global climate change treaty

[chiplee]

As far as the comment "can we do anything about it"

 

Nope.

 

If we can't colonize another planet or make one heck of a space station then eventually the sun is going to consume the earth anyways.

 

Ill bet anything in the world that we don't live to that point though

 

life finds a way. Especially sentient life. Never underestimate humanity's will to survive. There are several ingenious ideas for slowing the rate of change currently being observed. Fortunately, in spite of the ignorant dissenters, real scientists will forage on and make the necessary changes to protect us all. You can't stop the advance of human inquisitiveness, thankfully. If you could we wouldn't have modern medical science, astronomy, chemistry or any of the things we all take for granted. We'd be stuck with "healers", "astrologers", and "alchemists"; humans ignorant of their own psychology who convinced themselves that how it "seems" is a reliable source of information about how it "is". We are very fortunate indeed that "thinking" men and women do not allow non-thinking men and women to hold them back.

[BrazilBoy]

oh boy its been 15 minutes and Chip is still typing....... Edited November 3, 2009 by BrazilBoy

[chiplee]

Chip if you truely believe in global warming have your cars destroyed and recycled..Get a bus pass or rollerskate to work..

 

Have your dog put to sleep he is doing as much damage as a 4.2 Landcruiser...get a hamster that a Prius of animals you know.....lol

 

Also aren't flyovers at football games killing the enviroment, why not take your arguement to your superiors and explain how when you do flyovers which is completely without warrant and the polar bears will die because of it....

 

If you do not then I assume you aren't a true believer in global warming...

 

Sincerely Roberto

 

I've seen you make this point several times now. Apparently you think it's like a zinger or a "gotchya" or something. It's not. My actions have nothing to do with my "beliefs". There is always a disconnect between what people "believe" is important and what they believe is important enough to "act" on. You aren't "trumping" anyone like you think you are.

 

There are people who accept the science that suggests our climate is changing, and there are people who don't accept it. The primary difference between the two types of people is manifest in what they are WILLING to do, if the government encourages or requires it. For example, if I was told to keep my V8 4Runner driving below 3000 miles a year I would happily comply. Billy bob on the other hand, down in Alabama, who thinks all this "GLOBAL WARMING BS has always been a government plot to take his F150 away, will probably object if the gubment tries to tell him how much carbon he can put in the air.

 

SO the argument is less about what any of us actually "does", and more about what we'd be "willing" to do for the cause.

[BrazilBoy]

LOL...so you think its BS then too...if one truely believes in something you act on it....simple as that...

You say you will do as told by the Government when they make it law, thats a reaction not being proactive..

 

Oh yeah what with attacking people of the south?

 

 

What size rollerskate do you need? I am happy to help...

Edited November 3, 2009 by BrazilBoy

[chiplee]

LOL...so you think its BS then too...if one truely believes in something you act on it....simple as that...

 

Absolute nonsense. By that logic, anyone who doesn't adopt a child doesn't believe it's a good thing to do. Anyone who doesn't give to charity doesn't think it's admirable. Your advocating that I take my complaints to my command is childish drivel.

 

 

You say you will do as told by the Government when they make it law, thats a reaction not being proactive..

 

 

And? Again, you can continue making this point all you want. I'm just letting you know it's moot, and silly.

Edited November 3, 2009 by chiplee

[BrazilBoy]

Your advocating that I take my complaints to my command is childish drivel.

 

If your arguement is without flaw then I am sure your superiors would appreciate it...Or do you know they would laugh you right out the cockpit...

 

My point is valid standup for what you believe in Chip....other wise your statements are hypocritical at best..."Do as I say, not as I do" come on...

 

I am just asking you to live up to your word..

[PDX87Starion]

Besides Like Jay Leno says "Its not the cars that are the problem...its the fuel"

 

There are so many reasons to move away from middle eastern fossil fuel, and cutting the CO2 is one small part.

