AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › As the World Rots
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

As the World Rots - Page 2

post #41 of 132
12/14/07 at 7:43am
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

" If we reduce CO2 the rest of the world will produce more CO2 to compensate. "

Huh?

This isn't a race to keep a CO2 emission constant.

So you base this on what?

conservation -> lower prices -> more usage elsewhere due to people taking advantage of the lower prices -> more CO2 elsewhere. I think I need this on a macro key or something, because people like you never read the full thread, so I have to keep repeating myself.

It is exactly a race to keep emissions constant, exactly pegged at 100% of what we can pump out of the ground. They are not going to stop pumping at 100% until a lower priced replacement comes along, and lower priced that oil is pretty hard to do since almost all the work capturing the energy was done by nature.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #42 of 132
12/14/07 at 7:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

What is wrong with cleaning up the planet?

Well there is that whole consensus that CO2 is a "pollutant" since it is entirely naturally occurring. You are polluting the planet by breathing out, hence living has now been defined as an environmental hazard.

There there is the secondary belief that the planet must maintain its current stasis forever with regard to temperature when nothing in the past indicates this as a natural state.

Quote:
It is very childish to say well, he isn't doing it, so I don't have to, and this is the position the US is taking; behavior like a spoiled child that any teacher worthy of receiving minimum wage would squash immediately in a classroom. The "leader of the free world" should lead in solving issues, not creating them. If the US were to jump on the wagon here, it would give many more countries a reason to follow suit. As it is, nobody can say or do anything because the world's biggest and most selfish nation doesn't give a crud about anything other than its own immediate materialistic desires.

We can be the absolute leader in whatever we desire withing giving the U.N. some sort of global tax authority and also without having the mentality that we must sacrifice the known present to protect some unknown future.

You claim no one can do anything without our leadership and that is a lie as well.

Quote:
Tax the US and redistribute the wealth? That's a great idea! Did you know that the US throws away every day as much edible food as the entire starving population in Africa needs to stay healthy for a month?

Yet you would take the system that produces the excess and have it kneel down and adopt the standard of the system that produces starvation. That makes no sense and in fact is endorsing harm.

Finally there is the profound illogic in being judged by someone with your own morals when they do not hold or respect them. The U.S. endorses sustainability and does not need the definition of this dictated to them by organizations that in their bickering and refusal to address reality end up harming the lives and causing hunger among their populations. This is analogous to the cheating husband damning the faithful wife for leaving him because she made a commitment.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #43 of 132
12/14/07 at 7:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

conservation -> lower prices -> more usage elsewhere due to people taking advantage of the lower prices -> more CO2 elsewhere. I think I need this on a macro key or something, because people like you never read the full thread, so I have to keep repeating myself.

It is exactly a race to keep emissions constant, exactly pegged at 100% of what we can pump out of the ground. They are not going to stop pumping at 100% until a lower priced replacement comes along, and lower priced that oil is pretty hard to do since almost all the work capturing the energy was done by nature.

Can you provide some data to support this assumption? Something that shows it actually works this way.

You know a link to a study or something? If the U.S. leads the way most countries tend to emulate what we do. Bad or good.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #44 of 132
12/14/07 at 7:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Well there is that whole consensus that CO2 is a "pollutant" since it is entirely naturally occurring. You are polluting the planet by breathing out, hence living has now been defined as an environmental hazard.

There there is the secondary belief that the planet must maintain its current stasis forever with regard to temperature when nothing in the past indicates this as a natural state.



We can be the absolute leader in whatever we desire withing giving the U.N. some sort of global tax authority and also without having the mentality that we must sacrifice the known present to protect some unknown future.

You claim no one can do anything without our leadership and that is a lie as well.



Yet you would take the system that produces the excess and have it kneel down and adopt the standard of the system that produces starvation. That makes no sense and in fact is endorsing harm.

Finally there is the profound illogic in being judged by someone with your own morals when they do not hold or respect them. The U.S. endorses sustainability and does not need the definition of this dictated to them by organizations that in their bickering and refusal to address reality end up harming the lives and causing hunger among their populations. This is analogous to the cheating husband damning the faithful wife for leaving him because she made a commitment.

Nick

" Well there is that whole consensus that CO2 is a "pollutant" since it is entirely naturally occurring. You are polluting the planet by breathing out, hence living has now been defined as an environmental hazard. "

Snake bites are " naturally occuring " also. I don't think anyone would say avoiding them isn't a good idea.

