or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's departure prompts questions of chamber representation
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's departure prompts questions of chamber representation - Page 3

post #81 of 121
Global Warming "science" has shown to be faulty, especially that presented by the U.N.:
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=262

Apple had best get a clue before listening to Al Gore:
http://www.heartland.org/full/26066/...l_Warming.html
post #82 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

Global Warming "science" has shown to be faulty, especially that presented by the U.N.:
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=262

Apple had best get a clue before listening to Al Gore:
http://www.heartland.org/full/26066/...l_Warming.html

Oh crap, duck and cover, you linked to the heartland institute - there's a contigent on here that is going to massacre you for that...
post #83 of 121

Thanks, good reading. I guess 2007 was a particularly bad year for ice, when most of the dire predictions were made. It is always unsettling when the world as we know it seems to be headed for destruction. Of course that destruction would only be our civilization not the planet, but it is still pretty obvious to most people that nature is in retreat due to the onslaught of the human race be it global warming or just good old fashion deforestation.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #84 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

Oh crap, duck and cover, you linked to the heartland institute - there's a contigent on here that is going to massacre you for that...

If you had any interest in facts, you would massacre him yourself.
post #85 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

Oh crap, duck and cover, you linked to the heartland institute - there's a contigent on here that is going to massacre you for that...

When it comes to information (offering new, relevant, untested evidence) versus disinformation, more historically credible sources, i.e., non-partisan track record, should be cited instead of Heartland.
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
post #86 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

Because I think all the scientists who have reviewed the data and come to more moderate conclusion of "we need to study this more" have a more realistic approach. Their "science" is just as good as the "science" of the people you believe so who's in the right?

So, it's about their approach, more than the science? How can the "science" of one group be just as good as the "science" of another group and yet they reach contradictory positions based on (presumably) the same data? Are there multiple scientific truths? I think not. Also, your thoughts on how scientists deal with data that doesn't fit theories, is naively simplistic, and, more importantly, doesn't reflect the actual practice or history of science.

As has been pointed out by any number of people on this forum alone, none of the sources of information you cite has any credibility in the real scientific community. (As opposed to the alternate universe "scientific" community where anyone who publishes anything on a science related topic qualifies as a respected scientist, in any and all fields.) Contrary to what you believe, there is an overwhelming consensus in the climatology community that the threat of global warming is real. Contrary to what you believe, most of what you think are legitimate scientific articles are rubbish. The only question in my mind is whether you are intent on denying reality out of a basic inability to understand, out of fear, out of economic self-interest, or for some other reason. Clearly, you have no rational basis for your beliefs, despite your belief to the contrary, but it would be interesting to know what exactly does motivate you. Unfortunately, I think you lack the self-awareness to provide the answer yourself.

Fortunately, however, science-denial is no longer the order of the day in the White House. Fortunately, you are not a policy maker. Fortunately, the voices of reputable scientists are now being listened to in Washington, rather than ignored.
post #87 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

Many companies left before Apple so it's not like Apple is a trailblazer here (as noted in the article)

Obviously your eyes are better than mine as I cannot find the word "trailblazer" used at anytime in the article. In fact, the article stated that: " Preceding Apple in departure were Pacific Gas & Electric, PNM Resources and Exelon. Nike also withdrew from the chamber's board, but retained its membership."

So , either your reading and comprehension skills need upgrading or you have an agenda that we "are not aware of". Care to elaborate? \
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #88 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

So what if I gave you data from University professor and scholars around the world? Would you dismiss it instantly if it didn't go with your hypothesis?


Would these be the same "University professor and scholars around the world" that still claim that smoking doesn't cause cancer?
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #89 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt45 View Post

Good practices towards keeping our environment good is the way to go.

Global warming is a farce being forced on us. Redistribution of wealth is the real truth. There's so much junk science we'll never know the real truth.

Read Atlas Shrugged for a little enlightenment.

I find it impossible to be enlightened by A WORK OF FICTION, entertained, maybe ... but certainly not enlightened.
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #90 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post

I find it impossible to be enlightened by A WORK OF FICTION, entertained, maybe ... but certainly not enlightened.

Well, Rand is such a terrible writer that it's impossible to be entertained, either.
post #91 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by X38 View Post

Guess you'd better add the BBC to your hate list:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm

Interesting implicit perspective you have there - everyone who agrees with your hypothesis is using science and everyone who disagrees with your hypothesis is using pseudo science. Since you have been delegated the authority to declare what is science and what is pseudo science, I suppose that it your prerogative.

