Some think it is decreasing but even that hasn't been proven. Let's face it ever spring Snow melts, this may surprise you if you are a city boy used to seeing Snow trucked away by I can tell Snow does melt and so does ice.
Now you may try to say it is the warming air that is melting the Snow. To which I say yes the air warms up every spring and melts the Snow. Some years are just more agressive than others.
Besides all of that you have long term cycles in the Pacific Ocean that can have a massive impact on ice at the north pole. As you may suspect water will have a greater impact on that ice cap than air.
Another thing to realize is this isn't the first time in history, we are talking recent history here that there has been a melt off of ice in the North. So what evidence is there that this melt off is special in some way. The short and sweet is there is none, all we got is several sets of scientist saying the ice has melted. It may have were they measured but at least one group has admitted that their instruments had calibration errors that invalidated their original findings. Of course this has been surpressed by the lunatic fringe.
In any event let's say the ice is actually thinner than expected, the problem is how do you link that to manmade global warming. That is how do we factor in manmade causes along with everything else that is happening. That is known long term environmental cycles, volcanic activity, output from the sun and other factors. The reality is man is a puny factor when you consider these other factors.
In any event show me the mechanism where by mans activities have caused the ice to melt. It simply isn't good enough to say so, nor has there been a model put forth that clearly links CO2 to a planetary temperature increase. Yes I know there are lots of computer models that the developers think they have nailed down but absolutely none of them have been proven correct.
Sadly you will like many here, dismiss my point of view as a nut case from the extreme right. That is not the case at all, I'm not however gullible nor easily persuaded to adopt ideas that don't stack up. Nor do I have time for scientist that come off as crack pots. So if you don't like my point of view talk to an astronomer or a geologist who each have differing points of view on the subject.
You will eventually see that very well educated people don't always agree on this subject. In the case of Astronomers and Geologist they take a much longer view of events on and off the planet. The fact is there are a huge number of factors involved in the earths temperature, until there is a way to combine all of those into a computation we will not know what is going on.
The one really obvious problem with the global warming predictions is that they make the assumption that the sun has no impact on temperatures. This summer should make it glaringly obvious that a quite sun cools off the earth real fast, yet the suns impact is a constant with repect to the global warming crowd. Frankly it would be sad to here these people in normal scientific discourse but unfortunately they are very skilled at manipulating public opinion via thinly vieled threats to ones future. Sadly the science part of the debate died a long time ago, now it is all about threats and scare techniques to move a political agenda.
Dave
Actually, you're wrong. You just don't read scientific journals.
Try hitting that head a few times more, maybe it will free you from the RDF around the global warming movement. The other option is to come up North where it is cold and ask a few people about global warming.
After which I would suggest that you look deeper into Al Gore interest in global warming and how he is setting himself up to profit from your tax dollars. You can however have an impact here by talking to your congressman or woman and making sure this country doesn't go down this road blindly. These people need to know that you expect decisions based on sound science and not a flock of idiots scaring people into a life of servitude, poverty and social regression.
You see even if global warming is proven to be correct, there are positive ways to deal with it. That is moving forward with technology, the involvement of industry openly and actively avoiding social regression.
In any event please continue to bang your head until you get it. You are being manipulated to serve someone else agenda. An agenda that has nothing to do with the environment other than the gloss put on it to get the public to lap it up.
Dave
While I like a lot of what you have to say here usually, you are way off on this one.
Nothing wrong with having a passion about what we believe in, unless of course, our passion is so strong that it blocks out all other points of view. That is something that we all have to guard against. I keep reminding my kids to keep "walking around the elephant". ...
Now you know why I enjoy these boards so much. They expose me to a lot of different information, some of which I can use, and some of which I can't. But I must never stop "walking around the elephant". Good Luck, I'm out.
LOL, you wrote this and called my post the dumbest. As you have your kids walk around the elephant, remind them that there are other animals in the world and to look around, they might learn about them too.
BTW, it is unseasonably cool here lately, must be global cooling.
Canadians
Well, it's good you can grow your own Hemp (kind of). \
Lots of Omega 3, Omega 6, and other good nutrients in that stuff.
Regardless of whom or what is at fault we need to stop the affects of unpatterned global weather change so we may keep our communial homeostasis as current as possible.