Any internal combustion engine can run on hydrogen instead of gasoline. And pretty soon your average electric vehicle is going to embarrace modified hot rods and muscle cars in the 1/4 mile.

 

If gas is going to be 5$ and up a gallon (or much much more when the oil runs out). I will happily convert my buick 455 to run on something else.

 

One thing I have noticed from the deniers is first global warming was a hoax, then when Bush acknowledged "climate change" it was...well its getting hotter but its not because of humans, its the sun, or something, or anything other than man. Now that Obama's in we are back to its a hoax and its even getting colder...AND its a government/world conspiracy to take our SUV's away. Eventually the truth, science, and fact will prevail, unless your stuck in an alternate reality.

[BrazilBoy]

Besides Like Jay Leno says "Its not the cars that are the problem...its the fuel"

 

There are so many reasons to move away from middle eastern fossil fuel, and cutting the CO2 is one small part.

Any internal combustion engine can run on hydrogen instead of gasoline. And pretty soon your average electric vehicle is going to embarrace modified hot rods and muscle cars in the 1/4 mile.

 

If gas is going to be 5$ and up a gallon (or much much more when the oil runs out). I will happily convert my buick 455 to run on something else.

 

One thing I have noticed from the deniers is first global warming was a hoax, then when Bush acknowledged "climate change" it was...well its getting hotter but its not because of humans, its the sun, or something, or anything other than man. Now that Obama's in we are back to its a hoax and its even getting colder...AND its a government/world conspiracy to take our SUV's away. Eventually the truth, science, and fact will prevail, unless your stuck in an alternate reality.

I am all for alternative fuels, heck brazil leads the world in it so why can't the USA?....but this crisis mentality is the issue at hand..You must do this and that is what I am opposed too....I say keep drilling and keep searching for alternative means....this would resolve 2 issues, cut out funds to the enemy and provide jobs...

[Shelby]

some thing like 12k years ago north america was cover'd in an ice age

did all like die off, nope and they survive'd with out car heaters and with out cars even or a m d's , would people we know survive such an event ,, probly not , hell some would starve in a food market ,unless some one was there to cook for them

[chiplee]

If your arguement is without flaw then I am sure your superiors would appreciate it...Or do you know they would laugh you right out the cockpit...

 

Let me spell it out. Your argument is similar to the argument for pacifism. Pacifism is a disproportionate response to one's knowledge of horrible suffering caused in war, much like refusing to emit ANY carbon would be a disproportionate response to my knowledge of the danger it poses to the climate. Protecting, or training to protect, or demonstrating to its citizens our ability to protect the one country on earth that has a snowball's chance of bringing about "world peace", is a HIGH priority necessity, and one of the LAST places we would seek to reduce our carbon footprint. Although, DOD plans and policies are already moving more toward simulating a higher percentage of our flights to help in this regard.

 

My point is valid

 

Your point is stupid, shortsighted and childish...

 

edit: alright, I've thought it over and I'm going to post a public retraction. I get your point Brazilboy. It has its merits, but it doesn't say what you claim it says about what I believe. My fiance and I are always saying "we're no better than the naysayers if we don't act". We constantly try to stop ourselves from rationalizing our more gratuitous expenses. We're trying to tone down our wedding so we feel less guilty for even having one because it's such a ridiculously selfish thing to do when there are SO MANY better things we could do with the money. I had a bout of guilt when I bought her ring, but didn't let it stop me from actually buying it.

 

I guess on the subject of climate change, if you were making the point that I am "no better" than the naysayers, since I don't drive a Prius, then I would agree with you. A more rational way to rebut your argument would be to say my "actions" say more about my character, than my beliefs. But in general, the truth is that I like where you're going with the whole, "act on it if you believe in it" thing. It's just that I sincerely don't agree with your assertion that it means I don't "really believe" in global climate change.

 

standup for what you believe in Chip....other wise your statements are hypocritical at best..."Do as I say, not as I do" come on...

