Whistle blowing on Global Warming

[CAP1]

Is the episode on youtube? (drool).
Anyway, you can expect the N-Pole to be completely frozen in December Still....

it just aired lst night. they were saying that the episode could be downloaded on ituned i think?

[Penguin]

they aren't fossil fuels, and we aren't gonna run out.

What aren't fossil fuels? 

They need to keep their noses out of the situation and allow the market to determine the value.

Which will fall dramatically.  If we let the market determine the value of food, farmers will go out of buisness.
With the farmers out of buisness, you will set off an even worse chain of events.

I will now give you an example of what you are trying to do: Enter Kenya

We are sending thousands of tons of free grain over there every day.  The farmers are out of work, and now you have a capital city that has the nickname Nairobbery (Nairobi).  If you try this on a nation already hit by hard times, it's a recipie for disaster.

I would submit that the people that are making these decisions are poorly suited for any manual labor and in fact their positions more closely resemble that of thieves.

1. Let's keep the ad hominem attacks out.

2. Of course they are not suited for manual labor, they spend most of their time at a desk!

3. Prove your point, explain who, what, when, how, where, and why are stealing from others, or otherwise taking from one party for their benefit.


"...but just by going there i think they've done more than some of these "scientists"."

What is your point?  Is this an attack on the scientists; if so, the point is false, as there has been quite a bit of research done on the poles.  Also, you have missed the point, since the north pole is more of a group of islands.  Antarctica is where we are experiencing the real melting.

It doesn't matter if the interior is frozen as long as the exterior is melting, on any object.  Since this force will only increase as we keep pumping out CO2, CO, CH4, and other greenhouse gasses, the interior will eventually become the interior. 

Where is this debate going?  This seems to be closer to a point against a false dichotomy (If it isn't A, then it is B by default: A fallacy since the possibility of C wasn't discussed).  Explain how the Earth isn't getting warmer, and how we aren't wrecking the rainforests, and how the icecaps aren't being melted. 

Think about it.

-Penguin 

[CAP1]

What aren't fossil fuels? 

Which will fall dramatically.  If we let the market determine the value of food, farmers will go out of buisness.
With the farmers out of buisness, you will set off an even worse chain of events.

I will now give you an example of what you are trying to do: Enter Kenya

We are sending thousands of tons of free grain over there every day.  The farmers are out of work, and now you have a capital city that has the nickname Nairobbery (Nairobi).  If you try this on a nation already hit by hard times, it's a recipie for disaster.


1. Let's keep the ad hominem attacks out.

2. Of course they are not suited for manual labor, they spend most of their time at a desk!

3. Prove your point, explain who, what, when, how, where, and why are stealing from others, or otherwise taking from one party for their benefit.


"...but just by going there i think they've done more than some of these "scientists"."

What is your point?  Is this an attack on the scientists; if so, the point is false, as there has been quite a bit of research done on the poles.  Also, you have missed the point, since the north pole is more of a group of islands.  Antarctica is where we are experiencing the real melting.

It doesn't matter if the interior is frozen as long as the exterior is melting, on any object.  Since this force will only increase as we keep pumping out CO2, CO, CH4, and other greenhouse gasses, the interior will eventually become the interior. 

Where is this debate going?  This seems to be closer to a point against a false dichotomy (If it isn't A, then it is B by default: A fallacy since the possibility of C wasn't discussed).  Explain how the Earth isn't getting warmer, and how we aren't wrecking the rainforests, and how the icecaps aren't being melted. 

Think about it.

-Penguin 

OIL, coal, gas, etc.

[Penguin]

Uhh, I don't know if you know this or not, but those fuels come from the compressed, fermented bodies of plankton and other sea creatures from the dinosaur age. 

That process takes millions of years, so yes, we will run out.  Not to flame, but get your facts straight!

-Penguin

[saggs]

OIL, coal, gas, etc.

I believe CAP1 is referring to the Abiotic Oil theory, basically that some oil/hydrocarbons are not made from biological material, but are created much deeper in the earth, from non-biological carbon deposits dating back to the earths creation, and slowly seeps up to the level where we can drill it.  While not the most popular theory, you cannot discredit it easily either, seeing as we have evidence of non-biological  hydrocarbons in the form of methane on Titan, and it's right there on the surface.

So don't be so quick to judge others, on whether they have their "facts straight"

[CAP1]

Uhh, I don't know if you know this or not, but those fuels come from the compressed, fermented bodies of plankton and other sea creatures from the dinosaur age. 