LOL, you wrote this and called my post the dumbest. As you have your kids walk around the elephant, remind them that there are other animals in the world and to look around, they might learn about them too.
BTW, it is unseasonably cool here lately, must be global cooling.
Canadians
Well, it's good you can grow your own Hemp (kind of). \
Lots of Omega 3, Omega 6, and other good nutrients in that stuff.
You can buy hemp oil in the supermarket here in NYC.
If you are upset over the banking issue you really should be upset with Al Gore and the global warming crowd, they are just different facets of the same problem.
Dave
Wow! I can now appreciate why you have the name of Wizard69. It took a lot of "magic" to draw a connection between Al Gore, the banking industry and global warming. Here, let's see what you can do with these three: ice cream, the cha cha and mac minis.
I met many a Canadian when I was still in Cuba; pretty cool people in general. I have lived in the U.S. for over 15 years now so I guess I become pretty mad when I see certain groups pushing agendas that are designed to enslave us and take away our freedoms since I have that previous experience in my life and they seem pretty transparent to me.
I would become mad too when I heard that somebody was taking advantage of their newly found freedom to disrespect product license agreements.
Like your X7DAL-E Supermicro mobo,Dual QC 3.0 Ghz Xeons, 12 Gb RAM, 4 Raptor drives + 500 Gb TM drive, wireless-n EW-7728ln card, DVR-212D burner, M-Audio 7.1 sound card, Antec Titan 650 case running Leopard 10.6 Retail using Chameleon-DFE."
How do you explain the fact that the North Pole has ben completely ice free in the past?How do you explain the fact that the South Pole is actually gaining ice mass and the North Pole has gained two-year ice mass as well?
The South pole is gaining ice mass because it is warmer. In extremely cold temperatures the air can not hold moisture so it does not snow as much. As it warms the air becomes moister and it snows more so more ice mass.
As for the north pole, there have been times when it has been ice free, usually when the earth has been a lot warmer. Something we are trying to avoid causing ourselves.
------------------
All you man made global warming doubters; are you 100% sure there is no global warming and it is not man made? 100% sure that all the climatologists are wrong?
Because if you are only 98% sure, if there is even a very small risk that we might be causing global warming it's too great a risk to not do anything. We wear seat belts don't we? There is a small chance we might get in a car accident but the consequenses of not wearing a seat belt is great. Greater caution is warranted when the consequences are high.
Besides, energy efficiency saves money in the long run, keeps our money in our own country and is more comfortable. Do you really want to tie your economic future to the dictators in the Middle East?
I built a super insulated house that uses a ground-source heat pump for heating and cooling. It cost a little more but it will pay for itself in about 5 years. My energy bills are 70% less than other NEW houses, 300% less than the last old house I lived in. Also, in the winter other people turn their heat way down at night. Ours is 70 degrees day and night.
IF I am saving $1500/year on energy costs, over 30 years that's $45,000 saved at todays prices. Plus I have a greater resale value.
To argue against measures combating fossil fuel use is just dumb. It's dumb for long term economic reasons, comfort reasons and security reasons.
For those of you for whom this is the case, doesn't the very low quality of the aggregate case being made for your side kind of make you wonder, a little? When you post some kind of "Ha! I guess you liberals didn't think of THIS!", only to have someone immediately post a link that shows that what you thought was the case is simply untrue, or of course has been taken into account when the science is being done, or is based on some kind of basic misunderstanding of how physics, science, peer review or just simple logic works, and that happens over and over again, don't you start to maybe suspect that you have been misled?
Unfortunately, they have been so programmed to distrust science, government and essentially rationality itself that, no, they don't ask themselves anything at all, they just nod their heads in unison and chant "ditto". So, they repeat things like this,
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Al Gore just puts a public face on the decline of government and a sense of duty people once had. [...] If you are upset over the banking issue you really should be upset with Al Gore and the global warming crowd, they are just different facets of the same
which boggles the mind of anyone who still has a grip on reality. (I won't bother to explain why because if you've been programmed you wouldn't accept it and if you haven't there's no need to explain.)
So, basically, there's no point in trying to reason with them because they are beyond reason and have such an utterly distorted and irrational world view that rational argument cannot reach them.
So you agree that his review of Windows 7 is a crock, and that it isn't nearly as good as he thinks it is?
