In response to:

Caught Red-Handed on Climate Change

ericynot Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:07 AM
I'm not a scientist. I haven't the training to fully evaluate the arguments, pro or con, for global warming -- and I don't think John Ransom is any more qualified in that regard than I am. My skill set leans toward research, writing, and business. Having studied the monumental pollution disasters wrought by mankind on this planet over the years (did you note the air disaster in China just last week?) and having followed the satellite imagery of a rapidly melting polar ice cap over the past few years, I find the the possibility of man-induced global warming plausible. I look at it this way: what if those GW-proclaiming climate scientists are right? If they are, the climate damage we're doing to ourselves is even worse than ....
3204 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 2:27 PM

What's it like to be lost in your own little fantasy world?
Colonialgirl Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:36 PM
If you aren't qualified, then shut your mouth and go back to your cot in your mother's basement.
jimmyjames4 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:05 PM
What if they are wrong?
A hundred years is a nano-second in 4.5 billion year history, during which Earth has had many climate changes, clearly not man-made.
In the 70's we were told a new Ice Age was coming, now every weather episode that seems extreme is tethered to climate change and warming. So which is it?
stangerinmyownland Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 12:53 PM
Did you look at the South Pole? Massive increases in ice.
ericynot Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:21 PM
stranger,

Ice gains in Antarctica have been more than offset by losses in the Arctic. Here's an article worth reading:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2012/10/11/antarctic-ice-global-warming-climate-change/1626795/
3204 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 2:28 PM

What's it like to be lost in your own little fantasy world?
TommyMaq Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:50 AM
Are you kidding? You just claimed that "some Chinese pollute" is your evidence for global warming - could you make a more ludicrous 'argument'?
ericynot Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 12:10 PM
Maq,

I said no such thing. I merely pointed out that mankind has in the past done, and continues to this day to do, damage to the environment in which we all live. Human-induced CO2 increases are not pollution in the traditional sense, but, if climatologist are correct, CAGW is causing climate changes that will impact mankind in seriously negative ways for decades or centuries to come. And that there are personally positive things we as individuals can do to perhaps mitigate such changes.
Colonialgirl Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:40 PM
Liberal brain dead troll spew of nonsense as usual.
A major display of complete stupidity which is normal for liberal trolls with heads full of Bovine droppings.
3204 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 2:28 PM

What's it like to be lost in your own little fantasy world?
suyts Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:21 AM
Eric, this is the trap set which you've just walked into. You're conflating environmental damage with the Carbon dioxide issue. They're not remotely related. No one is against energy efficiency. Try applying some economics to the fuel efficient cars. It's all great and good, but entirely meaningless to the CAGW issue. You don't have to be a scientist to understand a few mpg increases will do nothing toward the global atmospheric CO2 levels. The economic hole we've dug, is in part, because of the CAGW idiocy. We're paying higher prices for energy and fuel...... what does that do to an economy? Apply a cost/benefit analysis to any CAGW inspired project and you'll see it isn't worth it.
Vic156 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:14 AM
One thought. Was the world warmer during the time of the dinosaurs? Would returning to temperatures like those be a bad thing? What makes you so certain that we can control the climate by our actions?
ericynot Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:27 AM
Vic,

As I said in my post, I'm not certain of anything. I just believe the scientific research I've seen is plausible. And I believe we have little to lose and much to gain by acting accordingly.

Yes, returning to the temps we had during the Jurassic or Cretaceous periods would be catastrophic. Coastlines would be completely swamped (Texas, for instance, was once mostly underwater), agriculture would be devastated, etc. Mankind might not disappear, but things would get pretty rough.
TommyMaq Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:53 AM
The evidence is quite clear; warmer times tend to have more biodiversity.

The eco-pagans are forever touting biodiversity, so clearly global warming is a Good Thing.

...so why are we talking about policies to stop it, assuming it's true?
TommyMaq Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:54 AM
For someone who is not sure of anything, you sure think you know what would happen with warming temps.

Are you aware that warmer temps lead to MORE snowfall on the poles?
Cecil33 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 12:47 PM
Texas once mostly under water?? Keep reading in the book of Genesis, and you will discover the cause - try chapter 6.
ericynot Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:00 PM
Cecil,

You're not really going to drag Noah into this discussion are you? I'll bet he had some serious problems handling those T. Rexes on that Ark.
Colonialgirl Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:39 PM
Liberal brain dead troll spew of nonsense as usual.
A major display of complete stupidity which is normal for liberal trolls with heads full of Bovine droppings.
Wayne from the Hoosier state Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:50 PM
If you go back to the first chapter of Genesis and verse 2, you will find that it was ALL under water.
Wayne from the Hoosier state Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:51 PM
I don't think that it was necessary to drag those on board. They may have been long extinct. The reason for the flood of Noah's day was to destroy that wicked civilization...and it did the job. How large an area the flood was or how many animals were on board is...what it was is what it was...and it was.
3204 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 2:28 PM