That process takes millions of years, so yes, we will run out.  Not to flame, but get your facts straight!

-Penguin

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38645

RAther an old article, but it is backed up by some military people i know.

http://thesolidsurfer.typepad.com/the_solid_surfer/2005/11/oil_a_renewable.html

http://www.321energy.com/editorials/bainerman/bainerman083105.html

[CAP1]

I believe CAP1 is referring to the Abiotic Oil theory, basically that some oil/hydrocarbons are not made from biological material, but are created much deeper in the earth, from non-biological carbon deposits dating back to the earths creation, and slowly seeps up to the level where we can drill it.  While not the most popular theory, you cannot discredit it easily either, seeing as we have evidence of non-biological  hydrocarbons in the form of methane on Titan, and it's right there on the surface.

So don't be so quick to judge others, on whether they have their "facts straight"

i didn't know what it was called, but yes.......that is what i was referencing.
 i think the same theory explains natural gas.

 coal is pretty much very old, hardened oil.

[Masherbrum]

Uhh, I don't know if you know this or not, but those fuels come from the compressed, fermented bodies of plankton and other sea creatures from the dinosaur age. 

That process takes millions of years, so yes, we will run out.  Not to flame, but get your facts straight!

-Penguin

Actually, they are from Prehistoric Swamps and Marshes.   

[Penguin]

Right you are 

I was explaining oil, I forgot to mention coal.

-Penguin

[Simba]

Bet the poor folks shivering in Britain at the moment wouldn't object to a li'l 'instant global warming'.

<leans back into his armchair in sunny Spain>

 

[Widewing]

Think about it.

I have thought about it, and researched the science. When I write a white paper, I must at least prove a significant portion of my hypothesis. AGW advocates can't prove ANY portion of theirs. These is so much supposition that is blended with some limited truth that the average person can't begin to sort it out.

A second point is that the AGW mafia equates being a AGW skeptic as being anti-environmentalist. They, not the skeptics are polarizing any discussion. I'm an advocate for doing everything feasible to preserve and repair the environment. Yet, I believe AGW is nothing less than a corrupt political movement with a large number of gullible followers. These people would call me a "denier" (but not to my face, I promise you). Al Gore's, "man made global warming is settled, their is no intelligent debate remaining", is the most remarkably pompous and arrogant statement I can recall ever hearing from a public figure. Especially coming from a guy whose personal carbon footprint is an order of magnitude greater than that of your typical American family.

Seriously, this has become more that just mind boggling silliness, it's become an intellectual tragedy.

Just today, a report was released, which claims that, "Man's best friend could be one of the environment's worst enemies, according to a new study which says the carbon pawprint of a pet dog is more than double that of a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle."

Now I get it (who said that I was slow to catch on?). The world is doomed due to far too many mutts. So, keep the Hummer, just shoot the damn dog. While we're at it, we should drown the cats too. "Cat poo can be even more toxic than doggy doo -- owners who flush their litter down the toilet ultimately infect sea otters and other animals with toxoplasma gondii, which causes a killer brain disease."

I think there's a brain disease they've overlooked.

Right now, Europe is suffering through what some are calling the coldest December since 1944. North America is experiencing the same. Last year was colder than the year before, and the year before that was colder than the preceding year. Yet somehow, using various schemes, these "scientists" insist that 2009 will be the hottest year on record. Sure, and little pink angels will fly out of my bellybutton tomorrow. The Copenhagen climate meeting (the most disorganized anarchy that I've seen in a long time) was punctuated with an "extraordinarily" rare snow storm and freezing temperatures. Few failed to notice the irony of that. Maybe this weather will not be so rare going forward...

This illogical desire to change nature to preserve the world is pure folly. Nature leaves no survivors; never has, never will.

Clean the air, clean the rivers, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and heal the sick. That we can do.


My regards,

Widewing

[ghi]

 The United Nations was not created to impose and collect global taxes, there's something behind the scenes using this scary theory to make UN more powerfull and bring the  Novo Ordo Seclorum .  

[greens]

OH MY GOD!! the worlds gonna end in 2012. time to restock y2k food in sod house 

[Sabre]

I have thought about it, and researched the science. When I write a white paper, I must at least prove a significant portion of my hypothesis. AGW advocates can't prove ANY portion of theirs. These is so much supposition that is blended with some limited truth that the average person can't begin to sort it out.

A second point is that the AGW mafia equates being a AGW skeptic as being anti-environmentalist. They, not the skeptics are polarizing any discussion. I'm an advocate for doing everything feasible to preserve and repair the environment. Yet, I believe AGW is nothing less than a corrupt political movement with a large number of gullible followers. These people would call me a "denier" (but not to my face, I promise you). Al Gore's, "man made global warming is settled, their is no intelligent debate remaining", is the most remarkably pompous and arrogant statement I can recall ever hearing from a public figure. Especially coming from a guy whose personal carbon footprint is an order of magnitude greater than that of your typical American family.

Seriously, this has become more that just mind boggling silliness, it's become an intellectual tragedy.

Just today, a report was released, which claims that, "Man's best friend could be one of the environment's worst enemies, according to a new study which says the carbon pawprint of a pet dog is more than double that of a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle."

Now I get it (who said that I was slow to catch on?). The world is doomed due to far too many mutts. So, keep the Hummer, just shoot the damn dog. While we're at it, we should drown the cats too. "Cat poo can be even more toxic than doggy doo -- owners who flush their litter down the toilet ultimately infect sea otters and other animals with toxoplasma gondii, which causes a killer brain disease."

I think there's a brain disease they've overlooked.

Right now, Europe is suffering through what some are calling the coldest December since 1944. North America is experiencing the same. Last year was colder than the year before, and the year before that was colder than the preceding year. Yet somehow, using various schemes, these "scientists" insist that 2009 will be the hottest year on record. Sure, and little pink angels will fly out of my bellybutton tomorrow. The Copenhagen climate meeting (the most disorganized anarchy that I've seen in a long time) was punctuated with an "extraordinarily" rare snow storm and freezing temperatures. Few failed to notice the irony of that. Maybe this weather will not be so rare going forward...

This illogical desire to change nature to preserve the world is pure folly. Nature leaves no survivors; never has, never will.

Clean the air, clean the rivers, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and heal the sick. That we can do.


My regards,

Widewing

Well said, Widewing. Couldn't have said it better myself.  From one educated and thoughtful person to another,  !

[CAP1]

I have thought about it, and researched the science. When I write a white paper, I must at least prove a significant portion of my hypothesis. AGW advocates can't prove ANY portion of theirs. These is so much supposition that is blended with some limited truth that the average person can't begin to sort it out.

A second point is that the AGW mafia equates being a AGW skeptic as being anti-environmentalist. They, not the skeptics are polarizing any discussion. I'm an advocate for doing everything feasible to preserve and repair the environment. Yet, I believe AGW is nothing less than a corrupt political movement with a large number of gullible followers. These people would call me a "denier" (but not to my face, I promise you). Al Gore's, "man made global warming is settled, their is no intelligent debate remaining", is the most remarkably pompous and arrogant statement I can recall ever hearing from a public figure. Especially coming from a guy whose personal carbon footprint is an order of magnitude greater than that of your typical American family.

Seriously, this has become more that just mind boggling silliness, it's become an intellectual tragedy.

Just today, a report was released, which claims that, "Man's best friend could be one of the environment's worst enemies, according to a new study which says the carbon pawprint of a pet dog is more than double that of a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle."

Now I get it (who said that I was slow to catch on?). The world is doomed due to far too many mutts. So, keep the Hummer, just shoot the damn dog. While we're at it, we should drown the cats too. "Cat poo can be even more toxic than doggy doo -- owners who flush their litter down the toilet ultimately infect sea otters and other animals with toxoplasma gondii, which causes a killer brain disease."

I think there's a brain disease they've overlooked.

Right now, Europe is suffering through what some are calling the coldest December since 1944. North America is experiencing the same. Last year was colder than the year before, and the year before that was colder than the preceding year. Yet somehow, using various schemes, these "scientists" insist that 2009 will be the hottest year on record. Sure, and little pink angels will fly out of my bellybutton tomorrow. The Copenhagen climate meeting (the most disorganized anarchy that I've seen in a long time) was punctuated with an "extraordinarily" rare snow storm and freezing temperatures. Few failed to notice the irony of that. Maybe this weather will not be so rare going forward...

This illogical desire to change nature to preserve the world is pure folly. Nature leaves no survivors; never has, never will.

Clean the air, clean the rivers, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and heal the sick. That we can do.


My regards,

Widewing

you know, as well as the rest of us.....they'll find a reason that colder weather is a sign of impending warming.