Not at all, but I bet you do. I reserve judgement until I actually see it and read more reviews especially from the other Apple fanboy, NY Times' David Pogue. But so far Mossberg has presented a very persuasive, well documented case for liking it, having used it for 9 months.
What is important is not the health of business. The health of the earth and the health of the people is what is important. You cannot live in a dirty world where people are dying because of business profit.
Next, they will argue that people will lose their jobs. Sure, I will rather be jobless than sick.
This is just Murdoch continuing to interfere in order to make profit. The Chamber of Commerce is corrupt. They will sell their mothers to make profit.
Screw WSJ!
Cancel you WSJ subscription and go back to subscribing to "Mother Earth News".... will help you control you your anger, reduce your BP and help you lead a calmer and longer life. Also check out Dr. Weil's web site for dealing with the stress of media and news. \
You can buy hemp oil in the supermarket here in NYC.
Yes, I know. You can buy hemp milk where I live in the grocery stores along with hemp seeds in cereal. What you can not do is grow your own hemp legally, according to the feds (generalized).
If you look at the laws on this, the reasons given for passing them, and those that benefitted there passing, you could draw some different conclusions as to why the laws were passed.
Not at all, but I bet you do. I reserve judgement until I actually see it and read more reviews especially from the other Apple fanboy, NY Times' David Pogue. But so far Mossberg has presented a very persuasive, well documented case for liking it, having used it for 9 months.
Yeah, I am waiting to test it out too, but have not had the need. Will reserve full judgement till then too. David Pogue and others seem to be paid corporate spokespersons.
If I were a betting man, I'd bet that Windows 7 is what they say it is and Apple will drop in Market Share Percentages.
Big question I have not looked at yet, will it work better with Mac and Unix platforms?
- SMB seems to be a standard for NAS shares. No problems there
- SMB sharing between Macs and Windows machines is a pain in the . Too many unnecessary steps to get things set up. Hopefully 10.6.x and Windows 7.x will make life easier. Not betting on that one .
The South pole is gaining ice mass because it is warmer. In extremely cold temperatures the air can not hold moisture so it does not snow as much. As it warms the air becomes moister and it snows more so more ice mass.
As for the north pole, there have been times when it has been ice free, usually when the earth has been a lot warmer. Something we are trying to avoid causing ourselves.
------------------
All you man made global warming doubters; are you 100% sure there is no global warming and it is not man made? 100% sure that all the climatologists are wrong?
Because if you are only 98% sure, if there is even a very small risk that we might be causing global warming it's too great a risk to not do anything. We wear seat belts don't we? There is a small chance we might get in a car accident but the consequenses of not wearing a seat belt is great. Greater caution is warranted when the consequences are high.
Besides, energy efficiency saves money in the long run, keeps our money in our own country and is more comfortable. Do you really want to tie your economic future to the dictators in the Middle East?
I built a super insulated house that uses a ground-source heat pump for heating and cooling. It cost a little more but it will pay for itself in about 5 years. My energy bills are 70% less than other NEW houses, 300% less than the last old house I lived in. Also, in the winter other people turn their heat way down at night. Ours is 70 degrees day and night.
IF I am saving $1500/year on energy costs, over 30 years that's $45,000 saved at todays prices. Plus I have a greater resale value.
To argue against measures combating fossil fuel use is just dumb. It's dumb for long term economic reasons, comfort reasons and security reasons.
---------------------------
To argue against measures combating fossil fuel use is just dumb.
Tell me which organic based fuels, fossil or not, do not produce oxides of carbon (which some scientists have claimed links and a precursor to AGW). Ethanol, biodiesel, wood, animal fat (makes synthetic fuels), grass(biomass)? Since the wonks in the ether have decided CO2 is a pollutant (as CO is). Even the process of rotting wood and decaying grass (think of it as slow burning) create these "Pollutants" and possibly lead to AGW.
