Skylinerider
Wandering the desert
- Location
- Ephraim
You're hardly a 'true' environmentalist.
Touche. I'll just go hang myself with a hemp rope to make ammends.
The Global Warming College Tour w/Sheryl Crow!
- Thread starter dunatic67
- Start date
Touche. I'll just go hang myself with a hemp rope to make ammends.
Brett
Meat-Hippy
- Location
- Salt Lake City Utah
Thanks for not answering my questions
Skylinerider
Wandering the desert
- Location
- Ephraim
Edit: I'm not gonna argue about something nobody is gonna win.
Last edited:
Brett
Meat-Hippy
- Location
- Salt Lake City Utah
It's pretty easy to go look at the data on any of the sites that I listed to see that there has been a sharp increase in surface, ocean and air temps since the mid 1800's.....now I wonder why?
Brett
Meat-Hippy
- Location
- Salt Lake City Utah
Good point. I'm out too. Until someone brings more than just their opinions, I'll leave this alone.
Tacoma
Et incurventur ante non
- Location
- far enough away
It's also easy to see the utter lack of information pre-1800's regarding temperature.
On one hand you've got scientists talking about the ice ages and tropical poles eons ago, and on the other hand you have those same scientists saying that man is causing it??? That stupid movie w/Dennis Quaid is the perfect example of that hypocrisy.
It's cyclical. We lack information to say anything but that.
On one hand you've got scientists talking about the ice ages and tropical poles eons ago, and on the other hand you have those same scientists saying that man is causing it??? That stupid movie w/Dennis Quaid is the perfect example of that hypocrisy.
It's cyclical. We lack information to say anything but that.
Tacoma
Et incurventur ante non
- Location
- far enough away
Tacoma
Et incurventur ante non
- Location
- far enough away
Nice Tacoma, nice... Its almost like everyone has forgotten elementary school sciences. I was taught back in the 70s that the earth's climate was always changing. I also remember my father getting all caught up in the coming ice age that was being "preached" at the time. Nope, won't fool him this time around with the warming false religion.
Read the book, "State of Fear". Yes, its fiction, but with a ton of research done. And even though I believe the earth is warming, it will cool again. And now, where is my check from the oil companies? Probably being hijacked by Manbearpig...
Read the book, "State of Fear". Yes, its fiction, but with a ton of research done. And even though I believe the earth is warming, it will cool again. And now, where is my check from the oil companies? Probably being hijacked by Manbearpig...
I'm seeing that the increase of CO2 follows (not causing) the rise and fall of the temperature.
lenny
formerly known as PokeyYJ
- Location
- Bountiful, UT
Ok, here is my take on the whole topic.. If you don't buy into the idea of human's adding to a changing global climate then bring your scale down to a local climate. Look at the Salt Lake Valley in the winter, and try to tell me that man does not have an impact on environment.
I do believe that humans have an effect on climate and this can be positive or negative. To say that the millions of tons of CO2 produced each year do not impact the climate is a false statement.
Even if you don't agree with me, at least look at what reducing pollution will gain you and your family in the future. I look forward to the days when I am not told to stay indoors in the winter because the concentration of PM2.5 is too high.
I do believe that humans have an effect on climate and this can be positive or negative. To say that the millions of tons of CO2 produced each year do not impact the climate is a false statement.
Even if you don't agree with me, at least look at what reducing pollution will gain you and your family in the future. I look forward to the days when I am not told to stay indoors in the winter because the concentration of PM2.5 is too high.
Brett, I bumped another thread with "more than just opinions" . . . it's all been said.
If you don't want to address what has been said already, that is fine. But you should at least have the common courtesy to address what has been said before sniping, and claiming that no one has said anything other than their opinions.
And it's ironic that you used the term "opinions . . ." Because, at the end of the day, isn't that all this is? NO ONE of authority (and I'm sorry, but Algore's degree in journalism hardly qualifies him as an expert) has ever claimed to have definitive proof. It is all theories, or opinions.
There is an old saying among archaeologists:
"You find what you are looking for."
Heinrich Schliemann set out to find Troy in his 1871-1873 expedition . . .
So when he found an old city which showed evidence of fire, he claimed that he found Troy (which he did) AND that he found proof of Agamemnon's reign . . .
The point is, he was looking for proof of Homer's tales, and when he found an old city, he made the leap to assume that all of his other theories are true.
In global warming, you have people who are ACTIVELY SEEKING LINKS between man, and global warming trends.
Well, you look hard enough, and you are bound to find something that seems to validate your claims.
I do NOT trust the science of people who have an agenda. Isn't the first rule of science to have an open mind, and follow the evidence? That isn't happening with global warming.
These people are looking for proof to validate their claims, and ignoring evidence which might contradict their beliefs (was natural climate change EVER mentioned in algore's flick?).
Finally, it's dangerous to rely on statistics. Any statistician will tell you that you can make statistics say or mean whatever you want them to. They are support for a claim, but NOT definitive proof.
