BUSH ADMIN ACKNOWLEDGES DAMAGE FROM "GLOBAL WARMING"

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: XFreebie
exactly, these plants love this CO2 stuff, they just eat it right up

Increase Atmospheric Concentration of CO2 + Deforestation = ?

A plant population of a constant size will only remove a fairly consistant ammount of CO2 from the atmosphere. With out enough plants to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, we just create a new standard level of CO2.

Anyone know what % of Oxygen in the air we need to survive?

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: IGBT
Typical national socialist enviroWACO out look.

National Socialists are nazis, in case you didn't know. So I could say, that according to Godwin's Law, you have lost this argument .

BTW: You spelled "outlook" wrong

 

[IGBT]

National Socialists are nazis, in case you didn't know. So I could say, that according to Godwin's Law, you have lost this argument .

Threw that out there for your consumption nemesis77...enjoy.....

 

[IGBT]

National Socialists are nazis, in case you didn't know. So I could say, that according to Godwin's Law, you have lost this argument .

And your right..enviroWACO'S are a bunch of nazi's looking for command authority over your life.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: IGBT

National Socialists are nazis, in case you didn't know. So I could say, that according to Godwin's Law, you have lost this argument .

And your right..enviroWACO'S are a bunch of nazi's looking for command authority over your life.

And like I said, when someone brings Nazis in to a discussion, it usually means that the person is out of valid arguments. And that means that person loses.

Are police nazis too because they enforce a set of laws? They too "command authority over your life". How about lawmakers? Are they nazis too? How about airline-pilots? When you are in a passenger-jet, you can't do whatever pleases you. So they are nazis too I guess... If there was no-one to command authority over your life, you would be living in an anarchy. And like one kid said "Anarchy is a nation where the queen is the king" .

 

[IGBT]

Are police nazis too because they enforce a set of laws? They too "command authority over your life". How about lawmakers? Are they nazis too? How about airline-pilots? When you are in a passenger-jet, you can't do whatever pleases you. So they are nazis too I guess... If there was no-one to command authority over your life, you would be living in an anarchy. And like one kid said "Anarchy is a nation where the queen is the king

Try to stay "on topic" nemesis 77. We're talking about enviro extremists..remember??

 

[LaBang]

I'm done with this thread because people are not willing to have an intelligent conversation. I think it should be locked.

 

[Queasy]

Couple of points:

1) During the 1970s, environmentalists were warning about global cooling.
2) We are actually producing LESS pollutants now than when we were during the 70s.
3) The U.S. in particular has gone a long way towards cleaning the environment, improving technology to produce less pollutants and increasing "greenspace". This is just in the United States mind you.
4) The major polluting countries are now third world countries such as China and Mexico where environmental laws are much looser.
5) The sun is currently experiencing an increase in solar flare activity.


I prefer to be a meat-eater instead of a vegetarian. I'm helping the environment by taking out the CO2 producing animal while the vegetarian is harming the environment by senselessly killing a harmless oxygen producing plant!

 

[busmaster11]

I have aske this question many times before: What caused glaciers to creep into the Great Plains of what is now called the United States of America and what caused those glaciers to recede?

I await your answers.

An ice age. Are you saying we're in the process of retreating from just having concluded one?

I await yours.

 

[IGBT]

Wondering/waiting when the population issue is discussed. Ever increasing populations will negate conservation efforts. Here in the bay area population density is 17k people per square mile and growing. I noticed many of these "green" types have an army of kids. Don't they realize fornicating like a bunny is only adding to the problem and the drain on recourses??

 

[Czar]

nevermind, forgot link will post again

 

[Queasy]

=================================================
Wondering/waiting when the population issue is discussed. Ever increasing populations will negate conservation efforts. Here in the bay area population density is 17k people per square mile and growing. I noticed many of these "green" types have an army of kids. Don't they realize fornicating like a bunny is only adding to the problem and the drain on recourses??
=================================================

Go check out some recent articles from Thomas Sowell on the bay area and real estate costs + density of population. Basically, he is saying that state and local governments are artificially driving up the cost of real estate in the bay area by severely limiting where housing can be built. The result - San Fran is the most expensive city to live in in the United States.

 

[busmaster11]

IGBT - your report is FAKE!!!!! It's unpublished pseudo-scientific BS! Scroll down to a link that says "a pamphlet".

Check out this commentary from a few of the most RENOWNED scientists, including Sherwood Rowland, discoverer 30 years ago that cholorine depletes ozone:
http://naturalscience.com/ns/forum/forum01c.html

Originally posted by: IGBT
ARTHUR B. ROBINSON, SALLIE L. BALIUNAS, WILLIE SOON, AND ZACHARY W. ROBINSON

Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, 2251 Dick George Rd., Cave Junction, Oregon 97523 info@oism.org

George C. Marshall Institute, 1730 K St., NW, Ste 905, Washington, DC 20006 info@marshall.org January 1998

ABSTRACT

A review of the research literature concerning the environmental consequences of increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide leads to the conclusion that increases during the 20th Century have produced no deleterious effects upon global weather, climate, or temperature. Increased carbon dioxide has, however, markedly increased plant growth rates. Predictions of harmful climatic effects due to future increases in minor greenhouse gases like CO2 are in error and do not conform to current experimental knowledge.
Summary

World leaders gathered in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997 to consider a world treaty restricting emissions of ''greenhouse gases,'' chiefly carbon dioxide (CO2), that are thought to cause ''global warming'' severe increases in Earth's atmospheric and surface temperatures, with disastrous environmental consequences. Predictions of global warming are based on computer climate modeling, a branch of science still in its infancy. The empirical evidence actual measurements of Earth's temperature shows no man-made warming trend. Indeed, over the past two decades, when CO2 levels have been at their highest, global average temperatures have actually cooled slightly.

