or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Global Warming
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Global Warming - Page 6

Poll Results: Are humans the primary cause of global warming?

 
  • 67% (25)
    Yes
  • 24% (9)
    No
  • 8% (3)
    Other (Please Elaborate)
37 Total Votes  
post #201 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

OMG they must be shitting their pants with fear!

This would be some funny sarcasm if not for the fact that they've released the watch list and so we know the profile.

"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 #202 of 291
Thread Starter 
I just stumbled upon this dandy little website: ICECAP

Oodles of good stuff on there. I'll share stuff that stands out to me.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #203 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I just stumbled upon this dandy little website: ICECAP

Oodles of good stuff on there. I'll share stuff that stands out to me.

I'm sure the stuff you post from that website will not be taken from the well respected peer reviewed climate science literature.

NTIA
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #204 of 291

Funny, but I don't see a populated PDF, do you?

One would naturally have to do this first, of course.

Also, these would be min/man, not mean (or ~99.999% of the population for that matter), and the entire population would to be shown to be invarient with time, to a high degree of confidence.

Also known as a non sequiter.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #205 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

I'm sure the stuff you post from that website will not be taken from the well respected peer reviewed climate science literature.

NTIA

It's another project from Frontiers of Freedom.

How many projects do they have?
post #206 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

So I'm bragging about it, now?

As Charlie Brown would say: good grief!

Why do I think the government is afraid of me? Well, there are several reasons.

1) I don't believe I should have to depend on the government for everything.

2) I don't buy into the 2 party system (which is really 2 branches of the same party)

3) I believe the government has far exceeded its Constitutional limits, and must be drastically reduced in size and power in order for this nation to prosper.

4) I believe that the Founders built in a "self-destruct" mechanism into the fabric of our founding documents--the assertion that we the people have the right and the duty to overthrow opressive, despotic government. I do not think that time is now, but I am not foolish enough to say that it could never come.

Those that are in positions of power and prestige in the government (and businesses that depend on large government) see me as a threat to that power and prestige, merely for thinking the way I do. So much so, that they are now targeting anyone who exhibits any indication of thinking the way I do--regardless of whether they have actually done anything illegal or contrary to the laws of this country--painting them as disloyal, unpatriotic, and extremist.

It's a new brand of McCarthyism, and it is wrong.

And what exactly does any of the above have to do with CC/GW/AGW?

In the end, at our level we (yes you and me) are only one voice. At least I am, and have never cliamed otherwise. \
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #207 of 291
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

I'm sure the stuff you post from that website will not be taken from the well respected peer reviewed climate science literature.

NTIA

Such as this peer reviewed paper?

Limits On CO2 Climate Forcing From Recent Temperature Data of Earth

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #208 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Another ad-hom? Cut it out, already.

That was not an ad-hominem attack, do you even know what that means?
post #209 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Such as this peer reviewed paper?

Limits On CO2 Climate Forcing From Recent Temperature Data of Earth

Energy & Environment?

ROTFFLMFAO!



E&E is definitely NOT a part of the well known and highly respected peer reviewed climate science literature.

This "journal" has been fully discussed in several previous CC/GW/AGW threads.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #210 of 291
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

That was not an ad-hominem attack, do you even know what that means?

Oh, the irony.

Your post is a prime example.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #211 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

That was not an ad-hominem attack, do you even know what that means?

This sub-forum would be nearly empty if all the arguments that attacked the person to garner imaginary "snark points" instead of addressing the substance of the argument were removed.
post #212 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss View Post

This sub-forum would be nearly empty if all the arguments that attacked the person to garner imaginary "snark points" instead of addressing the substance of the argument were removed.

That's not true. Sure, there's some of that. Look at the inconvenient truth thread. It's basically a whole thread designed specifically to be an ad-hominem attack against Al Gore. If you read this thread however, you'll find very little of that. Until the subject was changed to basically say that if you supported global warming prevention measures, the government is using/getting the better of you, isn't afraid of you/you they don't consider you a rightwingextremistnutjob.
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #213 of 291
Thread Starter 

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #214 of 291
Thread Starter 
I'm just curious...how many have used multiple aliases to cheat on this poll?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #215 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I'm just curious...how many have used multiple aliases to cheat on this poll?

It's possible none have. I'm absolutely positive the makeup of this board doesn't reflect the average US 2009 opinion poll on this or any subject.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...nds_not_people

Quote:
January 19, 2009
Forty-four percent (44%) of U.S. voters now say long-term planetary trends are the cause of global warming, compared to 41% who blame it on human activity.

