Global Warming so you think its fake?

reply to post by newworld


Are you implying that the only effect we have on the environment is limited to city borders?

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by newworld

 

Are you implying that the only effect we have on the environment is limited to city borders?

Not only city borders, but cities in general, forests, coastal areas, the ozone layer (some people mistake the hole in the ozone layer as something related to global warming. they are two different things), biodiversity of species, inland water supply contamination, and destruction of ocean life as a result of oil spills.

Those are areas that are affected directly by human endeavor, global warming is not.

You must have "faith" in this theory to instantly reject all other points of view.

I am also a tree-hugger who thinks the environmental movement has been hijacked by corporate interests, self-serving NGOs, junk science and is focusing on the wrong thing. They've got you thinking that to "save species" you must pay the carbon tax like a good citizen. It's a perversion that has amounted to mind control and, by golly, it works.

You can still be an environmentalist without buying into this scam.

Ok did you even read my opening post? I don't think you did. I already stated how aware I am of the NWO and its use of the situation.

No it does not take faith. I don't put faith in anything other than myself. I may be being deceived by "facts" produced but by no means I am being brainwashed. If I were truly someone brainwashed by the situation why would I post this discussion in the first place or be one of the morons who think that taxation is a good idea. The only thing I am for is getting rid of these #ing inefficient technologies that will be the undoing of our species less we change our ways.

They've not "gotten" to me and if you are going to keep saying things that I have already said I am not I am just going to ignore you, not for challenging my beliefs but simply for ignoring what I have already stated.

reply to post by Elliot


Now that is something I have never heard of! Do you have a link for these supposed findings? Or, I guess I could google the whole thing.

reply to post by john124

It's not news to me, in fact if it turns out to be mostly natural, then we may not be able to prevent climate change.

Aha. Caught you, you said climate change not climate warming.

Line two

reply to post by the siren


And what of the heat trapped by the C02 in the atmosphere, is that not having an effect?

TPTB needed a new enemy, and it is us. Terrorists are no longer a viable enemy so let's create a new one. Global Warming. Nice ring to that their name. But what if temperatures drop-which they have now for 10 years-we will say that is anecdotal evidence. We will use big 10 dollar words so the sheeple will not be able to argue the points.

Yes, pollution and other system problems need to be addressed. Carbon footprinting is bunk science. Or do you agree we should have only 500 million people on the planet? Let us start killing off all the useless eaters.

reply to post by newworld


How do you come about the decision that we can pollute the Earth but not cause global warming?

reply to post by endisnighe


Well considering that people have predicited global warming since the 60s and 70s, don't see how it is a replacement for terrorism which is a relatively new fear.

Originally posted by endisnighe
TPTB needed a new enemy, and it is us. Terrorists are no longer a viable enemy so let's create a new one. Global Warming. Nice ring to that their name. But what if temperatures drop-which they have now for 10 years-we will say that is anecdotal evidence. We will use big 10 dollar words so the sheeple will not be able to argue the points.

Yes, pollution and other system problems need to be addressed. Carbon footprinting is bunk science. Or do you agree we should have only 500 million people on the planet? Let us start killing off all the useless eaters.

Global temp is cooling? what? Show me your facts and links about this please as I am interested in seeing the studies that show that temperatures have been dropping.

If you look at the following graph, you will see that since the late 1800's the average global temperature has risen exponentially not dropped. Seriously, you have to look at long range temperatures, not just the past few years. Yes, temperatures "fluctuate", but you have to look at the long range changes, otherwise you are only looking at a very tiny piece of the puzzle.

www.princeton.edu...

enjoy

Harm None
Peace

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by newworld

 

How do you come about the decision that we can pollute the Earth but not cause global warming?

i come to the conclusion that global warming is not man-made because the data does not add up.
www.merchantcircle.com...

volcanoes contribute even more to than humans could in all of our existence to change of climate.

www.geocraft.com...

if you look at the chart above, you'll see that the vast majority of global warming (or climate change as it is called now) is caused by water vapor.

www.ncpa.org...

higher concentrations of greenhouse gases actually HELPED dinosaurs to remain alive. At least according to the above source.

now that i got this out of the way, I believe there is plenty of evidence to support that humans do have an effect on wildlife (the unnatural quick extinctions of animal species that occur each year), contamination of oceans due to oil spills (decrease of fish population), destruction of forests (simple pictures of the then-and-now of the Amazon easily proves this), or problems of contamination and smog that occurs in big cities.

In other words, humans DO affect the planet, but we do not have a big effect on the planet's climate.