The real solution is to move to alternatives such as nuclear, hydro, solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, temp differential, et. al.. Is not about dumb people combating fossil fuel use. It is about being proactive in adopting measures that reduce pollution and minimizing the use of ORGANIC BASED FUELS what ever the source (that is all those compounds which have all those C's, O's, H's and more in their structures)
Your comment pointed out what you have done to be energy efficient... great. How can that be applied so a family who earns only $45,000 per year in San Francisco? Vancouver, Seattle, Boston....... Calling someone who uses inexpensive NatGas to warm their home in Cheyene dumb because they want to use and advocate the cheapest way to survive is counter productive. Price of energy alternatives, especially cleaner NatGas, determine use of fossil fuels these days... not rants. I hear very little from the "conservation" side of the energy equation. I do not hear Obama telling anyone to turn down the thermostat and wear a sweater. People waste energy on a grand scale... Obviously you do not. Kudos. and I hope you can get your story published in other than "Mother Earth News"
You realize you sound very uneducated when you say things like that. If your spew crap like that, pleae provide some sort of proof to back up your outrageous claim.
I'm no CoC fan. I believe they are really only real agenda is to keep dues coming in to support their employees. Any chamber I've ever joined has proven to be able to help grow my business about 1% (give or take a percent).
But please, spare us the left wing agenda which currently seems to be... blame everything on the RNC. It's weak. And desperate.
I used to feel the same way. Back in 1994 I heard all that "left wing propaganda" about where the RNC wanted to take the nation. Tax cuts for the wealthy. Starve the Beast. Maybe an opportunistic war in the middle east. Radical deregulation of financial markets and energy trading.
I didn't believe any of it. Then.
If we stick to what we can actually point to in the real world, climate change denial has become rather "fringe" position. "Fringe" as in not-supported-by-the-facts. The Chamber's support of that position is consistent with a fairly radical attitude that moderate conservatives have mostly abandoned.
I'm not in favor of radicalizing the conversation either. But we can't simply write-off "left-wing" hyperbole any more. Far too much of it has proven to be frighteningly accurate.
Al Gore stands to profit from investing in "green" technology if the climate bill passes... how is that a bad thing?
Well. It's unclear that it's even true, for starters. Such has been widely flogged in the media, but Gore claims to have been putting all the profit from these investments into a non-profit organization.
And the rest of your observation (so what if Gore is profiting) is difficult to argue with. Especially if those arguing with it never raised a peep while the White House was practicing naked corporate cronyism for the last eight years, practically out in the open. Especially since the people attacking Gore for his alleged profiteering have no such objections about the activity of the Health Insurance lobby in the current Reform debates.
IF Gore stands to profit, that's at the very heart of the kind of capitalism we've apparently sanctified in this country. If you are silent when Haliburton and KBR and Blackwater and Aetna and Wellpoint do it, you can't get your knickers in a twist about Al. You really have no choice but to stick to facts, science, probabilities and potential outcomes.
The only reason to attack the messenger here is if the facts, etc, don't win the case for you.
I don't there is anyone who has had rudimentary physical science couses who does't believe that "CLIMATE CHANGES". It has changes for billions of years. (earth approx 4.5B years old). The discusion should be relegated to AGW. That means "Anthropogenic Global Warming".
What is the temp of the earth supposed to be and remain at? Who determines what is the ideal
temperatue...... the temperature of Paris in 1275 AD, 1787? 1930? 1500BC? How about Great lakes area 12,000 BC, 800AD, 1920AD? How arrogant can you get mankind? Pollution can be controlled. The carbon cylce, which includes animal and plant life forms is far too complex for even the most sophisticated modeling programs to predict let alone control. Want to control Carbon.... control and reverse reproduction of species, including humans, the biggest users of carbon compounds.
If we stick to what we can actually point to in the real world, climate change denial has become rather "fringe" position. "Fringe" as in not-supported-by-the-facts. The Chamber's support of that position is consistent with a fairly radical attitude that moderate conservatives have mostly abandoned.
...
Last week, over a hundred CEOs of American companies broke with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to lobby Congress to ?pass comprehensive climate change and energy policy legislation this year.? Participants in a Clean Energy Economy Forum on October 7, at the White House included J. Wayne Leonard, the Chairman and CEO of Entergy Corporation, the utility giant based in New Orleans, Louisiana. Speaking at the White House event, Leonard called for action on climate change and clean energy not just for economic reasons but starkly moral ones (full transcript here):
Quote:
We are virtually certain that climate change is occurring, and occurring because of man?s activities. We?re virtually certain the probability distribution curve is all bad. There?s no good things that?s going to come of this. But what?s uncertain is exactly which one of those things are going to occur and in what time frame. In the probability distribution curve is about a 50% probability that about half of all species will become extinct or be subject to extinction over this period of time. What we will never know on an ex ante basis is whether or not man be one of those casualties or not.