CO2 is a naturally occuring thing in our enviroment. Too much of anything isn't a good thing.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #45 of 132
12/14/07 at 8:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

" Well there is that whole consensus that CO2 is a "pollutant" since it is entirely naturally occurring. You are polluting the planet by breathing out, hence living has now been defined as an environmental hazard. "

Snake bites are " naturally occuring " also. I don't think anyone would say avoiding them isn't a good idea.

CO2 is a naturally occuring thing in our enviroment. Too much of anything isn't a good thing.

You are welcome to prove that snake venom is a dangerous pollutant that will destroy our planet and life on it.

You say that too much of a anything isn't a good thing. The reality is that there is nothing added or taken away from this planet. It is a closed system with regard to carbon. We are not making more carbon.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #46 of 132
12/14/07 at 9:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You are welcome to prove that snake venom is a dangerous pollutant that will destroy our planet and life on it.

You say that too much of a anything isn't a good thing. The reality is that there is nothing added or taken away from this planet. It is a closed system with regard to carbon. We are not making more carbon.

Nick

We are taking carbon that was sequestered in the earth for millions of years and introducing it to our atmosphere on top of what's natural like our and all of our fellow carbon based life form's breath. We can assume that life on the planet relies on an equilibrium between plant life which is the only producer of oxygen and non plant life which is the consumer of oxygen. Obviously the addition of the sequestered carbon will start to overwhelm the ability of plant life to supply oxygen for breathing. On top of that we are burning oxygen to get energy plus we are eliminating vast areas of oxygen producing plant life.

I hope this will give you a new understanding of what we are facing.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 132
12/14/07 at 9:32am
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Can you provide some data to support this assumption? Something that shows it actually works this way.

You know a link to a study or something? If the U.S. leads the way most countries tend to emulate what we do. Bad or good.

You don't need a study - this is basic economics, it no longer needs to be studied because it is so fundamental. Where do you think the oil goes? We know it is being pumped at 100% (they say it isn't, but the Saudis seem unable to increase production any further).

Didn't you notice all the big SUVs that started being made when the price of oil dropped? This is what happens when conservation lowers the price, people start using the lower priced oil for optional stuff (factories come on line for more shifts, etc)
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #48 of 132
12/14/07 at 9:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

We are taking carbon that was sequestered in the earth for millions of years and introducing it to our atmosphere on top of what's natural like our and all of our fellow carbon based life form's breath. We can assume that life on the planet relies on an equilibrium between plant life which is the only producer of oxygen and non plant life which is the consumer of oxygen. Obviously the addition of the sequestered carbon will start to overwhelm the ability of plant life to supply oxygen for breathing. On top of that we are burning oxygen to get energy plus we are eliminating vast areas of oxygen producing plant life.

I hope this will give you a new understanding of what we are facing.

Can you support the contention that plant life will be overwhelmed by having too much of what allows them to grow and thrive?

Can you show the equilibrium between plant life and animal habitation in the past?

I think you have some very strongly unsupported assumptions and contentions there.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #49 of 132
12/14/07 at 9:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

We are taking carbon that was sequestered in the earth for millions of years and introducing it to our atmosphere on top of what's natural like our and all of our fellow carbon based life form's breath. We can assume that life on the planet relies on an equilibrium between plant life which is the only producer of oxygen and non plant life which is the consumer of oxygen. Obviously the addition of the sequestered carbon will start to overwhelm the ability of plant life to supply oxygen for breathing. On top of that we are burning oxygen to get energy plus we are eliminating vast areas of oxygen producing plant life.

I hope this will give you a new understanding of what we are facing.

I don't think "understanding" is the problem.

Anyone who can actually trot out the "ha ha carbon dioxide is what I breath out but those global warming liars think it's a pollutant" line is actually imperviously stupid in the face of some pretty basic, grade school science, doesn't want to know because it conflicts with ideology, or knows and doesn't care, because it's not about science it's about hating on stupid hippies.

I mean, really, this "carbon dioxide is natural so what how do you explain that Mr. Smartypants" is like having some hillbilly tell you that there ain't no way they put no man on the moon on account of any fool can see that it moves around too much to hit. You just have to kind of make sure you keep smiling while you edge out of the room.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #50 of 132
12/14/07 at 9:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Can you support the contention that plant life will be overwhelmed by having too much of what allows them to grow and thrive?

Can you show the equilibrium between plant life and animal habitation in the past?

I think you have some very strongly unsupported assumptions and contentions there.

