Post Reply
Page 5 of 6  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
6 years ago  ::  Nov 18, 2007 - 6:01PM #41
Bodean
Posts: 7,334
[QUOTE=CharikIeia;78405]You do not want to peddle the idea to us that all astrophysicists deny the IPCC findings. Or do you?

The lackeys I spoke of were the Michael Crichtons and the local weathermen who say "it always has been warmer and colder again" -- the posters here who profess to be progressive but are stubbornly sabotageing any change towards energy independence, for purely political reasons, saying "you may be right but, he he, for the wrong reasons, so I prefer to just let the market solve a problem it cannot solve" -- the Bush 41s who say "the American way is not up for negotiation".

?[/QUOTE]


I don't think any of the Astrophysicist believe in CO2 warming.  IF they even have an opinion on it, it is likely along the lines of ... "well, that's what they say .. that's not my field, so I guess I'll take their word for it".

As far as Crichton .. I don't know much about the guy, and really don't care what he has to say.  In contrast, those "weather guys" are meteorologist .. the field from which Climatologist sprang.  Their opinion is at least worth considering.

Regarding those progressives who are sabotoging "progress" .. I disagree!  The Greens who IMO are not progressive but the ultimate in regressive do not propose any solutions to energy independence!  Their solution is a "back to nature" approach.  Many of their idols are on record as stating the earth and nature would be better without humans around.  In contrast, there are many progressives who believe that we should strive to replace our energy sources with alternatives.  Of course, you have to have viable alternatives to go to .. and slowly, the market is comming out with solutions.

A dude in France has created a car that runs on compressed air!  Now .. I like that idea!  Nuclear energy .. greens oppose it, but it is the single most viable answer to maintaining our current energy level.  Solar holds the most potential, but for some stupid reason, it doesn't get the traction it deserves.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Nov 27, 2007 - 6:54AM #42
Karma_yeshe_dorje
Posts: 10,353
You guys have got the issue all wrong. This here is News & Politics. We are not arguing about [COLOR="Red"]natural[/COLOR] science--but political science! And the political fact of the matter is that continuing to [COLOR="Red"]hang out with the deniers is a death sentence[/COLOR].

[QUOTE]FAILING to ratify the Kyoto Protocol was one of the reasons the coalition took a thumping in Saturday's federal election, outgoing environment minister Malcolm Turnbull said today.

During the election campaign it was revealed Mr Turnbull had tried unsuccessfully to convince the Howard cabinet to ratify the global greenhouse-gas emissions agreement.[/QUOTE]~News~
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Nov 27, 2007 - 9:39PM #43
Bodean
Posts: 7,334
[QUOTE=Karma_Yeshe_Dorje;96823]You guys have got the issue all wrong. This here is News & Politics. We are not arguing about [COLOR="Red"]natural[/COLOR] science--but political science! And the political fact of the matter is that continuing to [COLOR="Red"]hang out with the deniers is a death sentence[/COLOR].

~News~[/QUOTE]

Sure ... and as long as Global Warming is "in vogue" for the numb and dumb who dare not question, it will remain a political force.

BUT .. in 5 years, when Global Warming is completely debunked, .... you'll see a house cleaning.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Nov 28, 2007 - 2:28AM #44
Karma_yeshe_dorje
Posts: 10,353
More Greens senators, will give us the balance of power.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Nov 30, 2007 - 5:58AM #45
Karma_yeshe_dorje
Posts: 10,353
Head in the sand, as usual....[QUOTE]Kevin Rudd, head of the Australian Labor Party and incoming prime minister, announced his intention to ratify the Kyoto protocol on climate change. Australia would sign up within weeks[/QUOTE]~New Scientist~
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Dec 03, 2007 - 9:32PM #46
Bodean
Posts: 7,334
[QUOTE=Karma_Yeshe_Dorje;104845]Head in the sand, as usual....~New Scientist~[/QUOTE]


Order up another dunce hat!

There seems to be a demand for them in some sectors.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Dec 10, 2007 - 10:10AM #47
Karma_yeshe_dorje
Posts: 10,353
There is some opposition to targeting greenhouse emission cuts.

[QUOTE]Americans felt isolated because they are the only remaining industrialised nation not to have ratified the Kyoto Protocol[/QUOTE]~Telegraph~
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Dec 10, 2007 - 12:21PM #48
drawkcab
Posts: 314
[QUOTE=Karma_Yeshe_Dorje;96823]You guys have got the issue all wrong. This here is News & Politics. We are not arguing about [COLOR="Red"]natural[/COLOR] science--but political science! And the political fact of the matter is that continuing to [COLOR="Red"]hang out with the deniers is a death sentence[/COLOR].

