The global warming scare, whether real or generated is a good thing for the worlds people regardless. It spurred international cohesive action towards a "nearly" agreed upon result. It gave all companies looking towards the future with alternative energy a boost in business, and a chance to show that gas and oil doesn't always have to = power.

So if it is a scandal, I say let it continue. Returning to a one-way thinking pattern in regards to our electric, power and mobility scares me more than a little. I personally don't think that will happen anyway, because the "alternative" engine has already been fired up and is gaining momentum, and I don't believe that they can figure out how to turn it off. hehe

Originally posted by DangerDeath
Scientists lie about global warming, there is a global warming but we are not responsible, we cannot trust scientists any more?

But something is changing, and the change is accelerating. It is a very strong feeling.

Humans are rational. Always looking for reasons and explanations, and in our quest we have become so aware of ourselves that we actually started to think that we matter. That we're special in the greater scheme of things.
Well, of course if this is true then we must also be to blame for what happens to planet earth in the long run.
The problem is that somewhere along the way spin doctors realized that all this knowledge about biology and how the planet works in the solar system, and the solar system in the universe, is so vast and incomprehensible that the common man cannot contain or understand it, and seeing how we therefore like to be told what to think, feel and do, what was more obvious than to use these things against us?
The more you read that the heating of Earth is man-made the more you believe its true, right? Because if your neighbour, you boss, your wife and your dog believes it... well then it must be right, right?

We seem to forget that behind every little scientific study lies a stoodge ready to intrepret the value of its usability for a commercial or political agenda.

When governments are making deals over our heads, across borders and without comprehension, then they are selling our votes for the sake of power, money and political friendship.
I bet each of you can find a politician that looked aspiring, a hope for the people, during his or hers younger years. And then see them later, corrupted moraly towards the people they are supposed to govern, and their own ideals.
Oh, I wrote politician... basicly, I mean "person". This goes for scientists as well.

So no... you cannot trust scientists, or anyone claiming to be wise in matters of their field, simply because they don't know enough. None of them have shown capability of holding past events in the history of Earth together or even relate different parts of science to eachother. They ignorantly look at the present, and guess about the future when they should be looking at the past and learning from past events.
Apart from that there's no use of intuition and the logic that could evolve from this. Intuition in the objective sense. There's no... empathy. Only proclaimed logic.

But logic is: we have, winter, spring, summer, autumn. These fall at the same time every year. It's a cycle. Pretty simple.
The Earth revolves around the sun. A cycle.
The solar system revolves around in the galaxy. Another cycle.
Heck an even simpler cycle is, I eat then I crap.

We know there's been several iceages. After the iceage came something more mild, the something warmer and then at some point it goes back the other way. Let's not be so presumptious that anything we do or don't do is going to change this cycle or any of the others mentioned. Earth is going to fry and probably freeze too at some point.

Why are we discussing where the blame is to be put?
We should be discussing what to do when either scenario is happening again. Not that it matters, humanity is not supposed to last forever.

Having said that. I see no reason what so ever why we shouldn't switch completely to environmentally friendly energy. I think we can all agree that even though fossil fule usage might not contribute all that much to so-called global warming, it's definately not making our lounges better or the water taste nicer and since we are here, we might as well enjoy the ride as long as we can.
Our legacy IS NOT to earn as much money in a lifetime as we can, but to hand over the planet, we are borrowing, to the next generation in such a state that we would have been able to look ourselves in the mirror had we lived on.

Keep in mind... I'm not saying I'm right, I'm saying, I believe they are wrong and that you can't trust them. I hold no alligience to anyone, I'm here on borrowed time, just like you guys. So I think it best to trust that strong feeling we've got.


Or put in other words. Green taxes and the prolonging of development within the sector of green energy is just another way to suck out as much money from the common man as possible. A spin at best...
You think it's going to be cheaper when we switch over to green energy? You're wrong. It's going to be the exact same thing, same price, same people controlling it. And you're going to pay the price, because you forgot how to say "no".

[edit on 14/12/08 by flice]

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
On this thread the article is talking about how scientists say GW is made up.

...the article is talking about how scientists are saying that the worst is yet to come with GW.

Which to believe?

