Some things aren't so simple dude... what if by eliminating C02, something crazy and adverse in the other direction happens? Who knows? You can not truly know what the consequences of your action is until the aftermath. Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (Ok that's for Quantum Physics, but you get my point)

See, here's a perfect example... to get rid of Saturated Fats, people made something even worse for us, and put it in our foods: Trans Fats. How would anyone know that these were bad for us? They were doing this for the good of humanity! Now, who knows what they are going to do to get rid of trans fats... I hope they get it right this time...

Maybe we should focus on something like, trying to end deforestation (not in N. America, but in S. America/Africa) because, fuck, breathing is alot more important than climate change.

_________________
transientb.bandcamp.com

Any reason for saying not in N.America?

Not saying that its wrong to say that though because I can think of several good reasons.

_________________

Because deforestation isn't actually a problem in N. America...

_________________
transientb.bandcamp.com

What to say about global warming. It is a very serious issue that should be corrected. Most people think that everyone driving everywhere causes it but in my opinion it's just the diesel trucks. You always see smoke coming off of them when they're not even working hard. That smoke is what is burning wholes in our ozone layer. Also the exhaust from refineries and other burning facilities. That is exactly where we get our smog effect. What I don't get is that some people just don't get the facts. By burning wholes in our ozone layer we are letting in dangerous UV rays to melt the polar ice caps therefore raising sea levels and changing climates drastically. Believe it or not The Day After Tomorrow is a factual and not so exaggerated movie. Some effects are a bit drastic but the rest is true. People should definitely give more care to the situation and our planet.

_________________
Don't hate me 'cause you ain't me!

Have you read anything that was written before your post?? And seriously, your opinion is that diesels are the culprit? Do you actually know anything about global warming/climate change, or are you simply parroting what you have heard with your own embellishments about smoke from trucks and factories burning a "whole" in the ozone layer? And finally, i'm dying to hear how much sea levels and temperatures have changed...could you fill me in? No need to google, just tell me off the top of that pretty li'l head--obviously you're well informed.

Hey ReX, you seem pretty well informed and I see you are a USAF Air Traffic Controller. Could you give us your thoughts on 9/11?

In a period of 9 months prior to 9/11, fighter jets had been scrambled 67 times following standard operating procedure, and 129 times in 2000.
http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/norad/

Then on 9/11 four different aircraft manage to fly around for over an hour without interception. From your experience, do you think that is remotely possible without a standdown order or deliberate sabotage?
http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/defe ... games.html



On topic:

Scientific poll shows 56% of Brits doubt man-made global warming, problem exaggerated for profit.

Interesting how they use the term "global warming" only once. "Climate change" is the fashionable term now.

_________________

Are you a patriot? Then spend 1 hour reading this site.

OK first of all, and mind you this was two years ago so i don't know the current, the sea levels have risen by at least an inch or two since my generation. It may not seem like a whole lot but in the long run it really counts. Second of all, the world's temperature has increased but about 2 or 3 degrees. I'm not an environmentalist or tree hugger but i still know the facts from the text books. Maybe you should have payed attention in science class hmmm?

Besides, the fact that global warming is not a serious threat is absurd! If you ask me, this world is not going to look too pretty in the next 1,000 or so years. We will never know but it sure doesn't look too good.

And yes I do have a pretty lil' head! Prettier than your's anyways...

_________________
Don't hate me 'cause you ain't me!

[font=Times New Roman, serif][center]I can attest to that. [/center][/font]

So exaggerated that scientists on one show talking about the scientific accuracy of the movie said that it didn't have much accuracy at all. I think if you're going to put up an argument, you should definitely come up with something better than a movie.
Other than that, I'm not going to get involved in the topic.

If you new how to read, then you would know that I wasn't only refering to the movie! Once again, this stuff is in text books that you read in school. Just because one or two reviews say it's exaggerated doesn't mean they're true.

_________________
Don't hate me 'cause you ain't me!

hey I heard that the Ocean fell 1 inch in the last two years... how come nobody ever heard about that?

_________________
transientb.bandcamp.com

I said I wasn't getting involved because you seem to think text books are infallible when that is not the case. Bias from people (that is who writes textbooks, people) can easily make information favor their opinions over the opinions of other people.

Also, what are you talking about reviews? I was talking about a science show talking about the scientific accuracy of movies, not a movie review.

I could write a long post and give plenty of perfectly viable arguments to your points, but honestly I don't want to take the time to do that.

