when a volcano erupts it puts out a HUGE amount of emmisions like some crazy number like what the u.s. does in a decade or some such. a volcano is a natural occurance correct?? did man create the last ice age also?? did man cause glaciers to come scrapping across the land and remodeling the terrian??? climate changes have been going on since whenever this planet came about and i am pretty sure its going to continue whether we are here or not. its like saying that man creates a tornado..... natural occurance!!!....... the comment above about the huge ships putting out the most emmisions is entirely true but no one is doing anything about that.....
Some Inconvenient Facts About An Inconvenient Truth
- Thread starter 85 Cutlass Brougham
- Start date
- Status
i'm sorry but that has to be one of the dumbest connections anyone has ever made! it's all bush's fault, huh? he went back in time to the 70's and forced nixon to deal with china, he made bill clinton ignore the copyright infringements, the outright theft of phone and VCR etc. designs, he made the entire world ignore the blatant civil right violations (and i'm going by china's laws, not ours) and the brutalites carried out against tibet, the theft of nuclear and military secrets. these examples are all off the top of my head too. there are $h!t loads more. stop blaming the last person in the presidency. they've been talking about global warming for 30years (watch soylent green), they've been complaining about the recession since at least around '96. these issues predate G.W. Bush. for christs sake people blame him for a damn hurricane!!!! i'm sure he just called NOAA and said "i wanna screw over some black people, order me up a hurricane"
as to the earth adapting--you know how many times the planet has been hit by a "global killer" meteor? life went on! there is extremely strong evidence in the palentological record of rapid climate changes, both warm and cold. animals adapt or die--they don't plan ahead of time!
85cutlass: more example you're looking for---the young octoborists, the pioneers (a soviet "environmental" kids group), and china's cultural revolution--"the little red book"
Also, where is this evidence for polar bear extinction? Just because someone has seen a few dead ones means nothing. If you are basing all of your belief in the religion of global warming on Al Gore's book or movie, perhaps you should try finding something with well-documented sources instead. Don't just believe everything you are told by numerous media entities without doing your own investigations to verify their sources. Remember that if you tell a lie enough times to enough people sooner or later it becomes the "truth"-even though it is not true. It also must be noted that the media has no interest in telling the truth, unless it gets ratings. Today, that is all that matters. Fear sells news. No one will watch a show that tells them that there is nothing wrong. Human beings need a certain amount of misery and fear in order to feel alive. I may sound cynical, but after years of viewing what is sold as news, I have learned to take things with a grain of salt. The news is a product, just like the rest of the media. After all, in this day and age, religion is no longer the "opiate of the masses" : Entertainment is.
It is also part of the limited scope of most people's minds to believe that things will always be as they now are and if they are not, it is all of man's doing. Politicians clamoring for power know how to manipulate the fears of the middle class, and those fears can be summed up in one word: Instability. Make the middle class fear an instability in their own glorious little beige existence, and you can control their actions. After all, the majority of actual voting power lies with the middle class as most in the lower classes are typically too ignorant to care about voting, and the upper classes do not posses large enough numbers to over ride the middle. Thus, this whole thing has been launched as a scheme to allow a failed Marxist ideology to remove personal freedoms from frightened middle class people who otherwise would not surrender such things. Fear, after all, is a much stronger force than love when dealing with politics. Much of what is published on the subject is printed in middle class publications, or programmed on middle class cable networks like Discovery, TLC and National Geographic. This allows them a false sense of superiority and understanding while never really giving them both sides of the issue.
Given the tenor of my arguments here you would think that I believe nothing should be done about pollution. You would be wrong. I do not support the dumping of toxic waste in rivers, or the ground. I believe the particulate emissions of large factories and trucks need to be curtailed in real ways--not just by selling bullshit offsets for crushing old cars, or paying timber companies to replant their crops that would have been planted anyways. I also would love to see low cost solar come into existence and reduce the need for our fossil fuel electricity infrastructure. I am all for genetically engineering plants that can rapidly produce bio-fuels and get us off of foreign oil. I do believe there are responsible improvements to efficiency we can achieve that will both lower energy costs and pollution. In fact, I have started posts on this forum regarding solar and renewable fuels. I just don't like the lies being put forth to force me into sacrificing what little I have in the name of climate change.
It is also part of the limited scope of most people's minds to believe that things will always be as they now are and if they are not, it is all of man's doing. Politicians clamoring for power know how to manipulate the fears of the middle class, and those fears can be summed up in one word: Instability. Make the middle class fear an instability in their own glorious little beige existence, and you can control their actions. After all, the majority of actual voting power lies with the middle class as most in the lower classes are typically too ignorant to care about voting, and the upper classes do not posses large enough numbers to over ride the middle. Thus, this whole thing has been launched as a scheme to allow a failed Marxist ideology to remove personal freedoms from frightened middle class people who otherwise would not surrender such things. Fear, after all, is a much stronger force than love when dealing with politics. Much of what is published on the subject is printed in middle class publications, or programmed on middle class cable networks like Discovery, TLC and National Geographic. This allows them a false sense of superiority and understanding while never really giving them both sides of the issue.
Given the tenor of my arguments here you would think that I believe nothing should be done about pollution. You would be wrong. I do not support the dumping of toxic waste in rivers, or the ground. I believe the particulate emissions of large factories and trucks need to be curtailed in real ways--not just by selling bullshit offsets for crushing old cars, or paying timber companies to replant their crops that would have been planted anyways. I also would love to see low cost solar come into existence and reduce the need for our fossil fuel electricity infrastructure. I am all for genetically engineering plants that can rapidly produce bio-fuels and get us off of foreign oil. I do believe there are responsible improvements to efficiency we can achieve that will both lower energy costs and pollution. In fact, I have started posts on this forum regarding solar and renewable fuels. I just don't like the lies being put forth to force me into sacrificing what little I have in the name of climate change.