We condemn Wall Street for taking risks with our economy ? risks that all of you are trying very hard to reverse ? but at the same time we?re taking exactly the same kind of risks, with no upside whatsoever, with regard to our climate, failing to practice even the basic risk management techniques in terms of climate change reduction.
Comments
Some think it is decreasing but even that hasn't been proven. Let's face it ever spring Snow melts, this may surprise you if you are a city boy used to seeing Snow trucked away by I can tell Snow does melt and so does ice.
Now you may try to say it is the warming air that is melting the Snow. To which I say yes the air warms up every spring and melts the Snow. Some years are just more agressive than others.
Besides all of that you have long term cycles in the Pacific Ocean that can have a massive impact on ice at the north pole. As you may suspect water will have a greater impact on that ice cap than air.
Another thing to realize is this isn't the first time in history, we are talking recent history here that there has been a melt off of ice in the North. So what evidence is there that this melt off is special in some way. The short and sweet is there is none, all we got is several sets of scientist saying the ice has melted. It may have were they measured but at least one group has admitted that their instruments had calibration errors that invalidated their original findings. Of course this has been surpressed by the lunatic fringe.
In any event let's say the ice is actually thinner than expected, the problem is how do you link that to manmade global warming. That is how do we factor in manmade causes along with everything else that is happening. That is known long term environmental cycles, volcanic activity, output from the sun and other factors. The reality is man is a puny factor when you consider these other factors.
In any event show me the mechanism where by mans activities have caused the ice to melt. It simply isn't good enough to say so, nor has there been a model put forth that clearly links CO2 to a planetary temperature increase. Yes I know there are lots of computer models that the developers think they have nailed down but absolutely none of them have been proven correct.
Sadly you will like many here, dismiss my point of view as a nut case from the extreme right. That is not the case at all, I'm not however gullible nor easily persuaded to adopt ideas that don't stack up. Nor do I have time for scientist that come off as crack pots. So if you don't like my point of view talk to an astronomer or a geologist who each have differing points of view on the subject.
You will eventually see that very well educated people don't always agree on this subject. In the case of Astronomers and Geologist they take a much longer view of events on and off the planet. The fact is there are a huge number of factors involved in the earths temperature, until there is a way to combine all of those into a computation we will not know what is going on.
The one really obvious problem with the global warming predictions is that they make the assumption that the sun has no impact on temperatures. This summer should make it glaringly obvious that a quite sun cools off the earth real fast, yet the suns impact is a constant with repect to the global warming crowd. Frankly it would be sad to here these people in normal scientific discourse but unfortunately they are very skilled at manipulating public opinion via thinly vieled threats to ones future. Sadly the science part of the debate died a long time ago, now it is all about threats and scare techniques to move a political agenda.
Dave
Actually, you're wrong. You just don't read scientific journals.
Try hitting that head a few times more, maybe it will free you from the RDF around the global warming movement. The other option is to come up North where it is cold and ask a few people about global warming.
After which I would suggest that you look deeper into Al Gore interest in global warming and how he is setting himself up to profit from your tax dollars. You can however have an impact here by talking to your congressman or woman and making sure this country doesn't go down this road blindly. These people need to know that you expect decisions based on sound science and not a flock of idiots scaring people into a life of servitude, poverty and social regression.
You see even if global warming is proven to be correct, there are positive ways to deal with it. That is moving forward with technology, the involvement of industry openly and actively avoiding social regression.
In any event please continue to bang your head until you get it. You are being manipulated to serve someone else agenda. An agenda that has nothing to do with the environment other than the gloss put on it to get the public to lap it up.
Dave
While I like a lot of what you have to say here usually, you are way off on this one.
Nothing wrong with having a passion about what we believe in, unless of course, our passion is so strong that it blocks out all other points of view. That is something that we all have to guard against. I keep reminding my kids to keep "walking around the elephant". ...
Now you know why I enjoy these boards so much. They expose me to a lot of different information, some of which I can use, and some of which I can't. But I must never stop "walking around the elephant". Good Luck, I'm out.
LOL, you wrote this and called my post the dumbest. As you have your kids walk around the elephant, remind them that there are other animals in the world and to look around, they might learn about them too.
BTW, it is unseasonably cool here lately, must be global cooling.