 

I am just asking you to live up to your word..

 

Do you think it's true that an infant born onto a planet where there is abundant food, water and shelter shouldn't be hungry, thirsty or cold? If you don't you're an animal. If you do then I don't believe you until you sell everything you have down to a minimal existence for yourself so you can go feed, water and house as many children as you can. WE COULD ALL STAND TO ACT MORE AND DISCUSS LESS ON THE THINGS WE FIND IMPORTANT, DUDE!!! I get it. But claiming that anyone who doesn't act doesn't really believe is a weak argument.

Edited November 3, 2009 by chiplee

[BrazilBoy]

I can't believe I'm actually encouraging you this way. Ok, here it is in plain and simple words little fella'. Your argument is similar to the argument for pacifism. Pacifism is a disproportionate response to one's knowledge of horrible suffering caused in war, much like refusing to emit ANY carbon would be a disproportionate response to my knowledge of the danger it poses to the climate. Protecting, or training to protect, or demonstrating to its citizens our ability to protect the one country on earth that has a snowball's chance of bringing about "world peace", is a HIGH priority necessity, and one of the LAST places we would seek to reduce our carbon footprint. Although, DOD plans and policies are already moving more toward simulating a higher percentage of our flights to help in this regard.

 

 

 

Your point is stupid, shortsighted and childish. You should listen more when I talk, or read more and write less. You might learn how to think.

 

 

 

Do you think it's true that an infant born onto a planet where there is abundant food, water and shelter shouldn't be hungry, thirsty or cold? If you don't you're an animal. If you do then I don't believe you until you sell everything you have down to a minimal existence for yourself so you can go feed, water and house as many children as you can. WE COULD ALL STAND TO ACT MORE AND DISCUSS LESS ON THE THINGS WE FIND IMPORTANT, DUDE!!! I get it. But claiming that anyone who doesn't act doesn't really believe is a stupid argument. Again, keep it up though. Learning how convinced you are that it's a good point is telling.

"Little Fella" huh,... first off you resort to personal insults like all liberials always do when asked to face thier own "virtues", thanks for supporting that fact...

 

EX: If I say I hate how my car squeaks and all I do is complain how much noise it makes...If I don't fix the squeak then the next best thing to do is stop talking about it...Unless you are willing to take your virtues and live them you are a hypocrite by defination:

hypocrite

#1

a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs

#2

a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

[Shelby]

do you have any idea at all of what being in the military service is like ,

let along being an officer in the service ,,

it sure don't sound like it http://www.starquestclub.com/forum/public/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif

[chiplee]

"Little Fella" huh,... first off you resort to personal insults like all liberials always do when asked to face thier own "virtues", thanks for supporting that fact...

 

EX: If I say I hate how my car squeaks and all I do is complain how much noise it makes...If I don't fix the squeak then the next best thing to do is stop talking about it...Unless you are willing to take your virtues and live them you are a hypocrite by defination:

hypocrite

#1

a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs

#2

a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

 

 

yeah, see my edit. I was in a hurry and overstepped a bit. I apologize. Gave it some more thought and I'll stand behind the "new version" of that post. Sorry, dude.

[BrazilBoy]

 

 

yeah, see my edit. I was in a hurry and overstepped a bit. I apologize. Gave it some more thought and I'll stand behind the "new version" of that post. Sorry, dude.

No worries man....I think we have reached a point of no contest on this..we will not change the others mind that is evident...And we are both assured that our belief is right..

 

later Roberto

[chiplee]

No worries man....I think we have reached a point of no contest on this..we will not change the others mind that is evident...And we are both assured that our belief is right..