One involves the media reporting scientific findings from experts in climate science, the other is an oil-funded politician deceiving you.

The most laughable piece of deception is the conclusion that man is capable of causing climate change of any sort. Ad hominem attacks do not change basic physics or the unbiased findings of even the IPCC data and instrumentation.

As I've pointed out several times in this thread alone, the point is not anyone's opinion about warming or cooling, but whether man is the cause.

Those associated with the "pro-GW" movment say man's dispersal of CO2 is causing unnatural warming, and that carbon caps and/or sequestration must be forced upon all the people of the world.

Those opposed, typically say that the data shows cooling, rather than warming, but that in either case, it is nature and not man the primary cause. Moreover, they push no forced agenda upon people that must be paid ultimately by tge individuals small farms and small businesses of the industrializedworld.

I don't give a rat's a** if the data ultimately show temps trending up or down; they will ultimately change. But I'll be damned if I'm gonna let vested interests make me pay for their gimmicks, either way.

Are you willing to defend yourself before the World Climate Court now being proposed by PM Brown, which will have jurisdiction to enforce climate regs on individuals? Watch your emissions.

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

That warming did not have anything to stop it from cooling back off again. Humans have quite possible made it so that it will never cool again.

Not sure how that will turn out. All I know, is that in the North we depended on harsh winters to kill off many insects each year.

We didn't warmit, or cool it. Nature did it.

You can't stop insects, yet you believe you can change the climate.

Are you willing to pay more for all resources, not just fossil fuel, for govt. to tilt at windmills. Fight the unbeatable foe. GW proponents also propose CO2 containment and sequestration as "the cure." They want you to pay for it.

How much more do you want to pay for your food, lighting, water and housing to fund these efforts? Has anyone pro-GW given you their guarantee that they'll get the results they promise for your "investment?"

Originally posted by jdub297
The most laughable piece of deception is the conclusion that man is capable of causing climate change of any sort. Ad hominem attacks do not change basic physics or the unbiased findings of even the IPCC data and instrumentation.

Ad hom? So bringing out facts about the source of this deceptive list is ad hom? Don't think so, it was sourced from a response to someone talking about Gore and lying politicians. It was a relevant comment and shows the information you base this thread on is politically motivated and, moreover, a pile of tosh.

Basic physics? Heh.

As I've pointed out several times in this thread alone, the point is not anyone's opinion about warming or cooling, but whether man is the cause.

Or perhaps a major cause. And the science clearly suggests we are.

Those associated with the "pro-GW" movment say man's dispersal of CO2 is causing unnatural warming, and that carbon caps and/or sequestration must be forced upon all the people of the world.

Those opposed, typically say that the data shows cooling, rather than warming, but that in either case, it is nature and not man the primary cause. Moreover, they push no forced agenda upon people that must be paid ultimately by tge individuals small farms and small businesses of the industrializedworld.

Dude, the data doesn't show recent cooling. Even if it did, it wouldn't be of any great significance on short timescales. But I understand the complexity is a bit too much at times.

You're just making pure assertions and spreading misinformation.





As you note, we shouldn't get too excited about small moves up or down, but we do need to follow long-term trends to assess climate.

I don't give a rat's a** if the data ultimately show temps trending up or down; they will ultimately change. But I'll be damned if I'm gonna let vested interests make me pay for their gimmicks, either way.

And so money is your main motivator. Nowt to do with science or evidence.

Watch your emissions.

I try to.

[edit on 14-12-2008 by melatonin]

650 is quite a few but how many still argue the case for the existence of AGW?

Also this is what makes science so intriguing, the fact that there is no unanimously accepted theory, there is always dissenting opinions. There are always those who think that things are not as they seem.

While it is a big deal for those who disbelieve AGW and hate Gore, as if he is some how responsible for the notion of AGW, it is not much of a story.

Originally posted by Animal
650 is quite a few but how many still argue the case for the existence of AGW?

Also this is what makes science so intriguing, the fact that there is no unanimously accepted theory, there is always dissenting opinions. There are always those who think that things are not as they seem.

While it is a big deal for those who disbelieve AGW and hate Gore, as if he is some how responsible for the notion of AGW, it is not much of a story.

well...he and his friends ARE responsible for the GW scam...google 'club of rome and global warming'