Al Gore is a FAKE

I don't think stiicking corks in the rectums of animals and volcanoes will help much.

Not exactly an effective way to go about it.

How about we try to conserve energy and reduce unnatural emissions?

I think that is what Essan was suggesting, rather than your bastardisation of his words.

I'm talking about other causes of anthropogenic climate change - such a land use changes, deforestation, the Asian brown cloud, etc etc - do wake up




You;re such a wag - you ought to go into politics you know

However, the intelligent majority will know that turning lights off when you don;t need them on, wearing a pullover when the temp drops to 65f instead of turning the heating on, etc etc will a) save you lots of money and b) reduce carbon emissions without you really having to do anything.

Walking to work when the weather is clement and it's not too far is another great idea



Unnecessary consumption of electricity and oil based fuels.

Oil doesn't grow on tress you know




And I used to work for an Insurance Broker providing insurance cover for oil shipments from the Persian Gulf (had a few of 'my' ships hit during the Gulf War too - that's the real Gulf War btw, the war between Iran and Iraq in the mid 80s)



Nowadays I run an antique centre - recycling old furniture. But who said anything about finding a job that doesn't involve using plastic or oil based products? I'm just saying wouldn't it be good if we could come up with alternatives



He's a politician. What do you expect?



I'm a very, very, very cynical person Humans have ruined this lovely planet and wiped out thousands of other species. can't think of anything they've done that's been for the good.



See above I also ran a pub for a number of years.


Incidently I have never married and am not particularly close to my family And my idea of a holiday is to spend a week of so entirely on my own in some inhabited corner of the country where I don't even see, let alone speak, to anyone for days on end!


(Yeah, I'm a weirdo! )

[edit on 18-8-2007 by Essan]

You only have one species to apply that to. It is behaviour of humans.

I don't think we should reduce our technological advancement. That's off the cards. But we can do better, no?

We developed technology, that is really a good thing, but we are flying through resources at an alarming rate. We eventually will have to change our behaviour. Finding new technologies will help.

I see people ranting on about how stemming the population growth requires eugenics. Crap. We just need to get people to be happy with a couple of kids and use contraception.

Populations are normally controlled naturally. We can overcome these normal processes of population thinning. But should we just keep growing? How many humans can the earth hold? 10 billion? 20 billion? 30 billion? Sod it, lets go for 100 billion.

Do you think this is feasible?



I don't hate my own species. I think people can be stupid and myopic. Like lemmings.

I think we can do better. I think we have the ability to think past the 'here and now'. I think we can force politicians to think past the terms of their place in the political establishment. I think we can do better than put economic growth before all else, placing the non-human 'company' before people themselves. I think we can reduce the power of industrial lobbyists. I think we can get politicians to put people first, the ones who vote them, rather than the people who fund them.

Yeah, I won't hold my breath.

reply to post by Essan

---

I'd like some proof of the "thousands of species" that man has killed.
How can you know they didn't just die out as part of the evolutionary process?

This human hating is part of the problem with the world as it is today - this jumped up, self aggrandizement, arrogance that believes man as a species must be what's causing all the ill's of the world.
This is something else that comes from gore - and I for one despise him for it (amongst many other things :lol

reply to post by melatonin

---

I agree, in some respects - but instead of wasting all the money on fighting something we very likely can't control, why don't we put it into the search for new technologies.
Then again, with gore and others like him running the show that's unlikely to happen - it might upset the gravy train.

But we can control our behaviour. Oh, I dunno, maybe we can't, heh.

I can't see the problem. If we aim to conserve energy and reduce our consumption of finite fuels, it can only be a good thing. The finite fuels will last longer. I think we need to move to nuclear fuels now, but this is not a panacea, just another finite fuel. I think we need to produce as much alternative forms of energy as possible. And hope that technology will save the day.

If our activity is a significant contributer to climate change, and the weight of evidence clearly suggests it is, then the same action will help in this regards.

