Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest #1Stunner

Are you in favor of Global Warming?

Are you in favor of Global Warming?  

10 members have voted

  1. 1. Are you in favor of Global Warming?

    • YES - I live in Wyoming
    • YES - I live in Montana
      0
    • YES - I live in Burley, Idaho
      0
    • YES - I live in Russia
    • NO - I dislike hot weather. It's too damn hot!!


Recommended Posts

This is what I call cheesy trolling. Stunner, our silly fellers on the left changed it to climate change when some temps got colder than normal. And some remained the same. 

There actually two questions to do it right.

1. How much do you think the climate has actually been changing in the last 10-15 years?

2. How much is man responsible for it?

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NorCalCoug said:

Cashed out my 401K to enjoy the remaining 11.5 years I have.

Be sure to take out a reverse mortgage on your house, take on as much debt as possible, rack up more debt on the credit cards and have a great time!

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner
6 hours ago, Nevada Convert said:

This is what I call cheesy trolling. Stunner, our silly fellers on the left changed it to climate change when some temps got colder than normal. And some remained the same. 

There actually two questions to do it right.

1. How much do you think the climate has actually been changing in the last 10-15 years?

2. How much is man responsible for it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 1989, the U.N. warned that we had 10 years to solve global warming. In 2005, Al Gore’s movie An Inconvenient Truth gave us only 10 years. Here’s more laughable stuff:

 

The Last Chance

Michael Mann warned that the 2015 UN Paris summit “is probably the last chance” to address climate change. But the reality is that every UN climate summit is hailed as the last opportunity to stop global warming.

New Lyrics to an Old Tune
Newsweek magazine weighed in with its own tipping point: “The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find
it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.” That warning appeared in an April 28, 1975, article
about global cooling! Same rhetoric, different eco-scare.

Here, courtesy of the great research published at Climate Change Predictions, is a sampling of previous “last chance” deadlines that turned out to be—well—not the last chance after all.

Bonn, 2001: “A Global Warming Treaty’s Last Chance” —Time magazine, July 16, 2001

Montreal, 2005: “Climate campaigner Mark Lynas warned ‘with time running out for the global climate, your meeting in
Montreal represents a last chance for action.’” —Independent, November 28, 2005

Bali, 2007: “World leaders will converge on Bali today for the start of negotiations which experts say could be the last chance to save the Earth from catastrophic climate change.” —New Zealand Herald, December 3, 2007.

Poznan, Poland, 2008: “Australian environmental scientist Tim Flannery warned, ‘This round of negotiations is likely to be our last chance as a species to deal with the problem.’” —Age, December 9, 2008

Copenhagen, 2009: “European Union Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas told a climate conference that it was ‘the world’s last chance to stop climate change before it passes the point of no return.’” —Reuters, February 27, 2009

Cancun, 2010: “Jairem Ramesh, the Indian environment minister, sees it as the ‘last chance’ for climate change talks to
succeed.” —Telegraph, November 29, 2010 Durban, 2011: “Durban climate change meeting is “the last chance.” Attended by over 200 countries, this week’s major UN conference has been described by many experts as humanity’s last chance to avert the disastrous effects of climate change.” —UCA News, November 28, 201140

 

“Serially Doomed”
Perhaps the best summary of the tipping-point phenomenon comes from UK scientist Philip Stott. “In essence, the Earth has been given a 10-year survival warning regularly for the last fifty or so years. We have been serially doomed,” Stott explained. “Our post-modern period of climate change angst can probably be traced back to the late-1960s, if not earlier. By 1973, and the ‘global cooling’ scare, it was in full swing, with predictions of the imminent collapse of the world within ten to twenty years, exacerbated by the impacts of a nuclear winter. Environmentalists were warning that, by the year 2000, the population of the US would have fallen to only 22 million. In 1987, the scare abruptly changed to ‘global warming’, and the IPCC (the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) was established (1988), issuing its first assessment report in 1990, which served as the basis of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC).


https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/08/the-ever-receding-climate-goalpost-ipcc-and-al-gore-12-years-to-save-the-planet-again/

 

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely a BIG fan since I planted that Citrus orchard on my property in Minot. I can't afford to be replacing dead orange trees every spring forever.

 

“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”

-Richard Feynman

"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators."

-P.J. O’Rourke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CV147 said:

I prefer global warming to an ice age, but that's just me.

Denying Climate change is ignorant.

IMO, denying man made climate change is ignorant.

However, you touch on the conversation I'd like to hear.

Can we at least mention and discuss that there might be some worldwide benefits to climate change?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, renoskier said:

Denying Climate change is ignorant.

IMO, denying man made climate change is ignorant.

However, you touch on the conversation I'd like to hear.

Can we at least mention and discuss that there might be some worldwide benefits to climate change?

 

I am no climate change denier.

I just think that we are in an interglacial period and putting it off is better than encouraging it.

First: Though humans have been evolved for 200,000 years, the agricultural revolution that increased our carrying capacity in the environment only happened in the last 10,000 years. That was the last time glaciers retreated. We have zero evidence of any civilization that existed prior to this time. The reasoning from me is that if we couldn't make civilization in 190,000 years, but suddenly could during the biggest retreat of glaciers, what makes us sure we could continue as we are during another ice age?

Second: We have the technology to build coastal walls to protect large cities. It would take a considerable investment, but a mile of ice over NYC is the alternative.

Third: Crop patterns would change. And, as the climate changes we would have to adjust what we grow. Farmers are in tune with that, and with continuing advances in technology, we can adapt.

----------------------------

I would like someone else to post something similar saying an ice age Earth would be preferable and their reasoning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, renoskier said:

Denying Climate change is ignorant.

IMO, denying man made climate change is ignorant.

However, you touch on the conversation I'd like to hear.

Can we at least mention and discuss that there might be some worldwide benefits to climate change?

 

Denying sunspot activity as a primary cause of Earth's temperature is ignorant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, renoskier said:

Denying Climate change is ignorant.

IMO, denying man made climate change is ignorant.

However, you touch on the conversation I'd like to hear.

Can we at least mention and discuss that there might be some worldwide benefits to climate change?

 

The earth is getting greener. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, renoskier said:

Denying Climate change is ignorant.

IMO, denying man made climate change is ignorant.

However, you touch on the conversation I'd like to hear.

Can we at least mention and discuss that there might be some worldwide benefits to climate change?

 

I think environmental degradation is a massive issue.  Pollution worries me more than global warming, but I think it is probable that we have at least some impact on the climate.  

But if we put on our honest hats, most of this green new deal stuff is just the same old commie shit we've heard our whole lives.  It always ties in inequality, the awfulness of "monuments to wealth", and other redistrubutionist crap.  They use environmentalism, or more accurately, sacredness of the earth, to build an ethical framework with an overarching goal.  As Kant pointed out, you have to have to a central truth to build an ethical foundation.  There is no way to talk about conservation with these people in a reasonable way if you don't accept their premise that man made global warming is destroying the Earth, because they have built their entire religion on that premise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, renoskier said:

Denying Climate change is ignorant.

IMO, denying man made climate change is ignorant.

However, you touch on the conversation I'd like to hear.

Can we at least mention and discuss that there might be some worldwide benefits to climate change?

 

I don’t know of anyone that believes the climate doesn’t change. But it’s ignorant to think man is the sole reason. And it’s ignorant to think you know what’s going to happen 10 years down the road as we’ve seen from people’s predictions from the past. We can’t even predict the weather 7 days out. 

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...