Global Warming

Have an environmental cause? Announce and discuss here.

Moderators: Shari, collnarra, Butts, beach_defender, Forum Moderators

User avatar
Chamberess
Owl status
Posts: 4613
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 8:35 am
Location: wouldn't you like to know...

Post by Chamberess » Mon Oct 29, 2007 10:37 am

Put your money where your mouth is next weekend boys:

http://walkagainstwarming.org/

User avatar
--++sunstroke++--
Harry the Hat
Posts: 3081
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: the office

Post by --++sunstroke++-- » Wed Nov 21, 2007 5:28 am

http://www.truthnews.us/?p=820


High Cost of Paying for a Hoax

Phil Brennan
Ether Zone
November 13, 2007

It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create in (sic) allusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environment whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the ?research? to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon, they claimed to be a consensus?

—John Coleman, meteorologist and founder of the Weather Channel.

Coleman goes on to describe what has taken place regarding what he calls the global warming scam.

“Environmental extremists, notable politicians among them, then team up with movie, media and other liberal, environmentalists, [and] journalists to create this wild ’scientific’ scenario of the civilization threatening environmental consequences from Global Warming unless we adhere to this radical agenda. Now, their ridiculous manipulated science has been accepted as fact and becomes a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, the Democratic political Party, the Governor of California, school teachers and, in many cases, well informed but very gullible environmental conscientious citizens. Only one [ABC] reporter has been allowed to counter the Global Warming frenzy with one 15 minute documentary segment.”

Coleman is only the latest expert to declare that Global Warming is a hoax yet its advocates in Congress and among Democratic candidates for their party’s presidential nomination are promising to saddle the American people with laws designed to stop something that is not happening that will have many of us in the poor house.

According to the Washington Post a the Democrats’ current global warming proposals “will require a wholesale transformation of the nation’s economy and society.” The Post reported that Democrat presidential candidates’ climate proposals would “cost billions of dollars,” and detailed exactly what the American people will face when it comes to cap-and-trade proposals. Others hiked the price tag into the trillions of dollars.

The article went on to point out that energy expert Tracy Terry’s analysis of a recent Massachusetts Institute of Technology study showed that “under the scenario of an 80 percent reduction in emissions from 1990 levels, by 2015 Americans could be paying 30 percent more for natural gas in their homes and even more for electricity. At the same time, the cost of coal could quadruple and crude oil prices could rise by an additional $24 a barrel.”

A November 5 issue of the Wall Street Journal warned that “These new climate proposals come at a time when a “winter-heating crisis looms”

Wrote the Journal “As fuel prices surge to new records, lawmakers are trying to limit a potential crisis that could leave many of the Northeast’s poor without adequate heating this winter.”

According to The Colorado Springs Gazette the choices facing the government involve imposing: “costly, probably ineffective government dictates, or concede costs are too great and benefits too little to bother. Some are rethinking rash acts. An article in the British environmental journal Nature last month said it’s time to dump the Kyoto Protocol because it’s the wrong approach and has ?failed’ to cut greenhouse gases. The London School of Economics and Oxford authors also said carbon taxes and so-called cap-and-trade systems won’t achieve reductions, either.”

The paper continued: “Meaningful CO2 reductions would negatively affect a large part of the economy, Alan Greenspan writes in his new book, The Age of Turbulence that. Any meaningful reduction cap means a ‘large number of companies will experience cost increases that make them less competitive. Jobs will be lost, and real incomes of workers constrained.’”

The paper concluded “The Congressional Budget Office says consumers would pay most costs. Of course they would; consumers pay for everything in one way or another. The Free Enterprise Education Institute think tank forecasts an economic contraction that will cost each U.S. Family $10,800 by 2020. ‘Cap-and-trade systems or carbon taxes are likely to be popular only until real people lose real jobs as their consequence,’ Greenspan writes.”

According to a spokesman for Senator James Inhofe other news outlets have detailed how the poor face the most harmful impacts from rising energy costs. A 2006 survey of Colorado homeless families with children found that high energy bills were cited as one of the two main reasons they became homeless.

