Very good Bub. You left out a poignant quote.
"Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one
thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry,
high-altitude polar winds the so-called circumpolar vortex"
Perhaps Higgs can run this stuff through his grammar checker and see if
it should have any effect on his mental illness...
On 9/5/2011 7:53 AM, email@example.com wrote:
That is right, I not be satisfied until we stop trying to fix the minute
problems that have little to no return. Samples of what went on
thousands of years ago will never show a true picture and deductions
from those samples will always only be speculative.
The difference here is that we actually know that smoking contributes to
lung cancer cancer. Absolutely nothing has been proven by data from
samples of prehistoric ice concerning climate change being caused by
man.. Again it is all speculative.
On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 16:57:31 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard
Do you consider Science to be respectable? http://goo.gl/N2j1Q
http://goo.gl/RPxcR CO2 Science
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw
On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 17:42:00 -0500, Swingman wrote:
You're asking for a rational explanation of human behavior? Lotsa' luck
It's what happens with any issue that will cost somebody money.
A. Science comes out with some prediction that we need to do something
about a problem.
B. A group determines the solution will cost them money and starts a
propaganda campaign to prevent that.
C. Some political group believes the propaganda (or is paid to believe
it) and start writing letters to the editor and fulminating on talk shows
and in Congress (or the local equivalent).
D. Their political opponents immediately take the opposite position.
Usually, nobody on either side has taken time to determine if the
original prediction was true or false or somewhere in between.
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw
This is where the AGW proponents go off the rails. It is of only academic
interest exactly WHAT is causing the warming, there is NOTHING that can
reasonably be done to mitigate it. Proposals to limit greenhouse gasses, use
renewable resources, and the like will have a miniscule effect on GW while
reducing civilization to a hunter-gatherer society. Or at least cause our
Netflix subscriptions to increase again.
Brain power could be put to better use by suggesting ways to deal with the
(possible) effects of global warming (pre-fab dikes around coastal cities,
heat-resistant crops, more efficient air conditioning, etc.).
Unless, of course, the same people who promote the notion of AGW are also
Luddites. For example, has ANY AGW proponent calculated how many trees need
to be planted to act as sufficient carbon sinks, thereby offsetting the
industrial age? How many, you say? None?
Well, there you are.
Boys, it isn't that complicated. The forces that want to cast doubt
on the scientifically proven phenomenon of global warming are
operating strictly on pragmatic (to them) financial motivation.
People's health and lives, even those of their own family, don't
If the US govt and peoples of the world really try to stop global
warming before the tipping point,** the Big Corporate Polluters and
their behind-the-scenes financiers (like the Marshall Institute which
I repeatedly cite) fear that they may suffer economic damage, and that
their shareholders may desert them. So they make sophisticated and so
far successful efforts to confuse the public, even smart people.
So our choice is pathetically simple: Do something now, or it will be
If we do something, we may save ourselves.
If we keep listening to sophisticated, money-motivated propaganda, we
may wake up from our dream too late.
A command economy like China, e.g. can act -- though they have ****ed
up their environment perhaps beyond redemption.
But a democracy (really, now, a plutocracy), has a much harder row to
hoe, given the overweening power of Big Money to confuse the voters.
(and the lame executive supposed to be in charge!!!)
*** Some climate scientists warn that we may be past the tipping
I just don't see it's that complicated. We the people do have the
power to influence events. Depends whether we can stop kidding
As if there are not also powerful forces making
loads of money off of alleged solutions to
global warming. Everyone
from Al Gore to the industries getting subsidized to
produce energy solutions that don't emit CO2, to
companies supposedly planting trees in some forest
in some third world country.
You want us to believe that replacing
all the world's coal power plants, all the world's
cars, heat generation eqpt, etc doesn't equal
Let's look at some other govt efforts where just like
with global warming, govt claims to have science
on their side. In 1978 George McGovern's Senate
committee put out a report saying that the science
was irrefutable. Saturated fat was bad and killing
us all. We were to start replacing regular fat with
transfat, which was safe and good for you.
Within a few years the
govt had dietary guidelines that said stop eating
meat, replace butter with margarine made with
transfat. They created a food pyramid that relied
heavily on carbs. We were supposed to eat bread
On;y thing wrong with that was that it was, well
wrong. Now we realize transfats are one of the
worst things you could eat. A diet high in carbs'
and loaded with transfats has created an
epidemic in obesity, heart disease, and diabetes.
Now, govt is in turn banning transfats and warning
about carbs. And so it goes.
Simple question. Since the world is in direct
and immediate danger, are you in favor of
immediately building as many new nuclear
power plants as possible? Yes or no.
They are acting. They are reaping the rewards of all
the world's business that is coming their way to get
around the stiff environmental regulations in other
See the above question.
It is that complicated as HeyBub has pointed out. The
cost of going full out on eliminating CO2 emissions is
enormous. It will cost trillions of dollars and trillions of
lives. Lives, you ask? How so? The engine that has
lifted man out of poverty is economic growth. Every
time you reduce economic growth by putting more
burdens on it makes it that
much tougher everywhere around the world. Just
ask the additional people who are starving in Africa
right now because the cost of grain has been tripled
worldwide by the govt diversion of grain for green
In other worrds, if you're going to go all out on
this because we're all going to die from global
warming you better be right. And given govts
track record, some of us are just a bit skeptical.
At the time there were certainly dissenting voices. Maybe the margarine
industry was behind it <grin>. However, it is undoubtedly true that
saturated fats are bad for you. I'd rather look at the transfat as a
result of the laws of unintended consequences.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.