 

later Roberto

 

wait though, there is a chance to decide which thing failing to act says more about, a person's character or their beliefs? I'd like to hear you weigh in on that if you care to. What caused my change of heart was realizing that you were making an important point about "failing to act on the things you value". That point shouldn't be disregarded so quickly as I was disregarding it at first. I still think there's room for debate about whether people who don't act can be said to "not believe" what they say. Christians, for example, don't act on the majority of their own biblical "rules" but I think they still "believe" in Christ. When I try to hold their feet to the fire on their failure to act, it is to point out their hypocrisy, like you've pointed out mine, but that is a character flaw. You could make the point that what I believe is as good as pointless, if I don't act on it, and my intellectual integrity would require me to agree. But I would rebut with the same point I made earlier about what I would be happily "willing" to do, if forced. Then I think we'd be getting somewhere. We obviously can't "act" on everything we see that needs to be acted upon, so where should we draw the line? It's a valuable discussion.

Edited November 3, 2009 by chiplee

[Starwolf]

You guys type too much

 

Chip about my post...i HOPE you are right but I really think there is a point when humans will become over involved in themselves and be destroyed. We probably wont blow ourselves up...but there are things out there so massive and amazing that we stand no chance with any type of technology.

 

We will be destroyed im 100% sure of it...i don't believe in humans expanding enough and putting enough thought into it.

 

As for global warming...of course its true but i think cars are putting off way less harmful gas than you think. If we are speeding it up its SOOO little it wouldnt even matter...its going to come anyways.

 

It is a natural occurrence and we have little effect...we should be worried about cow farts more.. (just kidding)

[BrazilBoy]

As for Christianity, first off I am one...I have been kicked out of many churches for stating that a real christian is one who leads a Godly life and does not says as Christ requires..If one is to make a statement that thier life is dedicated to God then act on it....

 

In the bible it states often that Jesus didn't sit around the synagogue praying all day for God to do everything for Him..

Like so many churches do nowadays

 

He went to the "sinners" of the world the scum of society...He went where people needed him..

 

EX: Its like millioaires giving each other money no one truely gains..But if said millionaire built a business and hired people at a decent wage he has benefited the least of society...That is a basic view of what Jesus thaught...

 

Do I make mistakes yes I do, as no one is perfect..Was I a lifelong believer no, I was as skeptical as you are now..

[jszucs]

wait though, there is a chance to decide which thing failing to act says more about, a person's character or their beliefs? I'd like to hear you weigh in on that if you care to. What caused my change of heart was realizing that you were making an important point about "failing to act on the things you value". That point shouldn't be disregarded so quickly as I was disregarding it at first. I still think there's room for debate about whether people who don't act can be said to "not believe" what they say. Christians, for example, don't act on the majority of their own biblical "rules" but I think they still "believe" in Christ. When I try to hold their feet to the fire on their failure to act, it is to point out their hypocrisy, like you've pointed out mine, but that is a character flaw. You could make the point that what I believe is as good as pointless, if I don't act on it, and my intellectual integrity would require me to agree. But I would rebut with the same point I made earlier about what I would be happily "willing" to do, if forced. Then I think we'd be getting somewhere. We obviously can't "act" on everything we see that needs to be acted upon, so where should we draw the line? It's a valuable discussion.

 

 

Ok as random as I may be. Id like to chime in with. Sometimes giving up can be winning. For your consideration. In collage I meet a very good friend, he is one of my best friends I have ever made in life. He liked this girl, well call her Molly. I liked this girl to. Me being smart, cute, charming, and in shape I quickly won this girl. Him being sencer, nice, and an all around good guy lost out. After seeing the hurt I caused him, I gave up on her, and won a friend for life. Sometimes giving up can be winning. I valued this girl, infact I would rate her as one of my "lifes top 5" but the friend that developed from walking away is worth way more now.

 

He might not be giving up, he might be a smart general and choosing his battles wisely.

 

and good to hear from you chip there was some rambling lately as to your welfare and whereabouts.