Seven percent (7%) attribute global warming to some other reason, and nine percent (9%) are unsure in a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Democrats blame global warming on human activity, compared to 21% percent of Republicans. Two-thirds of GOP voters (67%) see long-term planetary trends as the cause versus 23% of Democrats. Voters not affiliated with either party by eight points put the blame on planetary trends.

In July 2006, 46% of voters said global warming is caused primarily by human activities, while 35% said it is due to long-term planetary trends.

In April of last year, 47% of Americans blamed human activity versus 34% who viewed long-term planetary trends as the culprit. But the numbers have been moving in the direction of planetary trends since then.

The idea of HIGW seems to be losing ground.
post #216 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I'm just curious...how many have used multiple aliases to cheat on this poll?

Hopefully no one.

Maybe Apple though have come in and skewed the reultshttp://www.apple.com/pr/library/2003/mar/19gore.html
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #217 of 291
I think there are several dual personalities present. It has gotten a bit odd lately. Maybe I should create a second persona so I can agree with myself all the time.

 

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 #218 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

I think there are several dual personalities present. It has gotten a bit odd lately. Maybe I should create a second persona so I can agree with myself all the time.

Want to name names?
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #219 of 291
Why would I want to do that? I didn't say it was wrong. Actually, it is interesting. Odd, but interesting. Adds to the mystery.

While we're on this, you realize there are three ways of discussing the self in English but only two ways of discussing others?

me - myself - I

you - yourself

The English language seems designed to promote self-ness. So, if people want three persona, I guess the already actually have them.

MMmmm. Been in Japan for many years where they often don't use the equivalent for I, so translating, especially computer translating, can get funny.

 

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 #220 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Why would I want to do that? I didn't say it was wrong. Actually, it is interesting. Odd, but interesting. Adds to the mystery.

I must be missing something, because I haven't noticed that at all. Everyone seems distinctly unique to me.
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #221 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I must be missing something, because I haven't noticed that at all. Everyone seems distinctly unique to me.

I've been working very long hours for the past two weeks... everything is beginning to blur in to a single continuum.

 

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 #222 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

I've been working very long hours for the past two weeks... everything is beginning to blur in to a single continuum.

http://www.naturaltherapypages.com.a...nal_Exhaustion
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #223 of 291
can't see... coffee... I am coffee... Coffee is me... myself and I!


Back to work...

Gotta love life.

 

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 #224 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I'm just curious...how many have used multiple aliases to cheat on this poll?

Funny stuff.

Maybe I should vote.
post #225 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I must be missing something, because I haven't noticed that at all. Everyone seems distinctly unique to me.

I'd guess that folks who have low post counts are suspect.
post #226 of 291
Not me (if your on an iPhone this link will not open where I linked to) http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009...-else-more.php This works on the iPhone instead http://www.treehugger.com/Global-War...ne-But-You.jpg

Who are you? http://www.planetforward.org/pages/energy2009-finding5
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #227 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Oh, the irony.

Your post is a prime example.

Just as I thought, you don't even know what an ad-hominem attack is.
post #228 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss View Post

It's possible none have. I'm absolutely positive the makeup of this board doesn't reflect the average US 2009 opinion poll on this or any subject.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...nds_not_people

The idea of HIGW seems to be losing ground.

A voluntary poll is not a random public opinion poll. You somehow expect PO to somehow be different? \

A random public opinion poll is inherently subjective.

The scientific method is the only objective method of determination as it is implicitly self correcting over time.

The current scientific concensus on CC/GW/AGW is as it ever was (IPCC era).

Since the beginning of the IPCC, the scientific concensus has always increased in terms of probabilistic certainty with respect to AGW.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #229 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

Just as I thought, you don't even know what an ad-hominem attack is.

That was one.

Seriously, Trajec, I'm a Liberal and agree with your points, but he's right, you're wrong.
post #230 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

That was one.

Seriously, Trajec, I'm a Liberal and agree with your points, but he's right, you're wrong.

Much as I agree with many of your posts tonton, Trajec is indeed correct, given as he was referring to an earlier post where jazzguru accused a post of being an ad-hominem attack when it wasn't, which Trajectory rightly pointed out. jazzguru's reply, of the irony of Trajectory's post is therefore moot and taken out of context.
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #231 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Much as I agree with many of your posts tonton, Trajec is indeed correct, given as he was referring to an earlier post where jazzguru accused a post of being an ad-hominem attack when it wasn't, which Trajectory rightly pointed out. jazzguru's reply, of the irony of Trajectory's post is therefore moot and taken out of context.

