The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 27    Average: 3/5]
74 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 5667
Rating: 3
Category: Science
Date: 05/13/12 07:30 AM

74 Responses to Global Warming: What Scientists Said 30 Years Ago

  1. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 11, 2012 at 7:21 am
    Link: Global Warming: What Scientists Said 30 Years Ago - GW deniers often say scientists were predicting a new ice age only yesterday. Peter Sinclair sets the record straight.
  2. Profile photo of Buiadh
    Buiadh Male 30-39
    6739 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 7:45 am
    Could you imagine if the world was run by regressive right wing Americans?

    Imagine that...

    *shudder*
  3. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3928 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 7:46 am
    If you don`t think that all the crap we`re putting in the air isn`t doing damage to the earth you have your head in the sand. This is not a conservative or liberal issue it is a human issue. The worst thing that could happen if we do something is that we would have cleaner air - the horrors.
  4. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36852 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 7:53 am

    Global warming sucks.

  5. Profile photo of LemonCurry
    LemonCurry Male 40-49
    1106 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 8:02 am
    @markust123

    Hear hear!
  6. Profile photo of uatme
    uatme Male 18-29
    1074 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 8:08 am
    We`re screwed, nothing new here
  7. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 8:14 am
    Unfortunately, these videos don`t matter to our right wingers here. They`ll come in with their phony statistics and graphs, and won`t accept when they`ve been disproven.
  8. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 8:26 am
    @markust: (and others)
    - Once I took a pee in the ocean! Polution! Teh horrorz!

    - Telling half the world: cut CO2 even if it destroys your economies! While telling the other half: you make as much CO2 as you like! =/= a good idea.

    Global Cooling WAS SO a `scary thing` 30-odd years ago! Some said `greenhouse effect` too, I personally remember hearing about both!

    "Global Climate Change" =
    Scientist #1: It`s getting cooler, give me money!
    Scientist #2: It`s getting hotter, give me money!

    It`s BEEN hotter before, and COOLER too! All without human help...
  9. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 8:27 am
    Cutting polution = GOOD!
    Destroying the economy = BAD!

    Get it?
  10. Profile photo of Buiadh
    Buiadh Male 30-39
    6739 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 8:48 am
    @5Cats - The world has to spend now to make sure that there`s still a habitable world in 500 years, which given the current rate of population expansion could be the tipping point. Thankfully there`s only a few countries that don`t agree with this mindset, so there is hope for the world yet. Will spending a few $$`s change the world tomorrow? No. Will it change the world for your great grandchildren? Yes. Most definately.

    It`s not a drop in the ocean, your analogy is laughable.
  11. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36852 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 9:20 am

    Ya know...I never really appreciated the contribution Madest made here at IAB as a Mod. Not until he hung up his Mod-badge and turned 5Cats loose did I understand how much we all owed him for his tireless services keeping 5Cats quite.

    Hats Off To You - Madest


  12. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 9:21 am
    The world has to spend now to make sure that there`s still a habitable world in 500 years

    The world was warmer 500 years ago, yet it was habitable, what`s your point?

    regressive right wing Americans

    Oh yes and communists had totally awesome govts.
  13. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14653 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 9:26 am
    I feel pity everytime I see an American city flooded or erased by extreme weather, because I don`t believe in karma.
  14. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 10:18 am
    The world was habitable 500 years ago, and it will still be habitable 500 years from now. BUT not for such a large population. That`s the point. Even the U.S. military accepts that this will pose a huge threat to world security, as civilizations are forced to migrate and resources become scarcer.

    Here`s an example for California; most of the state`s crops rely on the Sacramento Delta for irrigation. As the sea levels rise, the salinity of the Delta increases, making it harder and harder for farmers to irrigate their crops. And when the Delta floods, the lands within the flood plain will be damaged by the increased salinity in the waters.
  15. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 10:27 am
    @FoolsPrussia, so the actual problem is overpopulation, correct? That`s Canada`s fault for sure! (WE are expected to cut CO2, not China or India though...)

    So: 33 million > 2,300 million Obviously!

    The globe has been warming since the "little ice age" no matter what AGW alarmists do to ignore that event.