Nick

The only reason that any life exists on this planet is micro organisms that turned methane into oxygen for several million years before any other life form appeared.
How long does it take for a tree to grow versus how much does your Hummer spit out who do you think wins?

Try this:
Put a tree seedling and your head in a plastic bag and hermetically seal it. This is an easy way to find out if you are right.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 132
12/14/07 at 10:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

The only reason that any life exists on this planet is micro organisms that turned methane into oxygen for several million years before any other life form appeared.
How long does it take for a tree to grow versus how much does your Hummer spit out who do you think wins?.

If you give me the Hummer, I'll be happy to do that since I don't own one.

I wonder what would have happened if the microorganism U.N. had declared that they were responsible for global climate change and would cause the end of all life on earth with their obnoxious oxygen spewing.

Quote:
Try this:
Put a tree seedling and your head in a plastic bag and hermetically seal it. This is an easy way to find out if you are right

I've heard that the process you outlined is a prerequisite to believing global warming is man-made. Thanks for sharing it! I'm going to suggest adding it as a bullet point to the Gore website as a means of living carbon neutral. Hopefully yourself and many other advocates will try it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I don't think "understanding" is the problem.

Anyone who can actually trot out the "ha ha carbon dioxide is what I breath out but those global warming liars think it's a pollutant" line is actually imperviously stupid in the face of some pretty basic, grade school science, doesn't want to know because it conflicts with ideology, or knows and doesn't care, because it's not about science it's about hating on stupid hippies.

I mean, really, this "carbon dioxide is natural so what how do you explain that Mr. Smartypants" is like having some hillbilly tell you that there ain't no way they put no man on the moon on account of any fool can see that it moves around too much to hit. You just have to kind of make sure you keep smiling while you edge out of the room.

Can we send you back to grade school and have you do some sentence diagramming?

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #52 of 132
12/14/07 at 10:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

If you give me the Hummer, I'll be happy to do that since I don't own one.

I wonder what would have happened if the microorganism U.N. had declared that they were responsible for global climate change and would cause the end of all life on earth with their obnoxious oxygen spewing.



I've heard that the process you outlined is a prerequisite to believing global warming is man-made. Thanks for sharing it! I'm going to suggest adding it as a bullet point to the Gore website as a means of living carbon neutral. Hopefully yourself and many other advocates will try it.



Can we send you back to grade school and have you do some sentence diagramming?

Nick

People like you proof that the earth is already lacking oxygen.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 132
12/14/07 at 10:36am
The global warming deniers are terminally unable to prove that the effect is due to natural cycles only. So lets assume that that a "human activity" factor might be present (at the very least), and support a Marshall Plan type scheme to research and develop alternative methods of energy generation. The business potential in "green" technologies is enormous, but the rest of the world is poised to overtake the US in these fields because of our dysfunctional addiction to (arbitrary) traditions and a pathological unwillingness to evolve, on the part of the US powers-that-be. And couple that with an administration prepared to spend $Trillions of taxpayer dollars to enrich themselves and their cronies by starting wars (based on manufactured acts/threats and phony fear-mongering) to grab control of the remaining resources that power yesterday's technologies (and promote global anti-US sentiment on account of this (and previous) administrations' default to violent "solutions").... things are royally screwed up, and there is no hope on the horizon.

As much as I dislike Algore for other issues in the past (not least his involvement with promoting Big Brotherism, but a little off-topic here), why not give his climate change issues a fair wind?

Incidentally...are any of the "global warming human-factor denialist" reports sponsored by the fossil fuel industries?

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #54 of 132
12/14/07 at 10:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

The global warming deniers

The ad hominem from the global warming/climate change folks is becoming tiresome. I quote a great American: "You're going to have people try to attack the messenger in order to get at the message. They have not been able to succeed," Gore told CNN from Norway


Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

The business potential in "green" technologies is enormous

If that's true, there's no need for a so-called "Marshall Plan" since businesses and entrepreneurs will be willing to invest for the potential windfall to come from this enormous opportunity.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 132
12/14/07 at 11:32am
I know Trumptman, SDW2001BC and the likes believe that NASA scientist are complete imbecils and they themselves would be much better suited to invent technologies for spaceflight, but here is some new NASA report anyways:
Carbon cuts a must to halt warming-US scientists
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 132
12/14/07 at 11:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

You don't need a study - this is basic economics, it no longer needs to be studied because it is so fundamental. Where do you think the oil goes? We know it is being pumped at 100% (they say it isn't, but the Saudis seem unable to increase production any further).

