Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1605 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 81  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:21 am 
Offline
User avatar
The Man, The Myth
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:12 am
Posts: 1080
Location: boulder
$úñ_DëV|L wrote:
This is true, and I'm not trying to downplay the effect we have on the Earth. I think carelessness on our part is wrong. I guess my point is that global warming isn't really much of a concern. Our negative effect on the environment is in areas other than climate.


That seems like a silly distinction to draw though because our effects on the climate and other aspects of the environment all stem from the same processes. I don't see how you can advocate less harm for other areas of the environment while advocating maintaining the status quo in regard to climate..

_________________
"my fading voice sings, of love..."


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 7:29 am 
Offline
User avatar
Administrator
 Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:51 pm
Posts: 14534
Location: Mesa,AZ
stonecrest wrote:
$úñ_DëV|L wrote:
This is true, and I'm not trying to downplay the effect we have on the Earth. I think carelessness on our part is wrong. I guess my point is that global warming isn't really much of a concern. Our negative effect on the environment is in areas other than climate.


That seems like a silly distinction to draw though because our effects on the climate and other aspects of the environment all stem from the same processes. I don't see how you can advocate less harm for other areas of the environment while advocating maintaining the status quo in regard to climate..


I'm not advocating anything. I just don't see global warming as a problem. That's all. I think we should be careful with what we do in regards to the environment; I just don't think global warning is a cause for concern.

_________________
John Adams wrote:
In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 8:47 am 
Offline
User avatar
Yeah Yeah Yeah
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:53 am
Posts: 4470
Location: Knoxville, TN
Gender: Male
I'm not sure who to trust...scientists at NASA and the EPA or this crappy envirotruth website.


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 8:56 am 
Offline
User avatar
Spaceman
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 1:03 am
Posts: 24177
Location: Australia
$úñ_DëV|L wrote:
I guess my point is that global warming isn't really much of a concern.

There are a lot of species which are on the brink of extinction. Many of these occupy small niches and their optimal zone for life is within a certain temperature range. Imagine what effect a relatively quick change in temperature would have on these organisms and those which depend upon them for food and shelter. Sure, this has happened before, but never so quickly. Organisms don't have time to adapt, so they will die. Then add the human impact on their environments; our civilisation has blocked off migratory corridors for plants and animals to move to other climates. The rate of extinction is going to go up exponentially.
And that's only taking into account one factor, threatened plants and animals. Now add in the impact that will have on humans... as will rising sea levels... most of our major cities, with huge populations, are on the coast. Higher temperatures will assist in the spread of disease. Water is already becoming more scarce, in my country in paticular. The list goes on. Ocean currents could change which would be very damaging to our way of life. It's a huge fucking problem and something has to be done. Even if we cut our carbon emissions immediately, the damage already done is irreversible. And this is all on a global scale.

_________________
Oh, the flowers of indulgence and the weeds of yesteryear,
Like criminals, they have choked the breath of conscience and good cheer.
The sun beat down upon the steps of time to light the way
To ease the pain of idleness and the memory of decay.


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 9:23 am 
Offline
User avatar
Jim's Pal
 Profile

Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 5:58 am
Posts: 4417
Location: a block from yoko
Gender: Female
i hope i can live to see an ice age. i would looove to see a big ass glacier coming at me. maybe its time for bed...

_________________
dash sez:
i found r.m because i was doing research on skyscrapers


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 3:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:47 pm
Posts: 2932
:?

_________________
For your sake
I hope heaven and hell
are really there
but I wouldn't hold my breath


Last edited by Man in Black on Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 4:48 am 
Offline
User avatar
The Man, The Myth
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:12 am
Posts: 1080
Location: boulder
Man in Black wrote:
Cartman wrote:
I'm not sure who to trust...scientists at NASA and the EPA or this crappy envirotruth website.


The government?
Please, dear boy, always have the good sense to at least question your government.

Did you question the government when they cooked up the fantasies they used as justification for invading Iraq? I bet you did. Your instinct was correct.


The fact that you see the government as one homogeneous organization scares me. Cartman mentions the EPA and NASA and you talk about Iraq? Good god.

