Recently Active Forum Topics:

Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 112, 113, 114 ... 131, 132, 133 Next

lowelltr

lowelltr Avatar

Location: Cardinal Nation
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 27, 2009 - 10:49am
hippiechick wrote: Especially that part about running out of water. "Water is the new oil." The earth CANNOT "run out of water" - its a closed system. Nothing escapes the atmosphere, not hydrogen nor oxygen. Except for some astronaut pee and a few other "drops in the bucket", the earth has the EXACT same amount of water that it has had for millenia......

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2009 - 7:57am

miamizsun wrote:

Me personally, I like to know the truth. All of it.

Preferably from people I trust. (In my experience it has always yielded better results.)

Which begs me to consider the source.

All of the credible scientific data I've seen indicates that there is a lag in C02 cycle from 500 to 1000 years.

C02 follows the warming, it doesn't precede it.

Would you agree that manipulating data (all data, not just climate) to fit the political model is standard operating procedure for politicians?

Do you not see that theme in all of politics?

Regards

sirdroseph wrote:

I would never be in charge therefore it is not my place to implement poltical policy, what I can do is to recycle and lower my energy consumption the best I can on a personal level and what I won't do is politicize such an important issue by decrying the existence of climate change and dwell on buerocratic driven corruption that always exists regardless of the social issue. I agree there are cycles the Earth goes through regardless of our consumption, but I also know that C02 emissions accelerate the warming of the planet and that humans emit massive amounts of it therefore we should be looking at ways for us to reduce emissions and quite frankly that is all I need to know.

Yes, I do. {#Yes}

miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2009 - 7:51am

sirdroseph wrote:

I would never be in charge therefore it is not my place to implement poltical policy, what I can do is to recycle and lower my energy consumption the best I can on a personal level and what I won't do is politicize such an important issue by decrying the existence of climate change and dwell on buerocratic driven corruption that always exists regardless of the social issue. I agree there are cycles the Earth goes through regardless of our consumption, but I also know that C02 emissions accelerate the warming of the planet and that humans emit massive amounts of it therefore we should be looking at ways for us to reduce emissions and quite frankly that is all I need to know.

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2009 - 7:12am

miamizsun wrote:

Joe, what is the human impact of climate change, specifically?

I agree we need to clean up the pollution.

But the planet has been going through these cycles for billions of years (I've posted evidence, charts etc.).

The Carbon Derivatives & Tax scheme is the end result.

Ask yourself if you were in charge what you'd do?

miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2009 - 6:11am

sirdroseph wrote:

This is the crux of the situation; Two men are in a boat that is starting to sink, one man is arguing with the other that he does not like the way that he bails and is not sure if they should be bailing in the first place seeing how it was not their fault the ship is sinking! {#Eek}

If you think there is fraud in the climate change community and are wary of their methods, fine, but don't you think our time would be better spent on finding a better way to lessen human impact which is intensifying an already natural process to the extent that it poses a serious threat to our species survival? {#Stupid}

Southern_Boy

Southern_Boy Avatar

Location: On my way to the beach
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2009 - 6:06am
HazzeSwede wrote: China man is slowly but surely taking over the planet,,leading world power now,IMHO ! Oh,,and Merry Christmas,,all ! We'll have to bomb the shit out of 'em so we can reestablish the world order.

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2009 - 5:46am

HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2009 - 12:19am

MrsHobieJoe wrote:

I found this quite an interesting article. I didn't follow the talks in enough detail to filter the information well so I odn't have a feel for how accurate it is.

How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room

As recriminations fly post-Copenhagen, one writer offers a fly-on-the-wall account of how talks failed

Ed Miliband: China tried to hijack climate deal

The key players and how they rated

Copenhagen was a disaster. That much is agreed. But the truth about what actually happened is in danger of being lost amid the spin and inevitable mutual recriminations. The truth is this: China wrecked the talks, intentionally humiliated Barack Obama, and insisted on an awful "deal" so western leaders would walk away carrying the blame. How do I know this? Because I was in the room and saw it happen.

China's strategy was simple: block the open negotiations for two weeks, and then ensure that the closed-door deal made it look as if the west had failed the world's poor once again. And sure enough, the aid agencies, civil society movements and environmental groups all took the bait. The failure was "the inevitable result of rich countries refusing adequately and fairly to shoulder their overwhelming responsibility", said Christian Aid. "Rich countries have bullied developing nations," fumed Friends of the Earth International. MORE FROM THE GUARDIAN

China man is slowly but surely tak

ing over the planet,,leading world power now,IMHO !
Oh,,and Merry Christmas,,all !

xmas-smiley-4605 by HazzeSwede, on Flickr

miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 5:01pm

Lazy8 wrote:

miamizsun wrote:

not one bleedin' comment on this?

Um, nice tie?

It's appalling, but I don't have anything to add. The Medieval Warm Period is there (along with a notice that editing is locked until 12/25 due to vandalism), as is the Little Ice Age (which is particularly thorough and well-sourced). The IPCC's treatment of these events (including their waffling and dissembling about the earth's climate history) is described in this article.

Connolley's activity on Wikipedia has its own section in the article on him. It includes this:

A July 2006 article in The New Yorker reported that Connolley briefly became "a victim of an edit war over the entry on global warming", in which a skeptic repeatedly "watered down" the article's explanation of the greenhouse effect.<9> The skeptic later brought the case before Wikipedia's arbitration committee, claiming that Connolley was pushing his own point of view in the article by removing material with opposing viewpoints. The arbitration committee imposed a "humiliating one-revert-a-day" editing restriction on Connolley. Wikipedia "gives no privilege to those who know what they're talking about", Connolley told The New Yorker.<9> The restriction was later revoked, and Connolley went on to serve as a Wikipedia administrator from January 2006<9> until the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee revoked his administrator status on 13 September 2009.