Canadians
Well, it's good you can grow your own Hemp (kind of).
Lots of Omega 3, Omega 6, and other good nutrients in that stuff.
LOL, you wrote this and called my post the dumbest. As you have your kids walk around the elephant, remind them that there are other animals in the world and to look around, they might learn about them too.
BTW, it is unseasonably cool here lately, must be global cooling.
Canadians
Well, it's good you can grow your own Hemp (kind of).
Lots of Omega 3, Omega 6, and other good nutrients in that stuff.
You can buy hemp oil in the supermarket here in NYC.
If you are upset over the banking issue you really should be upset with Al Gore and the global warming crowd, they are just different facets of the same problem.
Dave
Wow! I can now appreciate why you have the name of Wizard69. It took a lot of "magic" to draw a connection between Al Gore, the banking industry and global warming. Here, let's see what you can do with these three: ice cream, the cha cha and mac minis.
I met many a Canadian when I was still in Cuba; pretty cool people in general. I have lived in the U.S. for over 15 years now so I guess I become pretty mad when I see certain groups pushing agendas that are designed to enslave us and take away our freedoms since I have that previous experience in my life and they seem pretty transparent to me.
I would become mad too when I heard that somebody was taking advantage of their newly found freedom to disrespect product license agreements.
Like your X7DAL-E Supermicro mobo,Dual QC 3.0 Ghz Xeons, 12 Gb RAM, 4 Raptor drives + 500 Gb TM drive, wireless-n EW-7728ln card, DVR-212D burner, M-Audio 7.1 sound card, Antec Titan 650 case running Leopard 10.6 Retail using Chameleon-DFE."
You don't need to hold the majority view to have the biggest ratings on a news cable channel.
What you need is rabid people who tune it in because it reinforces their own extreme views.
And that's enough extreme politics here.
exactly!
How do you explain the fact that the North Pole has ben completely ice free in the past?How do you explain the fact that the South Pole is actually gaining ice mass and the North Pole has gained two-year ice mass as well?
The South pole is gaining ice mass because it is warmer. In extremely cold temperatures the air can not hold moisture so it does not snow as much. As it warms the air becomes moister and it snows more so more ice mass.
As for the north pole, there have been times when it has been ice free, usually when the earth has been a lot warmer. Something we are trying to avoid causing ourselves.
------------------
All you man made global warming doubters; are you 100% sure there is no global warming and it is not man made? 100% sure that all the climatologists are wrong?
Because if you are only 98% sure, if there is even a very small risk that we might be causing global warming it's too great a risk to not do anything. We wear seat belts don't we? There is a small chance we might get in a car accident but the consequenses of not wearing a seat belt is great. Greater caution is warranted when the consequences are high.
Besides, energy efficiency saves money in the long run, keeps our money in our own country and is more comfortable. Do you really want to tie your economic future to the dictators in the Middle East?
I built a super insulated house that uses a ground-source heat pump for heating and cooling. It cost a little more but it will pay for itself in about 5 years. My energy bills are 70% less than other NEW houses, 300% less than the last old house I lived in. Also, in the winter other people turn their heat way down at night. Ours is 70 degrees day and night.
IF I am saving $1500/year on energy costs, over 30 years that's $45,000 saved at todays prices. Plus I have a greater resale value.
To argue against measures combating fossil fuel use is just dumb. It's dumb for long term economic reasons, comfort reasons and security reasons.
For those of you for whom this is the case, doesn't the very low quality of the aggregate case being made for your side kind of make you wonder, a little? When you post some kind of "Ha! I guess you liberals didn't think of THIS!", only to have someone immediately post a link that shows that what you thought was the case is simply untrue, or of course has been taken into account when the science is being done, or is based on some kind of basic misunderstanding of how physics, science, peer review or just simple logic works, and that happens over and over again, don't you start to maybe suspect that you have been misled?
Unfortunately, they have been so programmed to distrust science, government and essentially rationality itself that, no, they don't ask themselves anything at all, they just nod their heads in unison and chant "ditto". So, they repeat things like this,
Al Gore just puts a public face on the decline of government and a sense of duty people once had. [...] If you are upset over the banking issue you really should be upset with Al Gore and the global warming crowd, they are just different facets of the same
which boggles the mind of anyone who still has a grip on reality. (I won't bother to explain why because if you've been programmed you wouldn't accept it and if you haven't there's no need to explain.)
