No one argues that pollution of the air and water is "OK", although many on the warmist side try to blend pollution with global warming and then say the AGW skeptics are trying to poison the planet. They are two separate issues. And my concern is not only do we not know whether man's contribution to climate change is 1% or 10 %, but we're not certain in which direction we're effecting it. Or even which way its going and for how long. What if we make a huge effort to slow the warming only to discover that, as they theorized in the 70's, we're moving toward an Ice Age. In any case I don't see an urgency that merits screwing with the world's economy and requires jumping through hoops for no good reason.
On Dec 10, 4:29 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > Zeb, > > Of course, that is what the entire controversy is about. No one knows > for sure exactly how much of the climate change is directly caused, or > contributed to, man man's activity. Is it 1%, or 10% or what? It has > been turned into a political football, conservative vs liberal > bullshit. > Now it's almost impossible to believe anything because all the > infomation is being skewed and "spun" for political reasons, by one > "side" or the other. > Here's a rough, very rough and simplistic, analogy. I'm sitting in my > black Lincoln in a traffic jam in Phoenix in late July. The windows > are up and my A/C is going as hard as it can, but I'm hotter than > hell. Can i do anything about the heat caused by the sun? No. Can I do > anything about the fact my car is black and absorbing heat? No. Can i > do anything about being surrounded by heat absorbing concrete? No. But > if the air is stuffy and hot maybe it will help if i throw the big > cigar I'm smoking out the window. and don't light another. Will it > help my environment by 1% or 10%? No idea in the world. But it IS the > ONE factor I can actually do something about. > > On Dec 10, 3:10 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > What do you want to "do" about the man made factors Holly? All of the > > climate models failed to predict the current cooling trend which means > > we don't really know what is driving climate change or in what > > direction. For all we know, human activity is SLOWING a warming trend. > > The point being that spending trillions of dollars on complete > > uncertainty is absurd and possibly dangerous. > > > On Dec 10, 9:30 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Zeb, > > > > Really? Name the assholes I "hold up as climate Gods". Look at my post > > > and address what I said. Not the least bit interested in what you > > > THINK I believe and who you THINK I listen to. Where in the fuck have > > > I EVER claimed that the one variable (human activity) is the SOLE > > > cause of global warming? You can't because I never have. Now address > > > your stupid fucking comments to someone who actually has said such > > > things. I've told you morons time and time again that I am not the > > > spokesperson for the world's liberals. Address what I say or just > > > STFU. > > > > On Dec 9, 11:01 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > The assholes you hold up as climate Gods DO ignore those factors. > > > > Imagine doing an experiment where there are a hundred variables > > > > feeding into the test, which you cannot measure and many you don't > > > > even know about and you introduce ONE variable and infer that all > > > > changes are attributable to that element alone. You can't even > > > > rationally measure it!!! Its fuckin insanity. Why are you on board > > > > with this utter stupidity? > > > > > On Dec 8, 10:58 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Zeb, > > > > > > C'mon how stupid would one have to be to not already know that the > > > > > natural factors you list effect the global climate. We can't do > > > > > ANYTHING about natural factors, we CAN do something about made made > > > > > factors. That's the point. > > > > > > On Dec 8, 8:05 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > You should go to their web site. Its laughable. One of their charter > > > > > > definitions is as an authority on understanding the complexities of > > > > > > what causes the climate to change. Then they enumerate them. All of > > > > > > them are associated with human activity. They don't mention, AT ALL, > > > > > > solar activity, the variability of Earth's distance from the Sun in > > > > > > relation to the position of other planets, volcanic > > > > > > activity........LOL! Its as if nothing in the climate is a variable > > > > > > except human activity. > > > > > > > On Dec 8, 7:58 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > dick, > > > > > > > > You understand don't you that the globe, as in "global" consists > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > considerably more than the western United States? > > > > > > > > On Dec 8, 5:29 pm, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > The NYT has said the decade of the 2000's is the warmest decade > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > modern record!! So th...@!! > > > > > > > > >http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/science/earth/09climate.html?8au&em... > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