    "Cutting CO2 Emissions" will mean higher global food prices, which will starve the poor in 3rd world nations... which will cut population! HEY! Maybe AGW is right after all!
  16. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 10:34 am
    No, the problem is overpopulation in combination with increased CO2 emissions. You can`t release that many greenhouse gases and not expect to see any detrimental effects.

    But yes, Canada plays a huge part in it if they continue to exploit their tar sands, which hold an enormous amount of stored carbon. Nobody said China and India shouldn`t cut emissions. They should, since they`re becoming among the worst polluters.
  17. Profile photo of Buiadh
    Buiadh Male 30-39
    6739 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 10:35 am
    Are you serious @Cajun247? THe choice is regressive American style politicians or COMMIE SCUM? I knew American politics was simplistic, but come on!

    Also to your other point, the world has warmed quicker recently than it has done at any point in the past.
  18. Profile photo of Buiadh
    Buiadh Male 30-39
    6739 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 10:36 am
    @5Cats - Don`t give me that, your concern isn`t for the third world. When do your kind ever think outside their own house, family or bank balance? When it suits them. That`s when.
  19. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 11:04 am
    Ya know...I never really appreciated the contribution Madest made here at IAB as a Mod. Not until he hung up his Mod-badge and turned 5Cats loose did I understand how much we all owed him for his tireless services keeping 5Cats quite.
    @Gerry1: If you`re trying to be funny it has failed, I`ve taken this quite personally.

    I`ve noticed you`ve been rough on me lately, but having fun too.

    THIS however is just rude.

    @madest didn`t "keep me quiet" he DELETED MY SUBMISSIONS!
    It`s NOT the task of the Mods at IAB to keep ANYONE quiet, ok?
    If anything, I was MORE verbose and vitriolic when @madest would constantly spout his bullshiite. Now others have taken up that task, sad really, so I`m arguing with them.

    I expect an apology or an explaination, k-thx.
  20. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 11:04 am
    THe choice is regressive American style politicians or COMMIE SCUM

    I know that, but I reject populist and statist policies and politicians in whatever form.

    the world has warmed quicker recently than it has done at any point in the past.

    Uhh, no it has not. There have steeper spikes in temperature in human history.
  21. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 11:09 am
    @FoolsPrussia: Kyoto called for Canada`s reduction with NOTHING about China OR India. Facts, aquaint onesself with them!

    the world has warmed quicker recently than it has done at any point in the past.
    Not quite true @Buiadh: Our ability to accurately measure that change has only come about in the past 150 years or so. HOWEVER there`s been huge increases or decreases before, but we can only measure them in terms of decades, not month-by-month.

    your concern isn`t for the third world.
    stfu with your lame insults! Perhaps it`s because English is your second language? Being Scottish and all; your reading comprehesion must be impared by that.

    YOU want to drive up global foor prices and starve the poor. I WANT to avoid that, get it?
  22. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 11:18 am
    @5Cats: Right, and the USA wouldn`t even sign on to the Kyoto Protocol, and Canada recently renounced it. What`s your point?
  23. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 11:57 am
    @Cajun247:

    The world was warmer 500 years ago...

    Sorry, but you`re flat-out wrong. In 1,800 years, the world has never been as warm as it is now, and it`s getting warmer. You have to go back to geologic eras before man to find warmer global temperatures than what we`re currently experiencing.
  24. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 12:10 pm
    @FP: Um, I just made it? That a tiny country in the Artic zone needs to reduce CO2 to "save the world!" But two HUGE countries need not bother?
    Why is that so difficult to understand?

    33 million < 2,300 million, ok?

    True @Squrlz: it`s further back than 500 years, but still, the Midevil and Roman warm periods were warmer, lasted over 100 years and crops, animals and humans FLOURISHED!
  25. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 12:27 pm
    @5Cats and Cajun:

    You two are repeating (knowingly or unknowingly: I think unknowingly) one of the GW deniers` chief falsehoods--namely, that the Earth was warmer in the Medieval era than it is now. It wasn`t. The whole point of the hockeystick graph is that temperature are now higher, and climbing faster, than they ever have before.

    Attack the hockeystick graph if you like. But in 2006, it was affirmed by The National Academy of Sciences, this country`s most respected scientific body. Dismissing a verdict of the NAS is about as close I can think of to taking a position that could be defined as "anti-science."

    For an intelligent examination of the Medieval Warming Period, I encourage you to watch this.
  26. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 12:42 pm
    @Squrlz: The Hockey Stick is faked, the NAS no longer recognizes it as being accurate, they "hid the decline" to fit their goal, rather than present accurate data.
    What more do you want?
    There HAVE BEEN warmer times, you do admit that?
    ONE YEAR does not make a "global warming phenominon" right?
    It`s been colder too! Little Ice Age? The BIG Ice Age?
    You`re the one being a "denier" of cold, hot facts!

  27. Profile photo of Buiadh
    Buiadh Male 30-39
    6739 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 12:43 pm
    @5Cats - So because India and China don`t do it the rest of us shouldn`t bother? Tosh!

    How anyone can think that rising co2 levels will cause no long term problems is just silly.

    Also loving your "Scottish" reference, 5Cats. Not heard that before. YOu can have a generic "you`d be speaking French if it weren`t for us" in return.
  28. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 12:45 pm
    @Squrlz: Part 2: Each "warm period" of the last 4 lasted 100 years or more. Even if it wasn`t as warm as 1998, over those centuries it was WARM.

    Part 3: Humanity FLOURISHED in those times! And suffered terribly in the cold periods. Yet AGW alarmist claim DOOM if it goes up 0.7C? Um, NOT!

    1 decade < 2 centuries

    And the world keeps spinning, with or without us!
  29. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 12:48 pm
    "you`d be speaking French if it weren`t for us"
    Um, @Buiadh: Canada, Commonwealth nation, same as you, eh? We are us.
    Um, Canada, we do speak French (by force) here?

    Lolz! Oh those Scotsmen! What a sense of humour!
    (you are Scottish, right? I distinctly recall you saying that...)
  30. Profile photo of Buiadh
    Buiadh Male 30-39
    6739 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 12:58 pm
    @5Cats - Yes I am Scottish.

    But my point is, that if it weren`t for the British then you`d have French as your only language.

    I also recall the part the 78th Highlanders played at the Plains of Abraham too.
  31. Profile photo of kairobert
    kairobert Male 18-29
    1623 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 12:59 pm
    Many people believe what they want to believe. The truth is often painful and people who are prone to bias do not easily find the truth.
  32. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 1:02 pm
    @5Cats: Wow. I hardly know where to begin with your last two posts. Let`s try this:

    (1) To call the hockeystick graph "faked" is absurd. Every major scientific body in the U.S., Europe, and Japan has validated (and contributed toward) its science.

    (2) There have been times that were warmer than others in the past, yes, but no times in recorded history as warm as what we`re experiencing right now.

    (3) If the world`s climate scientists were predicting that we are entering a short period of slightly elevated temperatures, as you seem to be suggesting, there would be little cause for concern. Alas, that is precisely what the climate scientists are NOT predicting. Rather, the Earth is warmer now than it has been in recorded history and the CO2 mechanism driving that warming will only drive temperatures still higher.
  33. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 1:07 pm
    Squrlz4Sale: The Medieval warm period was real, it`s recorded in tree rings around the globe and in ice cores. The `Hockey stick` is an aberration created by an erroneous equation.

    It`s very suspicious when warmists wouldn`t let others see the equation for nearly a decade, nor even see the raw data they claimed to have collected. They`ve even gone as far as to delete e-mails and data to avoid it becoming public.

    What normal rational scientist resists having their data and equations checked, except by a select few they hold to strict secrecy?

    Warmists have become so shrill so vitriolic that they are sending death threats, calling skeptics `holocaust deniers` and calling for armed revolution. Why? Because they are about to loose a major source of funding, the American Government. The House of Representatives is set to vote to defund the IPCC and it has the warmists frothing at the mouth like rabid dogs.
  34. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 1:21 pm
    Squrlz4Sale: Cap and Trade would be devastating to the global economy, not just our own, and for what? 3/10ths of a degree over 100 years time won`t make a damn bit of difference.

    The termites on planet earth create more greenhouse gases than man does. The volcanic eruptions around the world in the past 30 years have caused more pollution than mankind ever has. Please, don`t buy into the warmists crap. The solar cycle has much more to do with our earth`s weather cycles than anything else, and that cycle has been stunted lately. We should be nearing the peak of our sun`s sunspot cycle and yet we are observing much less than we should. This could be the start of a maunder minimum and a resulting mini-ice age. Such cooling would be much more devastating to us ecologically than any small amount of warming that`s being currently screamed at us about.
  35. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 1:23 pm
    @CrakrJak:

    Let`s examine that post of yours.

    Graf 1 ("erroneous equation"): A ludicrous assertion. Oh, those wacky career scientists. Publishing an erroneous equation for the past 15 years! And to think the National Academy of Sciences, which affirmed the graphs accuracy in 2006, got it wrong, too. Tut, tut.

    Grafs 2 & 3 (secret data): An outright falsehood. Mann`s original paper contains a URL directing the reader to EVERY data point used in the chart. I will note, however, that this assertion of yours is one of the favorite canards used by GW deniers of late. So you get extra-credit for being on the same page with the right-wing think tanks directing your posts.

    Graf 4: The ol` butt-hurt complaint. Sorry, but my sympathies lie with the career scientists, like Michael Mann, who have been vilified by the propagandists on Fox News.
  36. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 1:26 pm
    Trust me @Buiadh: We Canadians LOVE our Commonwealth Cousins! Watch when Canada hosts international curling: Bagpipers galore!
    We came to help you out in `14 and in `39 eh?
    (It`s something I usually have to explain to Americans: WW1: 1914 NOT 1917! WW2: 1939 NOT Dec 1941!) We were, and still are, happy to lend a hand!

    @Squrlz: And every society &etc has now renounced the Hockeystick as "flawed". It`s propoganda, plain and simple. Looks good when AlGore points to it SEVEN times in a "documentary" but teh science? It`s crap. Hide the decline!

    What about MY graphic below? It uses ICPCC data! Is it `a conspiracy` to actually LOOK at the real data? Explain!
  37. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 1:39 pm
    Even if global warming was a real issue, government would just be slow, inefficient and most likely just make the situation worse. This is on top of the fact that economic liberty and to some extent social liberty would just be stifled leading to a lower quality of life in the long run.
  38. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 1:44 pm
    @5Cats: Oh my goodness. You come on so manic, 5Cats, I sometimes don`t know what to make of you. Well, to address your last two points:

    (1) The hockeystick graph has been affirmed by every major American, European, and Japanese scientific body that has examined it. Saying it`s "fake," as you repeatedly do, doesn`t change that fact.

    (2) The chart you posted is textbook propaganda of the GW deniers. Out of hundreds of locales, it uses one in England that shows relatively steady temperatures over a 12-year period, plots that against global CO2 levels, and pronouces, "SEE?! There`s no correlation!"

    But guess what? Global warming is about GLOBAL temperatures. Cherry-picking one data set for this chart, and not using world temperature averages, is foolish. (Or, from the standpoint of the oil-industry propagandists who produced it, very clever.)
  39. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36852 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 2:03 pm

    @ 5Cats - dude! This bugged you? How many people have told you to STFU but this one bugged you?

    Well, sorry to have hurt your feelings, but in my defense, I was unaware you had any.

    Seriously, I`ve picked on you `cause you had enough gumpshun to fire back. Because you could take it and dish some back. But I guess it your feelings are bruised I will stop.
  40. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 2:08 pm
    Climatologists who disagree with the IPCC
  41. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 2:44 pm
    @Cajun247: The majority of the scientists who signed their name to the letter to The Wall Street Journal are not climatologists. Truly, it can`t be hard to find a collection of engineers, chemists, and a former astronaut who have lifelong contempt for liberal causes who will sign their names to what is, essentially, a political statement.

    I don`t mean to dismiss your link entirely; the letter WAS signed by a few scientists who, from what I can tell, are qualified to interpret global warming research. But I`d be a lot more interested in a link to a peer-reviewed scientific paper, published by bona fide climatologists, than a letter to the editor signed by an assemblage of conservative scientists.
  42. Profile photo of jamie76
    jamie76 Male 30-39
    2345 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 2:51 pm

    Male, 18-29, Europe
    4887 Posts Sunday, May 13, 2012 7:45:43 AM
    Could you imagine if the world was run by regressive right wing Americans?

    Imagine that...

    *shudder*


    One needs only to read the comments of certain posters here that are clearly regressive conservatives to know what that would look like and yes, shuddering is the appropriate response.
  43. Profile photo of jamie76
    jamie76 Male 30-39
    2345 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 2:52 pm
    Gerry1of1

    I was not aware that Madest hung up the badge...but that would explain a few things...or at least the one you pointed out.
  44. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 3:04 pm
    Just a final thought:

    Truly, I think what we`re seeing with the American global warming debate, if you can call it that, is a symptom of a society that has lost its way. In the `60s and `70s, this nation created NASA, an assemblage of engineers and scientists that were the envy of the world. Our universities and our public school system had created a middle class that was more respectful of scientists and scientific achievement than at any time in history.

    Now the fossil fuel corporations and their propagandists have gotten the upper hand. And when NASA, its planetary scientists, and our own universities are making findings contrary to the profits of the status quo, they are being belittled, attacked, and marginalized.

    It is a society cannibalizing its best talent and best institutions for short-term gain.
  45. Profile photo of Shelworth
    Shelworth Male 50-59
    389 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 4:47 pm
    I doesn`t really matter what we (the West) do, China, India, and the rest of the world will continue to burn more and more coal, pumping billions of tons of crap into the atmosphere. And they really have no choice if they want to feed and house their billions and billions of people. Just be glad you are already here, and not one of the future citizens of the world.
  46. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 6:31 pm
    Squrlz4Sale: Mann never gave out his original data, just the data he cooked through his equation.

    Btw, when skeptics did get a hold of his equation, they tested it with multiple random data sets and they all came out looking like hockey sticks.

    After that fact was revealed Mann disavowed the equation was his and said only he had the real one, which was a lie.

    The problem is with career scientists, like Michael Mann. They are too vested in their careers to be objective and hyperventilate at the mere mention of skepticism.

    Also, when Mann`s original data was finally discovered it came from just 4 bristlecone pine trees. That`s all, just 4 trees growing in the same general area to represent the whole world.

    Squrlz, I`ve read a lot on AGW. much more than you may realize. It`s a scam, a scam that`s being used by eco-nuts to scare the world into spending billions of dollars into cap and trade, and carbon credits.
  47. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 6:41 pm


    It`s self-perpetuating junk science that won`t do a damn thing to lower temperatures by any significant amount. Legislation based on it will raise food and fuel prices astronomically.

    Quit the scaremongering, the sky isn`t falling.
  48. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 6:55 pm
    "Um, I just made it? That a tiny country in the Artic zone needs to reduce CO2 to "save the world!" But two HUGE countries need not bother?"

    So we don`t have to play by the rules since China and India don`t? How petty.
  49. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 7:12 pm
    @CrakrJak: Your assertions regarding the work of Michael Mann are patently absurd. His work, which was affirmed by the National Academy of Sciences in 2006, has been based on multiple data sets, multiple temperature proxies (including tree rings, lake sediments, stalactite growth, ice cores, and coral growth), multiple independent statistical methods, and has been peer-reviewed by leading climatologists in both the U.S. and abroad.

    If you would like to get a glimpse of Mann`s ethical, scientific rigor, I encourage you to watch eight minutes of his 2006 testimony under oath before the U.S. Congress. LINK
  50. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 7:36 pm
    dude! This bugged you? How many people have told you to STFU but this one bugged you?
    It`s the @madest angle - and I usually need a little time between tauntings, or else the skin gets tender!

    The @madest problem goes back to before he was a Mod. He`s been rude beyond measure not only to myself but to others, THAT gets me mad!
    THEN he deleted ALL my suggestions, I suspect a few times but have proof of one. I know it`s proof, for everyone else it might seem to be my word vs his, but I KNOW.

    So, tease away! Just let me re-group now and then, and keep you-know-who out of things ;-)
  51. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 7:50 pm
    Oh, and thanks for kindly explaining!
    Read @jamie`s comment at 52:44 to see why I`m still P.O`d about the whole affair. People who believe others "should be silenced" really get me.

    @jamie: @madest quit immediatly after I provided proof of his mass deletions of my submissions. Could be coincidence? idk, I just know that my submissions remain in the pool now!

    @Fools: 33 < 2,300 You are obviously an idiot to ignore this.
    Honestly, it`s very liberal of you to say: "One rule for ME, a different rule for YOU". Some people (conservatives mostly) believe in "equal justice for all"...



  52. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 7:59 pm
    I never said "one rule for me, one rule for you." Everyone should be playing by the same, fair set of rules. China is well-known for its human-rights violations. Should the U.S. and Canada stoop to their levels of abuses? No, because we try to hold ourselves to a moral standard.

    Stop trying to insult my intelligence with petty name calling. I`ve never done that to you. I even told you I liked you at one point. Not anymore, of course. But we can still try to maintain a civil conversation.
  53. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 8:03 pm
    @CrakrJak: Your posts have contained such a shotgun blast of falsehoods that it would take me most of the night to address all of them, so I`ll just pick one of the whoppers:

    "The volcanic eruptions around the world in the past 30 years have caused more pollution than mankind ever has."

    Really, CJ, if you`ve read "a lot" on AGW, as you claim, and you`re still repeating that propaganda chestnut, you need some new books. The USGS has been debunking this volcano myth for over 30 years now:

    "On average, human activities put out in just three to five days, the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide that volcanoes produce globally each year."

    I`d provide the link, but it would probably be more instructive for you to look it up yourself, seeing as it takes all of 30 seconds: Google search terms = "USGS" and "volcano CO2 emissions."
  54. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 8:20 pm
    @FP (that`s better I hope) You just said it`s OK for 2,300 MILLION people to NOT follow Kyoto, but Canada`s 33 million should.
    NOW you claim otherwise? Fine.
    My comment before was on your stupid (sorry, as polite as I can muster at the moment) one.

    But you didn`t even do that! You start whining about "human rights". How is that an excuse for No Kyoto? What about India and the dozen or more other countries who get a "free CO2 pass"??

    You obviously know nothing on the subject and are here to troll. No more food for you!
  55. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 13, 2012 at 8:50 pm
    Gee I`m grumpy lately! :-<
    My intestines have been killing since Thursday night...
    ... so off to bed before I am too rude for IAB to handle!
  56. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 12:08 am
    Squrlz4Sale: As I said before, You can pump pretty much any data set of numbers through Mann`s equation and end up with a hockey stick looking graph. That fact makes the equation appear self-affirming, but it`s total crap.

    Your quote of 3 to 5 days of human generated CO2 is complete junk. Mount Pinatubo erupted in 1991, it spewed forth hundreds of millions of metric tons of pollution including sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, chlorine, bromine and iodine in far larger amounts than anything ever produced by man. This pollution was harmful to our atmosphere for years afterward, but our earth dealt with it and the sky didn`t fall in on us. In fact the global temperature cooled after the eruption.

    The CO2 was absorbed by our abundant plant life and algae. And although a lot of acid rain was produced, it too was catalyzed.

    Our planet is far more robust than you or the warmists care to admit.
  57. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 12:30 am
    Squrlz: The error in your quote is in the "Average" part. Since there are no major eruptions like Mount Pinatubo or Mount St. Helens right now, the "Average" global volcano emissions are very low, for the time being.

    When volcanoes like Pinatubo and St.Helens do erupt the amounts of the emissions soar well beyond anything man produces in years, decades or even centuries. It`s estimated that man produces around 1,362,000,000 tons of CO2 in a year, Pinatubo released over a hundred times that, plus other chemicals that are considered many times more harmful than CO2, air pollution wise.
  58. Profile photo of kinky_afr0
    kinky_afr0 Male 18-29
    583 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 2:23 am
    if you close your eyes, the DR guy from 2012 sounds like Gene Hackman
  59. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 5:07 am
    @CrakrJak: Amazing. I`ve provided links to the data of the U.S. Geological Survey, linked to the testimony of climatologist Michael Mann before the U.S. Congress, and pointed you toward the conclusions of the National Academy of Sciences, this nation`s most prestigious, non-partisan scientific body.

    You reject all of it, returning again and again to the same falsehoods you`ve been repeating from Post #1.

    Like water off a duck`s back, you reject fact for rumor, science for conspiracy, and the research of scientists, both here and abroad, spanning decades, for the malicious smears and innuendo manufactured by the fossil-fuel propagandists.

    My favorite quote of yours would have to be the following: "The problem is with career scientists, like Michael Mann." If that statement doesn`t identify you as "anti-science," I don`t know what could.

    (Cont`d next post)
  60. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 5:20 am
    (Cont`d)

    All of this is unfortunate. I like having discussions on here with conservatives and respect their positions. There are many issues on which conservatives and liberals can intelligently disagree.

    But going in perpetual circles with someone who is anti-science and who is somehow impervious to facts is another matter. I often find myself with some time to waste, but not THAT much time.

    Peace be with you, and I`ll see you `round the site. =^.^=
  61. Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 6:04 am
    @CrakrJak

    Volcanoes have always erupted. Man hasn`t always polluted.

    Think of the world as a bath full to the brim with volcano water. When we pour a cup full of human pollution water into it, it overflows.

    The world runs in a reasonably robust balance, but that balance already includes the volcanoes. Our input is additional and new, and is upsetting that balance.

    How much we`re upsetting the balance, and whether the world`s systems are robust enough to cope with it, are the questions worth asking.
  62. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 6:30 am
    @Musuko42: I think a closer analogy would be a half-filled tub. There`s water added constanly (by nature) and water evaporats out, maintaining a balance.
    Humans come along and start a slow trickle of water. Some say this will overflow the tub, in 100+ years. Others say the evaporation rate will increase and the tub will not overflow.

    The World is more than robust enough to deal with CO2. It`s been higher before! Temperatures have been higher too! There seems to be several "self cooling" mechanisms in play that are stronger as the temp rises (unlike the alarmist `models`) We`re still here...
  63. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 6:34 am
    @Musuko42: You make an excellent point regarding balance. While natural CO2 emissions (such as animal respiration and volcanoes) are balanced by natural CO2 removal (such as uptake by plants and the oceans), there is no counter to man`s CO2 emissions. This is throwing a state of rough equilibrium out of balance.

    But don`t be misled by CrakrJak`s faux science. Volcano emissions are DWARFED by man`s CO2 emissions, a fact known and accepted by volcanologists the world over.

    Experts estimate the Mt. Pinatubo eruption released 42 million tons of CO2 in 1991. Compare that with the current yearly CO2 emissions from fossil fuel burning: 26.8 BILLION tons.

    This is well-known information, available to anyone willing to read reports of scientists, such as those found on the website of the U. S. Geological Survey.
  64. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 7:21 am
    Crakr: The problem is with career scientists, like Michael Mann. They are too vested in their careers to be objective and hyperventilate at the mere mention of skepticism.
    So then by your logic ALL scientists are corrupt, because all of them rely on funding. Swing that judgemental pendulum the other way and ask if the `experts` you put stock in don`t have ulterior motives, hmm?

    Crakr: This pollution was harmful to our atmosphere for years afterward, but our earth dealt with it and the sky didn`t fall in on us. In fact the global temperature cooled after the eruption.
    And this demonstrates your laughable lack of knowledge of science. You *do* realize that SO2 from volcanic eruptions goes into the stratosphere and actually COOLS the Earth, right? Oh wait, no you didn`t.

    @5cats: Your graph actually proves the AGW point. When the Earth`s temp rises, CO2 is released from the oceans. With no temp increase, why would there be such a...
  65. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 7:21 am
    ...rise in CO2 then?
  66. Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 9:53 am
    @5Cats

    That is a pretty good analogy, actually. I`ll go with yours.

    "The World is more than robust enough to deal with CO2. It`s been higher before!"

    The world is, but WE probably aren`t.

    If the icecaps melt and the sea levels rise and species go extinct left right and centre, of course the world will recover...

    ...but our cities will be flooded and our economies will be shattered and our people will be starving.

    We need to be worried about climate change for our *own* sake.
  67. Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 9:56 am
    @Squrlz4Sale

    "But don`t be misled by CrakrJak`s faux science. Volcano emissions are DWARFED by man`s CO2 emissions, a fact known and accepted by volcanologists the world over."

    I wasn`t, don`t worry.

    I was hoping to get through to him that it`s not about how much we pump out versus how much nature pumps out. It`s as you say; it doesn`t matter. What matters is that nature has a balance for its own emissions, but doesn`t have one for ours.
  68. Profile photo of mcboozerilla
    mcboozerilla Male 30-39
    646 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 10:10 am
    This shouldn`t even be a political issue. Valuing money over listening to the scientific community is going to cost us all dearly.
  69. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 14, 2012 at 11:46 am
    @Musuko: Regardless of what the "chicken littles" say: the Earth HAS been warmer before, for centuries at a time, and humanity has survived.

    Sure, some adjustments will be required, IF the temp keeps going up.
    BUT to claim we humans are the ONLY reason is insane! To demand half the world DESTROY their economies, while the other half (who polute just as much) do NOTHING is even more insane!

    The main problem is overpopulation. No one has an answer for that, eh?
  70. Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    May 15, 2012 at 6:16 am
    @5Cats

    "the Earth HAS been warmer before, for centuries at a time, and humanity has survived."

    When did I say humanity wouldn`t survive? I said our cities will be flooded and our economies will be shattered and our people will be starving.

    I didn`t say humanity wouldn`t survive.

    But we will likely be badly hurt. Badly enough for us to want to avoid it.

    And referencing the past isn`t of much use to you unless you can reference a point in the past when there were seven billion humans alive at the same time when the world was warmer.
  71. Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    May 15, 2012 at 6:18 am
    @5Cats

    "The main problem is overpopulation."

    Correct!

    "No one has an answer for that, eh?"

    Incorrect! Stop having so many babies!

    Here`s an idea: encourage our childless lifestyles by letting us gay people get married!
  72. Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    May 15, 2012 at 6:20 am
    @5Cats

    "To demand half the world DESTROY their economies, while the other half (who polute just as much) do NOTHING is even more insane!"

    If China takes a dump in the pool, will the water be cleaner or dirtier if you take a dump too?
  73. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    May 15, 2012 at 9:22 am
    @Musuko: Lets take that `dump in the pool` and examine it:

    China: 1,300 pounds of poop into the pool
    Canada: 33 pounds of poop

    How to make the pool cleaner?
    Kyoto Accord: Canada must reduce it`s poop output by 6%! China, however, can POOP AWAY!
    THUS: Poop is reduced from 1,333 pounds to 1,331 pounds HOORAY!

    Sane People: Um, China should poop a lot less!

    Reality: If Canada didn`t poop AT ALL, it STILL wouldn`t make the pool any cleaner! And that would mean Canada would return to the pre-stone age, no fires even! NO electricity, NO cars, NO heat in winter, NO farming. Is that going to happen? I sure hope not!!!
  74. Profile photo of Stormwolf
    Stormwolf Female 40-49
    74 posts
    May 18, 2012 at 5:47 pm
    China, who boasts 1/5th of the worlds entire population, also has the worlds strictest population control policy...often enforced in draconian fashion (aborting the near-term infant, or flat out killing it at birth). This has worked so incredibly well for China, hasn`t it?

    If we can`t get the country with the single largest population to even pretend to follow "green" laws, the rest of the world must suffer and be forced back into the dark ages to compensate?

    At what point does this start to turn into a rally cry of "Lets nuke China before they drag the rest of the world under?"...a justification for the survival of the rest of the planet, if you will. What about other 3rd world countries who don`t follow "green" laws?

    The rest of the world hates it when the US "gets involved" in the matters of other countries, but...what this seems to be saying is that advanced countries not only have the right, but the OBLIGATION to

Leave a Reply