If this is global warming ...

When I was i grade school we were all going to die in a nuclear war. By the time I got to high school overpopulation was going to finish everyone off. Somewhere in there we were headed for another ice age. Now it's global warming. Given all of the things I've lived through that were going to kill us all, I'm surprised I'm as old as I am and it's just hard to keep getting worked up about these things, especially when one of them is as pleasant as this one.

[quote]HRE wrote:

When I was i grade school we were all going to die in a nuclear war. By the time I got to high school overpopulation was going to finish everyone off. quote]

So, you don't recognize that global warming is basically an offshoot of overpopulation? OK.

I've just stopped thinking about it. I can't change it anyway and I like not having to clear the driveway and scrape ice off the windshield.

HRE wrote:

When I was i grade school we were all going to die in a nuclear war. By the time I got to high school overpopulation was going to finish everyone off. Somewhere in there we were headed for another ice age. Now it's global warming. Given all of the things I've lived through that were going to kill us all, I'm surprised I'm as old as I am and it's just hard to keep getting worked up about these things, especially when one of them is as pleasant as this one.

You forgot swine flu and bird flu. I refer to it as 'chicken little science.' The sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!

And for the Eurotrash thinking that only right wing conservatives doubt global warming, I am left leaning, think that Bush is a blithering idiot, and strongly believe that Fox News is evil incarnate.

HRE wrote:

I've just stopped thinking about it. I can't change it anyway

That's the spirit!!! Don't believe anyone who tells you your choices affect others!!!

HRE wrote:

I've just stopped thinking about it. I can't change it anyway and I like not having to clear the driveway and scrape ice off the windshield.

you appear to be a "the glass is half full" kinda guy.

mcgato wrote:

And for the Eurotrash thinking that only right wing conservatives doubt global warming, I am left leaning, think that Bush is a blithering idiot, and strongly believe that Fox News is evil incarnate.

OK McGato, so you're living proof that the uniformed can be found in every party.

At the start of the industrial revolution, C02 was about 285 parts per million in the atmosphere. It is now 370. This is not a theory or a prediction, it is an observation. CO2 makes up only a tiny percentage of the atmosphere (less than a half a percent), and that is why it is possible for us to change it. In this century, if current emissions continue, atmospheric CO2 will have doubled in concentration.

So in response to HRE's comment that "there's nothing I [we] can do to change the atmosphere... well, bullcrap. We've already proved we can change the atmosphere. We can also change it back by:

1. Bothering to get informed.

2. Facing the facts, once informed.

3. Developing technology that provides energy without emitting greenhouse gases.

Now I admit that I am not an economist, but my guess is that developing these technologies is not going to ruin the economy. My guess is that the companies that get ahead of the curve are going to be bazillionaires. Isaw an interview with the guy who made billions by developing secure online internet payments. Guess what he does now? He's developing electric cars that can go 150 mph and accelerate faster than a Porsche.

You won't like it when all the melted ice shelves mean that nearby communities will be turned into Venice West and everyone who lives there will become refugees in your area.

bootsie wrote:

fdgafdhgfg wrote:

Hey, show some respect, we saved Europe in WWII

ehhh... to some degree that's correct, but we didn't do it because we wanted to stop fascism in it's tracks (we sold oil to mussolini, and didn't get involved in ww2 until 1.5 million jews had already been gassed). we did it to secure resources and get a political leg up on russia for the worldwide post ww2 economy. that was the real reason for those god-forsaken bombs we dropped on japan. totally unforgiveable. totally.

This is a f***ing ridiculous argument? Are you saying that a country should act in a way besides what's best for it at the time? There are many very knowledgeable political scientists who would disagree with you. Even if you disagree with that basic premise, who cares what our motivations were - the end was good, wasn't it? And instead of dropping nukes on hiroshima and nagasaki, maybe we should have kept sending land troops that would have resulted in a hell of a lot more US deaths. For people who are screaming about the US death toll in Iraq, you're pretty cavalier about sacrificing American lives in retrospect to save foreign ones, don't you think? Or are you perhaps suggesting we should have remained isolationist and watched the rest of the world go to hell in a handbasket?

sc42 wrote:

OK McGato, so you're living proof that the uniformed can be found in every party.

I'm actually quite well informed. I just have serious doubts when the people who are trying to prove global warming are also the people who are responsible for estimating the temperature of the earth. They use their sophisticated 'models' to do this. I just see too much conflict of interest and too much grubbing for research grants.

I'll agree that we could clean things up a bit pollution-wise and sucking down petroleum products. Just spare me the end of the world arguments.

Oh and I didn't even make fun of your typo. Until now.

Fair enough, there are conflicts of interest everywhere. The biggest one is obviously the coal and oil industry's interest in seeing the status quo continue. [And where did Cheney and Bush spend their earlier lives? Oh yeah, in the oil industry.]

But the tenperature of the earth is not being estimated by models. Its is being measured, with plain old thermometers. You might debate whether future projections are precise, or unbiased, or whatever, but there is just no point arguing the increases that have already been measured. The earth's surface averages about 57 degrees, and it has been getting steadily hotter since the industrial revolution. Globally, the last few years have been the hottest in recorded history... there is no theory or model involved in that statement.

And it is worth pointing out that the climate models do a very good job of predicting past patterns of change in data sets other than the ones used to develop the models. So when people say 'the models aren't tested', that is not correct. Of course they can't have been tested on future data, but they have been extensively tested. And they work.

Any typos?

Sometimes I am. Sometimes not. I keep the house thermostat at 62-64. All of our cars get between 30-45 mpg. I try to get people to turn out lights in rooms we aren't using. I generally vote for candidates who get good revues from the "green" organizations. And what's happening, whatever it is, is till happening. Might as well enjoy it, whatever it is.

it doesn't matter if there is global warming, because if anyone dies and believes in christ then they will go to heaven and will be better off.

sc42 wrote:

Any typos?

Temperature in the second paragraph.

I could debate parts of the rest of your post, but I won't.

All things are done by God and God is good and so global warming is as it should be. If you don't believe that you'll know what global warming really is when you burn in hell.

Semper Fi

First Paragraph:

\"Status quo\" is a Latin phrase which generally should be italicized. Periods go after the closing bracket or parentheses.

Second Paragraph:

In addition to spelling \"temperature\" wrong, as has been mentioned, you began the second paragraph with a conjunction which is wrong. It is not a typo, but an outright mistake based on your lack of grammar know how, so maybe that does not count.

The sentence that begins \"Its is being measured\" has two mistakes in the first two words: it is both redundant and you miss the apostrophe.

Third Paragraph:

Once again you began a sentence with a conjunction. Actually, you do that twice in that paragraph.

Some of these are not really typos, as that implies an error based on typing quickly, these are errors based on your lack of knowledge of writing in general.

You are welcome.

There is no global warming. Al Gore invented it. Once he dies, it dies with him.

I saw a show on PBS of all places recently.

It stated something to the effect that the past 100 years has had some of the least amount of volcanic activity in history.

In other words the earth could be warming merely because there isn't as much soot and ash floating around.

You get a couple of big volcanoes up and running and douchebags like Al Gore sure won't be whining about global warming.