Oh, and jatguit, if you are so concerned about global warming, why do you choose to drive vehicles with poor fuel economy? I would expect that you would have nothing larger than a 2 liter engined economy car if you were so concerned about carbon emissions. a 1.5 or 1.6 liter 5 speed Sentra, Civic, Protege, etc. would get around 30 mpg in city driving compared to the 15-18 you are getting in the most economical car you have listed in your sig. If you want us all to lead by example, why not start with yourself? Don't worry though. I am sure the "Green Scarves" will expose your hypocrisy in the near future and help to re-educate you so that you turn from your polluting ways.
The hypocracy of the "greenys" is enough to make me puke, Their solutions for the "indesputable" fact of MANMADE global climate change (there is open mindedness for you) Only effects others i.e. AlGores mansion, private jet trips, motorcades ... His carbon footprint is as big as his ego, and yet he goes on good morning america to tell me to use flourescent lights in MY home! BTW Prez Bushes Crawford Texas home is very "green" but you wont hear any acolades from BIGFATALGORE on that one.
I have always found their hypocracy interesting. Hollywood goes to all of it's nonsense awards shows in gigantic limos, lives in huge houses, etc. but they all want to tell me to live in a one room apartment with no A/C and only use public transportation. They also rail against the beef industry as producing excessive methane due to bovine flatulence, but few of them dare to live a pure vegetarian or vegan lifestyle. As for green-ness, I have all compact fluorescent bulbs, choose the most energy efficient appliances in my price range, and would drive a more fuel efficient car right now if I could afford the $500-1000 it would cost me. I have also looked into solar electricity for my home (and found it too expensive), and even explored the possibility of building a veggie fuel Diesel Mercedes or VW. For me, it's about saving money though, so I guess I don't qualify as "green". Frankly, I do not see hybrid cars as being particularly green since they are so expensive to repair that it is more economically feasible to just replace them than fix them in a lot of cases-especially their CVT transmissions. Plus the cost of batteries, etc. means that their life cycle is no more environmentally friendly than other technologies. After all, green is more about fashion than real change for the majority of so-called environmentalists. That's why the Prius is more popular than say, the Civic Hybrid. Both are about the same functionally, but the Prius is more noticeable. And amongst the environmental Pharisees, everything is about outward appearances and not actual substinative changes.
I think all of you have some valid points, but that just my opinion or 2cents worth.
They claim the earth is a living planet growing changing on a daily basis if you were to grasp that the earth is billions of years old we as ahuman race are a spec of dirt compared to the earth. there is no way we(human race) will completely exhaust all of our planets resources or completly destroy the planet. we may destroy the human race (nuclear war) but the planet will prosper as it has done for billions of years.
in my own opinion I have done some things to conserve our planets resources or as I look at it keep some hard earned cash in my pocket. changed my light bulbs in the house and keep my house at a cool 70 degrees all year round. oh yeah change my oil at 4500 miles, go to the race track every other weekend instead of every weekend, and order my fuel from torco in 55 gallon drums(save about 150 bucks a month) vs.buying at the pump.
what the whole global warming thing is about, again this is my own opinion is money....if they were truly concerned about global warming world wide then auto manufactures would produce all there vehicles with emission controls. but if I were to post some gm part numbers up you could turn your car into a non catalyst vehicle from the head pipes with out cats(yes gm produces them for exported vehicles) even fuel filler necks made to except leaded nozzles, the list goes on and on as do the part numbers that support my rant. so again this is all about the money.
They claim the earth is a living planet growing changing on a daily basis if you were to grasp that the earth is billions of years old we as ahuman race are a spec of dirt compared to the earth. there is no way we(human race) will completely exhaust all of our planets resources or completly destroy the planet. we may destroy the human race (nuclear war) but the planet will prosper as it has done for billions of years.
in my own opinion I have done some things to conserve our planets resources or as I look at it keep some hard earned cash in my pocket. changed my light bulbs in the house and keep my house at a cool 70 degrees all year round. oh yeah change my oil at 4500 miles, go to the race track every other weekend instead of every weekend, and order my fuel from torco in 55 gallon drums(save about 150 bucks a month) vs.buying at the pump.
what the whole global warming thing is about, again this is my own opinion is money....if they were truly concerned about global warming world wide then auto manufactures would produce all there vehicles with emission controls. but if I were to post some gm part numbers up you could turn your car into a non catalyst vehicle from the head pipes with out cats(yes gm produces them for exported vehicles) even fuel filler necks made to except leaded nozzles, the list goes on and on as do the part numbers that support my rant. so again this is all about the money.
Also, if we were really that concerned about fuel efficiency, we would relax our collision standards and allow some of the super efficient cars from abroad. Cars like the VW Lupo diesel (70+mpg), and Japan's Kei class cars come to mind. They are super small, but the 660cc KEI cars are also very efficient in their use of urban space (which is why they exist) and in how much fuel they consume. Look also at the Nissan Tsuru sold In Mexico. It is essentially the 91-94 US Sentra with the same 1.6 liter engine, etc. It is also more efficient than the current Sentra or Versa. And, it sells for $7500, new. Plus, it is a very reliable car at a price that most low income people could conceivably afford. However, we expect too much in car design here as the needs of safety and fuel economy are very much at odds. Idiots in large SUV's and full size trucks make it scary not to drive a vehicle with similar tonnage, so they have become popular. I do not support banning SUV's, but I would support a more stringent class of license requirement for anyone wishing to operate one on public highways.
- Status