Since you speak for all science, how do you explain the discrepancies in weather station records? If you look at all weather stations, there appears to be a historical rise in temperatures. However, if you look at just the weather stations that are in rural areas there is no historical trend of increasing temperatures. If you look at those stations around which cities have grown up over time, there is a significant increasing temperature trend. In other words, our historical records of temperature show that if you build cities around weather stations they will be in a warmer environment, but those weather stations in locations that remain more or less unchanged do not show an increase in temperature. You've got a pretty classic proof of the well known urban island heat effect there, but no smoking gun proof of global warming.

The consequence is that we have to face the fact that the only meaningful direct measurements of temperature and temperature trends we have on a global scale have only come into existence in the age of modern weather & climate satellites over the past couple of decades or so. Since it is also well known that there are natural cyclical effects on global temperature of a similar time scale (such as the solar cycle and the Pacific ocean thermal cycle), it is simply impossible to determine at this time by direct measurement whether or not we are observing normal temperature fluctuations of a cyclical nature or a long term trend. At present global warming is only a conjecture that is supported by indirect and inconclusive evidence at best.

Of course I'm sure you're now going to tell me Im full of pseudo science and expose me for a heretic since I dared to question your dogma.


Don't know about the placement of weather stations, but the disappearance of the polar ice caps, which is documented by photos and satellite images, is enough to cause me concern. Not you tho', huh?
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #92 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt45 View Post

They should all be read so one can determine the best course of action because the way we are heading today is a pending disaster. The market manipulations are robbing us all.


Please tell me that you're kidding. Why on earth would we decide the best course of action on works of fiction and the study of nutjobs? We might as well base our actions on the movie: The Day After Tomorrow. I agree there is a certain amount of market manipulation, always has been, always will be, but what is the connection with that and climate change?
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #93 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt45 View Post

The only thing I see coming out of this fraud called global warming is corporations and Al Gore will get rich....the rest of us will be sucked dry. We are quickly being put back in to our place as peasents.

IMHO it's better to be "sucked dry" of money than to be "sucked dry" of breathable air? Cleaning up our environment is obviously going to cost us all money. But take a look around, can anyone honestly say that our environment is better today than it was 100 years ago? Let's keep our eye on the ball and not accept anything less than clean air and clean water. Shouldn't that be the goal for all of us?
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #94 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post

Please tell me that you're kidding. Why on earth would we decide the best course of action on works of fiction and the study of nutjobs? We might as well base our actions on the movie: The Day After Tomorrow. I agree there is a certain amount of market manipulation, always has been, always will be, but what is the connection with that and climate change?

Like it or not the "nutjobs" have a strong track record of getting to run the show....
The better you understand them the better you can deal with them. In terms of politics climate change is a game changer. It forces greater dependance on government and consiquently more loss of your wealth to those in control. Someone upstream in these comments stated that cap and trade would hardly cost anyone much. Don't know where they are, but where I'm at taxes, fees, etc. never go down and continue to rise above inflation. When all added up it's over 50% now. More government never solved anything.
post #95 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt45 View Post

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html

Based on the last 400,000 years we are not seeing anything out of the ordinary.

I'll have to take your word for it as I wasn't around 400,000 years ago, but I do know one thing. If our air keeps getting dirtier and dirtier none of us will be able to "see" anything.

For a point of reference, I live in Vancouver, BC and can remember the first time I saw evidence of the smog that was always mentioned in conjunction with L.A. While driving back into the city from about 25 miles out you could see a very thin line of smog above the city. That "thin line " has grown to about 1000 feet thick and only lessens on the weekend when a lot of cars are not commuting back and forth to work. I'm sure that this is a man made problem, unless cars have been around longer than I give them credit for.

There "may" be many reasons for global warming, but to take man out of the equation would be a serious mistake.
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #96 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

Global Warming "science" has shown to be faulty, especially that presented by the U.N.:
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=262


I read it and find that the article does no such thing ("shown to be faulty"). All of the article's points, and be clear that this is an agenda-site, not a scientific site, have been debunked and/or discredited by legitimate climate scientists repeatedly. An untruth, no matter how often repeated, remains untrue until proven otherwise (with new evidence). For them to posit such a staggering lack of understanding of the basic science of climate change, as well as old discredited claims, should immediately disqualify anyone who advances it from a debate.