According to Sen. Inhofe “The Congressional Budget Office recently looked at the approach taken by most global warming proposals in Congress - known as cap and trade - that would place a cap on carbon emissions, allocate how much everyone could emit, and then let them trade those emissions. Let me quote from the CBO report:

“‘Regardless of how the allowances were distributed, most of the cost of meeting a cap on CO2 emissions would be borne by consumers, who would face persistently higher prices for products such as electricity and gasoline. Those price increases would be regressive in that poorer households would bear a larger burden relative to their income than wealthier households would.’”

“Think about that. Even relatively modest bills would put enormous burdens on the poor.

“The poor already face energy costs much higher as a percentage of their income than wealthier Americans. While most Americans spend about 4 percent of their monthly budget on heating their homes or other energy needs, the poorest fifth of Americans spend 19 percent of their budget on energy. Why would we adopt policies which disproportionately force the poor and working class to shoulder the heaviest burdens through even higher energy costs?”

Says astronomer Dr. Ian Wilson after reviewing a new study “Heat Capacity, Time Constant, and Sensitivity of Earth’s Climate System,” authored by Brookhaven National Lab scientist Stephen Schwartz: “Anthropogenic (man-made) global warming bites the dust.” Another scientist said the study overturned “in one fell swoop” the climate fears promoted by the UN and former Vice President Al Gore.

“Effectively, this (new study) means that the global economy will spend trillions of dollars trying to avoid a warming of ~ 1.0 K by 2100 A.D.” Dr. Wilson wrote in a note to the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee on August 19, 2007. Wilson, a former operations astronomer at the Hubble Space Telescope Institute in Baltimore MD, was referring to the trillions of dollars that would be spent under such international global warming treaties like the Kyoto Protocol.

If the global warming fanatics have their way, you’ll be paying a lot to finance a hoax, a scam, and a covert scheme to impose socialism on the U.S. and the rest of the world.




So, when are you bunch of whining communists gonna wake up & realize that you've had the wool pulled over your eyes haha!

2nd Reef
Harry the Hat
Posts: 3065
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 12:14 pm
Location: Pau Malu

Post by 2nd Reef » Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:01 am

Not when a lid-riding, contrarian, conspiracy theorist from the Northern Beaches starts cutting and pasting hysterical rants from f*cking Alex Jones.

If you don't know who Alex Jones is I'll give you a bit of background; believes 9-11 is a govt hoax, thinks secret societies like the Masons rule the world, believes the US is succumbing to a world govt.

Yeah, you know the type.

They used to walk around near busy intersections with a sandwich board and a big beard. Now they buy a handy cam and spout their unfounded hysterical rubbish to anyone looking for a contrary view.


John Coleman at least has credentials, although his views have been completely discounted by his peers.

Keep trawling though Sunstroke. Or buy yourself a sandwich board and grow a beard.

User avatar
Damage
Owl status
Posts: 3727
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:35 pm

Post by Damage » Wed Nov 21, 2007 11:19 am

I just rate the fact that all these posts will be immortalised for eternity in cyber-space and so Sunstroke's grand-children can come here in 50yrs and look up this thread and learn just how 'unsound' of mind ole gramps was.

ps And hello to my own grandkids! Rest assured that your poppy tried to fight the good fight. :D

User avatar
ric_vidal
Snowy McAllister
Posts: 6287
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 4:34 pm

Post by ric_vidal » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:53 pm

Damage wrote:Sunstroke's grand-children can come here in 50yrs and look up this thread and learn just how 'unsound' of mind ole gramps was.

And what if --++Moonbeam++-- is correct? Eh? What then, eh? :D

Many appear big on questioning the validity of his sources however I have heard and read enough to suggest their is reasonable doubt about the cause. I can’t be the only one.

And no Demag, it’s not just because that is what I WANT to believe and yes I think we should be cleaner and greener.

User avatar
Damage
Owl status
Posts: 3727
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:35 pm

Post by Damage » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:04 pm

ric_vidal wrote:And no Demag, it’s not just because that is what I WANT to believe.......


No, its because your the biggest contrarian in cyber-space, if not the world. :lol:

User avatar
ric_vidal
Snowy McAllister
Posts: 6287
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 4:34 pm

Post by ric_vidal » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:28 pm

Damage wrote:
ric_vidal wrote:And no Demag, it’s not just because that is what I WANT to believe.......