Didn't you notice all the big SUVs that started being made when the price of oil dropped? This is what happens when conservation lowers the price, people start using the lower priced oil for optional stuff (factories come on line for more shifts, etc)


No, no. I need to hear it from someone other than you so we can varify their credentials. You know to assure accuracy.

And what we were talking specifically about not something quoted from a textbook on economics and then interpreted by you.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #57 of 132
12/14/07 at 11:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You are welcome to prove that snake venom is a dangerous pollutant that will destroy our planet and life on it.

You say that too much of a anything isn't a good thing. The reality is that there is nothing added or taken away from this planet. It is a closed system with regard to carbon. We are not making more carbon.

Nick

It's where the carbon ends up and you got the analogy so this isn't really a valid response.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #58 of 132
12/14/07 at 11:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

No, no. I need to hear it from someone other than you so we can varify their credentials. You know to assure accuracy.

And what we were talking specifically about not something quoted from a textbook on economics and then interpreted by you.

He's cited one of the most fundamental understandings in the science of economics which is that the slope of demand curves is downward (i.e., the less costly something is the more of it will be demanded and vice versa) and is readily observable by most human behavior.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 132
12/14/07 at 12:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

I know Trumptman, SDW2001BC and the likes believe that NASA scientist are complete imbecils and they themselves would be much better suited to invent technologies for spaceflight, but here is some new NASA report anyways:
Carbon cuts a must to halt warming-US scientists

No, no, no, you're not concentrating. Remember: Al Gore is fat and has a big house and a jet, therefore NASA scientists are, uh, in it with him because the gravy train, um, is, a.... pouring right down Al Gore's fat throat! HA HA HA HA HA HA !

No, seriously, NASA scientists are being paid to lie. By Al Gore, who hates America and hopes to see us living as pre-technological peasants. So he can be our king.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #60 of 132
12/14/07 at 12:20pm
double post
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #61 of 132
12/14/07 at 12:23pm
The Pope condemns the climate change prophets of doom

Pope Benedict XVI has launched a surprise attack on climate change prophets of doom, warning them that any solutions to global warming must be based on firm evidence and not on dubious ideology.

Yeah, read that again. Too funny. The Pope pretty much has to wage war on science. It's what Popes do when they're feeling their power drain from their magic crystals.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 132
12/14/07 at 12:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

The Pope condemns the climate change prophets of doom

Pope Benedict XVI has launched a surprise attack on climate change prophets of doom, warning them that any solutions to global warming must be based on firm evidence and not on dubious ideology.

Yeah, read that again. Too funny. The Pope pretty much has to wage war on science. It's what Popes do when they're feeling their power drain from their magic crystals.

I've never quite figured out the reasoning behind the notion that science, of all things, has embraced this "ideology" that I'm apparently to understand is anti-technology, anti-first world, anti-prosperity and anti-progress.

The bulk of the science community is made up of tech hating hippies? Rabid anti-western zealots? The circumstances that define and engender the careers of every scientist on the planet are in fact a target of those very scientists' bottomless contempt?

Or is it that the evil cabal that thinks all those things have mysterious mind powers that can hold the science community in thrall, forcing them to fudge data, repress results and lie their asses off at every opportunity?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #63 of 132
12/14/07 at 1:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

The Pope condemns the climate change prophets of doom

Pope Benedict XVI has launched a surprise attack on climate change prophets of doom, warning them that any solutions to global warming must be based on firm evidence and not on dubious ideology.

Yeah, read that again. Too funny. The Pope pretty much has to wage war on science. It's what Popes do when they're feeling their power drain from their magic crystals.

This gives "HOLY CRAP" a whole new meaning.
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 132
12/14/07 at 3:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

No, no, no, you're not concentrating. Remember: Al Gore is fat and has a big house and a jet, therefore NASA scientists are, uh, in it with him because the gravy train, um, is, a.... pouring right down Al Gore's fat throat! HA HA HA HA HA HA !

No, seriously, NASA scientists are being paid to lie. By Al Gore, who hates America and hopes to see us living as pre-technological peasants. So he can be our king.

You forgot about Man-bear-pig. No discussion about Algore (remember it's one word) is complete without referencing that.
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 132
12/14/07 at 4:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

His house and what he does in his personal life has been mentioned several times on this forum when talking about his push for GW awreness.

The house is 80 years old so this is pretty remarkable.