[jszucs]

some thing like 12k years ago north america was cover'd in an ice age

did all like die off, nope and they survive'd with out car heaters and with out cars even or a m d's , would people we know survive such an event ,, probly not , hell some would starve in a food market ,unless some one was there to cook for them

 

I would like to think some of us would. But it's true people have become "weak" for lack of a better term. Heck people get pissed when they can't get some rare fruit in the middle of winter here. Or look at all the people that freaked when we had that blackout. Me and closed friends procured water, food, guns, shelter, Then we rounded up beer, and inground pool and women. And we had one heck of a weekend.

[Cobalt60]

Have your dog put to sleep he is doing as much damage as a 4.2 Landcruiser...

 

Just stop. If anything the pet industry needs to stop breeding so many dogs. And trust me, they are putting to sleep all their "surplus" dogs.

 

I read somewhere that one cross country flight in a private jet uses as much fuel as a years worth of driving a hummer. My point there, is its not your average person doing most of the damage. Yes fly bys over football games are a good example of this.

[Focus]

No one knows why global warming is happening.

 

Actually...no one can be certain that is is happening. It's all theories put forward by people that assume they know what they are talking about.

 

The truth of the mattter is that the weather/climate of this world is so complex that it's impossible for man to accurately predict. Our technology simply cannot handle the date.

 

In life it's all about the numbers.

 

We say it's 78 degrees outside (if only...come on global warming) but in all truth it's 78.7479749748927474987047984774972947921479274927984729147974987984719847947987490879879847984792174982749174891274986594809584058849809248 REPEATING FOREVER/

 

Same with the temp of the ground. And the humidity. And so on and so forth.

 

But our computers can't handle a never ending decimal so that number above becomes 78.74797497489274749870479847749729. A number the computer can handle. Then the same happens with the other factors and pretty soon you see why weather men aren't always spot on. (or never spot on...depending on their luck) Sometimes the rest of the never ending decimal makes a difference and a sunny day turns into a cloudy one and blue skies turn to rain.

 

So how does this have anything to do with global warming? Well....if plugging in those numbers for a local community made tiny errors imagine the data needed for THE ENTIRE WORLD. It simply cannot be done. We cannot expect to have an accurate prediction of what's happening with the earth.

 

And look at some of these headlines from a quick google search.

 

Report: Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling (Daily Tech – February 26, 2008)

 

Forget Global Warming: Welcome to the new Ice Age (Canada's National Post – Feb. 25, 2008)

 

Arctic Sea Ice Sees 'Significant Increase' in Size Following 'Extreme Cold' (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation -CBC – February 15, 2008)

 

Ice between Canada and Greenland reaches highest level in 15 years (Greenland’s Sermitsiak News – February 12, 2008)

 

Global warming sceptics bouyed by record cold (UK Telegraph – February 26, 2008)

 

Solar data suggest our concerns should be about global cooling – (By Geologist David Archibald of Summa Development Limited in Australia – March 2008 Scientific Paper)

 

 

You get the idea.

 

And what about this....

 

http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/7390_large_hadcrut.jpg

 

That's a pretty big drop. Perhaps a lot of people were buying hybrids, or walking to work...or maybe...just maybe.....it has very little to do with us.

 

In fact while trying to dig up some data on how much of CO2 produced is man made I found everything from 3% to 98%. Obviously scientist are influenced by outside sources(politics, media, and funding).

 

You see where I am going. The data isn't there because scientist can't agree. And if they can agree on so many other things why can't they agree on something as "simple" as global warming.

 

Maybe it's not so simple after all.

 

And the people that are fighting to save our planet?

 

A VERY INCONVINIENT TRUTH: POWER: GORE MANSION USES 20X AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD; CONSUMPTION INCREASE AFTER ‘TRUTH’:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Media hype and propaganda that is designed for us to fear something because what to scared people do? They spend money to stop whatever they fear.

 

Cold war ended and global warming jumped up right after. Isn't that funny.

[Mech]

Chip i believe you can do you part to be more green.....may i make a suggestion?