To be sure, CO2 levels have increased substantially since the Industrial Revolution, and are expected to continue doing so. It is reasonable to believe that humans have been responsible for much of this increase. But the effect on the environment is likely to be benign. Greenhouse gases cause plant life, and the animal life that depends upon it, to thrive. What mankind is doing is liberating carbon from beneath the Earth's surface and putting it into the atmosphere, where it is available for conversion into living organisms

 

[Czar]

http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/hies97/k/k.htm
right, now I have the link

 

[Jimbo]

I'm sorta surprised at some of the reactions in this thread. I figured that the leftist/Liberal would applaud the new stance of the Bush Administration and the Rightist/Conservative (like me) would like it because it signals an even greater commitment toward Hydrogen power. We get a cleaner environment and we lessen dependence on foreign energy sources.

 

[XZeroII]

It has been proven that the Greenhouse effect does exist. Whether or not it is adversely affecting the planet has NOT been proven. There is NO way to prove that the average temp on the planet has increased since preindustrial ages because we were not recording the temp back then accuratly, if at all. You may look at antarctica or something, but then you are just looking at one specific area and making a broad generalization. The climate on earth does fluxuate over time. Sometimes it gets warmer, sometimes cooler. Where are we now? Who knows because it can't be seen until after it actually happens. I've seen some stats that say that the temp on earth has raised by 3 degrees C in the past 200 years. Some say a half a degree and they are all scietific studies. What do we do? Average them all? People who actually write these figures are crackpots who don't know what they are doing. It is IMPOSSIBLE to tell what the average temp on earth is or was because there will always be gaps in the data that will cause inconsistancies. What about africa? Or Brazil? Have they been accuratly recording temps for the past 200 years? No. So how can you take that into account when figuring out the average temp of the earth? Ask the people and they will say it was hot a few years back. Ok...ummmm, is that 100 degree hot or like 80 degree hot? In the 60's we had 20 years of oil left. 70's we had only 25 years. 80's we had 30 years. 90's we had a good 35-40 years. Now we have between 50 and 100 years. Hmmm, crackpots?

 

[IGBT]

Movement's prosperity comes at a high price
(First of five parts)
By Tom Knudson
Bee Staff Writer
(Published April 22, 2001)

As a grass-roots conservationist from Oregon, Jack Shipley looked forward to his visit to Washington, D.C., to promote a community-based forest management plan. But when he stepped into the national headquarters of The Wilderness Society, his excitement turned to unease.

"It was like a giant corporation," Shipley said. "Floor after floor after floor, just like Exxon or AT&T."

In San Francisco, Sierra Club board member Chad Hanson experienced a similar letdown when he showed up for a soiree at one of the city's finest hotels in 1997.

"Here I had just been elected to the largest grass-roots environmental group in the world and I am having martinis in the penthouse of the Westin St. Francis," said Hanson, an environmental activist from Pasadena. "What's wrong with this picture? It was surreal."

Soon, Hanson was calling the Sierra Club by a new name: Club Sierra.

Extravagance is not a trait normally linked with environmental groups. The movement's tradition leans toward simplicity, economy and living light on the land. But today, as record sums of money flow to environmental causes, prosperity is pushing tradition aside, and the millions of Americans who support environmental groups are footing the bill.

High-rise offices, ritzy hotels and martinis are but one sign of wider change. Rising executive salaries and fat Wall Street portfolios are another. So, too, is a costly reliance on fund-raising consultants for financial success.

Put the pieces together and you find a movement estranged from its past, one that has come to resemble the corporate world it often seeks to reform.

 

[busmaster11]

IGBT - at best your posts are tangentially relevant to anything we're discussing here. You have no credibility.

Hint: To establish credibility, you may want to enlighten us with some personal insight on how your citations are relevant to global warming. You may also want to defend your views when they are attacked, instead of ignoring them.

No? Thought so. Go be a lamer elsewhere.

 

[IGBT]

IGBT - at best your posts are tangentially relevant to anything we're discussing here. You have no credibility.

Get a grip doll...your not making any sense. And your dizzy comments are embarrassing yourself.

 

[glenn1]

Ouch... this has got to hurt....

Rush Limbaugh is tearing the Bush Administration a new one...

 

[MacBaine]

I prefer to be a meat-eater instead of a vegetarian. I'm helping the environment by taking out the CO2 producing animal while the vegetarian is harming the environment by senselessly killing a harmless oxygen producing plant!

You do know, however, how much food is required to grow one cow large enough for your consumption? A LOT more than you would be eating. Thank you.

 

[tcsenter]

Rush Limbaugh is tearing the Bush Administration a new one...

If you draw the ire of a demagogue and bona fide liar like Rush Limpnuts, you've got to be doing something right. lol!

 

[glenn1]

If you draw the ire of a demagogue and bona fide liar like Rush Limpnuts, you've got to be doing something right. lol!

Right or wrong, not a few million people listen to him and parrot his every word and thought, and because of that, I don't think any President would relish the idea of being on his sh!t list.

 

[Pennstate]

Happy puppy.

Scientists have analyzed the ice cores from the north pole. While you can clearly see patterns prior to 1000 years ago, dramatic changes are seen for the recent years. I think your attitude is you won't believe it until it's "proven", then you should be reminded that the scientific method only disproves hypothesis. Overwhelming evidence exists the environmental conditions for the past 200 years do not fit the cycle. These factors are not just temperature.

 

[Pennstate]

IGBT, if you are going to attempt to argue, at least find CREDIBLE PEER-REVIEWED sources!

Here's a link for starters: www.pubmed.gov


Think tanks that name themselves as if they are a REAL scientific institution don't count!