So, basically, there's no point in trying to reason with them because they are beyond reason and have such an utterly distorted and irrational world view that rational argument cannot reach them.
So you agree that his review of Windows 7 is a crock, and that it isn't nearly as good as he thinks it is?
Not at all, but I bet you do. I reserve judgement until I actually see it and read more reviews especially from the other Apple fanboy, NY Times' David Pogue. But so far Mossberg has presented a very persuasive, well documented case for liking it, having used it for 9 months.
What is important is not the health of business. The health of the earth and the health of the people is what is important. You cannot live in a dirty world where people are dying because of business profit.
Next, they will argue that people will lose their jobs. Sure, I will rather be jobless than sick.
This is just Murdoch continuing to interfere in order to make profit. The Chamber of Commerce is corrupt. They will sell their mothers to make profit.
Screw WSJ!
Cancel you WSJ subscription and go back to subscribing to "Mother Earth News".... will help you control you your anger, reduce your BP and help you lead a calmer and longer life.
You can buy hemp oil in the supermarket here in NYC.
Yes, I know. You can buy hemp milk where I live in the grocery stores along with hemp seeds in cereal. What you can not do is grow your own hemp legally, according to the feds (generalized).
If you look at the laws on this, the reasons given for passing them, and those that benefitted there passing, you could draw some different conclusions as to why the laws were passed.
Not at all, but I bet you do. I reserve judgement until I actually see it and read more reviews especially from the other Apple fanboy, NY Times' David Pogue. But so far Mossberg has presented a very persuasive, well documented case for liking it, having used it for 9 months.
Yeah, I am waiting to test it out too, but have not had the need. Will reserve full judgement till then too. David Pogue and others seem to be paid corporate spokespersons.
If I were a betting man, I'd bet that Windows 7 is what they say it is and Apple will drop in Market Share Percentages.
Big question I have not looked at yet, will it work better with Mac and Unix platforms?
- RDC rules (beats Apple's free screen sharing / remote access software hands down)
- SMB seems to be a standard for NAS shares. No problems there
- SMB sharing between Macs and Windows machines is a pain in the
The South pole is gaining ice mass because it is warmer. In extremely cold temperatures the air can not hold moisture so it does not snow as much. As it warms the air becomes moister and it snows more so more ice mass.
As for the north pole, there have been times when it has been ice free, usually when the earth has been a lot warmer. Something we are trying to avoid causing ourselves.
------------------
All you man made global warming doubters; are you 100% sure there is no global warming and it is not man made? 100% sure that all the climatologists are wrong?
Because if you are only 98% sure, if there is even a very small risk that we might be causing global warming it's too great a risk to not do anything. We wear seat belts don't we? There is a small chance we might get in a car accident but the consequenses of not wearing a seat belt is great. Greater caution is warranted when the consequences are high.
Besides, energy efficiency saves money in the long run, keeps our money in our own country and is more comfortable. Do you really want to tie your economic future to the dictators in the Middle East?
I built a super insulated house that uses a ground-source heat pump for heating and cooling. It cost a little more but it will pay for itself in about 5 years. My energy bills are 70% less than other NEW houses, 300% less than the last old house I lived in. Also, in the winter other people turn their heat way down at night. Ours is 70 degrees day and night.
IF I am saving $1500/year on energy costs, over 30 years that's $45,000 saved at todays prices. Plus I have a greater resale value.
To argue against measures combating fossil fuel use is just dumb. It's dumb for long term economic reasons, comfort reasons and security reasons.
---------------------------
To argue against measures combating fossil fuel use is just dumb.
Tell me which organic based fuels, fossil or not, do not produce oxides of carbon (which some scientists have claimed links and a precursor to AGW). Ethanol, biodiesel, wood, animal fat (makes synthetic fuels), grass(biomass)? Since the wonks in the ether have decided CO2 is a pollutant (as CO is). Even the process of rotting wood and decaying grass (think of it as slow burning) create these "Pollutants" and possibly lead to AGW.
The real solution is to move to alternatives such as nuclear, hydro, solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, temp differential, et. al.. Is not about dumb people combating fossil fuel use. It is about being proactive in adopting measures that reduce pollution and minimizing the use of ORGANIC BASED FUELS what ever the source (that is all those compounds which have all those C's, O's, H's and more in their structures)
Your comment pointed out what you have done to be energy efficient... great.
