Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Climate Change Denier comes in from the cold: SCIENCE!!!
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(7)
Message 106 of 944 (750691)
02-20-2015 8:54 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by marc9000
02-20-2015 8:47 PM


Re: steps to take
I see no increases in government.
We will measure the success or failure based on the relative impact on US citizens over the next 100 years.
AbE:
marc9000 writes:
In other words, elect Democrats! Surrender freedom! Ignore the 10th amendment!
Well, as a long term Republican (since I worked as campaign manager for Ike in a class mock convention) I must point out that there is not a single current Republican candidate that would make a pimple on Goldwater or Rockefeller or Roosevelt or Eisenhower or Nixon's ass. They are all simply pathetic little fascists licking the soles of their masters boots.
But no, there is no need to surrender any freedoms and certainly no threat to the 10th. Amendment.
And I'd love to see even a single Republican candidate at any level of government that was not just simpering whore or who showed even a modest capability of rational thought.
I think it is disgusting and pathetically pitiful how far the Grand Old Party has fallen since the Reagan coup and Christian Fascist takeover.
Edited by jar, : see AbE:

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by marc9000, posted 02-20-2015 8:47 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 107 of 944 (750702)
02-21-2015 2:02 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by marc9000
02-20-2015 8:30 PM


What action do I propose to "do something" about my fear of a future financial crisis? And here's my answer - THE U.S. GOVERNMENT SHOULD STOP BORROWING MONEY. Do you have any answers to global warming that are that direct and simple?
In other words, you are not personally going to do anything about your fear of a future crisis. You want the government to fix the problem while you go on doing what you do. On the other hand, you want people who are concerned about global warming to take on the problem strictly by taking personal actions.
No, I don't have a solution for global climate change that involves a bunch of people sitting on their butts ranting about government spending all the while sucking off the government teat. But then, I don't think that's a great way to judge a solution.

Je Suis Charlie
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by marc9000, posted 02-20-2015 8:30 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by frako, posted 02-21-2015 6:09 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied
 Message 121 by marc9000, posted 02-22-2015 8:51 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 108 of 944 (750712)
02-21-2015 7:45 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by marc9000
02-20-2015 8:18 PM


marc9000 writes:
Many posters in this thread have indicated that "something must be done", to combat/control global warming. But there have been no examples.
I can give you examples from my country.
One way is to go the nuclear . The idea is to not only built new nuclear power stations, but also to replace existing coal fired power stations with nuclear stations at the end of their life-spans. This is not an ideal way, but it is a lot better as far as greenhouse gases are concerned.
quote:
Russia's atomic energy agency said Monday it will provide up to eight nuclear reactors to South Africa by 2023 in a $50-billion strategic partnership between the two countries. One reactor costs around $5 billion, according to the Itar-Tass news agency.
Tina Joemat-Pettersson, minister of energy and Sergey Kirienko, the Director General of the State Atomic Energy Corporation ROSATOM signed the agreement on the sidelines of the 58th session of the International Atomic Energy Agency General Conference in Vienna.
The agreement will underpin the country’s nuclear power plant construction programme with new nuclear power plants featuring Russian VVER reactors with total installed capacity of up to 9,6 GW (up to 8 nuclear power plant units).
The agreement will cover joint nuclear power plant construction and also research and education collaboration.
  —source
Climate change is addressed in the last paragraph.
quote:
He also mentioned that one of the things South Africa has to do is reduce dependence on coal to reduce carbon footprint to meet targets regarding climate change.
SA also has the huge problem that easily accessible and obtainable coal resources and reserves are running out rapidly. The result is that alternatives for coal have to be found urgently anyway.
Alternative energy would be the ideal, but the technologies involved in using alternative energies as a baseline (instead of coal and nuclear) are just not available yet.
While existing, proven technologies are utilised, a lot of research on alternative energies are being conducted. One of the major organisations involved is Sanedi. Solar farms, wind farms, etc. have been opened with the accompanying research in improving the technologies.
One of the units at the second largest coal fired power station in the country has already been converted to be fired by Underground Coal Gasification (UCG). Sasol has been running a pilot project utilising UCG on one of their major plants (converting UCG into chemicals). The major greenhouse gases get captured instead of being released into the atmosphere.
Futhermore, a lot of research and exploration is being done on shale gas and CBM.
marc9000 writes:
What suggestions do you have? Fossil fuels seem to be the target.
Actually, coal and oil would be targets for the simple reason that they are the main culprits. Coal is a lot more detrimental to the atmosphere than the gases extracted from the earth. Simple chemistry.
marc9000 writes:
What steps should be taken to cut back their use? Do any of your proposals NOT involve politics?
Well, in my country large swaths of the population not having electricity would be very detrimental to the chances of the ruling party getting voted back into power (excuse the pun)
Edited by Pressie, : Added sentence

