Duncan Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20070528&s=****burn “When measured reality doesn't cooperate with the lurid model predictions, new compensating factors are "discovered," such as the sulfate aerosols popular in the 1990s, recruited to cool off the obviously excessive heat predicted by the models. Or inconvenient data are waterboarded into submission, as happened with ice-core samples that failed to confirm the modelers' need for record temperatures today. As Richard Kerr, Science's man on global warming, remarked, "Climate modelers have been 'cheating' for so long it's almost become respectable." The consequence? As with the arms-spending spiral powered by the cold war fearmongers, vast sums of money will be uselessly spent on programs that won't work against an enemy that doesn't exist. Meanwhile, real and curbable environmental perils are scanted. Hysteria rules the day, drowning useful initiatives such as environmental cleanup, while smoothing the way for the nuclear industry to reap its global rewards.” Interesting take from The Nation and I’m looking forward to reading the next installment. For those interested… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_****burn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 I've been saying for at least a year that it's WAY more than a little suspicious that most arguing on the left side of this issue declare, "it's already been decided. Global warming is for real and we're the cause." Or "all of the world's top scientists agree that we're causing global warming." You ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS have to be suspicious anytime one side wants to "close down" the argument. If they can make valid points, they will. If they can't, they'll refuse to discuss it, and call the other side names. "Ignorant, uninformed, head-in-the-sand conservatives, etc., etc." Sound familiar? I can't wait until the sun enters its approaching 50-year cooling trend. Course, the left is already dishonestly preparing for that too. Notice it's called "Global Climate Change" now. That way, they can cry no matter which way the trend goes. It's ridiculous. It's like betting all 20 horses at the Kentucky Derby. Sadly, there are entirely too many people out there who can't see what's really going on. So the fight against the "new" phantom menace will continue. I'm really anxious to see Hillary's plan to warm the sun back up though. Good luck with that. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 Global warming predictions are irrelevant. Let's have clean water and clean air. I think we can all agree on that but it seems your attention has been refocused on straw men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 I've been saying for at least a year that it's WAY more than a little suspicious that most arguing on the left side of this issue declare, "it's already been decided. Global warming is for real and we're the cause." Or "all of the world's top scientists agree that we're causing global warming."You ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS have to be suspicious anytime one side wants to "close down" the argument. If they can make valid points, they will. If they can't, they'll refuse to discuss it, and call the other side names. "Ignorant, uninformed, head-in-the-sand conservatives, etc., etc." Sound familiar? I can't wait until the sun enters its approaching 50-year cooling trend. Course, the left is already dishonestly preparing for that too. Notice it's called "Global Climate Change" now. That way, they can cry no matter which way the trend goes. It's ridiculous. It's like betting all 20 horses at the Kentucky Derby. Sadly, there are entirely too many people out there who can't see what's really going on. So the fight against the "new" phantom menace will continue. I'm really anxious to see Hillary's plan to warm the sun back up though. Good luck with that. :laugh: we don't need to heat up the sun, just the planet. pop a hole in her and there should be enough hot-air to sustain us to the next millenium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 If the left really believe in global warming that will melt the ice-caps that will cause floods in eastern sea countries.... how come they aren't building pipes that will re-route the water to desert/dry areas that need the water? There's a ton of desert in Nevada, California, Arizona, Utah that could use it... Just my idea... if they really believe so strongly in this they will fund an effort like this as strongly as we fund our military... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurrayH81 Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 I'm really anxious to see Hillary's plan to warm the sun back up though. Good luck with that. :laugh: I am thinking you really, really don't want to know that plan might entail. Let's just say it is likely physical, personal, un-spiritual, and disgusting to 99% of the population (but then what about Hilary and Bill isn't?) lol /hail:helmet: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 If the left really believe in global warming that will melt the ice-caps that will cause floods in eastern sea countries.... how come they aren't building pipes that will re-route the water to desert/dry areas that need the water? There's a ton of desert in Nevada, California, Arizona, Utah that could use it... Just my idea... if they really believe so strongly in this they will fund an effort like this as strongly as we fund our military... umm ... you realize there is a difference between ocean water and drinking water, right?If we could solve water problems in the Southwest by pumping water from the ocean, we could do it right now - it's not like there is a shortage of water in the ocean right now. In any case, I think the point of the article is good. The environmental debate seems unnecessarily focused on global warming. I'm not entirely sure whose fault it is, but both sides seem to have