You realize you sound very uneducated when you say things like that. If your spew crap like that, pleae provide some sort of proof to back up your outrageous claim.
I'm no CoC fan. I believe they are really only real agenda is to keep dues coming in to support their employees. Any chamber I've ever joined has proven to be able to help grow my business about 1% (give or take a percent).
But please, spare us the left wing agenda which currently seems to be... blame everything on the RNC. It's weak. And desperate.
I used to feel the same way. Back in 1994 I heard all that "left wing propaganda" about where the RNC wanted to take the nation. Tax cuts for the wealthy. Starve the Beast. Maybe an opportunistic war in the middle east. Radical deregulation of financial markets and energy trading.
I didn't believe any of it. Then.
If we stick to what we can actually point to in the real world, climate change denial has become rather "fringe" position. "Fringe" as in not-supported-by-the-facts. The Chamber's support of that position is consistent with a fairly radical attitude that moderate conservatives have mostly abandoned.
I'm not in favor of radicalizing the conversation either. But we can't simply write-off "left-wing" hyperbole any more. Far too much of it has proven to be frighteningly accurate.
fdp3
Al Gore stands to profit from investing in "green" technology if the climate bill passes... how is that a bad thing?
Well. It's unclear that it's even true, for starters. Such has been widely flogged in the media, but Gore claims to have been putting all the profit from these investments into a non-profit organization.
http://mediamatters.org/research/200906040051
And the rest of your observation (so what if Gore is profiting) is difficult to argue with. Especially if those arguing with it never raised a peep while the White House was practicing naked corporate cronyism for the last eight years, practically out in the open. Especially since the people attacking Gore for his alleged profiteering have no such objections about the activity of the Health Insurance lobby in the current Reform debates.
IF Gore stands to profit, that's at the very heart of the kind of capitalism we've apparently sanctified in this country. If you are silent when Haliburton and KBR and Blackwater and Aetna and Wellpoint do it, you can't get your knickers in a twist about Al. You really have no choice but to stick to facts, science, probabilities and potential outcomes.
The only reason to attack the messenger here is if the facts, etc, don't win the case for you.
fdp3
No, genius. I am just someone who had to live under socialism for 22 years and I know what's going on in this country.
Heh. Don't look now, but the little green men in black helicopters are coming to take away all your automatic weapons.
[signed]
The Genius
What is the temp of the earth supposed to be and remain at? Who determines what is the ideal
temperatue...... the temperature of Paris in 1275 AD, 1787? 1930? 1500BC? How about Great lakes area 12,000 BC, 800AD, 1920AD? How arrogant can you get mankind? Pollution can be controlled. The carbon cylce, which includes animal and plant life forms is far too complex for even the most sophisticated modeling programs to predict let alone control. Want to control Carbon.... control and reverse reproduction of species, including humans, the biggest users of carbon compounds.
...
If we stick to what we can actually point to in the real world, climate change denial has become rather "fringe" position. "Fringe" as in not-supported-by-the-facts. The Chamber's support of that position is consistent with a fairly radical attitude that moderate conservatives have mostly abandoned.
...
Last week, over a hundred CEOs of American companies broke with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to lobby Congress to ?pass comprehensive climate change and energy policy legislation this year.? Participants in a Clean Energy Economy Forum on October 7, at the White House included J. Wayne Leonard, the Chairman and CEO of Entergy Corporation, the utility giant based in New Orleans, Louisiana. Speaking at the White House event, Leonard called for action on climate change and clean energy not just for economic reasons but starkly moral ones (full transcript here):
We are virtually certain that climate change is occurring, and occurring because of man?s activities. We?re virtually certain the probability distribution curve is all bad. There?s no good things that?s going to come of this. But what?s uncertain is exactly which one of those things are going to occur and in what time frame. In the probability distribution curve is about a 50% probability that about half of all species will become extinct or be subject to extinction over this period of time. What we will never know on an ex ante basis is whether or not man be one of those casualties or not.
We condemn Wall Street for taking risks with our economy ? risks that all of you are trying very hard to reverse ? but at the same time we?re taking exactly the same kind of risks, with no upside whatsoever, with regard to our climate, failing to practice even the basic risk management techniques in terms of climate change reduction.