I work for the government and I can tell you that where I work, 98% of the people were rooting for Kerry. And if I'm wrong about that number, it's because I was too conservative with my estimate. Man would I love to mention some of things I've overheard at work about Bush...

_________________
"my fading voice sings, of love..."


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:47 pm
Posts: 2932
stonecrest wrote:
Man in Black wrote:
Cartman wrote:
I'm not sure who to trust...scientists at NASA and the EPA or this crappy envirotruth website.


The government?
Please, dear boy, always have the good sense to at least question your government.

Did you question the government when they cooked up the fantasies they used as justification for invading Iraq? I bet you did. Your instinct was correct.


The fact that you see the government as one homogeneous organization scares me. Cartman mentions the EPA and NASA and you talk about Iraq? Good god.

I work for the government and I can tell you that where I work, 98% of the people were rooting for Kerry. And if I'm wrong about that number, it's because I was too conservative with my estimate. Man would I love to mention some of things I've overheard at work about Bush...


So you're saying I should take the word of the EPA? NASA? Are you seriously not aware of all the problems at NASA the last 20 years?

Help me out then. Which government agencies should I trust? Which ones should I question?

...good god is right.

_________________
For your sake
I hope heaven and hell
are really there
but I wouldn't hold my breath


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Devil's Advocate
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:59 am
Posts: 18643
Location: Raleigh, NC
Gender: Male
macjunkie wrote:
i hope i can live to see an ice age. i would looove to see a big ass glacier coming at me. maybe its time for bed...


Image :lol:

I'm interested to know if the earth has ever experienced the same rapid rate of warming that it has over the last 100 years.
While I believe that fossil fuels are contributing, I also think it's foolhardy to assume that the earth isn't playing a part as well.


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:09 pm 
Offline
Yeah Yeah Yeah
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:25 pm
Posts: 3567
Location: Swingin from the Gallows Pole
stonecrest wrote:
My biggest gripe with those who think that global warming or climate change is a myth is that they don't seem to acknowledge the vast number of other reasons to support small-footprint technologies. Perhaps the biggest reason that people can relate to being our health. Look at the rates of asthma and so on near coal plants or in dense urban areas, look at the rates of cancer near nuclear power plants, mines, or farms that spray lots of pesticides, the list goes on and on.


But wouldn't you say that the # of cancer rates and asthma rates has gone down significantly since the 40's and 50's when they were burning coal in their homes as a heat source. Not many people had energy from coal plants and nuclear plants since they are only a few decades old.

_________________
This space for sale by owner. Contact within.


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Man, The Myth
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:12 am
Posts: 1080
Location: boulder
Man in Black wrote:
stonecrest wrote:
Man in Black wrote:
Cartman wrote:
I'm not sure who to trust...scientists at NASA and the EPA or this crappy envirotruth website.


The government?
Please, dear boy, always have the good sense to at least question your government.

Did you question the government when they cooked up the fantasies they used as justification for invading Iraq? I bet you did. Your instinct was correct.


The fact that you see the government as one homogeneous organization scares me. Cartman mentions the EPA and NASA and you talk about Iraq? Good god.

I work for the government and I can tell you that where I work, 98% of the people were rooting for Kerry. And if I'm wrong about that number, it's because I was too conservative with my estimate. Man would I love to mention some of things I've overheard at work about Bush...


So you're saying I should take the word of the EPA? NASA? Are you seriously not aware of all the problems at NASA the last 20 years?

Help me out then. Which government agencies should I trust? Which ones should I question?

...good god is right.


Have you not seen the number of prominent members of the EPA that have left during the previous Bush's administration? Have you not heard all the criticism that the EPA has spouted about being shackled or censored by the administration? I'm not telling you which organizations to trust or not trust, but your gross oversimplification of government is ridiculous.

For example, it's well known that the Bush administration is very opposed to climate-related legislation and also believes that global warming should not be taken seriously. Wait.. what's that you say? The EPA doesn't have the same position? Hold on a second.. NASA also has made claims of being stifled by the administration about climate change?

The sheer fact that these entities disagree with the administration over how its handling thing is enough evidence alone that they should be trusted.

