BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Dec, 2015 08:55 pm
@FBM,
I would be all for taking some steps to reduce C02 such as going far more to nuclear power, getting better power grids that do not waste so must power, better technology at the user end and so on.

I am not for tearing up the world economic on a prediction that have little solid foundation and placing and or keeping a large percent of the human race in poverty in the name of slowing down global warming.
Tuna
 
  2  
Reply Sat 19 Dec, 2015 09:05 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

I am not for tearing up the world economic

You can rest easy, Bill. If the global economy crashes, it won't be because of measures taken to reduce CO2 emissions.
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Dec, 2015 09:39 pm
@BillRM,
The electric grid infrastructure is in need of replacement. That is on the hidden agenda of the GW devotees.
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Dec, 2015 09:40 pm
@Tuna,
Quote:
If the global economy crashes, it won't be because of measures taken to reduce CO2 emissions.
One trillion dollars just to help Africa alone.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Dec, 2015 09:43 pm
@BillRM,
I agree with Tuna. One thing we can be pretty sure of is that the uber-rich will resist any sweeping changes that would threaten their elite status, and the uber-rich are pulling most of the strings in the first place. As for the poor, I don't see any substantial efforts at the present for lifting them out of poverty, so that seems to be independent of the global warming issue.
layman
 
  0  
Reply Sat 19 Dec, 2015 09:46 pm
Is this indicative of a wholesale assault on science in America?

Quote:
2011

69% of adult Americans say it’s at least somewhat likely that some scientists have falsified research data in order to support their own theories and beliefs, including 40% who say this is Very Likely. Another 10% are undecided.

Fifty-seven percent (57%) believe there is significant disagreement within the scientific community on global warming, up five points from late 2009. Another 18% aren’t sure.

Republicans and adults not affiliated with either major political party feel stronger than Democrats that some scientists have falsified data to support their global warming theories, but 51% of Democrats also agree.


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/environment_energy/69_say_it_s_likely_scientists_have_falsified_global_warming_research

Quote:
2014

Only 20% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the scientific debate about global warming is over.

Consistent with earlier polling is the finding that 60% of voters consider global warming a serious problem, with 37% who describe it as a Very Serious one. Thirty-five percent (35%) disagree and don’t believe global warming is that serious a problem, with 14% who say it is Not At All Serious. But even among those voters who consider global warming a Very Serious problem, 57% say the debate is not yet over.

The BBC has announced a new policy banning comments from those who deny global warming, a policy already practiced by the Los Angeles Times and several other media organizations. 60% of voters oppose the decision by some news organizations to ban global warming skeptics. Only 19% favor such a ban, while slightly more (21%) are undecided.


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/july_2014/only_20_think_debate_about_global_warming_is_over

"The BBC has announced a new policy banning comments from those who deny global warming, a policy already practiced by the Los Angeles Times and several other media organizations."

What's up with that, ya figure?
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Dec, 2015 09:55 pm
@FBM,
My friend the super rick will always do fine flying in their private jets while we will be told that we will need to take the bus as otherwise it will be too large of a carbon footprint to fly.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Dec, 2015 10:05 pm
@Tuna,
Quote:
If the global economy crashes, it won't be because of measures taken to reduce CO2 emissions.


Any increase of the cost of energy would be in effect a tax on the whole world economy.

An other then nuclear which the same people who cry about co2 hate all the non CO2 energy sources cost more then oil/coal plants and not by a small margin.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Dec, 2015 10:17 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

My friend the super rick will always do fine flying in their private jets while we will be told that we will need to take the bus as otherwise it will be too large of a carbon footprint to fly.


As far as I can tell, that's what's happening now, more or less.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Dec, 2015 02:25 am
@BillRM,
You remind me of the joke about the guy falling from a skyscrapper, and telling himself: "so far so good... so far so good... so far so good."
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Dec, 2015 02:27 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
The funny part is we might be dodging or at least delaying the next ice age.

Indeed, that's a very funny fairy tale. Keep telking it to yourself if it makes you feel better.
layman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Dec, 2015 03:16 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
President Obama made headlines Monday when he said during his remarks at COP21 that the climate change conference taking place in Paris is an "act of defiance" against terrorists who attacked the city earlier this month. Later on the same day, Bill Nye, the "science guy," took that link a step further, explaining to HuffPost Live that the brutality in Paris was "a result of climate change."


Pretty simple, actually, eh? Defy terrorism by going to Paris. End it forever by controlling CO2. That's why Obama says he is going to apply the majority of the defense budget to climate control. We'll never need military forces again. It's science, I tellya!
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Dec, 2015 03:21 am
@layman,
So some guy went overboard in his rhetoric. Big deal. Let's hope we're not changing the climate then...

Little children grasping at straws to reassure themselves. That's what you deniers are. Scared, like the rest of us, but incapable of facing your fear.
layman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 20 Dec, 2015 03:27 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
That's what you deniers are. Scared


Exactly. I don't give a rat's ass about climate change, but I just love them scary stories, ya know? Where's Count Floyd when ya need him?
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Dec, 2015 03:52 am
@layman,
People grasping at straws, while they pretend to redo the computations of scientists? What else is new?

Doesn't matter what you think. It's what you do that betrays you. Posting thousands of quotes and nervous wisearse jokes on GW, again and again for weeks... That's not the behavior of someone who doesn't care.
Ionus
 
  2  
Reply Sun 20 Dec, 2015 04:14 am
@Olivier5,
Scientists are not united, politicians are...doesnt that make you suspicious? I prefer layman's jokes to your personal attacks. You show real fear of being wrong.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Dec, 2015 05:59 am
@Ionus,
Scientists ARE united on this. They truly really are. But that's not the reassuring words you want to hear so you won't hear them.
layman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 20 Dec, 2015 06:25 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
Scientists ARE united on this. They truly really are.


Yeah, right, eh, Ollie?

Quote:
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs. For information about this project, click on the appropriate box below.

http://www.petitionproject.org/gw_images/Teller_Card_100dpi.jpg


Quote:
Nearly six in ten climate scientists don’t adhere to the so-called “consensus” on man-made climate change, a new study by the Dutch government has found.

The study, by the PBL Netherlands Environment Assessment Agency, a government body, invited 6550 scientists working in climate related fields, including climate physics, climate impact, and mitigation, to take part in a survey on their views of climate science.

The findings directly contradict the claim that 97 percent of climate scientists endorse the view that humans are responsible for global warming, as first made by Cook et al in a paper published in Environment Research Letters.

Cook’s paper has since been extremely widely debunked, yet so ingrained has the 97 percent consensus claim become that The Guardian has an entire section named after it, and President Obama has cited it on Twitter.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/07/31/new-study-majority-of-climate-scientists-dont-agree-with-consensus/

I'm starting to wonder, Ollie, if the ONLY information you ever get comes from commie-ass websites, eh?
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Dec, 2015 06:27 am
@layman,
1997 huh?

What's a scientist without a phd anyway? A student?
layman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Dec, 2015 06:32 am
@Olivier5,
1997 huh?

July, 2015, eh?

You don't even read one post that you don't think was made by a commie?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/19/2024 at 06:39:30