Again, if you are in possession of new evidence on any of the areas of climate science, take it to the appropriate place for review.
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
post #97 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post

IMHO it's better to be "sucked dry" of money than to be "sucked dry" of breathable air? Cleaning up our environment is obviously going to cost us all money. But take a look around, can anyone honestly say that our environment is better today than it was 100 years ago? Let's keep our eye on the ball and not accept anything less than clean air and clean water. Shouldn't that be the goal for all of us?

As countries develop people tend to care more about their surroundings. Ask my dad about swimming with the raw sewage in the rivers in Illinois when he was growing up. What you may think of as bad is a lot better than 75 years ago overall. You really don't want to go back to heating with coal like in England in the 1800's.
post #98 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt45 View Post

Like it or not the "nutjobs" have a strong track record of getting to run the show....
The better you understand them the better you can deal with them. In terms of politics climate change is a game changer. It forces greater dependance on government and consiquently more loss of your wealth to those in control. Someone upstream in these comments stated that cap and trade would hardly cost anyone much. Don't know where they are, but where I'm at taxes, fees, etc. never go down and continue to rise above inflation. When all added up it's over 50% now. More government never solved anything.

And neither has less government ... perhaps a BALANCED government is what we should strive for.
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #99 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt45 View Post

...Someone upstream in these comments stated that cap and trade would hardly cost anyone much. Don't know where they are, but where I'm at taxes, fees, etc. never go down and continue to rise above inflation. When all added up it's over 50% now. More government never solved anything.

On a cautionary note, don't get suckered with junk economics, a variant of climate change denial. There's more to it (also read the related posts by Krugman).

It is often stated that "Economic estimates of the costs of cutting CO2 emissions are huge." In an absolute sense, this is true, it would be a lot of dollars, but it comes down to a few percent of GDP, which, in an economic system that grows by a few percent per year, just puts off the attainment of a given amount of wealth by a few years. And anyway, business-as-usual will always argue that the alternative would be catastrophic to our economic well being.

I think the intelligent, accurate argument would be that in favor of better government, not "more" government, for timely and effective solutions to acknowledged problems.
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
post #100 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt45 View Post

As countries develop people tend to care more about their surroundings. Ask my dad about swimming with the raw sewage in the rivers in Illinois when he was growing up. What you may think of as bad is a lot better than 75 years ago overall. You really don't want to go back to heating with coal like in England in the 1800's.

That may have been true of Illinois but my point was, although not clearly stated, the sheer numbers of earth's citizens then as opposed to now clearly had a beneficial effect on climate and pollution.
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #101 of 121
I am a big fan of Apple products, but I find this move to quit the US Chamber of Commerce by Apple a bogus, hypocritical, publicity stunt. What exactly is Apple's "carbon footprint" in the United States? Not very much for a company of their size. Apple has moved or outsourced all of it's manufacturing overseas - a lot of it to China, a country that does not have the greatest environmental record. What does Apple have here in the US? Some office buildings in Cupertino and a few other locations around the country, along with all the Apple stores. When I see Apple getting tough on its suppliers and manufacturing partners about how they treat the environment and how they treat their employees, then I might respect Apple for "taking a stance on the environment".


And being linked with Nike is no big deal. They do the same thing. All their products are made outside the USA, and, they have a HORRIBLE record for how employees are treated at their manufacturing plants.

You can believe in global warming or not - you can go back and forth with the cut&paste and name calling, but dig beneath the surface and Apple looks pretty lame on this.
post #102 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_heat_island

Edit: Here's the main point of it if you don't want to click
"There are several causes of an urban heat island (UHI). The principal reason for the nighttime warming is that buildings block surface heat from radiating into the relatively cold night sky. Two other reasons are changes in the thermal properties of surface materials and lack of evapotranspiration in urban areas. Materials commonly used in urban areas, such as concrete and asphalt, have significantly different thermal bulk properties (including heat capacity and thermal conductivity) and surface radiative properties (albedo and emissivity) than the surrounding rural areas. This causes a change in the energy balance of the urban area, often leading to higher temperatures than surrounding rural areas. The energy balance is also affected by the lack of vegetation in urban areas, which inhibits cooling by evapotranspiration."