I'm still scratching my head over your Iraq statement.

_________________
"my fading voice sings, of love..."


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:47 pm
Posts: 2932
stonecrest wrote:
Man in Black wrote:
stonecrest wrote:
Man in Black wrote:
Cartman wrote:
I'm not sure who to trust...scientists at NASA and the EPA or this crappy envirotruth website.


The government?
Please, dear boy, always have the good sense to at least question your government.

Did you question the government when they cooked up the fantasies they used as justification for invading Iraq? I bet you did. Your instinct was correct.


The fact that you see the government as one homogeneous organization scares me. Cartman mentions the EPA and NASA and you talk about Iraq? Good god.

I work for the government and I can tell you that where I work, 98% of the people were rooting for Kerry. And if I'm wrong about that number, it's because I was too conservative with my estimate. Man would I love to mention some of things I've overheard at work about Bush...


So you're saying I should take the word of the EPA? NASA? Are you seriously not aware of all the problems at NASA the last 20 years?

Help me out then. Which government agencies should I trust? Which ones should I question?

...good god is right.


Have you not seen the number of prominent members of the EPA that have left during the previous Bush's administration? Have you not heard all the criticism that the EPA has spouted about being shackled or censored by the administration? I'm not telling you which organizations to trust or not trust, but your gross oversimplification of government is ridiculous.

For example, it's well known that the Bush administration is very opposed to climate-related legislation and also believes that global warming should not be taken seriously. Wait.. what's that you say? The EPA doesn't have the same position? Hold on a second.. NASA also has made claims of being stifled by the administration about climate change?

The sheer fact that these entities disagree with the administration over how its handling thing is enough evidence alone that they should be trusted.

I'm still scratching my head over your Iraq statement.


So I should trust all government agencies that disagree with Bush (and by implication, agree with you)?

Seriously, how ridiculous is that?

_________________
For your sake
I hope heaven and hell
are really there
but I wouldn't hold my breath


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Cameron's Stallion
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:44 pm
Posts: 753
Buggy wrote:
I dont believe that it is within our power to fuck up the earth so bad that it would be uninhabitable.


No?

Image


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 8:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Man, The Myth
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:12 am
Posts: 1080
Location: boulder
Man in Black wrote:
So I should trust all government agencies that disagree with Bush (and by implication, agree with you)?

Seriously, how ridiculous is that?


I disagree with Bush on every issue? Thanks for letting me know.

If you don't understand the point that two people, or groups, in disagreement over something can't be working in cohorts, then I give up. You're welcome to explain to me how the EPA is untrustworthy, despite holding the opposite position, because the Bush administration used false pretense to go to Iraq, but I sure as hell don't see the connection.

_________________
"my fading voice sings, of love..."


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 8:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:47 pm
Posts: 2932
stonecrest wrote:
Man in Black wrote:
So I should trust all government agencies that disagree with Bush (and by implication, agree with you)?

Seriously, how ridiculous is that?


I disagree with Bush on every issue? Thanks for letting me know.

If you don't understand the point that two people, or groups, in disagreement over something can't be working in cohorts, then I give up. You're welcome to explain to me how the EPA is untrustworthy, despite holding the opposite position, because the Bush administration used false pretense to go to Iraq, but I sure as hell don't see the connection.


You're being intentionally obtuse, quite obviously,
The adventure in Iraq was simply provided as an example of why you should, at the very least, question your government.

By the way, whose dime are you on? Mine or the good people of your home state?

_________________
For your sake
I hope heaven and hell
are really there
but I wouldn't hold my breath


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Man, The Myth
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:12 am
Posts: 1080
Location: boulder
Man in Black wrote:
stonecrest wrote:
Man in Black wrote:
So I should trust all government agencies that disagree with Bush (and by implication, agree with you)?

Seriously, how ridiculous is that?


I disagree with Bush on every issue? Thanks for letting me know.

If you don't understand the point that two people, or groups, in disagreement over something can't be working in cohorts, then I give up. You're welcome to explain to me how the EPA is untrustworthy, despite holding the opposite position, because the Bush administration used false pretense to go to Iraq, but I sure as hell don't see the connection.


