Will the USA green up its act?

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Rotax447
They say ignorance is bliss, Beetle, I guess that is true.  

I agree entirely, so why not just go on believing that global warming is a myth? Go prattling on about GDP. Pretend that a car that consumes twice as much fuel as the version with the small engine only causes the same amount of greenhouse gas.  Dig a hole in the sand and shove your head in good and deep...

Whatever anyone feels about anything that's been said in this thread or how it's been presented, the facts remain unchanged. There IS a global warming problem, it IS caused by greenhouse gas emissions, and the US emits 25% of the world total. And, as Nashwan has kindly pointed out, the US greenhouse gas output per GDP is about twice that of the world's next four leading economies. Slice it, dice it, an onion is still an onion.

The attitudes here remind me of the Elizabeth Kübler-Ross analysis of emotions exhibited by the terminally ill. The five stages are denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.

Stage 1, Denial

Hey, not us. We're not the problem.  We see no reason to conserve fossil fuels. Burning up all remaining oil stocks would be a good thing! Cutting back would harm our economy. No way, man. We don't want that Kyoto nonsense in our back yard!

Stage 2, Anger

How dare you accuse the US of being the country with the largest greenhouse gas output! How dare you suggest that I should give up my SUV! How dare you confront us with the facts!

Stage 3, Bargaining

OK, maybe there is a problem. Maybe we should do something, but we don't want to have to cut back on burning hydrocarbons. We still want high GDP. We still want WalMart and JCPenney. Well maybe if we dream about the answer that would help? Maybe if we get some plastic sheeting and put it in space, then maybe just cut back on fossil fuel burning 10%? I'm sure there's a deal that can be struck out of this mess. And my idea of plastic sheeting/fresnel lens is soooooo plausible. I saw it done in a sci-fi movie set in 2450, so it must be possible...


I don't think we're quite at Stage 4, Depression, just yet. But like Ghost, I want to know how big this plastic sheeting arrangement is going to be. Doesn't sound like anything that's going to happen in the next 100 years, and by then it will be too late.

[Jackal1]

When nailed to the wall and backed in a corner, then bafffle them with your BS, eh Beet?

[beet1e]

Again - for the benefit of Jackal -

Whatever anyone feels about anything that's been said in this thread or how it's been presented, the facts remain unchanged. There IS a global warming problem, it IS caused by greenhouse gas emissions, and the US emits 25% of the world total. And, as Nashwan has kindly pointed out, the US greenhouse gas output per GDP is about twice that of the world's next four leading economies. Slice it, dice it, an onion is still an onion.

[Rotax447]

Originally posted by beet1e
I agree entirely, so why not just go on believing that global warming is a myth? Go prattling on about GDP. Pretend that a car that consumes twice as much fuel as the version with the small engine only causes the same amount of greenhouse gas.  Dig a hole in the sand and shove your head in good and deep...

Whatever anyone feels about anything that's been said in this thread or how it's been presented, the facts remain unchanged. There IS a global warming problem, it IS caused by greenhouse gas emissions, and the US emits 25% of the world total. And, as Nashwan has kindly pointed out, the US greenhouse gas output per GDP is about twice that of the world's next four leading economies. Slice it, dice it, an onion is still an onion.

The attitudes here remind me of the Elizabeth K�bler-Ross analysis of emotions exhibited by the terminally ill. The five stages are denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.

Stage 1, Denial

Hey, not us. We're not the problem.  We see no reason to conserve fossil fuels. Burning up all remaining oil stocks would be a good thing! Cutting back would harm our economy. No way, man. We don't want that Kyoto nonsense in our back yard!

Stage 2, Anger

How dare you accuse the US of being the country with the largest greenhouse gas output! How dare you suggest that I should give up my SUV! How dare you confront us with the facts!

Stage 3, Bargaining

OK, maybe there is a problem. Maybe we should do something, but we don't want to have to cut back on burning hydrocarbons. We still want high GDP. We still want WalMart and JCPenney. Well maybe if we dream about the answer that would help? Maybe if we get some plastic sheeting and put it in space, then maybe just cut back on fossil fuel burning 10%? I'm sure there's a deal that can be struck out of this mess. And my idea of plastic sheeting/fresnel lens is soooooo plausible. I saw it done in a sci-fi movie set in 2450, so it must be possible...


I don't think we're quite at Stage 4, Depression, just yet. But like Ghost, I want to know how big this plastic sheeting arrangement is going to be. Doesn't sound like anything that's going to happen in the next 100 years, and by then it will be too late.

Beetle, a word of friendly advice.  Your posts are coming dangerously close to the "stupid is as stupid does" standard.

In terms that any American would understand, the lens would require the equivalent of about eight million rolls of Saran Wrap.

[lazs2]

there are some simple solutions... the type of products involved in GNP are part of the problem..  the U.S. has a very effective and strict pollution program...

But.. we produce (farm a lot of land) a lot of food.... we should stop producing food except for what can be used as biodiesel and plant all the farmland in forests...  

No more tree cutting should be allowed around the world.  

No airline or cruise ship travel should be allowed.

that would pretty much solve the problem.  if... there really is a problem.

lazs

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Rotax447
Beetle, a word of friendly advice.  Your posts are coming dangerously close to the "stupid is as stupid does" standard.

LOL! You're talking about putting 8 million rolls worth of Saran Wrap in outer space, and then sending guys up to adjust it, and you claim that I'm the one who sounds stupid.

The astronauts will need to divide it into segments, like you said, so tell me one thing: Will the space vehicle that deploys this work of ingenuity have a serrated blade running around the cargo door?

[Rotax447]

Originally posted by beet1e
LOL! You're talking about putting 8 million rolls worth of Saran Wrap in outer space, and then sending guys up to adjust it, and you claim that I'm the one who sounds stupid.

The astronauts will need to divide it into segments, like you said, so tell me one thing: Will the space vehicle that deploys this work of ingenuity have a serrated blade running around the cargo door?

If that is the way you think NASA engineers would build it, then yes, beetle, you are stupid.

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by beet1e
Again - for the benefit of Jackal -

Whatever anyone feels about anything that's been said in this thread or how it's been presented, the facts remain unchanged. There IS a global warming problem, it IS caused by greenhouse gas emissions, and the US emits 25% of the world total. And, as Nashwan has kindly pointed out, the US greenhouse gas output per GDP is about twice that of the world's next four leading economies. Slice it, dice it, an onion is still an onion.

And yet again for the benefit of Beetle....................... ................
When nailed to the wall and backed in a corner, then bafffle them with your BS, eh Beet?

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Jackal1
And yet again for the benefit of Beetle....................... ................
When nailed to the wall and backed in a corner, then bafffle them with your BS, eh Beet?

Global warming scientists= "Let`s grab some quick cash out of this new doomsday theory"
The climate on earth has been a constant changing thing since recorded history and I suspect it will conrinue that way until the earth no longer exists.
And yes , everything humans do on a large scale basis effects not only climate, but just about every aspect of nature. If the existance of a living, breathing, ever changing planet frightens you into such a frenzy, why not just end the horror for yourself now? That would be one less whining *** doomsdayer breathing perfectly good air that I might have a need for at some point.
I think pretty much anyone that has been on these boards for more than a week knows why you started the thread to begin with. Another "Evil U.S. Empire" thread. Well Ho Hum, yawn. Why don`t ya look up Skylilter. You could happily be jealous of the U.S. and our way of life together.
Yes the folks here in the U.S. have a heartbeat over 30 and are a very active, industrious mobile society. We also feed, clothe , support and protect a good bit of this planet. Deal with it.

[beet1e]

Nope, I'm not nailed in a corner, tied to a tree or anything like that. The subject of this thread is about global warming, and US greenhouse gas emissions, which far exceed those of other leading economies. Mash tried to say the list I provided was BS, and Nashwan has since provided further proof that it isn't. And, in case you hadn't noticed, the problem has been discussed at a conference in Montreal just last week, with delegates from a multitude of countries present, the Kyoto treaty having been signed by 157 different countries. If global warming was a cyclic thing, why didn't they also have conferences in 1950, 1900, 1850, 1800...?

I can see why your handle is Jackall - because you know Jack all about anything. Anything knowledge you do have is out of date, but you keep stepping in it by trying to hold sway about matters you know nothing about, like various countries (which you have never visited eg. Britain, Singapore), certain books (which you have never read - eg. the Cynthia Lennon book) the British Monarchy (of which your perception is based on the status quo that might have existed in the 15th century) and now global warming, whose existence you deny. Ah wait, I can see why you don't believe it - it's because 100 years ago (which is current by your standards) global warming wasn't a problem.

But go ahead - bring up your goal line defence, like you always do when you're out of steam( which is often), and remind everyone about my ladyfriend. You know Jack all about her too, but it suits you to keep bringing it up because it's old information, which is all you ever have. Guess you never did catch the latest. It's here . Go ahead and read it...

... on second thoughts, don't bother. Making do with incomplete, inaccurate and out of date information is more your style. Why change the habits of a lifetime?

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by beet1e
Again - for the benefit of Jackal -

Whatever anyone feels about anything that's been said in this thread or how it's been presented, the facts remain unchanged. There IS a global warming problem, it IS caused by greenhouse gas emissions, and the US emits 25% of the world total. And, as Nashwan has kindly pointed out, the US greenhouse gas output per GDP is about twice that of the world's next four leading economies. Slice it, dice it, an onion is still an onion.    

Global warming by human caused greenhouse gas emmissions is inference, accepted by many but refuted by other climatologists.  Many respected scientists believe at least part of the current trend is cyclical. Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions do not explain the receeding of polar caps on Mars.  Jupiter and Pluto are thought to be experencing a warming trend too.

While the majority of scientists do believe that human caused greenhouse gas is a leading contributor, science is not a democracy.  It is presently a theory (a strong one to be sure) but it is not yet a fact.

[Vulcan]

Originally posted by beet1e
and the US emits 25% of the world total.

Prove it, the only statistic saying this has been a "guess". Show me hard figures that are not guesswork.

[Skuzzy]

The percentage produced (a largely unproven statistic) means little, to nothing, without taking into account the amount consumed as well.

If you are really worried about CO2, then you should be beating up the folks who are destroying the greatest resource the world has in consuming CO2.  The rain forests.

The amount of CO2 the world produced was easily handled by the rain forests when they were unmolested by man.

[Rotax447]

What Skuzzy said is absolutely correct.  If Kyoto had been serious, they would have asked 157 nations (sans Brazil) to make an annual contribution from their GDP, to boost the Brazilian economy.   This, to prevent the further destruction of the rainforest.  I would have gone along with something like that.  The rain forests are the lungs, and the pharmacological laboratory of this planet.  If we want good stewardship of the rainforest, we had best be prepared to pay the steward.

We are all paying subsidies to Arab nations for their oil.  It it madness not to pay subsidies to Brazil, for removing the CO2 produced by burning that oil.

[lazs2]

I think that people are noticing that beet has an agenda that has little or nothing to do with global warming...

It has been shown that cutting our vehicle greenhouse gasses in half would have little or no overall effect yet... that is what he is asking for... worse... he would have no qualms about renting a 747 for himself and a friend to go on an extended vacation if the price were cheap enough...  He doesn't care how much vacation travel pollutes.

lazs