Pretty standard application of "no duh" science. Which is hotter? Grass or Asphalt? Is Asphalt hotter than grass after the sun has gone down? Just puts some numbers to the natural observation

Thanks, but I was really looking for the data saying that there had been no temperature increase in rural areas.
As you said, it's kind of a "no duh" that urban areas are hotter.
post #103 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by msimpson View Post

I am a big fan of Apple products, but I find this move to quit the US Chamber of Commerce by Apple a bogus, hypocritical, publicity stunt. What exactly is Apple's "carbon footprint" in the United States? Not very much for a company of their size. Apple has moved or outsourced all of it's manufacturing overseas - a lot of it to China, a country that does not have the greatest environmental record. What does Apple have here in the US? Some office buildings in Cupertino and a few other locations around the country, along with all the Apple stores. When I see Apple getting tough on its suppliers and manufacturing partners about how they treat the environment and how they treat their employees, then I might respect Apple for "taking a stance on the environment".

The measurement of footprint includes that of each product ... a global footprint, not just in the U.S. Apple explains it and their environmental efforts here. They don't dispute that more is requred, particularly in the manufacturing supply chain. Where, with the evolving nature of our understanding of environmental impact, would it be considered complete? The supplied link also includes the Supplier Code of Conduct, and the Supplier Progress Report (both PDFs) and Historical Reports. Temporarily set aside your cynicism ... you may find that their current program, considerations, and commitment is more comprehensive than you presume ... and certainly not driven merely by publicity considerations. After reading all the materials, ask yourself what technology company is doing more.

Jobs is on record (print and Youtube) in moving admiration of the global contributions of Gates' Foundation. Though he's been active in environmental concerns for over a decade, I suspect his recent health concerns has prompted elevated environmental activity. Along with how his innovation benefits our lives in a variety of fields, my impression is that he genuinely wants benefits for the environment as an enduring part of his legacy and for his family (personal and global). Subjectively speaking, a brutal confrontation with one's mortality tends to heighten one's values.
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
post #104 of 121
Steve Jobs car = Mercedes SL55 AMG = 14 mile per gallon

Steve Jobs plane = Gulfstream V = Burns 2000 gals per hour, or about 3.6 gallons per mile.

And Al Gore is no better. By some estimates his house consumes 20x the national average house uses in energy. And he flies private jets wherever goes.

When Steve Jobs drives a Prius to Apple headquarters (and parks it in the handicapped spot as usual) then I will start to take him seriously about his stance on global warming.
post #105 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

...

EDIT 2: Crap - ... "On the scientific evidence so far, according to Dr Kusano, the IPCC assertion that atmospheric temperatures are likely to increase continuously and steadily "should be perceived as an unprovable hypothesis"."

Since you brought up the subject of "Crap", I suppose one can expect you to utilize it as fodder for your positions. So typical of the denyosphere to grab anything you don't understand, but hope something will stick when thrown against the wall. Here's something, on the "report", the person, the agency, the long-debunked points, to clean up after yourself.
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
post #106 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by msimpson View Post

And Al Gore is no better. By some estimates his house consumes 20x the national average house uses in energy.

Isn't that weird?
And yet, as I've repeatedly posted on this very site, when he came into possession of the house in 2002 it was in pretty bad shape, but he has worked steadily to properly restore the historic residence and make it energy efficient. In fact the house is one of only 14 residences in the US to receive a LEED Gold rating from the Green Building Council (meaning his house is actually known to be *extremely* efficient.)
http://current.com/items/88793568_al...ur-country.htm
So does this make you a liar, ignorant of the facts, a mindless parroter of things you heard on FOX News, or all three?
post #107 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by msimpson View Post

Steve Jobs car = Mercedes SL55 AMG = 14 mile per gallon

Steve Jobs plane = Gulfstream V = Burns 2000 gals per hour, or about 3.6 gallons per mile.

And Al Gore is no better. By some estimates his house consumes 20x the national average house uses in energy. And he flies private jets wherever goes.

When Steve Jobs drives a Prius to Apple headquarters (and parks it in the handicapped spot as usual) then I will start to take him seriously about his stance on global warming.

Which falls under the category of "impossible expectations."

Quote:
llusory "free-thinkers" employ denialism through rhetorical tactics (conspiracy, selectivity, false experts, impossible expectations, moving goalposts, argument from metaphor, violations of informal logic) to give the appearance of argument or legitimate debate, when in actuality there is none.

If the lack of perfection in one's behavior is sufficient to deny their contributions ... imagine what kind of parent that would make you? (or boss, or friend, or partner, or citizen ... take your pick)
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
post #108 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by msimpson View Post

Steve Jobs car = Mercedes SL55 AMG = 14 mile per gallon

Steve Jobs plane = Gulfstream V = Burns 2000 gals per hour, or about 3.6 gallons per mile.

And Al Gore is no better. By some estimates his house consumes 20x the national average house uses in energy. And he flies private jets wherever goes.