No, its because your the biggest contrarian in cyber-space, if not the world. :lol:

Well someone has to do it, and I don’t do it for sport :twisted: well maybe I lob a few grenades but I can’t let you plicks have your own way ALL the time.

‘contrarian’, not really, least you didn’t say I was wrong, phew!

2nd Reef
Harry the Hat
Posts: 3065
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 12:14 pm
Location: Pau Malu

Post by 2nd Reef » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:28 pm

So it's a 50/50 bet as to whether global warming is a reality or not. No one knows for sure what will happen.

If Damage is wrong then it's business as usual and all we've lost is a fossil fuel economy. Another side affect would be a propagation of alternative energy sources and a cleaner environment.

If he is right then we'll all be doomed, and everyome's grandkiddies will be living in far worse circumstances.

Put you're pride and ego aside (impossible for some I know) and get on the smart money.




PS: I would gladly admit I was wrong knowing I had wider interests at heart. What will you say if you're wrong?

User avatar
ric_vidal
Snowy McAllister
Posts: 6287
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 4:34 pm

Post by ric_vidal » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:54 pm

2nd Reef wrote:So it's a 50/50 bet as to whether global warming is a reality or not. No one knows for sure what will happen.

Not sure quite who you are talking to SN-2nd Roof, but I’ll step up. [SN-reef that makes you tin-reef] :D

There is NO doubt there is global warming, it’s the cause that is at question.

2nd Reef wrote:If Damage is wrong then it's business as usual and all we've lost is a fossil fuel economy. Another side affect would be a propagation of alternative energy sources and a cleaner environment.

We will lose fossil fuel one way or another. There is already a fair bit happening to find VIABLE alternatives, and yes there should be more, but it is hard when they either aren’t up to it or get knocked on the head because of a potential hazard.

2nd Reef wrote:PS: I would gladly admit I was wrong knowing I had wider interests at heart.

You’re not wrong, but you’re not necessarily right either and isn’t that the point. All I see is --++Moonbeemer++-- questioning, and there is nothing wrong with that.

2nd Reef wrote:What will you say if you're wrong?

You mean ‘oops’ doesn’t really cover it? Yes, despite my frivolous answer it does bother me. We are going to pay through the neck or with it I suggest.

User avatar
oldman
Snowy McAllister
Posts: 6949
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 1:11 pm
Location: Probably Maroubra, goddammit!

Post by oldman » Wed Nov 21, 2007 5:04 pm

ric_vidal wrote:Many appear big on questioning the validity of his sources however I have heard and read enough to suggest their is reasonable doubt about the cause. I can’t be the only one.

And no Demag, it’s not just because that is what I WANT to believe and yes I think we should be cleaner and greener.

Yes Ric, there is doubt, not about the weather, just about the science. Freeman Dyson is probably one of the top 20 minds of the 20th century. He's no meteorologist, he is a mathematician and physicist in the order of Richard Feynman, Albet Einstein. You know, pretty smart.

He doesn't doubt the weather, he expresses doubt about the computer projections.

Having said that, we should have been doing renewables 20 years ago, because it's smarter. We knew then that polluting the atmosphere wasn't a good idea. It still isn't.

Mind you, the political system doesn't look equipped to deal with this. There may have to be a revolution before genuine action occurs

Nick-W
barnacle
Posts: 1126
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 4:17 pm
Location: The Internet

Post by Nick-W » Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:37 pm

Some call it summer some call it global warming, it jsut means girls wear less clothing

User avatar
--++sunstroke++--
Harry the Hat
Posts: 3081
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: the office

Post by --++sunstroke++-- » Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:47 pm

Damage wrote:I just rate the fact that all these posts will be immortalised for eternity in cyber-space and so Sunstroke's grand-children can come here in 50yrs and look up this thread and learn just how 'unsound' of mind ole gramps was.

ps And hello to my own grandkids! Rest assured that your poppy tried to fight the good fight. :D



Sometimes a picture tells a thousand wordz, sometimes just a few will more than adequately cover any situation...