Nothing on Wikipedia is permanent, not even a lie.

I noticed a ton of stuff he worked on were recently edited, some as recent as yesterday.

Lazy8

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 4:40pm
Manbird wrote: I edited the article about you so that it says the length of your inseam is 41 inches. I don't think anyone's corrected it yet. You'll find a little something extra in your stocking this year. Or your hat, wherever they'll hold still.

Manbird

Manbird Avatar

Location: La Villa Toscana
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 4:30pm

Lazy8 wrote:

miamizsun wrote:

not one bleedin' comment on this?

Nothing on Wikipedia is permanent, not even a lie.

I edited the article about you so that it says the length of your inseam is 41 inches. I don't think anyone's corrected it yet.

ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 3:46pm
miamizsun wrote: not one bleedin' comment on this? I didn't see it the first time you posted it but it's old news so I probably would have ignored it anyway.

callum

callum Avatar

Location: its wet, windy and chilly....take a guess
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 3:33pm

lowelltr wrote:

I find it fascinating marketing that this bogus campaign is now called "climate change" rather than the previous "global warming".....
Debunked? Doubters? That's OK - just rename it and resell it......will they stop at nothing to get their hands on tax dollars???!! {#Grumpy}

That is because global warming was a term used by the media when early long term climate models predicted global rises in average surface temperature. This did not correspond to warmer weather in all countries; for instance the melting of the ice caps slows the gulf stream, potentially giving Britain a climate closer to Canada. Who exactly is going to get their hnds on your taxes? Power companies that invest in wind turbines as opposed to ones with gas? Engineers working on renewable energy who would otherwise be working on aircraft engines?

Lazy8

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 3:23pm

miamizsun wrote:

not one bleedin' comment on this?

Nothing on Wikipedia is permanent, not even a lie.

musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 3:06pm

miamizsun wrote:

not one bleedin' comment on this?

miamizsun wrote:

Wikibullies at work. The National Post exposes broad trust issues over Wikipedia climate information.

and this

Lawrence Solomon: Wikipedia's climate doctor.

All told, Connolley created or rewrote 5,428 unique Wikipedia articles. His control over Wikipedia was greater still, however, through the role he obtained at Wikipedia as a website administrator, which allowed him to act with virtual impunity. When Connolley didn't like the subject of a certain article, he removed it - more than 500 articles of various descriptions disappeared at his hand. When he disapproved of the arguments that others were making, he often had them barred - over 2,000 Wikipedia contributors who ran afoul of him found themselves blocked from making further contributions. Acolytes whose writing conformed to Connolley's global warming views, in contrast, were rewarded with Wikipedia's blessings. In these ways, Connolley turned Wikipedia into the missionary wing of the global warming movement.

The Medieval Warm Period disappeared, as did criticism of the global warming orthodoxy. With the release of the Climategate Emails, the disappearing trick has been exposed. The glorious Medieval Warm Period will remain in the history books, perhaps with an asterisk to describe how a band of zealots once tried to make it disappear.

Read more: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/12/18/370719.aspx#ixzz0aT81n3Pp
The National Post is now on Facebook. Join our fan community today.

Connolley has been a busy boy. {#Whisper}

Wiki would be a very useful tool for finding information if it were straight up...I have found numerous and sometimes glaring errors in the arena of US History. But, I still use Wiki...

miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 2:19pm

not one bleedin' comment on this?

miamizsun wrote:

Read more: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/12/18/370719.aspx#ixzz0aT81n3Pp
The National Post is now on Facebook. Join our fan community today.

Connolley has been a busy boy. {#Whisper}

MrsHobieJoe

MrsHobieJoe Avatar

Location: somewhere in Europe
Gender: Female

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 1:28pm

I found this quite an interesting article. I didn't follow the talks in enough detail to filter the information well so I odn't have a feel for how accurate it is.

How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room

As recriminations fly post-Copenhagen, one writer offers a fly-on-the-wall account of how talks failed

Ed Miliband: China tried to hijack climate deal

The key players and how they rated

Welly

Location: Lotusland
Gender: Female

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 1:21pm

hippiechick

hippiechick Avatar

Location: topsy turvy land
Gender: Female

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 1:10pm
sirdroseph wrote: Yea, that is all that it is about, nothing is wrong at all, everything is fine. It is nothing but a conspiracy to get their hands on your tax dollars. Nothing to see here people, just move on (head in sand), continue doing what you are doing and everything will be just fine! Especially that part about running out of water. "Water is the new oil."

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 23, 2009 - 1:07pm

lowelltr wrote:

Yea, that is all that it is about, nothing is wrong at all, everything is fine. It is nothing but a conspiracy to get their hands on your tax dollars. Nothing to see here people, just move on (head in sand), continue doing what you are doing and everything will be just fine! {#Rolleyes}

Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 112, 113, 114 ... 131, 132, 133 Next

I found this quite an interesting article. I didn't follow the talks in enough detail to filter the information well so I odn't have a feel for how accurate it is.How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room

I found this quite an interesting article. I didn't follow the talks in enough detail to filter the information well so I odn't have a feel for how accurate it is.How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room

I found this quite an interesting article. I didn't follow the talks in enough detail to filter the information well so I odn't have a feel for how accurate it is.

How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room

I found this quite an interesting article. I didn't follow the talks in enough detail to filter the information well so I odn't have a feel for how accurate it is.

How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room