When Steve Jobs drives a Prius to Apple headquarters (and parks it in the handicapped spot as usual) then I will start to take him seriously about his stance on global warming.

Heard of verified, audited "offsets?" And, heard of the fact that it really doesn't matter, from the standpoint of the global warming potential of CO2e, whether the emissions happen in Cupertino or Shenzen? And, that what matters is net, not gross emissions?
post #109 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by msimpson View Post

Steve Jobs plane = Gulfstream V = Burns 2000 gals per hour, or about 3.6 gallons per mile.

BTW your math is off by a factor of 4
as you can see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulfstr...Specifications
There is no GPH fuel consumption figure for the the jet, but
Maximum fuel weight: 41,300 lb (18,772 kg)
Range: 5,800 nautical miles (10,742 km)
Capacity: 14-19 passengers (I doubt this jet is ever "crowded" though)
jetA weighs 6.84 lb/G
41,300 lb/(6.84 lb/G) = 6,038 G of jetA to go 5,800 (nautical) miles
or slightly over 1 (nautical) mile per gallon (your milage may vary.)

My back of the envelope calculation may be slightly less than perfect, but at least i don't just repeat faulty information as truth as it appears you have done repeatedly (and gosh his jet, if loaded with passengers, does better than an SUV!)
post #110 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Heard of verified, audited "offsets?" And, heard of the fact that it really doesn't matter, from the standpoint of the global warming potential of CO2e, whether the emissions happen in Cupertino or Shenzen? And, that what matters is net, not gross emissions?

In truth I would bet his offsets are purchased on the basis of "miles" rather than "Gallons of jet fuel consumed" which does not offset carbon consumption when flying in a private jet, but I can't say for sure.
post #111 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Put another way, past experience indicates that severing your aorta will result in a rather quick death, and most of the medical community will assure you of the same.

I trust my doctor far more then the weatherman.

Then again, they do call it practicing medicine...
post #112 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by justbobf View Post

Climate change is too important an issue to take chances. We must act to protect the planet, for our children's sake, whether you believe the scientists, or not, we cannot take the chance of inaction.

Yes, think of the children!



Never mind the proponents of global warming are benefiting financially and bankrupting our childrens future with economic policies that haven't shown to affect global warming one bit.

But at least the children will be able to breathe
post #113 of 121
EDIT: Never mind... fruitless really...
post #114 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt45 View Post

Good practices towards keeping our environment good is the way to go.

Global warming is a farce being forced on us. Redistribution of wealth is the real truth. There's so much junk science we'll never know the real truth.

Read Atlas Shrugged for a little enlightenment.

Do you have clue-one about objectivism and Ayn Rand? Capitalism IS the redistribution of wealth!! At least it is as much as progressive taxation and regulation. The key is that both need to be balanced.

Ayn Rand was not balanced and Atlas Shrugged is a peculiar kind of mythology. A couple dozen CEO's live in a valley in Colorado protected by a cloaking ray gun, some how build their own city with a power plant run by a super special engine that can sense your emotions and intention and blow itself up into minute dust particles if it doesn't like you. Two guys can run an entire copper mine and with help from corporate MacGivers, Biff and Buffy, design and build complex machinery without pollution or any economic capital except the gold they steal from the outside world that actually created that wealth ... and then, and this is great ... when they aren't going after each others wives ... and when one of them is captured by evil, yet incompetent government officials, the very same bunch of CEO's in perfect A-Team fashion, get into their private airplanes (which they all can flawlessly fly) and burst into a guarded installation and win a shoot out against US security forces, free their leader and return to Colorado without a trace. Kind of like a mix of Flash Gordon and Days of Our Lives for Wall Street Hedgefund managers or MBA's who got punked in World of Warcraft!

Anyway as long as you are honest and consistent in being an objectivist, I don't have any problem with your comments - just realize that putting money and yourself above all others and all things has been tried before, and it doesn't work for very long ... and in the end is rejected or controlled by every society in history.

For example you can't hold Atlas Shrugged in one hand and the Bible in the other.

Objectivism only sounds good when you narrow your perspective to yourself and your bank account. In any society with children or villages bigger than 100 people it can't work, kind of like true communism and libertarianism ... nice in theory, but lousy in practice.
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
post #115 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Yes, think of the children!



Never mind the proponents of global warming are benefiting financially and bankrupting our childrens future with economic policies that haven't shown to affect global warming one bit.