So BOGOF. Buy one, get one free

[edit on 18-8-2007 by melatonin]

But all those mammals and volcanoes keep on releasing all those unnatural emissions constantly... What are we to do about those GHGs emissions all mammals, volcanoes, soils, oceans emmit?...




....Essan proposed plans which are already being used yet apparently he thinks his ideas are new and there is noone doing this....

You actually think that companies don't try to find ways to stop wasting more money, such as turning lights off, or not ordering products not needed so they can keep their profits high?......



My "bastardization of his words"?.... i am just following his line of reasoning and taking it to the next level...

BTW, you two perhaps should be the president and vice president of "The Lemmings' Club"...

You can have other people from the AGW crowd join your club, and get together in a cliff, then do a brainstorming session thinking about all those pesky things those evil mammals humans do, and have the member jump off the cliff, with the president and vice-president going in first, and as the members jump say aloud why they are jumping, and of course by jumping the Lemming's club members are stopping more of those evil mammals, humans, from emitting more of those pesky GHGs....

As the president and vice-president go over the cliff:

Melatonin yells: "This is for all the trees killed during the writtings of Mann et al trying to blame Climate Change on people....." (as melatonin lands in his head you hear a ) *THUMP*

Essan yells: "This is for having so many pesky humans on this planet, wouldn't it be a great planet if no life existed.....?" *SQUASH*

[edit on 18-8-2007 by Muaddib]

I'm pretty sure the Passenger Pigeon didn't 'just die out as part of the evolutionary process'

There are hundreds of animal species that have become extinct over the past few hundred years, most due to over hunting by man, destruction of their habitat by man, or the introduction - by man - of new species which have out-competed them.

www.petermaas.nl...

www.abc.net.au...
www.well.com...
library.thinkquest.org...


Oh, and there's also the Tasmanian Aborigines - they became extinct because they failed to evolve an immunity to bullets

I don't think farts and volcanoes would be considered as unnatural sources.




Not really. You in the US can't even get a decent restriction on fuel efficiency in cars.



Yeah, to the absurd.




Errm, yeah. Ask ya mam where the pills are...

Hey Essan...how about those millions of species which the Earth itself has helped to exterminate?....

Why should the Earth be allowed to exterminate so many millions of species?...

Why should other mammals, such as carnivours, be able to kill other mammals?....

When bears kill humans most of the times bears don't eat the humans....so every one of those pesky bears should be exterminated....

[edit on 18-8-2007 by Muaddib]

Maybe in the US it's different, but you'd be amazed at how many Offices, Shops and Factories have all their lights on 24 hours a day all year round. And the number of people who have lights on in every room of the house at night .... then complain about the cost of their electricity bill!

It's nothing new, just that some folk have yet to cotton on

(As an aside, I allow customers to use the toilet in my shop. It has a light you switch on when you go in. The majority of people who use it leave the light on afterwards. Why? I know it makes no real difference in the grand scheme of things,but it does demonstrate how people today just 'don't think' ...

Probably because the statements and comments made by some, including you, are nothing more than absurd?.....

Essan, there might be some cases to the contrary....but no business "leaves the lights on all night", unless it is a business that has people working all night.

There is no business, and no business owner that wouldn't want to "maximize profits" by not using too much energy, or saving money in some way.

Are there "employees" that would leave lights on and won't care if their companies spend more money by having the lights on all night?... sure there are, and there will be nomatter how many times you try to remind them to "turn off the lights when they leave".

Your statements about "companies turning off lights" etc, is no real solution at all, and you yourself don't have any alternative means of power in mind.

[edit on 18-8-2007 by Muaddib]

Please, let's "play nice" and not let this degenerate into a flame fest

I agree with essan on one point - there are lots of business's in th UK that leave lights on at night - large chain shops are some of the worst culprits, and don't forget all those lights left on in office buildings "for security purposes" with government buildings some of the worst offenders.

I can take you through the town I live in, and point out at least a couple of dozen examples - and it's a small town.

