, none of us are saying it's only the U.S. problem. China's a huge problem. Nobody denies that. But if America creates alternate, clean energy and can make it safe, China will eventually follow.

And he brought up china in a response to something I said. And for some reason he keeps saying "picher" which I guess is an insult of some kind???

 

[sggatecl]

Because them "pichers" that won't convince the GOP are "pichers" from China...I didn't bring China into this - I'm not the one who posted them "pichers". So how about I talk slow for you. I...don't...need...proof...that...pollution...is...a...problem... I...know...pollution...is...a...problem. But...you...people...don't...like...that... everyone...is...not...a...MMCC...alarmist...so...when...conservatives...who...care...about...pollution...don't...want...to...put...the...US...and...American...jobs...at...risk...by...signing...an...international...treaty...that...liberals..are...all..too...happy...to...exempt...our...top...economic...competitor...and...the...world's...#1...polluter...from...you...say...stupid...stuff...like..."pichers...of...how...bad...the...problem...is...in...China...will...never...convince...the...GOP...because...they...believe...in...Jesus."

 

[elrod817]

http://www.youtube.com/embed/qGGabrorRS8?rel=0

 

[Spartanmack]

ignorance is bliss...

 

[Spartanmack]

And he brought up china in a response to something I said. And for some reason he keeps saying "picher" which I guess is an insult of some kind???

The pictures, which I didn't post were all of pollution in China. You said GOPers would never be convinced by pictures and we're all just waiting for "Jebus" to come back (which apparently is supposed to be and insult of some kind - basically any person of faith thinks God is the answer to every problem facing the planet - that about right?). So I respond in kind sarcastically explaining that I'm well aware of the problem, particularly in China so the pictures don't really add much to the discussion and now you're pulling some whiny "he started it" nonsense. You sound like sbee.