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by marc9000, posted 02-20-2015 8:18 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by marc9000, posted 02-22-2015 9:16 PM Pressie has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 109 of 944 (750718)
02-21-2015 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 103 by marc9000
02-20-2015 8:42 PM


Show your figures.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by marc9000, posted 02-20-2015 8:42 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 110 of 944 (750727)
02-21-2015 11:28 AM


Personal lifestyle changes
So above I listed some communal changes I'd like to see the US adopt.
In my own life I also try to do things that will reduce may contributions to global warming.
I drive much less; use my bicycle more.
I take bags to the store when shopping.
When I change or upgrade appliances I try to get more energy efficient ones.
I changed out the heating and AC at home for a CFC free high efficiency unit even though I may not live long enough to recoup the cost.
I use only cold water clothes washing and do fewer but larger loads. Also returned to sun drying.
I wash dishes by hand and stopped using the dishwasher.
I have moved to LED lighting.
In winter I set the thermostat to mid-high 70s and in summer to low-mid 80s. This significantly lowers heating and AC usage. AC still runs a bunch during the summer.
I try to always turn out lights when I am not using them.
In all they are small efforts and certainly insignificant to the overall picture but reasonable.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Theodoric, posted 02-22-2015 12:30 PM jar has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 111 of 944 (750746)
02-21-2015 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by marc9000
02-20-2015 7:23 PM


They have a reason to lie, the oldest reason in the world. Power and money.
Looks like you and a bunch of other denialists got scammed
Ultimate Wealth Report - Ultimate Wealth Report - Real Asset Investing to Fight Inflation
Gotta love those conspiracy theorists and their patsies.
What in the world does this investment guru's advertising have to do with this thread?
Don't you even read and investigate your own sources? This site:
Is your "investment guru's" page of falsehoods about climate change ...
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by marc9000, posted 02-20-2015 7:23 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by marc9000, posted 02-22-2015 9:20 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 112 of 944 (750753)
02-21-2015 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by NoNukes
02-21-2015 2:02 AM


No, I don't have a solution for global climate change
Geneticly engineer an organism that thrives on crude oil and changes it in to something we cant burn for fuel. Then infect all oil fields with the bug. Now i know many would die because of the sudden lack of energy on the market, but my guess is that number would be less then what we are going to have to face with climate change.
Once the supply is gone humanity will find a way to live without fossil fuels in a short amount of time.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by NoNukes, posted 02-21-2015 2:02 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


(3)
Message 113 of 944 (750760)
02-21-2015 9:44 PM


Climate change denial bought and paid for
New York Times writes:
But newly released documents show the extent to which Dr. Soon’s work has been tied to funding he received from corporate interests.
He has accepted more than $1.2 million in money from the fossil-fuel industry over the last decade while failing to disclose that conflict of interest in most of his scientific papers. At least 11 papers he has published since 2008 omitted such a disclosure, and in at least eight of those cases, he appears to have violated ethical guidelines of the journals that published his work.
Deeper Ties to Corporate Cash for Doubtful Climate Researcher

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by marc9000, posted 02-22-2015 9:24 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 114 of 944 (750775)
02-22-2015 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by jar
02-21-2015 11:28 AM


Re: Personal lifestyle changes
A dishwasher is actually more energy efficient than hand washing.
Built-In Dishwashers Versus Hand-Washing: Which Is Greener?
Dishwashers | ENERGY STAR

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by jar, posted 02-21-2015 11:28 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by jar, posted 02-22-2015 12:34 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 115 of 944 (750776)
02-22-2015 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Theodoric
02-22-2015 12:30 PM


Re: Personal lifestyle changes
That depends on how you do it.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Theodoric, posted 02-22-2015 12:30 PM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by RAZD, posted 02-22-2015 4:07 PM jar has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 116 of 944 (750796)
02-22-2015 4:07 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by jar
02-22-2015 12:34 PM


