Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

[ob]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Originally posted by jimonica:<br /> Ob said,<br /><br />"Oh and ,try to inject some specifics if you have any.Generalizations are simply not good enough if you're going to attempt to discredit anything.Bring some knowledge to the table or kindly refrain from uncontrolled finger pointing"<br /><br /> Okay Ob,.....sniffle.....sniffle...... I'll try to do better.

You'll probably do whatever you like.Don't try to please me.Redeem yourself.Why not just start out with reasons of why you think any dated documents may or may not hold accuracy in todays science.Gotta list more than dates if you want my attention.I'm all ears.<br /><br />I don't think that the issue of Global warming needs to be believed or not believed .It's been established to some degree more than once.Problem is ,noones come up with a viable solution or a deadline date as to what if anything should or should not be done to rectify a<br />theoretical/factual phenomenon.I'm quite confident that finger pointing isn't going to help though.So where do we all begin to do our part.You willing to sacrifice the use of your automoblie asap.What would your reaction be if Bush decided tomorrow that all Americans would be limited to so many miles per week of auto use or suffer steep pentalties?Would you recognize his concern for the planets well being and have a different point of view?That's a rhetorical question btw.

 

[jimonica]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Ob said,<br /><br />"Why not just start out with reasons of why you think any dated documents may or may not hold accuracy in todays science.Gotta list more than dates if you want my attention.I'm all ears."<br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /> I'm not a scientist. But if you would like to read some updated info on global warming, from people who are experts in the field of global warming, you can start with the link I provided. And from there you can try running a search, using key words global warming and you'll find that the scientific experts are becoming increasingly alarmed at the rapid rate that our oceans warming and the rapid rate that our polar ice caps are melting. <br />BTW, we have remote Alaskan fishing villages that the natives have been fishing out of for hundreds of years and now they're being forced to move because the ice has gotten so thin. Hows that for facts. Not ten years old, but real life facts, here and now.

 

[ob]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Originally posted by jimonica:<br /> Ob said,<br /><br />"Why not just start out with reasons of why you think any dated documents may or may not hold accuracy in todays science.Gotta list more than dates if you want my attention.I'm all ears."<br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /> I'm not a scientist. But if you would like to read some updated info on global warming, from people who are experts in the field of global warming, you can start with the link I provided. And from there you can try running a search, using key words global warming and you'll find that the scientific experts are becoming increasingly alarmed at the rapid rate that our oceans warming and the rapid rate that our polar ice caps are melting. <br />BTW, we have remote Alaskan fishing villages that the natives have been fishing out of for hundreds of years and now they're being forced to move because the ice has gotten so thin. Hows that for facts. Not ten years old, but real life facts, here and now.

That's all great info.It really is.But what are the specific solutions?Do the esteemed scientists have that?Do they drive or walk to work?<br /><br />Point being...this is an issue that very single human being needs to work together on.We can start right here if you like.Finger pointing and condescending I feel almost certain will not help.Rectifying the issue I fear will require a significant life style change for all of us.How many that will be willing to partake is anyones guess.I personally would be reluctant to sacrifice/limit my auto use.How about you?

 

[jimonica]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Ob asked,<br /><br />"That's all great info.It really is.But what are the specific solutions.Do the esteemed scientists have that?Do they drive or walk to work?" <br /><br />Well I've heard a lot of ideas being presented.<br />We could start a Manhattan or an Apollo type of project. We could put our best and brightest in charge of developing a truly workable hydrogen car. Invest more in wind, solar and coastal wave energy. Maybe more light rail transportation for the larger cities. There is all kinds of possibilities, if we would just make a commitment and invest in refining these technologies.<br /><br />We could use our trade as a bargaining tool to get the rest of the world on board. We need to go after American corporations that move over seas to get around our environmental laws. Not to mention labor laws, but that's another story.<br /><br />And finally we need to vote out our leaders that weaken and don't enforce our environmental laws, like the current administration did.