You're being intentionally obtuse, quite obviously,
The adventure in Iraq was simply provided as an example of why you should, at the very least, question your government.


And you're purposely evading my question. Tell me why an agency like the EPA should be considered untrustworthy.

Man in Black wrote:
By the way, whose dime are you on? Mine or the good people of your home state?


I thank you for your financial contribution, kind sir.

_________________
"my fading voice sings, of love..."


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Administrator
 Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm
Posts: 20537
Location: The City Of Trees
stonecrest wrote:
And you're purposely evading my question. Tell me why an agency like the EPA should be considered untrustworthy.


I don't know if "untrustworthy" is the right word, but I do think there is an inherent agenda. Any gov't agency depends on funding, and unless they give a reason to continue the funding, it won't keep coming.

This skepticism is higher for me when I consider a group like the IPCC, which is solely dedicated to climate change.

stonecrest wrote:
Man in Black wrote:
By the way, whose dime are you on? Mine or the good people of your home state?


I thank you for your financial contribution, kind sir.


:lol:


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 11:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:47 pm
Posts: 2932
stonecrest wrote:
Man in Black wrote:
stonecrest wrote:
Man in Black wrote:
So I should trust all government agencies that disagree with Bush (and by implication, agree with you)?

Seriously, how ridiculous is that?


I disagree with Bush on every issue? Thanks for letting me know.

If you don't understand the point that two people, or groups, in disagreement over something can't be working in cohorts, then I give up. You're welcome to explain to me how the EPA is untrustworthy, despite holding the opposite position, because the Bush administration used false pretense to go to Iraq, but I sure as hell don't see the connection.


You're being intentionally obtuse, quite obviously,
The adventure in Iraq was simply provided as an example of why you should, at the very least, question your government.


And you're purposely evading my question. Tell me why an agency like the EPA should be considered untrustworthy.

Man in Black wrote:
By the way, whose dime are you on? Mine or the good people of your home state?


I thank you for your financial contribution, kind sir.


So...you're lecturing me on the integrity of government as you moderate an internet message board while getting paid by taxpayers. I can assume that RM moderator is not on your job description?
Some(god knows not me), might call you a hypocrite.


The EPA? Well that's just too easy.
I could go on and on. Just say the word.

_________________
For your sake
I hope heaven and hell
are really there
but I wouldn't hold my breath


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:12 am 
Offline
User avatar
The Man, The Myth
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:12 am
Posts: 1080
Location: boulder
Green Habit wrote:
I don't know if "untrustworthy" is the right word, but I do think there is an inherent agenda. Any gov't agency depends on funding, and unless they give a reason to continue the funding, it won't keep coming.

This skepticism is higher for me when I consider a group like the IPCC, which is solely dedicated to climate change.


I disagree with that. An administration can affect where resources are alotted and shift the focus from one issue to another (i.e. energy efficiency to hydrogen storage), but it's going to run up against a lot of resistance if it tries to censor what's coming out of the agency. We saw this happen in the EPA, and it reached the media for a reason. Scientists are not going to climb over the fence for funding.

Man in Black wrote:
So...you're lecturing me on the integrity of government as you moderate an internet message board while getting paid by taxpayers. I can assume that RM moderator is not on your job description?
Some(god knows not me), might call you a hypocrite.


...except that I don't post/browse from work. Good try though ;) I typically work 20 hours a week there. (I admit that I do have 14 msgs posted from my work's IP over the 18 months that I've been there. Damn, you've caught me.)

Main in Black wrote:
The EPA? Well that's just too easy.
I could go on and on. Just say the word.


You could go on and on? I'm still waiting for you to start here. Stop evading the question and answer it.

_________________
"my fading voice sings, of love..."


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:15 am 
Offline
User avatar
Of Counsel
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am
Posts: 37778
Location: OmaGOD!!!
Gender: Male
Man in Black wrote:
The EPA? Well that's just too easy.
I could go on and on. Just say the word.


Word. I'm listening.

--PunkDavid (moderating on the client's time)

_________________
Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1605 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 81  Next

Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 10Club Management and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 3:52 pm