Re: Personal lifestyle changes
Let your dog lick the plates clean, rinse and let dry.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by jar, posted 02-22-2015 12:34 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by jar, posted 02-22-2015 5:17 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 117 of 944 (750800)
02-22-2015 5:17 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by RAZD
02-22-2015 4:07 PM


Re: Personal lifestyle changes
Yup. And the kitties love to dry them.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by RAZD, posted 02-22-2015 4:07 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
glowby
Member
Posts: 75
From: Fox River Grove, IL
Joined: 05-29-2010


(1)
Message 118 of 944 (750807)
02-22-2015 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by marc9000
02-20-2015 8:18 PM


glowby writes:
You deny GW is real.
marc9000 writes:
I don't deny that it's real.
Then why do you post arguments denying it's real?: Message 15, Message 24, Message 25, Message 27, Message 36, Message 42, Message 49, Message 91. Most of your other comments attempt to cast spurious doubt on the science, like the old denier stand-by, "Scientists get paid, therefore they're dishonest." Message 103
Are we to assume that you are now convinced that GW is real?
marc9000 writes:
What suggestions do you have?
I suggest that you use facts and evidence to decide whether GW is real, rather than blindly accepting the words of the politicians to whom you're devoted. I also suggest you stop complaining that politics has gotten involved in the issue while at the same time emulating politicians with statements like this...
marc9000 writes:
Fossil fuels seem to be the target.
Seem to be? It has made headlines over and over. Fossil fuel use is the cause of the problem. Of course it's the primary target.
marc9000 writes:
What steps should be taken to cut back their use? ... I'd like to see you list and justify actions to remedy it.
Summarized nicely by jar in Message 102 and Message 110, and Pressie in Message 108, and others.
marc9000 writes:
Do any of your proposals NOT involve politics?
The main proposal I've made to you is to stop denying global warming exists. But in your case it involves only politics. Your denial is inspired by your political affiliation which demands that you deny.
marc9000 writes:
How would we measure your proposals effectiveness?
My proposal, if implemented, could be considered effective if you stop denying global warming. It could only be measured by some admission on your part that you're wrong. I don't think this can happen. You're too deeply invested in being "right", politically and personally.
marc9000 writes:
Full and precise accountings will have to be a part of actions to reduce man-made CO2.
No, best estimates will have to do. We have reasonable estimates of fossil fuels consumed and CO2 generated by industry, transportation, etc, in every developed country, country by country. We can measure the amount of man-made CO2 that ends up in the atmosphere too. It would be irresponsible to delay action because we haven't measured the gas passed from every gnat's ass.
marc9000 writes:
I don't see any way of dealing with it that won't cause far more problems than will ever be solved.
Of course you don't. You deny that there is any problem. Any solution would seem more problematic. I don't see how dealing with it could possibly cause more problems than it solves. Money spent now will lessen money spent later to deal with the consequences. It's similar to maintaining your home or car or health. You let them go to hell, there's hell to pay later.
marc9000 writes:
So how can the problem be dealt with, without politics being involved?
It can't be. Sure, we can make some choices in personal lifestyle that consume less energy from fossil fuels, but it's not enough. We need an infrastructure that depends very little on these fuels. Individuals can't accomplish this. Plus, there are many individuals, like you, whose politics and peers demand that they deny the problem, and denigrate those who accept it. They can't accept it for fear of being ostracized from their group.
It's a global problem, therefore it's an international problem. Nations have governments. Governments have politics. It's naive and stupid to suppose that governments shouldn't get involved. They are charged with protecting the interests of their citizens and developing infrastructure. This issue demands that they do their jobs.
marc9000 writes:
If there is a financial meltdown ...
Every financial meltdown to date has been caused by the bad economic and financial policies of governments and financial institutions. Whatever stresses mitigation programs add to the world's economies will be compensated by minimizing future stresses associated with the consequences of the warming like coastal flooding, and changing or disappearing agricultural areas.
marc9000 writes:
My point is that "doing something about" or "putting the brakes on" global warming involves actions that ALWAYS have costs. If those actions are based on "estimates of future events" that turn out to be wrong, what assurances do we have that the incorrect estimators will pay those costs? None? Be honest, please.
My point is that doing nothing will be more costly in the long run.
Suppose you cancel your trip to Bermuda at the last minute because the weathermen say there's a 90% chance that a hurricane will hit it, and you re-book a week later at a higher price. The hurricane misses the island. The meteorologists had very good reason to believe it would hit, but it didn't. Would you demand compensation from them? Would you consider your re-booking to have been a bad idea.
Projections of future warming could indeed turn out to be very wrong. All it would take is a few truly enormous volcanic eruptions to hit the brakes and put things in reverse ... for a while. If it occurs, it wouldn't mean climatologists were wrong. It would mean that we'd been bought a little more time. And after that time, when the ash has settled, we could have an even worse problem if these volcanoes had generated enough CO2.
marc9000 writes:
I also easily see how science is controlled by liberalism and atheism.
... except when doesn't conflict with your ideological extremism. When a new cancer treatment or better weapon technology is developed, you never say, "Oh, those damn godless liberals are at it again!"
But guess what? Galileo and Darwin were right, despite the "right" denying it. You can't whine the facts away with global warming either.
marc9000 writes:
... a temperature increase of 1 DEGREE OVER 50 YEARS!!! HELLO!!!! IS ANYBODY HOME???? ... I know what 1 degree C. is. I know how long 50 years is ... (Message 25) Yes, 2.5 degrees over 50 years.
Actually the change was about 0.6 C (1 F) over 50 years.
So, what is it you know? Are you talking 50 years US or metric?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by marc9000, posted 02-20-2015 8:18 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by marc9000, posted 02-22-2015 10:12 PM glowby has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 119 of 944 (750809)
02-22-2015 8:24 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by glowby
02-20-2015 1:58 AM