Brett
Meat-Hippy
- Location
- Salt Lake City Utah
I'm assuming that you are referring to the thread started by 1\4elliptical toy and how he thought that "An Inconvient Truth" was good.
As for what you think that I should respond to, I'm not sure what the gain is to that. You have your opinions and from what I've gathered, you don't believe in the fact that mankind is part of the problem with global warming. I do understand the fact that this planet goes through warming and cooling periods, which take thousands of years to happen. I don't see anyone who is "ignoring," as you put it, the fact that this happens. The main point that most people seem to be trying to make is that this warming period is happening now, and that mankind is contributing to it more with the release of pollution into the air. Can you honestly tell me that you think that it's a good thing for humans to be dumping all the crap into the air that we do? As Lenny stated above my post, you can look at the SLC valley during winter...and what do you see? Nothing but smog and pollution in the air. You can drive up to Park City and suddenly it's clear and sunny, but in the valley all you can see is a thick layer of pollution. Maybe I'm just missing something there, but that's a pretty good example of what mankind does with the enviorment. I doubt that 200 years ago this valley had that happening every winter time as badly as this has been. You can't even see blue sky unless we get a storm to roll through and blow out the smog! I did try to run a search for "Smoky Mountains" in Utah, but the only thing that I could find was an area in Glen Canyon National Park.....so are you sure on that reference you made?
Greenhouse gases are produced naturally, I agree with you there. Is there any good from mankind adding more gases to the atmosphere that you can name? I guess that only BIG point I am trying to make here is that we, humans, are contributing to the damage. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but it seems like you don't think that we are. Please, correct me if I am wrong, but that's how it comes across to me.
Anyway, I'm not trying to attack you, I'm just stating my own opinion, as you are. My only problem has been that it seems you bring up points saying everything about global warming is a fraud or wrong, but I haven't seen anything to say that you are correct, such as a link to anything science article or paper stating that.
I'm done for now :greg:
Brett
Meat-Hippy
- Location
- Salt Lake City Utah
Correct, and I would like to think that NASA, NOAA, the EPA are all unbiased in their opinions on this subject, but who knows.
Actually, yes it was mentioned quite often in the movie. I don't think that they are out to just say "It's mankinds fault!" Most likely, they started looking for some natural reason and when there was none, they looked at ourselves. Who knows though, we'd have to ask them.
No one ever stated that it was proof, but not using history as a guide is one way to shoot yourself in the foot later on.
Brett
Meat-Hippy
- Location
- Salt Lake City Utah
Check the very far right of the graph where it shows CO2 levels higher than the temperature variation.
So, if one believes his impact is greater than it needs to be, drive a smaller car, carpool, bike... Me, I own 2 four cylinder cars, one low emission labeled truck and my Grand Cherokee. I carpool to work, ride my bike when I can (not to work, thats 100 miles roundtrip...). Try to recycle as much as I can. Pick up trash on trails.
Man does have an impact on man's environement. The amount of that impact is certainly up for dispute. I would imagine that if you stopped burning wood (fireplaces) in the valleys during winter, the smog would lessen.
But the whole Global Warming religion is hooey. All about MAN'S arrogance. There is certainly historical evidence/statistics to show the Earth doesn't have a steady/solid/ideal temperature. Even supporters of Kyoto admit their SEVERE protocols will not have a serious impact.
All I am saying is that it is up to each person to do what they can to limit their environemental impact. Buying carbon credits/offsets is ludicrous. When Algore lives like I do, I'll be more willing to give more up or do more. Until then, my footprint is smaller than his and always will be. I can't wait for Algore to be shown the HERETIC he is... It will happen in this lifetime.
Man does have an impact on man's environement. The amount of that impact is certainly up for dispute. I would imagine that if you stopped burning wood (fireplaces) in the valleys during winter, the smog would lessen.
But the whole Global Warming religion is hooey. All about MAN'S arrogance. There is certainly historical evidence/statistics to show the Earth doesn't have a steady/solid/ideal temperature. Even supporters of Kyoto admit their SEVERE protocols will not have a serious impact.
All I am saying is that it is up to each person to do what they can to limit their environemental impact. Buying carbon credits/offsets is ludicrous. When Algore lives like I do, I'll be more willing to give more up or do more. Until then, my footprint is smaller than his and always will be. I can't wait for Algore to be shown the HERETIC he is... It will happen in this lifetime.
Last edited:
Check the very far right of the graph where it shows CO2 levels higher than the temperature variation.
And it lags behind the temperature rise. NOT causing the rise...
Brett
Meat-Hippy
- Location
- Salt Lake City Utah
I'm talking about the spike where it just shot above the temp variation at the very end of the graph
Tacoma
Et incurventur ante non
- Location
- far enough away
If you believe that, move to smogless CA, where everything is mandated clean and wholesome. The Salt Lake Valley has a unique geographic reason for being HISTORICALLY hazy.