It wasn't personal, I figure. Chinese individuals and the Chinese government are very different.
H.R. 2454 - "Cap & Trade": Your Take
- Thread starter drrty byl
- Start date
It wasn't personal, I figure. Chinese individuals and the Chinese government are very different.
He didn't say anything offensive to Chinese people....... Premature race card Played!!!!
I think this has avoided the point of the topic so back to it.
I can't afford gas as it is.... I better warm up the ole' bmx.
Cyrus
Iron Chef - Master Emeritus
There's nothing to take offense at, Qwachansey, because he's stating a matter of fact: The People's Republic of China is doing nothing regarding global warming, and doesn't intend to.
If you believe in the green movement, then you know that even a "step in the right direction" such as this means nothing without India and China (half of the world's population and a huge chunk of its economy) on board...And if you don't believe in the green movement, then you already realize how bogus this is.
The biggest green allies claim that the human influences to global warming are enough to catastrophically harm the planet and the human race, when there isn't much to really back this up other than a haunting, over-produced video made in the backseat of Al Gore's limousine.
It's these people who are trying to place limits on human carbon emission, wrongfully cited as the reason for future environmental damage to this planet...Which, when you think about it, is absurd. Carbon emissions are not only a standard of the modern life, but of human life as a whole. carbon dioxide is a part of your body, your blood, and your breathing...Essentially, you emit Carbon. So what will we do to "save the planet" from a bogeyman of epic proportions: kill every living being?
Even if I was a member of the green movement, and a firm believer in global cap and trade, I still would think that H.R. 2454 is BAD because India and China have not signed on to any agreement like that. Because those two haven't done anything, all that cap and trade legislation would lead to is an economic handicap for everyone else to have against us.
If you believe in the green movement, then you know that even a "step in the right direction" such as this means nothing without India and China (half of the world's population and a huge chunk of its economy) on board...And if you don't believe in the green movement, then you already realize how bogus this is.
The biggest green allies claim that the human influences to global warming are enough to catastrophically harm the planet and the human race, when there isn't much to really back this up other than a haunting, over-produced video made in the backseat of Al Gore's limousine.
It's these people who are trying to place limits on human carbon emission, wrongfully cited as the reason for future environmental damage to this planet...Which, when you think about it, is absurd. Carbon emissions are not only a standard of the modern life, but of human life as a whole. carbon dioxide is a part of your body, your blood, and your breathing...Essentially, you emit Carbon. So what will we do to "save the planet" from a bogeyman of epic proportions: kill every living being?
Even if I was a member of the green movement, and a firm believer in global cap and trade, I still would think that H.R. 2454 is BAD because India and China have not signed on to any agreement like that. Because those two haven't done anything, all that cap and trade legislation would lead to is an economic handicap for everyone else to have against us.
Last edited:
Articjedi
Active Member
Ugh, the stupid "humans breathe out CO2" fallacy again. When we breathe out CO2, it's only because we ate something, or we ate something that ate something (like a cow that eats corn) that took that CO2 out of the air in the first place. Therefore, there's no net emissions when a human, or any other living thing, breathes out CO2. It's the fact that we're taking CO2 that's been stored underground, in the form of coal and oil, and burning that into the air, that creates the problem.
I'm staying out of the most of the debate but I hate when people get this wrong time and time again. I hate messing with a very well put point, but it really peeves me when anyone gets this wrong.
Qwachansey
Active Member
Haha. I was born in Manhattan. I said I was born in China to make Darth Pika feel bad for his outrageous and rude sentence.
India and China do not represent the world. If you must know, China is taking steps right now to a greener world. You're using the excuse Bush does, but you know what? It's because you're too lazy to do anything. China and India should not influence our environmental ideas to the point where we do nothing. If we - the United States of America - stepped up, perhaps something would be done. I'm sure people in China may use the same argument as you - the United States doesn't do anything about global warming, so why should we? It's disgusting and disturbing that you think the carbon we emit individually relates to the carbon emitted from a factory. The reason you don't care about the environment is either that you are uneducated or just don't want to lift a finger - much like Bush.
Yes, carbon emissions are a fact of life. However, they can be enormously reduced. But because of fools like you, nothing is being done to save your children and the Earth (of course, making sure gas is below $3 a gallon with extra offshore oil drilling in coral reefs is more important than the fate of the Earth and all living things on it!).
The Earth should be the main worry. Because you know what? Without the Earth, there is no economy.
As for The Inconvenient Truth being the basic fact for all environmentally suportive arguments, good luck finding information denying global warming not writen by an unlicensed publisher who happily accepts checks from Exxon Mobil!
Qwachansey
Active Member
The 1st sentence I got when I looked up that book:
"State of Fear is, like many of Crichton's works, a fictional work "
Here's another quote on the book:
"Sixteen of 18 top U.S. climate scientists interviewed by Knight Ridder said the author was bending scientific data and distorting research."
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
Ha, I looked it up on Wikipedia and found this . . .
Doesn't seem very reliable to me if some of the scientists he quotes says he is distorting their work.
Doesn't seem very reliable to me if some of the scientists he quotes says he is distorting their work.
drrty byl
New Member
Here's a rare, opposing viewpoint:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=288952680655100870
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=288952680655100870
Qwachansey
Active Member
Really?
"Michael Crichton’s latest blockbuster, State of Fear, is also on the theme of global warming and is likely to mislead the unwary. . . Although this is a work of fiction, Crichton’s use of footnotes and appendices is clearly intended to give an impression of scientific authority." - Head of Climate Dynamics Group
Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:
Hahaha!
"You can't assume that CO2 will change the Earth. It never did in the past!"
In the past, there wasn't nearly as much CO2. Before 1800, there was so much less, fool!
Oh wait, thank goodness! Since this guy is supposedly a "Professor", he must be right!
Last edited:
I feel like if I pursue this further, I will sound like a conspiracy theorist, which hardly helps my point.
But just take this into account: your opinion is very emotionally charged. You don't have a higher level grasp on the science behind the accusations being made, nor do you know where the data is coming from, and the same goes for most of the politicians making the relevant decisions. Feel free to make your own conscientious decisions, but when you start rallying others with a weak basis in objective fact, chaos brews. Religion has showed us that time and again.
But just take this into account: your opinion is very emotionally charged. You don't have a higher level grasp on the science behind the accusations being made, nor do you know where the data is coming from, and the same goes for most of the politicians making the relevant decisions. Feel free to make your own conscientious decisions, but when you start rallying others with a weak basis in objective fact, chaos brews. Religion has showed us that time and again.
Qwachansey
Active Member
Perhaps... but the same goes for you.
Hahaha! A hilarious quote!
"None of the climate changes in the last 100 million years have depended on CO2"
But of course! CO2 was barely a worry until a few hundred years ago, not 100 million! There weren't even humans 100 million years ago!
Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:
And even if there is no man made global warming, I'd much rather use wind energy than foreign oil!
Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:
"We are told that the climate is changing. But the climate is always changing!"
Hahaha!
Last edited:
The same does go for me, you're absolutely right, but that is erroneous logic. "If we can't guarantee that we're right, and you don't have a definitive alternative, why not just assume that we're right?" Of course, that's a bit exaggerated (in most cases), but I need to magnify it to show my point.
Another point is, humans would die from pollution long before the planet. It's survived worse. Once serious effects start afflicting humans, (almost) everyone will join in to stop it. Don't start crying wolf until it's in town for certain, or the cries may be ignored when they matter most.
Another point is, humans would die from pollution long before the planet. It's survived worse. Once serious effects start afflicting humans, (almost) everyone will join in to stop it. Don't start crying wolf until it's in town for certain, or the cries may be ignored when they matter most.
Qwachansey
Active Member
They just showed a false graph. What a ridiculous video.
Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:
I find it funny that they have "Temperature" on the y-axis, but no numbers, just that convincing word, "Temperature".
Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:
I find it funny that they have "Temperature" on the y-axis, but no numbers, just that convincing word, "Temperature".
Last edited:
An Inconvenient Truth had graphs that made me laugh out loud, if I recall.
Average people don't respond to scientific data. America is a country of sensationalism.
Qwachansey
Active Member
"Dinousaurs didn't have factories, yet the Earth was warm then!"
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Okay, I'm closing the video!
Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:
And where are your "correct" graphs from? A book about the "fake scam" of global warming? You can't say I'm wrong for accepting these graphs, when yours are likely produced by someone who does not believe in man made global warming!
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Okay, I'm closing the video!
Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:
An Inconvenient Truth had graphs that made me laugh out loud, if I recall.
Average people don't respond to scientific data. America is a country of sensationalism.
And where are your "correct" graphs from? A book about the "fake scam" of global warming? You can't say I'm wrong for accepting these graphs, when yours are likely produced by someone who does not believe in man made global warming!
Last edited:
DarthPika
New Member
Qwachancy, just stop. Please. You very obviously have NO CLUE what you are talking about, and have even more obviously never taken a advanced class in these matters. The levels of CO2 were HIGHER than they are to day millions of years ago. The same goes for air temp. If you're even going to try to argue here, then PLEASE actually make sure you have your facts straight before posting again. Whats the point in a good argument if one of the sides only presents their own personal and very uninformed opinons with out ever doing reasearch?
Yes, the earth IS getting warmer, but we can NOT say that it is JUST people causing it. It's so complex that I seriously doubt anyone will be able to figure it out any time soon. Is it us, or is it just a natural pattern? Who knows. That beind said, it never hurts to cause less polution, but you do have to keep things realistic and not go fanatic.
Do you even know what the Green House effect is, or what Green House Gasses are?
Yes, the earth IS getting warmer, but we can NOT say that it is JUST people causing it. It's so complex that I seriously doubt anyone will be able to figure it out any time soon. Is it us, or is it just a natural pattern? Who knows. That beind said, it never hurts to cause less polution, but you do have to keep things realistic and not go fanatic.
Do you even know what the Green House effect is, or what Green House Gasses are?