Climate Change Report

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whirlin

The stance from the EU, as told by some brit dude on Bill Maher (so clearly an authority), is something along the lines of,

We don't know if it's specifically man made or not, or how much of it is man-made. But regardless, the man-made portion isn't helping, and we're so completely fucked if we let it continue, we should try to fix it.

But I mean, conservatives are right... We can deal with a little mass extinction if it means keeping our free market!

---

Actually.. if we know anything, we know that the Government will never get anything done. Do you want to bet that it will be private industry that figures out something? and why is that? because it will be a HUGE FUCKING PAYDAY.

Free market to the rescue.

Once again.. 3 Billion a year JUST from the KNOWN U.S. Budget on Climate change Research aka "studies".

Can anyone here at all disagree that MAYBE we would be better spent spending that money on technology research instead?

Tell every climate scientist... "Fine we believe you, now fuck off, we are spending your grant on stopping it.. not another study on if it exists".

I have no problem with Green energy research.

I ~DO~ have a problem with someone telling me.. sorry.. your energy bill is going to have to double ~NOW~ because we want to fix the environment... when doubling my energy bill won't do a fucking thing to fix it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

So.. ever heard of something called the Sun?

as for confirmation bias on these boards??? Are you seriously fucking nuts?? there are what.. 5 MAYBE non liberals that seriously post here? There are what.. 20-30 Liberals? I would be better off posting on the NY Times then here for confirmation bias.

Want to know the reason why no study has ever had even a remotely correct outlook on the "impact of humans on the environment"? because it can't. We don't have enough data. Not even remotely. Not to mention, every fucking person int he universe is biased moron. One scientist puts data into his 'program" he will get out a different outlook then another scientist that puts it into his.

it's ok, keep sucking the tailpipe of YOUR party.

Until then.. why are you not doing something to save mother earth? Like.. NOT FUCKING USING A COMPUTER. it would sure help us all out.

---

LOL. Right. Every other thread in this section is a total circlejerk between you and a half-dozen other neocons. There may be "20-30 liberals" lurking around, but they (like myself) rarely post, because it's an exercise in futility. You're totally disinterested in reality, and you've proved it repeatedly, just like in your last thread where you were called out on your bullshit and ran screaming.

Like Bill Nye said to Marsha Blackburn--uncertainty in certain aspects, or incomplete pictures don't equate to debunking, and don't justify inaction.

And your personal charges of people's alleged hypocrisy are hilarious. "We can't do anything about global warming! Uh, uh.. Because then you'd have to stop using all your stuff! If you don't, you're a total hypocrite or something!" Or, y'know, the non-totally-insane approach, where we can all take steps to reduce our carbon footprint? Oh, yeah. Totally brainwashed liberal propaganda. Twit.

In the end the world will cleanse itself of overpopulation, via plague, natural disasters or some other gruesome thing. Too many people live in a small tiny area. I suspect China will get the next major plague/disease outbreak.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashliana

LOL. Right. Every other thread in this section is a total circlejerk between you and a half-dozen other neocons. There may be "20-30 liberals" lurking around, but they (like myself) rarely post, because it's an exercise in futility. You're totally disinterested in reality, and you've proved it repeatedly, just like in your last thread where you were called out on your bullshit and ran screaming.

Like Bill Nye said to Marsha Blackburn--uncertainty in certain aspects, or incomplete pictures don't equate to debunking, and don't justify inaction.

And your personal charges of people's alleged hypocrisy are hilarious. "We can't do anything about global warming! Uh, uh.. Because then you'd have to stop using all your stuff! If you don't, you're a total hypocrite or something!" Or, y'know, the non-totally-insane approach, where we can all take steps to reduce our carbon footprint? Oh, yeah. Totally brainwashed liberal propaganda. Twit.

---

You mean my last thread about Hagel and the defense budget? And me being pissed about the loss of the A-10?

Btw... how do you run away screaming in a thread. Let me know please cat boy.


Biggest posters in the Politics thread...

Back, Cwolff, TG, Latrin, PB, WarriorBird, Wrathbringer, Me, Rocktar, Ninja, Bob used to..

lets see.. those are just off the top of my head. TG generally goes both ways.. (lol) so that would be 5 vs 5. Considering Clyder doesn't count for anything... I would have to count them.. But I would say the starting of threads is pretty well split evenly. Infact.. Cwolff started this one. So maybe HE wanted a circle jerk with you. maybe you should PM him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnny Five

In the end the world will cleanse itself of overpopulation, via plague, natural disasters or some other gruesome thing. Too many people live in a small tiny area. I suspect China will get the next major plague/disease outbreak.

---

I don't give a fuck, I am hoping for Zombies. Biological ones. Will I survive? Who knows.. but it would be fun finding out.

Remember the Chinese curse.... "may you live in interesting times"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

Actually.. if we know anything, we know that the Government will never get anything done. Do you want to bet that it will be private industry that figures out something? and why is that? because it will be a HUGE FUCKING PAYDAY.

Free market to the rescue.

Once again.. 3 Billion a year JUST from the KNOWN U.S. Budget on Climate change Research aka "studies".

Can anyone here at all disagree that MAYBE we would be better spent spending that money on technology research instead?

Tell every climate scientist... "Fine we believe you, now fuck off, we are spending your grant on stopping it.. not another study on if it exists".

I have no problem with Green energy research.

I ~DO~ have a problem with someone telling me.. sorry.. your energy bill is going to have to double ~NOW~ because we want to fix the environment... when doubling my energy bill won't do a fucking thing to fix it.

---

To get to this point though, we need to first reach consensus that it IS an issue worth fixing/solving. But there's too much pushback to bring the discussion to that next step of fixing it. I think we've had this same discussion on one of the other 1000 climate change threads that we've done, and I agree with you that the actions taken aren't the best course of action, but we can't bring it to the next level of discussion until we all consensus that there's a problem worth doing something about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whirlin

To get to this point though, we need to first reach consensus that it IS an issue worth fixing/solving. But there's too much pushback to bring the discussion to that next step of fixing it. I think we've had this same discussion on one of the other 1000 climate change threads that we've done, and I agree with you that the actions taken aren't the best course of action, but we can't bring it to the next level of discussion until we all consensus that there's a problem worth doing something about.

---

The real problem is.. the only things we can do at this point, is limit fossil fuel usage. Which the American people in whole will not do. Neither will the world.

(This is for Cwolff) Since most coastal states are blue.. we should burn 10x as much fossil fuels. raise the ocean level higher, and flood those states. Then we can get republicans elected more often. MWHAHAHAHAHAHHAA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

My point exactly. But thats what people like cat boy do...

---

You are so far unhinged, it's difficult to even respond seriously. Let's give you the benefit of the doubt for the 500th time, only to have you run screaming from the thread (again) or post totally nonsensical replies (again).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

"WE ARE GOING TO ALL BURN/FREEZE!!!"

---

Please show me where any influential environmentalist is claiming "we're all going to burn, or freeze." Because the actual claims (you know, the ones you're totally disinterested in) are actually things like "If the planet continues to warm, we'll see mass starvation in the third world, which will create numerous problems for the entire world."

Oh, right. Liberal hysteria, right? Right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

What should we do.... what we have been doing. Research.

We spend so much on "Climate change research" I am surprised we haven't found a way to "cure" the earth.

We actually spend nearly the same on "Climate change Research" Not Technology research.. just funding to do "studies" as we do finding a cure for ALL cancer types.

---

Oh, hello, Mr. Totally-Unsourced-Claim. What exactly is the basis for your claim that we spend (who is "WE?") the same on "climate change research" as opposed to cancer study? And in any case, cancer affects 6-1.6 million people a year in the US, versus climate change, which represents significant risks to the entire population as well as every future generation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

So lets put this into perspective.....

Give money to fanatical Scientists so they can spend all their time coming up with study after study after study, along with their projections that are always wrong.... or Give money to scientists to find a cure for cancer. HMMMMMMM.

~~~IF~~~

---

Lol @ "fanatical scientists." Who are these magical fanatical scientists you're referring to? NASA? NOAA? Again, models not turning out to be 100% accurate (welcome to science) or certain parts being reworked in order to incorporate new data (again, welcome to science) do not equate to debunking, nor do they justify inaction. And again, your "climate change or cancer curing" emotional argument could be applied to anything. Should we pay for JSF35 fighters which will never see combat, or cancer research grants? Should we have mail delivery? But cancer research! Funny how we're able to do more than one thing at once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

Man made Climate change is FACT, why are we spending 3 billion a year to fund more studies? Why not use that money to fund technology research?

It's like saying.. well, we have proved that the earth is round.... we need 3 billion more next year to continue proving it.

---

You're contradicting yourself. First, you're blaming scientists for not being omniscient and knowing everything beforehand, then blaming them for continuing to research when they find that their models are incomplete. Which is it? And no, a lot of our efforts are focused on not just confirming that it's happening (which is already taken as a given, given the evidence), but to what degree, how to reverse it, etc. Again, you're uninterested in the reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

Some people may say.. well we need to know how bad it is. Why is that? If a study came out tomorrow.. but 99.99999999999999% of the scientists in the world and they said that they have proved 100% utterly that if we burn fossil fuels past june 20th we will reach a tipping point that will destroy the world. Do you think the WORLD will turn off every fossil fuel? Seriously? if they say 5 years from now.. do you think we will stop in 5 years? 50? Would you stop? Would you MAKE your neighbor stop?

NOTHING we do here in America means ANYTHING if China and India don't do it as well. Are you prepared to fight a war with China over Fossil Fuel Usage? That's what it will take you know.

I am all for alternative energy. I don't care what some of the assholes on here think.

For fucks sake.. I want to buy a Model S so damn bad. Tho I would prefer the model Z.. Falcon wing doors FTW. I helped my friend install solar panels on his roof. (Bought them for him as a house warming present). I rent, so I cant have them. I took a vacation back in 2004 and spent a week planting trees in PA. Do I believe in man made climate change.. I believe we impact the environment. I do NOT think it's as significant as some people think. I DO find it funny that a large number of the politicians that believe in it just HAPPEN to own stock in a "green" company.

---

Totally delusional. A global approach is indeed important, but that doesn't mean we can't do our part, nor that we can't exert influence over other countries. And look at that. You again try to de-legitimize supporters of environmentalism. This time, instead of "B-b-b-but you can't argue for environmentalism if you're using a computer!," it's "See!? These politicians invested in green companies whose futures they believe in! It means they want to make money!" OR, if you weren't a partisan hack and they were a right-winger, you'd be praising them as putting their money where their mouths are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

As for Cwolff's us vs them comment...

for fuck sake dude.. if you didn't know.. if cat boy got any more to the left, he would fall off the fucking graph. EVERYTHING it says is about what his party (Dems, duh) believe. The guy doesn't have a single thought in his head of his own. He has never said, you know, the GOP had a good idea on this one thing.... That's sucking the tailpipe.

---

:lol: Okay, buddy. You'd also need to back up that assertion. (Spoiler Alert: You won't). I've praised the GOP on here, including Dubya, multiple times (especially for his failed attempt at immigration reform). They're totally wrong on social issues, and if that makes me "off the fucking graph," then so be it.

You are a dyed-in-the-wool, Rush Limbaugh-style replaced-your-blood-with-GOP-Kool-Aid partisan, and you've proved yourself uninterested in reality, science, and even the appearance of being rational.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

The real problem is.. the only things we can do at this point, is limit fossil fuel usage. Which the American people in whole will not do. Neither will the world.

(This is for Cwolff) Since most coastal states are blue.. we should burn 10x as much fossil fuels. raise the ocean level higher, and flood those states. Then we can get republicans elected more often. MWHAHAHAHAHAHHAA

---

... who will deny the problem, and burn more fossil fuel inland!
:p

Well, wasn't that you point is that inadequate research has been done to find a way to stop the further damage? Perhaps synthesis and release of O3? What if it were to construct "Green Towers" in metropolitan areas? The problem is that deniers won't even come to the table to have that discussion until we spend another 30b to prove that it's a problem worth solving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

You mean my last thread about Hagel and the defense budget? And me being pissed about the loss of the A-10?

Btw... how do you run away screaming in a thread. Let me know please cat boy.

---

No, I'm referring to the thread where you claimed supporters of gay marriage advocate forcing Christian churches to perform same-sex marriages. You were challenged, repeatedly, to provide the slightest evidence of such a claim, and you ran from the thread, screaming how you weren't going to respond to the likes of me. Hint: That's called you conceding.