~News~[/QUOTE]

Your Right, Karma_Yeshe_Dorje, I've been reading the posts and tring to figher what polical has to do with natural, but concerning Global Warming, I guess to some there is no difference. But when you look at it, and all
the trees that were burned this year, Well, from a commerical point of view, I guess I can see why. But here is my assessment of the situation; Fire does use oxygen when it burns forest, but every living thing on the face of the earth turns oxygen to carbon dioxide, also. All except one type of life, that is. That life is Broad Leaf trees. Want to save the earth? Stop the destruction of trees, stop the spread of greedy land developers, and the belief that progress is worth the cost, and you will be on the right path. Oh, yeah, there is a problem there isn't there? Yeah, you see it, now are you, as goodwill commentators ready to climb the Mount Everest of commercial Global warming?
  drawkcab
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Dec 10, 2007 - 1:50PM #49
Bodean
Posts: 7,334
[QUOTE=drawkcab;129244]Your Right, Karma_Yeshe_Dorje, I've been reading the posts and tring to figher what polical has to do with natural, but concerning Global Warming, I guess to some there is no difference. But when you look at it, and all
the trees that were burned this year, Well, from a commerical point of view, I guess I can see why. But here is my assessment of the situation; Fire does use oxygen when it burns forest, but every living thing on the face of the earth turns oxygen to carbon dioxide, also. All except one type of life, that is. That life is Broad Leaf trees. Want to save the earth? Stop the destruction of trees, stop the spread of greedy land developers, and the belief that progress is worth the cost, and you will be on the right path. Oh, yeah, there is a problem there isn't there? Yeah, you see it, now are you, as goodwill commentators ready to climb the Mount Everest of commercial Global warming?
  drawkcab[/QUOTE]


Drawkcab ... welcome. :)

I'm not sure that you guys get it.  The issue is not to try and figure out what political has to do with natural .. it is to recognize the FRAUD that is being perpetuated on the populace by "creative" science and dogmatism, that has a goal completely alterior to "saving the planet".

We as environmentalist would all like to see better practices implemented.  I agree, let's save some trees.  I agree, let's move towards cleaner forms of energy, the ultimate being the Sun .. next to that kinetic energy.  BTW ... drawkcab .. the ocean plankton far excede broad leaves in producing oxygen.

But ..what this really boils down to, is the failure of the Soviet Union marked an end to the hopes of socialsim and its egalitarian vision for the world.  Yet ... Global Warming stepped up to take it's place.  Go to any Global Warming rally and see what you see .... a bunch of ANTI-CAPITALIST!!  That is it ... nothing else .. just anti-corporatist, anti-capitalist, and anti-industrialist.  Within this group, you find the despot leaders of failed countries, who wholeheartedly support ravaging the wealthy industrialized nations in a scheme to transfer their wealth to themselves.  You also find the more refined socialist that exist in parts of Europe.  But in the end, it is all about installing Socialism and implementing CONTROL over the worlds populace.

THAT IS WHAT GLOBAL WARMING IS ALL ABOUT!!!

The purpose of my post is to expose the false science that forms the basis for this misinformation campaign!!  Hence, when scientific information regarding the "natural" influences on climate are brought up, they are cited for the purpose of illustrating that two things cannot exist at the same time.  One is false .. and it just so happens, it is the message of the IPCC .. who are the cornerstone of this socialistic movement known as "global warming".

The only evidence the Socialist have are computer models, which are "virtual".  Astrophysics, in contrast, has the real data, which shows that 1) the Globe did NOT warm as much as the IPCC says it did, 2) the MWP DID exist, and most importantly, 3) the Globe is headed for a big COOL DOWN!!

OH .. and one other fact ... Cold KILLS much more than Warm.  If anything should scare the crap out of people, it should be that the Planet is on the cusp of its next glaciation period.  And .. when it hits, it will take care of Global Warming .... and about fifth of the human population.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Dec 10, 2007 - 3:19PM #50
drawkcab
Posts: 314
[QUOTE=Bodean;129444]Drawkcab ... welcome. :)

I'm not sure that you guys get it. 
.. the ocean plankton far excede broad leaves in producing oxygen. [/QUOTE]

I get it alright, but my post was meant more as a jest, (remember Mount Everest?) with a few facts thrown in. I didn't say anything about other sources of oxygen reproduction, and there are many fishes in the sea.
However I must say I never link it with the socialist. But sitting here thinking about it, I can definitely see your point. I've got to think on this. As the termator would say, "I'll be back."

drawkcab
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 5 of 6  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook