Climate Change

[Rick Rowlands]

The green movement to reduce the quickening depletion of natural resources is good, and I am all in favor of that.  However that has been linked to the complete scam of global man made climate change which causes me to view all green advocates with suspicion. 

[northside lurker]

You're right, I was the one who assumed you made the ice age statement to say "we shouldn't believe global warming predictions now, because in the 1970's they were predicting an ice age."  If that's not why you brought it up, then I apologize.

[Why?Town]

Can you provice evidence to back this up?

There are studies showing that the rise and fall of co2 in the atmosphere FOLLOWS the rise and fall of global temperatures.  It is very interesting to note that during the industrial heyday of the 40s through the 70s massive amounts of co2 were produced yet the earth was cooling to the point of some scientists predicting an ice age, yet since the 70s, while man made co2 levels dropped, the earth is supposedly warming. Both of these points are quite opposite of what the Global Warming Scaremongers would have you believe. Another thing to consider is the percentage of man made co2 to all co2. That percentage is extremely small.

Using this logic, one could argue that the Earth is not round, because we used to think it was flat.  Or, that it does not revolve around the sun in the outskirts of our galaxy, because we used to think the Earth was at the center of the universe.

Statement: n. Something stated; a declaration.

Logic: n. The relationship between elements and between an element and the whole in a set of objects, individuals, principles, or events.

It should be clear that I simply stated what some scientists thought in the 70s.

You had to add quite a bit to turn my statement into "logic" that you could trivialize through comparisons to quite narrow-minded ways of thinking. I have to question your motive in that regard.

[northside lurker]

What do the environmentalists suggest we do to solve these acts of nature?

If we can't prevent an earthquake, or a volcano, what makes them think that man is capable of turning the planet into a pristine planet when even at its creation it was a boiling mass of fire and gasses?

By the way, many of the forest fires in California are caused by lightning strikes that burn thousands of acres every year. Are the environmentalists going to stop that?

I'm won't be able to answer your questions, because I'm not much of an environmentalist.  Which is why I rarely participate in these threads.

I don't really care if you believe in the whole "manmade global climate change" idea or not.  But, this attitude would also seem to indicate an unwillingness to change and become more environmentally friendly.  The same logic could be used to ask why people take their health so seriously.  Why should I eat right and exercise?  I might die of a massive heart attack tomorrow. (or even get hit by a car)  We can't prevent "acts of God," but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do what's right for ourselves anyway.

[Towntalk]

I've asked these questions before, but didn't get an answer so I'll ask them again:

1. Volcano's spew out tons of pollutants that the currents carry around the world ash and toxic gas. In Hawaii there are active volcano's as well as Peru. There is absolutely nothing environmentalists can do to stop them.

2. There are many "Old Faithfuls" that spew out gasses, and we can't turn them off.

3. Our planet has been struck over and over again by meteors, and reputable scientists acknowledge that Earth was struck several times over the course of the planets history that sent the planet into ice ages, and killed off life forms.

4. Solar storms endanger our planet, but there's nothing we can do to prevent a major solar flare from striking Earth ripping our atmosphere asunder.

What do the environmentalists suggest we do to solve these acts of nature?

If we can't prevent an earthquake, or a volcano, what makes them think that man is capable of turning the planet into a pristine planet when even at its creation it was a boiling mass of fire and gasses?

By the way, many of the forest fires in California are caused by lightning strikes that burn thousands of acres every year. Are the environmentalists going to stop that?

[northside lurker]

Global temperature change (up or down) is NOT fake! 

It's the "man made" part that's fake.

Can you provice evidence to back this up?

Did you know that scientists in the 1970s were worried about how mankind would survive the then impending ice-age?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ice+age+1970&aq=f&oq=

Using this logic, one could argue that the Earth is not round, because we used to think it was flat.  Or, that it does not revolve around the sun in the outskirts of our galaxy, because we used to think the Earth was at the center of the universe.

[Why?Town]

Global temperature change (up or down) is NOT fake! 

It's the "man made" part that's fake.

Did you know that scientists in the 1970s were worried about how mankind would survive the then impending ice-age?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ice+age+1970&aq=f&oq=

[ytowner]

Climate Change, aka Global Warming, aka Fake.

[Towntalk]

Two interesting articles about climate change:

Gems Point to Comet as Answer to Ancient Riddle

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/01/AR2009010101490.html?hpid=topnews

Climate scientists: it's time for 'Plan B'

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/climate-scientists-its-time-for-plan-b-1221092.html