That's good that he's improved his home, (seriously) but what did it cost? How much would it cost me to improve my home? I can't afford to replace my gutters right now, much less drill for geothermal. Obviously not a solution for everyone, unless there is some type of cost sharing involved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

A really cool catamaran...



Commence eternal flame war...

I think you mean a trimaran. /ship geekiness satisfied

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

You forgot about Man-bear-pig. No discussion about Algore (remember it's one word) is complete without referencing that.



(tried to find one from this week's episodes, with 'Algore' running around with a red cape and Nobel Prize on)
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #66 of 132
12/15/07 at 9:41am
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

No, no. I need to hear it from someone other than you so we can varify their credentials. You know to assure accuracy.

And what we were talking specifically about not something quoted from a textbook on economics and then interpreted by you.

The argument is so simple a child could understand it, do you think that the arabs will stop pumping oil at 100%? If so why? If not, where will that carbon go?

You and your side are the people advocating change, prove that the change you are advocating will do any good at all. Your argument to me is like this: "prove that stuffing apples up your nose will not have some beneficial health effect, and back it up with studies, or else start stuffing"
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #67 of 132
12/15/07 at 10:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

The argument is so simple a child could understand it, do you think that the arabs will stop pumping oil at 100%? If so why? If not, where will that carbon go?

You and your side are the people advocating change, prove that the change you are advocating will do any good at all. Your argument to me is like this: "prove that stuffing apples up your nose will not have some beneficial health effect, and back it up with studies, or else start stuffing"

Your proof that doing nothing will be a good thing, please!
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 132
12/15/07 at 12:13pm
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

Your proof that doing nothing will be a good thing, please!

I'm not saying that "doing nothing is a good thing", I am saying "it is a waste of time to do something" - big difference. Actually, doing nothing is a good thing if you spend the time and resources on something else, like preparing for the coming climate change.

Why should I try to prevent global climate change, when it is pretty obvious that there is nothing effective I could do? I will continue to do nothing, other than encourage alternative fuel research (by burning lots of fossil fuels and keeping the price up).
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #69 of 132
12/15/07 at 2:12pm
Because of Bush, US only nation on the planet with childish and simply idiotic stance on climate change:
Bali outcome
Not even third world countries are this anti science. This is truly an outrage and makes the US look like a nation of complete moron's, thanks Mr. Bush.
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 132
12/15/07 at 2:25pm
It took a tiny country to show the world the US is losing it's role as a world leader.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapc...ef=mpstoryview
Quote:
The head of the U.S. delegation, Paula Dobriansky, undersecretary of state for democracy and global affairs, announced the United States was rejecting the plan. Her comments were met by booing from other delegations.

After Dobriansky's announcement, a delegate from the developing country of Papua New Guinea challenged the United States to "either lead, follow or get out of the way."

Five minutes later, when it appeared the conference was on the brink of collapse, Dobriansky took the floor again to say the United States was willing to accept the arrangement. Applause erupted in the hall and a relative level of success for the conference appeared certain.

http://www.time.com/time/health/arti...695145,00.html
Quote:
with the exception of a confused statement from Japan not one of the allies that had generally stood with the U.S. the past two weeks Australia, Russia, Canada rose in its defense.

Hopefully this means... nah, they just wanted to get out of there.
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 132
12/15/07 at 3:04pm
Indeed!

When is the US going to learn to follow in the footsteps of the Europeans and agree to do something and then just simply not do it.

So much less fuss when you talk the talk but don't walk the walk because at least then you're saying you're going to do something.
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 132
12/15/07 at 3:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

No, no, no, you're not concentrating. Remember: Al Gore is fat and has a big house and a jet, therefore NASA scientists are, uh, in it with him because the gravy train, um, is, a.... pouring right down Al Gore's fat throat! HA HA HA HA HA HA !

No, seriously, NASA scientists are being paid to lie. By Al Gore, who hates America and hopes to see us living as pre-technological peasants. So he can be our king.

King Gore? I can kind of see that!

But in all seriousness, I don't see how an intelligent and otherwise independent-minded individual (or jamac) can embrace the hysteria and dogma of Teh Global Warming. The theory of Teh Global Warming has many holes and is not "settled science" in any respect.

And yes, that debate is wholly separate from GoreCo's rank hypocrisy. I agree that mixing the two is not a good way to approach the subject. It's still fun to show pictures of Gore's jet though.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #73 of 132
12/15/07 at 6:06pm
Thread Starter 
Screener beat me to it: Hurray for Papua New Guinea! That could not have been better said. http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...7&postcount=35

The world's reaction was fantastic.