Originally posted by amazed

If you look at the following graph, you will see that since the late 1800's the average global temperature has risen exponentially not dropped. Seriously, you have to look at long range temperatures, not just the past few years. Yes, temperatures "fluctuate", but you have to look at the long range changes, otherwise you are only looking at a very tiny piece of the puzzle.

www.princeton.edu...

That graph picks a start date just after a fairly cold period and is hardly a long range look climatically ( is that even a word?). You can make your data fit your assumption given enough tweaking of it. Levels of CO2 and temps have both been higher in the past and life is still here on Earth.

I think I may have the (deserved if true) reputation as one of the more vehement Global warming deniers on this board. I am sure I'm in the top ten.

Now according to the OP, that insinuates that I care nothing about the environment. Allow me a few moments to explain how I live to you:

I live outside of any city or metropolitan area. My home is on the side of a small mountain. The nearest town is close, about 5 miles away, but it is so small it has only one general store and a couple small businesses. The nearest thing that could be called a 'city' is about ten miles in the other direction, and is pretty small itself. The largest employer is WalMart.

To get to anything like a metropolitan area you get to drive about 50-60 miles.

I presently control 90 acres of land here. It belonged to my father before me, and to his father before him. Only 10 acres is cleared and fairly level; the remainder is heavily wooded with virgin forest. These trees have stood for at least 100 years, perhaps longer, undisturbed by anyone except us. I have denied multiple requests to log commercially here, and have consistently refused any suggestion of developing the land beyond building our own homes here, cutting firewood for our own use, and fencing in a few areas.

We (my mother, myself, and my family) still grow a garden whenever we can. My present plans are to increase the garden size to a little over an acre, the extent of the plot we have available for it. That will produce enough vegetables for my entire family (and then some for the neighbors), enough tobacco plants for myself to have plenty of smokes each year, and the rest will be planted in corn. We don't eat a lot of corn, but chickens do.

I have a section of the mountain fenced in where we used to have goats. Goats are wonderful for keeping the brush at bay and snakes away. In the center of this pen, surrounded by a new herd of goats, I plan on building a chickenhouse to give us free meat and eggs. The manure from this chickenhouse will be mixed with the manure and compost from the rabbits we have to produce fertilizer for that garden. The goats will keep the snakes away, and a secondary tightly-woven fence should handle the coyotes, raccoons, possums, foxes, and weasels. The tree canopy should manage to keep the hawks and that new family of eagles at bay.

I have plans to build a geothermal heating/cooling system for our house, providing climate control for the cost of a simple series of fans during the summer, and that plus some hot water during the winter.

We have blackberry vines, grape vines, muscadine vines, mulberry trees, apple trees, pear trees, cherry trees, and a cornucopia of walnut, pecan, and water chestnut trees already here. I want to add strawberries and blueberries, perhaps some raspberries as well. It would also be nice if i could get this mulberry tree to start bearing.

Our water comes from a private well. Our sewer is a private septic tank. that septic tank is set up so as to be continually regenerating. Chances are it will never need to be cleaned out.

I am presently working on ways to produce my own electricity.

I am also looking into gasoline alternatives.

I burn almost all of my waste that is burnable, including brush from where the mountain tries to overtake my home each year. I have a small bonfire pit that I use for this. The ashes are mixed with the compost and manure to be used as more fertilizer.

I have plenty of wildlife here for meat as well. Squirrel and deer are abundant. Yes, I would shoot a deer for the meat. No, I wouldn't wipe them out. Thanks to my management over the last 20 years, we went from having only the occasional deer to several herds. That management included private hunting.

I do like a few of technology's benefits. I love to drink Mountain Dew. I buy it in cans and recycle them to help pay for more. The cans are cheaper than plastic bottles and I can recoup some of my cost. I can also use them for some projects around the house. Anyone familiar with making a cook stove from two cans? I still have a few of the two liter bottles from time to time. They get recycled for water bottles, funnels, containers for nuts or bolts, and a myriad of other uses.

I have used furniture that others were ready to throw out to make room for new. This is a very comfortable couch, and the coffee table in front of me was actually built by my father 40 years ago. When my appliances break down, my first thought is to fix them, not to buy new. The newest vehicle I own is a 1999 Saturn. I also have two pickups, both made in the 1980s. I again prefer to repair rather than replace whenever possible.

After working at a regular job, I have a to-do list of repairs and improvements that is literally astronomical. All I do is work to keep my lifestyle the way I want it. I have precious little time for play.

I should also mention that I am a devout Christian.

Now, explain to me how I am not 'green' enough. Explain to me how I am not doing my part to preserve our planet. Then tell me what you are doing to help keep our planet clean and natural. I don't want to hear about organizing others or about how loudly or how often you protest. That's just talk. Tell me what you do.