this is going to be fun.
First of all, measuring sea levels on earth are much more complex than you realize, and fiercely debated. It doesn't involve a ping pong ball and a yardstick, trust me. I'm not saying i do understand, i am saying that i read enough to recognize when a subject is being over-simplified, like this one. And actually, one or two inches sounds like a whole hell of a lot to me, spread out over the entire seven seas. There are somewhere between 335 and 361 million square kilometers of ocean (see? even surface area is up for debate) That's quite a bit of water--where's it all coming from?
Secondly, the world's temperatures have increased by 2 or 3 degrees. They have? On average, all over the world? At some specific spot? Who measured and did the math? Is it 2? Or 3? I mean, this is important, right? How about this: In the US, average temps over the last 120 years went up about .33 degrees Celsius. Not even a whole degree. Global data puts it at about 1.1 degree in the same time span....120 years. I'm not saying this to downplay what you say, i'm pointing out that you're not well-informed. Either your textbooks were wrong, or you were texting in class. Even that degree of change is up for debate. Think about this: land use affects local temperature. Do you live near an airport? Ever notice it's always the hottest place around? All that concrete and asphalt soaks up heat and radiates it out later. Climatologists know this as the "heat-island" effect, and try to "correct" for it with various mathematical formulas. So they debate about that....
Thirdly, to say that global warming is not a serious issue is not absurd. Whether you consider yourself and tree-hugger or not, i am concerned about the environment and man's effect on it. You see, i have a little boy. Not even two years old yet, but i want the best for him. Land-use, deforestation, and trash are concerns for me with regard to the world i leave him. A planet that is heating to the boiling point is not.
I used to believe the same things you did. I did some research and changed my mind. I'm still willing to listen to other points of view, more data, more opinions. You aren't. Who is being unreasonable?
Finally, i did pay attention in science class. Turns out, "science" as we know it is constantly changing. Rules of English usage, however, are pretty static. Spellcheckers don't pick up "new" instead of "knew", nor do they know the correct placement of apostraphes. Maybe you should have payed attention in English class hmmm?

RE Virus

Expect a post from me on the 9/11 board. Tonight it's very late and i need to go beddy bye.

Off the top of my head though, I can tell you that military fighters intercepting civilian or commercial planes is a rare occurrence, only done when aircraft violate certain restricted airspace, like the President's bubble, for example. Also, losing communications with an aircraft is much more common than you'd think.
I'll check out some of your references and get back to you, on the appropriate board.

btw, I made that post about the ocean because it seemed like you pulled those numbers from an area far beyond your sphincter... let us see a source please pretty girl...

Funny story, Smog is actually benificial for me... when I lived in Taipei for a year, I could be in the sun all day and never get a sunburn... in Canada I go out in the sun for fifteen minutes and I'm a lobster...

_________________
transientb.bandcamp.com

I was always planning to add my thoughts to this topic... but didn't have time to do thorough research on the issues... However I came across this blog today, I couldn't agree with him more... read on http://euanmason.blogspot.com/

BTW that doco was a sad, badly researched joke!

Nothing will ever get done regardless.
Unless everyone agrees to a plan, then the actions of the few will be trumped.

The Conservative Party of Canada pissed off alot of people, but they put it simply. If Canada reduces greenhouse emissions completely, that 2 percent will have next to no effect on global warming, since global warming is a global phenomenon, and not a local one, it will have no discernible affect on Canada, except fuck them up economically.

National campaigns are pretty useless. We need some sort of Global Agreement that levels the playing field, cap greenhouse emissions on a per capita basis.

Of course it will never happen.

_________________
transientb.bandcamp.com

I will flip-flop that logic and say "Unless everyone agrees to a plan, then the resistance of the few (skeptics) will trump everyone else"

That's a cop-out argument same as the US; one that the former conservative government in Oz ran as policy. But they lost the last election and Australia has now signed Kyoto. So there are now only 2 countries who have signed but not ratified USA and Kazakhstan.
As for the economic impact issue, assuming the scientists are correct, better to do something now as the impact will be much worse later.
Isn't that what Kyoto an attempt at?

Is Kyoto even being followed though? I thought I had seen a report that said only 2 out of 100+ countries were even following the emissions guidelines set by Kyoto.

I tend to agree with Doyle unfortunately - even if we could convince industry or the average car driver to tone it down, there's still many countries industrializing to offset that. And the "official" line I've heard is that many of global warming's effects will happen regardless after we've passed a "tipping point". I think our oil-dependent culture is far too ingrained to cut out emissions to point where it will make any difference. I've heard some scientists who believe in global warming say even if we were to shut down every car from this instance on, the earth would still warm for the next 100 years or so. It's a pretty bleak outlook.

I think we're gonna look back 100 years from now when several miles of coastline has disappeared from America and be like "Oh crap."

_________________

Not really... I read the same/similar report... I was using it as an example of a global agreement vs. national policy.

I read that Kyoto would slow Global Warming by 5 years by the year 2100... if Every country ratified it.

We need to invent a fossil fuel replacement, and fast.

_________________
transientb.bandcamp.com

Even if you don't believe in Global Warming, there's one thing that can't be denied and that's the disappearance of the summer Arctic icesheet. I think that's the most dramatic instance of evidence that something's up even if the cause of it is disputed.

_________________

Agreed, a safe Hydrogen engine would be a good start, long term high power battery storage would also improve solar power.
Similar stuff is happening with the ice sheets around Antarctica too, not to mention Greenland.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6962
and
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070307075644.htm

Let's just give up and @*&# the environment...the garbage we're spewing out is good for Earth anyway ^_^

And there is the logical fallacy upon which your whole argument, and belief, is based.

(Did you read this post?)

Though I like how you make fun of Doyle's self-defeating (il)logic, crispy.

_________________

Are you a patriot? Then spend 1 hour reading this site.