What's it like to be lost in your own little fantasy world?
ericynot Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:10 AM
the economic hole we've dug ourselves into. And measures requested of us by scientists writing about this issue are simple and win-win. When we buy a new vehicle, it should be as energy efficient as possible, given our actual needs. That saves us long-term money on fuel and, if you have fewer cylinders, probably maintenance too -- a clear win. We should keep our houses a little cooler in the winter and a little warmer in the summer. Again, we save money. And for anyone who says, "Gee, I couldn't live with my home cooled only to 80", I say, you're a wuss. When I was a young kid -- in Texas -- we had NO air conditioning.
ericynot Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:11 AM
The point is, being a little more conscious about not wasting energy is easy and puts money in our pockets. And maybe, just maybe, it will help avert a worldwide disaster. I see no downside and perhaps a huge upside.
olerocker/bluesman Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:17 AM
The planet has being changing for millions of years and will continue as long as it exist with or without man.....true, we are some what responsible but not enought to kill off the planet.....yet.
votedagainstcarter Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:24 AM
silly libratard.

See my above statement.
arvamus Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:42 AM
Mentioning pollution and global warming in one breath certainly demonstrates that you're no scientist. Carbon dioxide, the supposed driver of global warming (debunked) is NOT pollution but then the supposedly most brilliant POTUS Obama is also confused on this issue. CO2 is plant food, a necessity for life on this planet. The govt is not simply asking you to do a few simple cost effective things to conserve fuel. That should be encouraged for a far more realistic reason - to deprive oil producing Arab countries of payment they use to fund jihad against American interests around the world. Govt is increasing the cost of energy depressing our economy transferring wealth to China and other users of cheap (coal) energy. That's suicide.
TommyMaq Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:52 AM
Being 'just a little more' conscious costs nothing.

Being 'just a little more' energy efficient does cost, and if it costs more than the resulting savings, it's a waste of resources...but you ignored that relevant question and settled on a useless platitude, instead, the _opposite_ of thinking clearly.
Tincan Joey Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:53 AM
"The point is, being a little more conscious about not wasting energy is easy and puts money in our pockets."

No it won't. If every American reduced their energy consumption by 50%, the government would find a way to tax,fee, and regulate us to make up for any savings we would have gotten.
ericynot Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:56 AM
arvamus,

It's difficult, given the space limitations of TH to draw fine distinctions. No, GW is not exactly the same as what we traditionally call pollution. But, assuming CAGW is a legit theory, both are generated by mankind, and both result in serious problems that can -- and should -- be mitigated or avoided.

As for our Middle Eastern "friends", even though, thanks to improved drilling techniques, we're moving toward energy independence, there will remain plenty of other countries willing to buy their oil. They will not run out of money any time soon regardless of what we do.
ericynot Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 12:39 PM
VAC,

How did you know I'm a Libra (October 22)? That's spooky. As for the "tard" part, I'll gladly compare IQ scores with you.
Colonialgirl Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:37 PM
Liberal brain dead troll spew of nonsense as usual.
A major display of complete stupidity which is normal for liberal trolls with heads full of Bovine droppings.
Colonialgirl Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:37 PM
Liberal brain dead troll spew of nonsense as usual.
A major display of complete stupidity which is normal for liberal trolls with heads full of Bovine droppings.
Colonialgirl Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:37 PM
Liberal brain dead troll spew of nonsense as usual.
A major display of complete stupidity which is normal for liberal trolls with heads full of Bovine droppings.
Colonialgirl Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:38 PM
Liberal brain dead troll spew of nonsense as usual.
A major display of complete stupidity which is normal for liberal trolls with heads full of Bovine droppings.
Colonialgirl Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 1:38 PM
Liberal brain dead troll spew of nonsense as usual.
A major display of complete stupidity which is normal for liberal trolls with heads full of Bovine droppings.
BTW; MINUS numbers don't count, so you would lose.
3204 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 2:27 PM

What's it like to be lost in your own little fantasy world?
3204 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 2:27 PM

What's it like to be lost in your own little fantasy world?
3204 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 2:27 PM

What's it like to be lost in your own little fantasy world?
3204 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 2:27 PM

What's it like to be lost in your own little fantasy world?
Ethan Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 2:53 PM
Ericynot, your suggestion that we should turn dow our thermostats in winter and turn them up in summer is a good illustration of what I hate about socialism. When I heat my house in the winter, my goal is to have a comfortable environment to live in, as opposed to the harsh winds and sub-zero temperatures outside. Since the reason for having a house is comfort, I would have to be crazy to adjust the temperature to make it uncomfortable inside. If I want to be uncomfortable, I’ll go outside! I’d rather spend some effort on weatherproofing so I can afford to maintain a comfortable house.

Now, do you think Algore keeps his house comfortable? Do YOU keep your house comfortable? If you don’t, you’re crazy, and if you do, you’re a hypocrite.

A prominent global warming scientist, Peter Gleick, who was chairman of the ethics committee at the American Geophysical Union, admitted last year that he stole some documents- and he may have forged others- from the conservative think-tank the Heartland Institute. But that’s all in a day’s work for a work-a-day climate warrior. The important thing isn’t the quest for the truth in global climate research, but, as Charlie Sheen would say, winning. With winning comes cash.   

Because for some time it’s been clear, that in the climate debate, instead of actually accomplishing something worthwhile, all the attention will be...

Related Tags: Climate Change