[excerpted additional comments from last post because they kept adding up )

In the future we will discover more efficient or better power sources, but for now we have to work with what we have.

Us humans are just like any other mammal that has lived in this planet.

What happens if you let wolf packs grow too large? They will overkill prey animals...

What happens if you let prey animals, such as deer, grow too large?....

They eat all food and slowly die because they will find no food....

Should the above be a reason to exterminate wolves and deer, or wonder what sort of wonderful world it would be without these animals?.... No...

Anyways, back to the subject, CO2 is not the evil GHG some claim it does.

As for deforestation, more forests are growing, there are forests which are protected and forests in the U.S. and Europe have been replenished as per an environmental report which was in the news not that long ago. (A few months back)

Urban islands just cause some regional warming, but they do not affect or cause "Climate Change".

Soon enough we will go into a cooler period, since the Sun's Great conveyor belt is slowing down to a crawl, which means the Sun's activities will decrease in about a decade or so....

What then?...

What do we do when we go into a cooler period? Do we start trying to increase water vapor, since we would soon realize CO2 is not doing it's supposed job of exarberating warming?




[edit on 18-8-2007 by Muaddib]

yes, links to more of your threads too. I remember i tried to find them all once, it was like a merry go round.



no, because i will say the same thing as usual. you will stubbornly disbelieve me , and just take my word for it. in a stubborn contest i will win.



Parrot?

Most of these people y


Anyways, so "humans are "pesky" Essan?...

Do you agree with some of the environlunatics who claim "population reduction must be forced"?....

I don't think anyone would suggest we do otherwise. Just that we can if we so desire do things better. Be more efficient and be cleaner.



Again, who here is proposing wiping out humanity or even culling people. That's just silly.

All Essan is saying is that IF we disappeared. The earth won't end. Particular environments will recover. And all will be well. We just wouldn't be there. Knowing our own stupidity we might just wipe out large portions of our own population, we have the means to do so.

Population will become a growing problem in the future. In the developed countries, we're doing quite fine. No massively growing population. But in the third world, it's all rather different.

Now, in many ways, it's not their fault. They are polluted by religious BS and have little infrastructure for decent birth control. And more kids can means more money. But, again, it''s a myopic approach to their problems.



If the sun does cool, then we should be happy. It would mean an offsetting of human influences on climate.

Wouldn't mean that human activity is insignificant though. Just that one of the numerous natural forcings was falling.

[cynicism]I was saying elsewhere perhaps we need to get have a talk with places like Mexico for being so selfish with all of those beans and related spicy foods they eat all the time. How selfish!? They're causing irreversible point of no return within 10 years global destruction. Think of the pengiuns. Seeing how this threads going, perhaps an ethnic cleansing is in order. How could they be so selfish? Maybe this is why Gore supported the NAFTA exploitation pact???[/cynicism]

You guys crack me up , except Octavious, well actually, octavious does as well. Sad but funny seeing someone who cant think for themself. It reminds me of when I used to say that there must be millions of Bush supporters out there who obsess over him so much that even if they seen video of him chopping people up with his bare hands they'd go into denial and still keep worshipping him. I've had people tell me that Bush is in power because GOD put him there. Now I'm seeing this same cult of personality adoration behavior with Gore supporters. The messiah cometh, from Washington DC.


[edit on 18-8-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

The only thing that gore wanted was to further his own enrichment and relaunch his political career.
If he really cared, he wouldn't be such a hypocrite.
If he really cared, he wouldn't be using a private plane or have 3 huge houses.
If he really cared, he would be helping the environment, instead of treating it like a meal ticket.
If he really cared, he'd donate the profits from his book/film to alternative energy sources.

Al Gore is the least of the reasons why I reject AGW.

I care about the environment - I've been a member of greenpeace for over 15 years - but I don't care for characters like gore sensationalizing something and laying all problems at the door of mankind, just to further their own goals.