The confused response from Japan was the confused response of a puppet that doesn't want to completely follow it master at all times, and hopefully from now will act independently.

The pitifully childish, selfish, greedy stance the US has taken on giving everyone (including themselves) a cleaner world is pathetic, and I am ashamed to be an America (again). It really is embarrassing.

Oh, the science is actually coming from US data; the US just chooses not to look at it. Again, even if it is not true, what do we lose? It is just a stubborn, spoiled brat that is refusing to cooperate with anyone pretty much for the sake of refusing, it seems.

Oh, I forgot: God bless America, the Land of the Free, the greatest nation on earth. [repeat ad nauseum for most of your life and you will go crazy]

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #74 of 132
12/15/07 at 9:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

King Gore? I can kind of see that!

But in all seriousness, I don't see how an intelligent and otherwise independent-minded individual (or jamac) can embrace the hysteria and dogma of Teh Global Warming. The theory of Teh Global Warming has many holes and is not "settled science" in any respect.

And yes, that debate is wholly separate from GoreCo's rank hypocrisy. I agree that mixing the two is not a good way to approach the subject. It's still fun to show pictures of Gore's jet though.

I have been making money by investing into pollution free energy production for 12 years. I did not need Gore to tell me that's the way to go. I am not hysterical at all. Indeed I do welcome other people's hysteria because it will make my investments even more valuable. My main focus iwas to be independent from Edison and Enron and flip them off. As a side effect I did something to reduce my stink.
Reply
Reply
post #75 of 132
12/16/07 at 6:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

I have been making money by investing into pollution free energy production for 12 years. I did not need Gore to tell me that's the way to go. I am not hysterical at all. Indeed I do welcome other people's hysteria because it will make my investments even more valuable. My main focus iwas to be independent from Edison and Enron and flip them off. As a side effect I did something to reduce my stink.

You making money off the Teh Global Warming doesn't make you immune to being hysterical.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #76 of 132
12/17/07 at 9:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You making money off the Teh Global Warming doesn't make you immune to being hysterical.

I am not making money of Global Warming. I am making money of energy.

Maybe GW is a good thing and will bring back Dinosaurs. After all they evolved to eat all the abundant plant life when the entire earth was covered in rain forest. We should get used to a diet of Mango, Papaya and large insects.

Invest in umbrella manufacturers now!!
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 132
12/17/07 at 10:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

I am not making money of Global Warming. I am making money of energy.

Maybe GW is a good thing and will bring back Dinosaurs. After all they evolved to eat all the abundant plant life when the entire earth was covered in rain forest. We should get used to a diet of Mango, Papaya and large insects.

Invest in umbrella manufacturers now!!

Let me ask...do you ACTUALLY believe that is going to happen? If so, why?
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #78 of 132
12/17/07 at 12:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Let me ask...do you ACTUALLY believe that is going to happen? If so, why?

The age of the dinos was brought on by a huge plume of magma erupting in an area which is now Siberia. The eruption caused massive amounts of CO2 to be released into the atmosphere. 97% of all land based life vanished. The GW affect brought on 200 million years of heavy rains which gave us oil and coal from rotting biomass. To our great luck a meteorite plus massive volcanoes in india coincided around 65mill years ago. It wiped out our dino friends because all the rain forests died from lack of sun light.

this is very well known science and is documented in geology and 100% accurate.
Thus more CO2 could lead to re-emergence of huge land animals.
Reply
Reply
post #79 of 132
12/17/07 at 12:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

The age of the dinos was brought on by a huge plume of magma erupting in an area which is now Siberia. The eruption caused massive amounts of CO2 to be released into the atmosphere. 97% of all land based life vanished. The GW affect brought on 200 million years of heavy rains which gave us oil and coal from rotting biomass. To our great luck a meteorite plus massive volcanoes in india coincided around 65mill years ago. It wiped out our dino friends because all the rain forests died from lack of sun light.

this is very well known science and is documented in geology and 100% accurate.
Thus more CO2 could lead to re-emergence of huge land animals.

We cannot possibly contribute that much C02, even if it itself is the cause of warming instead of vice versa.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #80 of 132
12/17/07 at 12:42pm
So Jamac's contention is that the earth and life on it survived country sized volcanic eruptions and massive asteroid impacts, but somehow us driving around in cars will kill the planet and end all life on it.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › As the World Rots