You're right... I'm wrong...

I didn't go back to the original post.

"He rightly pointed out that having the government afraid of people like you is nothing to brag about which you yourself clearly stated. You obviously think your more powerful than franksargent and no doubt you see many in that same light. Personally I think big business with their connections to government are far more scared of people who fight to prevent CC through laws than your impact will ever be."

...is not an ad-hom attack.

"...do you even know what that means?"

...however, was, as was, "Just as I thought, you don't even know what an ad-hominem attack is."

post #232 of 291
Thread Starter 
"You obviously think your more powerful than franksargent and no doubt you see many in that same light."

Telling someone what they think can be perceived as an ad-hom attack.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #233 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

"You obviously think your more powerful than franksargent and no doubt you see many in that same light."

Telling someone what they think can be perceived as an ad-hom attack.

Many of your posts are short responses, that to some of us here, serves only to create a distraction. Often, it seems, only to incite a conflict rather than to enhance discussion.

It's boring for the rest of us, maybe you'll eventually realize that. Sheesh already!!

"I count more than you. I count so much the government is afraid of me."~ jazzguru

You don't count as much as you'd like to jazzguru.
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #234 of 291
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Many of your posts are short responses, that to some of us here, serves only to create a distraction. Often, it seems, only to incite a conflict rather than to enhance discussion.

It's boring for the rest of us, maybe you'll eventually realize that. Sheesh already!!

"I count more than you. I count so much the government is afraid of me."~ jazzguru

You don't count as much as you'd like to jazzguru.

You're right. I posted that in the heat of the moment without thinking things through.

Indeed, nobody should be more important than anyone else.

Sadly, in today's America, that is not the case.

Can you please tell me the required minimum word count for posts in PO? I seem to have missed that memo.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #235 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

You're right. I posted that in the heat of the moment without thinking things through.

Indeed, nobody should be more important than anyone else.

Sadly, in today's America, that is not the case.

Can you please tell me the required minimum word count for posts in PO? I seem to have missed that memo.

I'm sure if you had more time, you'd be able to take longer to explain your thoughts, giving a better understanding to the rest of us, what it is your thinking. That's really all I'm saying.
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #236 of 291
Thread Starter 
Think twice about 'green' transport, say scientists

Quote:
A saloon (sedan) car or even an 4x4 that is fully occupied may be responsible for less greenhouse gas per kilometer travelled per person than a suburban train that is a quarter full, the researchers calculate.

It appears that "green" transportation isn't as "green" as we are being led to believe.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #237 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I was referring to the pictures. I used myself as an example because I have already stated I believe in being environmentally responsible, developing cleaner more efficient energy and production technologies, etc.

It is possible for someone to be mindful of the environment without believing all of the hype and politicization of the issue.

Of course, it may not be all hype...but that would be impossible.

Quote:
Do we need to be good stewards of the planet on which we live? Absolutely.

Do we need to enact legislation to further infringe upon the right of the people to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (property) in order to "save the planet"? Absolutely not.

For a bibically based political movement I find the association of happiness with property to be a dubious one.

If the problem really is a need to "save the planet" then it would be hard to hang on to the right to life if we failed.

The real problem is "saving the planet" isn't the issue. The planet will be perfectly happy with or without humans. The real problems is whether human effects on the environment will indeed impact the pursuit of life, liberty and the pusuit of happiness.

That doesn't require catestrophic effects on the environment. It merely needs to affect key US fertile growing areas to impact the US in a significantly negative manner. Even a little bit of change can impact the US economy in a long term fashion.

Those who are short sighted should take into account that when you are on the top of the food chain anything that may measuably affect the status quo is typically a "bad" thing that may result in someone else occupying the top of the food chain if the change is significant enough.
post #238 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Think twice about 'green' transport, say scientists



It appears that "green" transportation isn't as "green" as we are being led to believe.

Riiight...because SUVs are typically driven with full occupancy.
post #239 of 291
Riiiiight...because trains, plains, bridges, subways, city buses, high speed railways, etc... alll only operate when at full occupancy.

"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 #240 of 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Riiiiight...because trains, plains, bridges, subways, city buses, high speed railways, etc... alll only operate when at full occupancy.

And old batteries from electric vehicles evaporate into water vapor when they become unusable.

I'm glad to see you're thinking green!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Global Warming