Then I'll explain to you how those very same people who have been screaming about Global Warming and carbon dioxide are the self-same reason why several of the things above included the phrase 'I plan to'. Their answer is to take from me via taxes, carbon credits, and regulations to prevent me from carrying out my plans, and they are apparently very good at it.

So tell me now, who is 'green' and who isn't?

TheRedneck

reply to post by GenLo


I honestly believe that it is arrogant to assume that we have that much control over the earth. We inhabit such a small portion of it, yet we claim such a large responsibility for it.

Read about fractuals. Read about the history. And I mean the history prior to humans.

"There are things far greater than heaven and earth"

-Bill Shakespeare. A good friend of mine.

reply to post by john124

We know carbon dioxide and methane are greenhouse gases, therefore precautionary measures are required whether you accept the evidence of man-made global warming, or not!

I vote we lower the CO2 levels to 150ppm or lower. See this article on why we need to reduce the levels to below 150ppm Planet Natural: Plant Science 101

I think it MIGHT be real - but at the same time I feel that going "green" in some ways is one of the dumbest things to do. It will cause absolutely no drop in Carbon Dioxide emissions worldwide, and will dramatically increase the cost of living. What it will do is, however, provide a pathway to World Government as well as billions of dollars on useless technologies such as many renewables.

Wonder if it will blow over like the global cooling hoax did.

I vote we lower the CO2 levels to 150ppm or lower. See this article on why we need to reduce the levels to below 150ppm Planet Natural: Plant Science 101

As CO2 is a critical component of growth, plants in environments with inadequate CO2 levels - below 200 ppm - will cease to grow or produce.

If you have never enriched your garden with CO2, start with 700 - 900 ppm (double the normal atmospheric levels). If yields improve, increase CO2 enrichment to 1200 - 1500 ppm.

Lowering them to 150 (which are under natural levels) would stop plant growth.

[edit on 21/9/2009 by C0bzz]

reply to post by TheRedneck


That sounds like a nice place. Sorry you took it so personally, apparently I need to make it more obvious that those quotes are from personal events in my life, needless to say they didn't come from evironmentally concious christians so I am sorry that you feel stereotyped.

What do I do? Well I cannot say I do much. I life in the military barracks and share a bathroom with my neighbor. I cannot control how the water, electricity, or heat is distributed but I do try to lesson my own impact. I don't own a vehicle, I recycle what the base recycling plant accepts, I usually only use one light to illuminate my 15x15 bedroom/kitchen/study, I would try to buy things that are environmentally friendly but without a vehicle its a little difficult, and finally every once in a while I donate to charities or programs, however its generally not more than $100. Once I get out of the military I don't really plan to do much else since I will be studying to learn a new language and hopefully within 6 months head out to Japan to backpack cross country from Tokyo to Kyoto. Maybe when I have settled down in a place where I can do some of the same things you are doing I can mention them in my egotistical repertoire however if I ever mention it in an argument to show that I am better than someone I'll make sure that they aren't someone whose life span is less than 30 years. Not saying a 22 y/o is incapable of doing things similar or better but its generally uncommon.

reply to post by C0bzz


To me though, this whole "going green" thing is more than just about reducing emmisions, its about our farming and agriculture, and how we use resources on the planet. Again reform needs to be made regardless of whether or not global warming is occuring because I am 100% sure that if in another 100 years our population were to grow in the exponetial rate that it did in these past 100 years without a shift in conciousness or environment supportive technologies our species would not last because our Earth would not last.

reply to post by mikerussellus


I suggest you read about what the average american family consumes and then get back to me about how you think its arrogant. So far our world population could probably fit in the state of Texas if we all stood side by side but the yearly waste made by such a "small" population would far exceed the borders of Texas.

Originally posted by GenLo
reply to post by C0bzz

 

To me though, this whole "going green" thing is more than just about reducing emmisions, its about our farming and agriculture, and how we use resources on the planet. Again reform needs to be made regardless of whether or not global warming is occuring because I am 100% sure that if in another 100 years our population were to grow in the exponetial rate that it did in these past 100 years without a shift in conciousness or environment supportive technologies our species would not last because our Earth would not last.

You are absolutely correct. However, it seems that most environmental groups are more concerned about depopulating the planet, pushing useless forms of energy, and just plain whining about everything.

www.heartland.org...

www.american.com...

They also oppose one of the possibly greatest ways to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, Nuclear power, with half-truths or just plain ignorance.

[edit on 21/9/2009 by C0bzz]