Image


Image


Image


Image


Image


Image

User avatar
Damage
Owl status
Posts: 3727
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:35 pm

Post by Damage » Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:27 pm

Hey I never said you were a complete moron; just a bit of a loose cannon.

ie:

and a covert scheme to impose socialism on the U.S. and the rest of the world.


Come on! :shock: :) :lol: 8) :?

ps True RV. Hand grenades are what its all about!

User avatar
--++sunstroke++--
Harry the Hat
Posts: 3081
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: the office

Post by --++sunstroke++-- » Wed Nov 21, 2007 11:11 pm

2nd Reef wrote:So it's a 50/50 bet as to whether global warming is a reality or not. No one knows for sure what will happen.

If Damage is wrong then it's business as usual and all we've lost is a fossil fuel economy. Another side affect would be a propagation of alternative energy sources and a cleaner environment.

If he is right then we'll all be doomed, and everyome's grandkiddies will be living in far worse circumstances.

Put you're pride and ego aside (impossible for some I know) and get on the smart money.




PS: I would gladly admit I was wrong knowing I had wider interests at heart. What will you say if you're wrong?



Uhh, why is it you guys keep fcuking sh1t up :shock:

I have never disagreed that we are polluting the planet.

I have never disagreed that we need to find functional alternative energy & water sources (got something to post on that soon BTW.)

My only bug-bear is that human beings are NOT responsible for global warming via man-made CO2 being released into the atmosphere.

Pay more fcuking attention :idea:

Still it is pretty funny watching you guys go spastic over the tidbits I can be bothered posting. Its just like fishing, but humans are the catch of the day <Damage has to go back cos he's undersize & Oldman is like that disintegrated rubber boot you pull up from the bottom of a creek :lol: >

User avatar
Damage
Owl status
Posts: 3727
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:35 pm

Post by Damage » Tue Dec 18, 2007 5:02 pm

This line out of an article i read today caught my eye:

It makes no greenhouse sense to fly around the world and look at nature if, by the act of getting there, you're serving to hasten its destruction.

(article then went onto say how a plane trip from australia to london produces about 3.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide for every traveller)

Nick Carroll
Duke Status
Posts: 17781
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 9:29 am
Location: Newport Beach

Post by Nick Carroll » Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:24 pm

Global warming was invented by gay people to destroy the Family.

User avatar
LONGINUS
barnacle
Posts: 1243
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:27 pm
Location: http://www.surfingatlas.com/spot/3016
Contact:

Post by LONGINUS » Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:45 pm

Nick Carroll wrote:Global warming was invented by gay people to destroy the Family.


Come on Nick, I expect better.

I know that it isn't popular or cool at the moment to play devils advocate against global warming, hell, even Leonardo De Caprio believes in it now but there is a lot of information around to suggest that what we are seeing are merely reoccurences of natural planetary cycles.

For every piece of western Antartica that breaks up, the eastern shelf expands, record high temps in North America see record lows in South america the same year etc etc. Just becasue Al Gore turns a slick keynote presentation on his 17" mac book pro into a movie doesent nesecarily make it so. Carbon / emission trading is very big business now though and a lot of people are making a lot of money on it, so there is no turning back.

I see it as important to conserve fossil fuels not so much to reduce emissions but because future generations may have a much greater role for them other than dropping off the kids across town in a 5 litre 4WD. The reason this planet has so many wars is because the maximum population based upon current disposition and availability of continental mass in closer to 3 billion, try to squeeze 4 billion into it you get problems - simple. Ironically, the disposition of the continents one million years ago would have supported around 6 billion people if they were around at the time.

CO2 emissions at the end of the day are pretty much small potatoes compared to other effects such as core cooling and stellar dust that have caused ice ages in the past 100,000 years. current models predict global warming - which is a result of a collective of causes to peak around 2012 and remain steady until 2030. Beyond that the trend is towards a mini ice age similar to that experienced around 1000AD. It is worth bearing in mind that that mini ice age was exactly what led to vastly reduced sea levels and hence greater exploration access to many areas of the world now considered extremely vulnerable to increases in sea level in the first place.

User avatar
--++sunstroke++--
Harry the Hat
Posts: 3081
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: the office

Post by --++sunstroke++-- » Thu Mar 13, 2008 2:29 am


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest