Report: Global warming near critical point

[scorpioboy33]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6863557/


You know it's seems like this world is burning up and we just sit and watch it happen. Bush won't just Kyoto, we all mostly still drive cars. What kinda world is this gonna be in 50 years? Will there still be one. Very fucking scary, I hope something happens to reverse this cause I really don't want my daughter to have to suffer cause of our apathy.

Is there anything we can do individually that can curb this from happening?

[Nickdfresh]

Drive only a 'Low-Emissions' vehicle. Keep your car tuned up and the oil changed (use synthetic motor oils), keep the tires properly inflated, lower the heat a few degrees in your house/apartment, and don't spill gasoline. You will save money and protect the enviroment.

[ODShowtime]

use only battery-powered dildoes

[RogueHorseman]

Originally posted by scorpioboy33
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6863557/


You know it's seems like this world is burning up and we just sit and watch it happen. Bush won't just Kyoto, we all mostly still drive cars. What kinda world is this gonna be in 50 years? Will there still be one. Very fucking scary, I hope something happens to reverse this cause I really don't want my daughter to have to suffer cause of our apathy.

Is there anything we can do individually that can curb this from happening?

Many prominent scientists debunk the entire "global warming" theory... and, it is just a theory at this point in time.

[academic punk]

Originally posted by RogueHorseman
Many prominent scientists debunk the entire "global warming" theory... and, it is just a theory at this point in time.

It's a theory in so much as evolution is a theory, or weather patterns are a theory.

Meaning, a good deal of those "prominent" scientists are associates or appointed to their positions through the bush administration - whose Clean Air Act doesn't even recognize carbon dioxide as a pollutant, and doesn't impose mandatory emissions reductions on power plants with that justification. The administration believes this s a difficult time for the power industry, and for that reason as jusitfication doesn't even have a gradual reduction requirement in place. It's pretty crazy. (and just to keep this bi-partisan, the Clinton administraion failed to even send Kyoto to the Senate for ratification, meaning they passed the buck).

There is no doubt that our global society is putting more stress and prsssure on the quality of the environment than ever.

What we do locally can help, but only so much: Kyoto is perceived as fatally flawed b/c it doesn't apply to nations such as China and india, whcih, along with the rest of Asia, are exopected to account for as much as 70% of the global growth of greenhouse gases over the next 15 years.

(which is also a bizarre element of this administration: Firstly, Bush campaigned in 2000 on imposing madatory emissions cap and then reversed himself (thanks to pressures brought on him by the likes of Chuck Hegel, Jesse Helms, Larry Craig, and pat Roberts) upon winning the white house, and also then going on to say - RH's Prominent scientists do - "Ther's no such thing as Global warming", and then go onto say, "besides, the real problem is cheifly in asia".

so which one is it? is there a problem or not? or is jesus going to be here soon to fix all our problems? is there a connection to carbon dioxide belched out from factory smoke and the level of mercury in seafood? is there a connection between more emissions than ever and the rise of emphysema and asthma?

scorpioboy - pick up for yourself robert a kennedy's "Crimes Against Nature" - a very worthwhile, educational read. And for your duaghter pick up and read Seuss's "The Lorax" - maybe the most important book she'll read in her life.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by RogueHorseman
Many prominent scientists debunk the entire "global warming" theory... and, it is just a theory at this point in time.

No! Very wrong. There is no credible debunking of global warming and most of the "prominent scientists" are on the take form oil companies, sort of like the "scientists" that say fossil fuels like crude oil "come from rocks" and not the remains of dinasaurs.

[scorpioboy33]

Thanks AP I appreciate it I WILL!

Originally posted by academic punk
It's a theory in so much as evolution is a theory, or weather patterns are a theory.

Meaning, a good deal of those "prominent" scientists are associates or appointed to their positions through the bush administration - whose Clean Air Act doesn't even recognize carbon dioxide as a pollutant, and doesn't impose mandatory emissions reductions on power plants with that justification. The administration believes this s a difficult time for the power industry, and for that reason as jusitfication doesn't even have a gradual reduction requirement in place. It's pretty crazy. (and just to keep this bi-partisan, the Clinton administraion failed to even send Kyoto to the Senate for ratification, meaning they passed the buck).

There is no doubt that our global society is putting more stress and prsssure on the quality of the environment than ever.

What we do locally can help, but only so much: Kyoto is perceived as fatally flawed b/c it doesn't apply to nations such as China and india, whcih, along with the rest of Asia, are exopected to account for as much as 70% of the global growth of greenhouse gases over the next 15 years.

(which is also a bizarre element of this administration: Firstly, Bush campaigned in 2000 on imposing madatory emissions cap and then reversed himself (thanks to pressures brought on him by the likes of Chuck Hegel, Jesse Helms, Larry Craig, and pat Roberts) upon winning the white house, and also then going on to say - RH's Prominent scientists do - "Ther's no such thing as Global warming", and then go onto say, "besides, the real problem is cheifly in asia".

so which one is it? is there a problem or not? or is jesus going to be here soon to fix all our problems? is there a connection to carbon dioxide belched out from factory smoke and the level of mercury in seafood? is there a connection between more emissions than ever and the rise of emphysema and asthma?

scorpioboy - pick up for yourself robert a kennedy's "Crimes Against Nature" - a very worthwhile, educational read. And for your duaghter pick up and read Seuss's "The Lorax" - maybe the most important book she'll read in her life.

[Panamark]

Everytime a human being invents an environmentally friendly, non fossil fuel burning motor, the energy companies pay bigtime hush
money.

Thats all I want to say about that.

[Jano]

Originally posted by Panamark
Everytime a human being invents an environmentally friendly, non fossil fuel burning motor, the energy companies pay bigtime hush
money.

Thats all I want to say about that.

That's so true!!

[academic punk]

Scorpioboy -

It also just occurred to me that Bush's former EPA chief (and former NJ governor) has a new book out called It's My Party Too.

I have not read it, but I would assume the book takes a case against the Bush administration policies since she resigned the job pretty soon after several anti-enviromental policies and initiatives were set by the administration.
(several of which contradicted Whitman's comments and promises at press conferences and interviews)

Then again, she always took a beating for her environmental policies while she was gov of NJ. Businesses loved her, which probably explains why Bush appointed her in the first place.
But the numbers in her statistics were always faulted great;y by the environmenatl lobbies and industries.

Also, if you google "christine whitman robert kennedy interview" you'll find a pretty great interview between the two of them where kennedy makes several strong points against her (and she makes several good points herself).

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
No! Very wrong. There is no credible debunking of global warming and most of the "prominent scientists" are on the take form oil companies, sort of like the "scientists" that say fossil fuels like crude oil "come from rocks" and not the remains of dinasaurs.

And the rest of the scientists are funded by environmental charities.

So who knows.

I'm not too impressed when after years of research a bunch of top scientists here came back with a report saying that the globe will increase in temperature by between 2 and 11 degrees within 150 years.

What the fuck is the point if they can't be in any way accurate. Shows we don't really know what the fuck is going on.

Also I've still to hear a decent explanation of why the Earth cooled down from 1945 to 1970 when the worlds carbon dioxide emissions were rising rapidly.

Cheers!

[twonabomber]

Originally posted by RogueHorseman
Many prominent scientists debunk the entire "global warming" theory... and, it is just a theory at this point in time.

i'm debunking it too...it was 21 degrees this morning.