drawn the battle lines there. It seems to me that there are very simple reasons to curb our emissions - like maybe keeping the air that we breathe a little cleaner? And wouldn't it make sense to cut back on oil consumption to reduce our economic dependence on the Middle East? Global warming seems like one of the the least pressing reasons to be environmentally sound - it baffles me that we're arguing about it all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 If the left really believe in global warming that will melt the ice-caps that will cause floods in eastern sea countries.... how come they aren't building pipes that will re-route the water to desert/dry areas that need the water? There's a ton of desert in Nevada, California, Arizona, Utah that could use it... Just my idea... if they really believe so strongly in this they will fund an effort like this as strongly as we fund our military... The desert kind of needs to be dry or you would kill almost every type of animal living in it. Ocean water also destroys the nutrients in soil, so it would only make it more of a desert, but hey, at least your trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 It takes too much energy to process ocean water into drinking water? But I thought the balance of humanity was in question!?!?!?!?! We're doomed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 Global warming predictions are irrelevant. Let's have clean water and clean air. I think we can all agree on that but it seems your attention has been refocused on straw men. Can't disagree with this. Worst outcome is that our planet is cleaner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSB 21 Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 umm ... you realize there is a difference between ocean water and drinking water, right?If we could solve water problems in the Southwest by pumping water from the ocean, we could do it right now - it's not like there is a shortage of water in the ocean right now. http://www.technologyreview.com/Nanotech/16977/ A water desalination system using carbon nanotube-based membranes could significantly reduce the cost of purifying water from the ocean. The technology could potentially provide a solution to water shortages both in the United States, where populations are expected to soar in areas with few freshwater sources, and worldwide, where a lack of clean water is a major cause of disease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 http://www.technologyreview.com/Nanotech/16977/A water desalination system using carbon nanotube-based membranes could significantly reduce the cost of purifying water from the ocean. The technology could potentially provide a solution to water shortages both in the United States, where populations are expected to soar in areas with few freshwater sources, and worldwide, where a lack of clean water is a major cause of disease. Hey thats great. Glad to be wrong. Except for our deserts don't really need water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan Posted May 13, 2007 Author Share Posted May 13, 2007 Can't disagree with this. Worst outcome is that our planet is cleaner Isn't that the point of the article? Let's focus our efforts and wealth cleaning up the environment and keep the false fear mongering out of the equation. Nobody wants a dirty environment but there are ulterior motives behind the global warming alarmists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan Posted May 13, 2007 Author Share Posted May 13, 2007 Hey thats great. Glad to be wrong. Except for our deserts don't really need water. They did before they were deserts. Wait, maybe they didn't when they were frozen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EersSkins05 Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 IT'S A LEFTIST CONSPIRACY!!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!! (by the way, please ignore stories like these that demonstrate that the right has suppressed evidence of global warming at the behest of the oil behemoths that have funded them for the past 20 years. Carry on.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 If the left really believe in global warming that will melt the ice-caps that will cause floods in eastern sea countries.... how come they aren't building pipes that will re-route the water to desert/dry areas that need the water? There's a ton of desert in Nevada, California, Arizona, Utah that could use it... Just my idea... if they really believe so strongly in this they will fund an effort like this as strongly as we fund our military... because its salt water brother (when it melts into the sea).... were you joking? sorry if I missed it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 I guess they don't teach about desalinization in school anymore. You young kids need to pay more attention in science class. I know it takes a lot of energy but it's still possible... how does our Navy keep a fresh supply of water on board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 ok go ahead you have my full support Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 I don't think it matters which side is right about global warming. The human race is tragically crapping where they eat anyway in plenty of other ways. The biggest threat that every inhabitant of this planet faces is the continued overpopulation of man. A great reduction in human population or even a near-extinction event would be the true best thing for Planet Earth. Also- It's not the planet they are trying to save. It'll be here LONG after we're gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 Chachie...Does that mean you are gonna take one for the team or are you volunteering someone else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 Chachie...Does that mean you are gonna take one for the team or are you volunteering someone else? :laugh: **** it. Charles in Charge sucked anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.