There's an amusing dissection of Tom Luongo's scam tactics here:
It's amusing all right!
quote:
Claim: "Well, according to NASA’s own data, the world has warmed .36 degrees Fahrenheit over the last 35 years (they started measuring the data in 1979)."
Response: According to which data set? NASA GISS data show that the world warmed by 0.56C (1.01F) since 1979. That is 2.8x larger than the 0.36F figure that Luongo cites.
.56 degrees as opposed to Luongo's claim of .36???? WOW, what a shocking difference!!!!!!!
and;
quote:
he starts his graph at 1998 and ends at 2014, which is 16 years, not the 17 years he claims.
WHAT A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!!! Hahahaha - thanks for the amusement! But I'm more amused at Al Gore's tactics over the years, or by the fact that so many liberals automatically accept it without question;
Page not found - The Western Journal
The Health Wyze Report - The Health Wyze Report
http://www.foxnews.com/...nnel-founder-sue-al-gore-for-fraud
quote:
Coleman says his side of the global-warming debate is being buried in mainstream media circles.
Maybe it's not so amusing after all.
quote:
"As you look at the atmosphere over the last 25 years, there's been perhaps a degree of warming, perhaps probably a whole lot less than that, and the last year has been so cold that that's been erased," he said.
"I think if we continue the cooling trend a couple of more years, the general public will at last begin to realize that they've been scammed on this global-warming thing."
Don't count on it Mr. Coleman, $22 billion a year buys a LOT of scam.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by glowby, posted 02-20-2015 1:58 AM glowby has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by glowby, posted 02-23-2015 12:16 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 120 of 944 (750810)
02-22-2015 8:32 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by New Cat's Eye
02-20-2015 8:48 PM


marc9000 writes:
Expenditures on global warming studies, by the U.S. and much of the world, is all over the internet. It's a big business.
\
Yeah but if it is real then it makes sense that people are spending money to stop it.
I was asking how you know that the people that are saying that the scientists are lying aren't the ones who are lying?
I trust the advocates of small government over advocates of big government. I find rich people who advocate small government to be more accountable for their mistakes than rich people who advocate big government. Corruption of course, makes it all less cut and dried than I wish it was, but the general rule still applies IMO.
In message 102, jar listed the following as ways to address global warming;
quote:
The steps we should take is address the US contributions.
Continue to legislate reducing emissions from both corporate and individual usage.
Continue to legislate more fuel efficient vehicles.
Continue to legislate more efficient appliances.
Increase the cost of gasoline and diesel fuels by adding an additional tax that will be set aside to use only to mitigate harmful effects of global warming and rebuilding infrastructure.
Place a moratorium on any new coastal construction and tax existing coastal industry and corporations.
Work on plans to move people away from potential flood areas.
Then when I asked "How will the successes of all these increases in government be measured?" - in message 104, he said this in message 106;
quote:
I see no increases in government.
Do you think that is ignorance, or do you think it's lying? Continue to legislate were the most repetitive words in his list. No increases in government? 7 green dots? I love this place!!
Edited by marc9000, : Included question

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-20-2015 8:48 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-23-2015 10:26 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024