 

[ob]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

And those options you mention have been on the table for years.Now we need to find wealthy companies/investors that can forsee a profit in the implimentation of these concepts.So far ,this has not happened on a large scale.Solar is great but presently requires vast amounts of area to generate significant amounts.Hydrogen fueled cars or alternative fuel vehicles will likely come to be in the relatively near future.In what capacity is still uncertain.The infrastructure of the fuel sources and the way industry uses them will simply take time and money to convert.It is not a quick fix by any means.Recognizing a problem and solving that same problem are opposite scenarios.Sadly it's the political partisanship game that gets most of the attention,and the remedy somehow gets lost in the mix.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Sadly it's the political partisanship game that gets most of the attention,and the remedy somehow gets lost in the mix.

That's more the point. <br />Not all issues require politicizing.<br />A census report and a little commonsense is enough for most people. For others, all the data NASA/NOAA can put together over a decade will do.<br /><br />For a select few all it takes is the utterances of a politician to settle the matter. Or at the very least.....close.... thier .....mind....

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Typical of jmonica, never read a word of the posts. What an interesting exercise in human nature. He was afraid of the date. He wanted to debate facts and he, as usual, failed to address anything. Except the date. I wonder what kind of person spends time on a site he referenced. Interesting. There was of course more there than just the superficial, but why don't you find a chart of the average temps for about 2000 years. It's interesting how they didn't have Americans or internal combustion engines to blame. It is interesting how some of us are interested in imposing their theories and by extension their convelueded solutions that involve additional control over the masses. Just another example of how the left uses the environment to exert control over others. It is interesting how environmentalists try to pass off the cow fart theory on the world. The fact they have an agenda is something we are not suppose to look at. But it is a rather new theory, so it must be right.<br /><br />Did you get this far in the absence of scientific poost?<br /><br /><br />"Fascism, animal rights and human rights.<br /><br />The most notorious environmentalists in history were the German Nazis. The Nazis ordered soldiers to plant more trees. They were the first Europeans to establish nature reserves and order the protection of hedgerows and other wildlife habitats. And they were horrified at the idea of hydroelectric dams on the Rhine. Adolf Hitler and other leading Nazis were vegetarian and they passed numerous laws on animal rights. <br /><br />'They had essentially a biological view of society,' Dr Furedi continues. 'They regarded society as an organism to which you were rooted through blood ties ... and felt much more comfortable with what they perceived to be natural than what were the products of human creativity. I think that's one of the reasons why [Hitler] had this celebration of the animal kingdom, the celebration of wildlife.' <br /><br />The historian Dr Mark Almond, of Oriel College, Oxford, goes further. 'Goering made ferocious blood curdling speeches saying that people who were cruel to animals, including scientists who did research on them, would be put in concentration camps,' he says. 'This was perversely part of the logic which could at the same time put people into concentration camps, on whom they experimented.' <br /><br />Frank Furedi agrees. 'History shows us is that whenever people begin to treat animals like human beings, it's only a smell step away from treating human beings like animals. And that seems to me the logical outcome of this nostalgic, sentimental approach towards animal rights."

 

[Bondo]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Originally posted by POINTER94:<br /> Typical of jmonica, never read a word of the posts. What an interesting exercise in human nature. He was afraid of the date. Interesting. There was of course more there than just the superficial, but why don't you find a chart of the average temps for about 2000 years. It's interesting how they didn't have Americans or internal combustion engines to blame.<br /><br />Did you get this far in the absence of scientific poost?<br /><br /><br />"Fascism, animal rights and human rights.<br /><br />The most notorious environmentalists in history were the German Nazis. The Nazis ordered soldiers to plant more trees. They were the first Europeans to establish nature reserves and order the protection of hedgerows and other wildlife habitats. And they were horrified at the idea of hydroelectric dams on the Rhine. Adolf Hitler and other leading Nazis were vegetarian and they passed numerous laws on animal rights. <br /><br />'They had essentially a biological view of society,' Dr Furedi continues. 'They regarded society as an organism to which you were rooted through blood ties ... and felt much more comfortable with what they perceived to be natural than what were the products of human creativity. I think that's one of the reasons why [Hitler] had this celebration of the animal kingdom, the celebration of wildlife.' <br /><br />The historian Dr Mark Almond, of Oriel College, Oxford, goes further. 'Goering made ferocious blood curdling speeches saying that people who were cruel to animals, including scientists who did research on them, would be put in concentration camps,' he says. 'This was perversely part of the logic which could at the same time put people into concentration camps, on whom they experimented.' <br /><br />Frank Furedi agrees. 'History shows us is that whenever people begin to treat animals like human beings, it's only a smell step away from treating human beings like animals. And that seems to me the logical outcome of this nostalgic, sentimental approach towards animal rights."

All Righty Then,............<br /><br />Global Warming is the FAULT of Roosevelt,+ Churchill....................<br /><br />How Dare them to Stop Hitler,+ the Earth Loving Nazis.............

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

And they burned a bit of oil during that conflict. That was the start of global warming, and it was the fault of Americans and the west.<br /><br />History shows far greater fluxuations and there are many other explainations for the rise in temperature, but to accept those theories you would then have to surrender the agenda of control over others. And that just isn't going to happen. Reading the link to 60minutes provide nothing more than a political hit piece with no hard facts as was promised, just observations and agendas. And adding in a little daily kos was really a nice touch. But short of statistics and historical references that are documentable and any real science other than accolades provided by the interviewer nothing as usual was provided. But it is what makes the left and most of their positions laughable. <br /><br />Lets look at the term Leading Scientists as referenced in my previous links. This from 2003, but that is three years old :<br /><br />Most press accounts characterize the IPCC report as a consensus of 2,000 of the world’s leading climate scientists. The emphasis isn’t on getting qualified scientists, said Lindzen, but on getting representatives from 100 countries, only a handful of which do significant research. "It is no small matter," said Lindzen, "that routine weather service functionaries from New Zealand to Tanzania are referred to as the world’s leading climate scientists. It should come as no surprise that they will be determinedly supportive of the process." <br /><br />Sad that I had to post this as it was in my previous links, but some just don't get it.<br /><br /><br />I know I an going to be spend all my free time searching CROOKSANDLIARS.COM for a balance presentation of facts.

 

[dogsdad]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

No Pointer, you're wrong. If we don't let Algore establish his eco-nazi dictatorship, we're all going to die.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Weather humans are the cause of global warming or not, many here have the attitude that we couldn't possibly have an effect on our environment.<br />The close-mindedness of those that go to bed every night wearing pajamas with cartoon charactures of their favorite president on them.<br /><br />From a domestic arguement standpoint the point is mute. The US and Europe are on the clean-up while the developing nations are in slash and burn the forests, industrial spew, and populate mode.<br /><br />Spending billions upon billions at an exponential rate every hurricane season, mudslide season, fire season is a small consequence.<br />Not having the money to rebuild, or rebuilding in areas that will just be destroyed again is a larger consequence.<br />Directly or indirectly but ultimately the consequences assaults our future standards of living. <br />Preserving that and accepting responsibility for the well being of our children are definitely conservative values. <br /><br />Even still there are more pressing issues that have nothing to do with the weather. <br />The inability to find common ground (seemingly on every issue)will ensure nothing gets done. And nothing will get done on the more pressing issues.<br />Many here exibit the willingness to embrace the group(s) that will see to that.

 

[jimonica]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Pointer wrote,<br /><br />--------------------------------------------------<br />"The most notorious environmentalists in history were the German Nazis. The Nazis ordered soldiers to plant more trees. They were the first Europeans to establish nature reserves and order the protection of hedgerows and other wildlife habitats. And they were horrified at the idea of hydroelectric dams on the Rhine. Adolf Hitler and other leading Nazis were vegetarian and they passed numerous laws on animal rights. <br /><br />'They had essentially a biological view of society,' Dr Furedi continues. 'They regarded society as an organism to which you were rooted through blood ties ... and felt much more comfortable with what they perceived to be natural than what were the products of human creativity. I think that's one of the reasons why [Hitler] had this celebration of the animal kingdom, the celebration of wildlife.' <br /><br />The historian Dr Mark Almond, of Oriel College, Oxford, goes further. 'Goering made ferocious blood curdling speeches saying that people who were cruel to animals, including scientists who did research on them, would be put in concentration camps,' he says. 'This was perversely part of the logic which could at the same time put people into concentration camps, on whom they experimented.' <br /><br />Frank Furedi agrees. 'History shows us is that whenever people begin to treat animals like human beings, it's only a smell step away from treating human beings like animals. And that seems to me the logical outcome of this nostalgic, sentimental approach towards animal rights." <br />--------------------------------------------------<br /><br />QC wrote,<br /><br />--------------------------------------------------<br />"This was my point when some were comparing our sitting Gov't to Nazi's and referring to conservatives as the "Reich wing". It is not as some have said that I was personally offended, it is that they were making a mockery of the horror of the Nazi's, those who fought to eliminate them and those who were eliminated by them."<br />--------------------------------------------------<br /><br />ALRIGHT QC, HERES YOUR CHANCE TO REDEEM YOURSELF!<br /><br />We have your buddy Pointer comparing environmentalist, vegetarians and animal rights groups to the Nazis! I'll be waiting to here you scold Pointer in your usual pompous self righteous indignation about the "mockery" he is making of all the people that died under the Nazi regime.

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Is that article a load of carp or what? .....JK

 

[gafteci]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Hi Everyone. I've been browsing this site for a couple of days, but I just registered 2 minutes ago, so this is my 1st post.<br /><br />I don't want to get people mad at me right off, but, let me tell you, some of you are really on the fringe!!!<br /><br />Pointer, your post about "The most notorious environmentalists in history were the German Nazis." makes me question your sanity. Are you suggesting that just because the Nazis were Environmentalists that WE should be polluters to show that we're not Fasists??<br /><br />The Nazis were very much into physical fitness, also. Should we all cancel our gym memberships and become fat and lazy (more so)?<br /><br />Should we also quit using all the technologies that came out of Nazi Germany? Our rocket and space program would have been decades behind if we did that.<br /><br />Nazi Germany did so much to hurt the world, but lets not throw out what little good came out of that horrible period.<br /><br />Don't worry Pointer, I'm not just going to pick on you. QC will get her's, also. (I'd use a smilely face if I knew how to)

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Welcome aboard, click on the "full reply form" for all the bells and whistles.<br />

 

[jimonica]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Oh boy! Just what we need another communist on Iboats! Welcome aboard gafteci!

 

[bootle]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Originally posted by gafteci:<br /><br />Don't worry Pointer, I'm not just going to pick on you. QC will get her's, also. (I'd use a smilely face if I knew how to)

QC is there something that you need to tell us ?

 

[gafteci]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Thanks, Skinnywater <br /><br /><br />Jimonica - I'm a Liberal. Communists like the color red. My favorite color is BLUE not RED ... like RED China or RED state!

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

Welcome aboard gafteci. New members are always an asset. <br /><br />Now go back and read the entire post from the beginning. You clearly missed my posts intention. The original fanatics (Nazi's) held animal rights above human rights, and that is congruent with the modern mindset of todays rabid environmentalist fringe. As I pointed out this is a quote from the link I provided earlier. It is a historical reference, not an indictment. But as you are new and everyone has a unique writing style, and mine is unique (strange), I would encourage you to take another run at it.<br /><br />I believe the Nazi's also used soap, I am not suggesting we abandon the use of it in defference to their atrocities. But the modern left wing whackos take whatever angle, regardless of the validity, (spotted owl, acid rain, snail darter, and now global warming) forward their political agendas. It is my contention they have little or no concern for the environment just the influence they can peddle by leveraging a theory, not even an undisputable fact. Replace these whacko's contention of fossil fuels and replace it with bubble gum and their postulate has the exact same validity. Or lack there of. This is inconsistant with the tenents that founded this country. But it is more consistant with other more radical and repressive political structures. Do I think they are NAZI's? No. Do I think they are above fabrication or overstatment in furthance of their repressive goals? You can answer that for yourself. But if you think forcing free americans to drive little hybrids instead of the vehicles of their own choice (SUV's) will change the worlds climate then clearly all is lost.<br /><br />Nice to see jmonica back to his usual tactic of personal attacks and obfuscation.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: Question about GW Bush and Global Warming

But the modern left wing whackos take whatever angle...

It's just too easy to define a "left wing wacko" and their agendas.<br />A honest debate and honest accounting of the short-comings of all political agenda's is the hard part.