 

maybe you could limit driving your 400HP gas guzzling starion to a couple days a week, then drive your 300HP gas guzzling SUV around for the remainder of the week..

 

Together, we can all contribute and make a difference.

[Mech]

Al Gore Set To Become First “Carbon Billionaire”

 

Paul Joseph Watson

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

 

 

The New York Times has lifted the lid on how Al Gore stands to benefit to the tune of billions of dollars if the carbon tax proposals he is pushing come to fruition in the United States, while documenting how he has already lined his pockets on the back of exaggerated fearmongering about global warming.

 

As is to be expected, the article is largely a whitewash and takes an apologist stance in defense of Gore.

 

However, the NY Times‘ John M. Broder does reveal how one of the companies Gore invested in, Silver Spring Networks, recently received a contract worth $560 million dollars from the Energy Department to install “smart meters” in people’s homes that record (and critics fear could eventually regulate) energy usage.

 

“Kleiner Perkins and its partners, including Mr. Gore, could recoup their investment many times over in coming years,” states the report, highlighting the fact that Gore is “well positioned to profit from this green transformation,.. if and when it comes.”

 

“Critics, mostly on the political right and among global warming skeptics, say Mr. Gore is poised to become the world’s first “carbon billionaire,” profiteering from government policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars to the business ventures he has invested in,” writes Broder.

 

Since he left office, Gore’s personal net worth has skyrocketed on the back of his advocacy for global warming issues and the financial dividends this has reaped. Gore’s assets totaled less than $2 million in 2001 and although he refuses to give a figure for his current net worth, a recent single investment of $35 million in Capricorn Investment Group, a private equity fund, illustrates just how fast Gore has enriched himself from his climate change bandwagon.

 

The Times report notes how Gore “has a stake in the world’s pre-eminent carbon credit trading market.” As we reported back in March before he became President Barack Obama also helped fund the profiteers of the carbon taxation program that he is now seeking to implement as law.

 

The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) has direct ties to both Al Gore and Maurice Strong, two figures intimately involved with a long standing movement to use the theory of man made global warming as a mechanism for profit and social engineering. Gore’s investment company, Generation Investment Management, which sells carbon offset opportunities, is the largest shareholder of CCX.

 

Maurice Strong, who is regularly credited as founding father of the modern environmental movement, serves on the board of directors of CCX. Strong was a leading initiate of the Earth Summit in the early 90s, where the theory of global warming caused by CO2 generated by human activity was most notably advanced.

 

Both Strong and Gore come from the Club of Rome clique, who in their 1991 Report, “The First Global Revolution” openly admitted how they were planning to exploit the contrived hoax of global warming in order to further their agenda.

 

“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.,” they wrote.

 

Gore’s defense against claims that he is peddling fearmongering about global warming to get filthy rich, and one dutifully supported by the NY Times’ whitewash report, is that he is simply putting his money where his mouth is.

 

However, Gore’s insistence that he is walking the walk, not just talking the talk, doesn’t seem to extend to his own private life in the context of energy conservation and CO2 emissions. While lecturing the world about reducing CO2 emissions and saving energy, Gore’s own mansion uses 20 times the energy of the average American home.

 

In February 2007, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research revealed that the gas and electric bills for the former vice president’s 20-room home and pool house devoured nearly 221,000 kilowatt-hours in 2006, more than 20 times the national average of 10,656 kilowatt-..hours. These figures were not disputed by Gore.

 

“If this were any other person with $30,000-a-year in utility bills, I wouldn’t care,” said the Center’s 27-year-old president, Drew Johnson. “But he tells other people how to live and he’s not following his own rules.”

[Cobalt60]

OK so we see plenty of controversy over the matter in the US, which is generally considered to be the nation with the highest greenhouse gas emissions. So why is it that in every country in Europe there is no debate? In Europe, it is accepted that global warming is primarily caused by people.