But at least the children will be able to breathe

And opponents of global warming are not benefitting financially and bankrupting the ecological capital of their children's future with economic policies? Your grasp of economics, much less science ad much, MUCH less morality, is wafer thin.

Few scientists or policy wonks make much money touting global warming warnings. They would make far more creating insolvent hedge funds or running coal plants. Are you willing to pay for half of Vanuatu sinking beneath the waves? Are you willing to ignore Vanuatu and feel no personal responsibility for your own actions?

Problem with either far left or far right idealogues is that whining about other people's irresponsibility is so much more fun than being honest about your own. (See Glenn Beck)
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
post #116 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

Global Warming "science" has shown to be faulty, especially that presented by the U.N.:
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=262

Apple had best get a clue before listening to Al Gore:
http://www.heartland.org/full/26066/...l_Warming.html



libertyforall ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Nice name except being egocentric and irresponsible isn't liberating, its middle school!

Do you actually know anything about science?

The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
post #117 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by msimpson View Post

Steve Jobs car = Mercedes SL55 AMG = 14 mile per gallon

Steve Jobs plane = Gulfstream V = Burns 2000 gals per hour, or about 3.6 gallons per mile.

And Al Gore is no better. By some estimates his house consumes 20x the national average house uses in energy. And he flies private jets wherever goes.

When Steve Jobs drives a Prius to Apple headquarters (and parks it in the handicapped spot as usual) then I will start to take him seriously about his stance on global warming.

What do the life styles of Al Gore or Steve Jobs have to do with the science behind the physical modification of the Earth's atmosphere? Do you understand the ramifications of an "ad hominem" argument? You were a child left behind.
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
post #118 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt45 View Post

Like it or not the "nutjobs" have a strong track record of getting to run the show....
Don't know where they are, but where I'm at taxes, fees, etc. never go down and continue to rise above inflation. When all added up it's over 50% now. More government never solved anything.

First, taxation policy is a separate issue from the regulation of the "free" market. They work synergistically and affect each other, but they have different drivers and models.

A fair and stable tax structure is always important, but should not drive your view of an ecological issue ... it significantly affects how we approach an issue, but should not define it. I don't want my taxes or your taxes or Bill Gates taxes to be oppressive or continually going up, but come up with a plan beyond "cut taxes" simpleton-ness.

So being skeptical of the government is great and American and even liberal in the Jeffersonian sense. However to say "more government never solved anything" is typical neo-con b.s. bumper sticker philosophy, not something an educated adult should use as an argument.

How much tax should you pay and why?

How much personal responsibility for our ecological resources are you willing to take and what responsibility do producers and polluters have for their waste products?

Should we really let the "free" market decide and define what "clean air," "clean water" and "global climate change" mean to the point where ethics and morality have no role?
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
post #119 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt45 View Post

Like it or not the "nutjobs" have a strong track record of getting to More government never solved anything.

This is just a blanket statement repeated over and over again that government is the problem. It's not a matter of all government control or all anarchy, but a mix of private and public participation on various issues.

The biggest "government" program is the military who protect our freedom under the Constitution. How about our state and local police? Do you want to abolish the military and police forces and let everyone defend themselves with their Colt 45?
post #120 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

ooo, busted. You didn't read my links, bad bad bad. The consensus you refer to was conducted in 1992, as I'm sure you're aware was quite a while ago and a lot of new scientific data has become available. As such you now have thousands upon thousands of scientists coming out saying, wait not so fast. I'm not saying there wasn't a percieved consensus in 1992. Given the data we had at the time it's completely understandable but give a whole decade and a half of new data many scientists are starting to think maybe we should, ya know, do our jobs and continue to evaluate what's going on. (here's 31k more dissenters http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...0-deniers.aspx) (that's not on Curtis' list of "junk science" either, sorry C)

Um, your link is to an opinion piece in a pro-business, anti-gov website. Its author runs a blog called Energy Probe with a very specific and targeted perspective. That doesn't make him wrong, just makes him suspect and his facts not necessarily "junk science" but in need of real citations.

So if the "thousands" of "scientists" can really be confirmed and that the survey really asks for their objective opinions in a way that isn't skewed ... then it needs to be weighed against the many more thousands of scientists who feel the opposite ... then we need to decide, what do we do?

At that point it is a political decision, not a scientific one. Otherwise we can spend the next several decades trying to be 98% right, just as we lose our ability to do something about the problem. Sometimes you have to make an ethical judgement call when you are only 79% sure.
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's departure prompts questions of chamber representation