tvashtarkatena Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 (edited) Hiding ones head in the sand is a common reaction to worsening conditions. The sad part about this so called 'debate' is that, as it continues, the effects of human produced co2 are coming far sooner and at a far greater magnitude than even conservative models predicted. Unfortunately, some of those same models predict truly catastrophic effects in the not so distant future; rapid sea level rise, truncating (that means to shorten or cut off, Stonehead) the Gulf Stream to Europe, and wiping out most of the world's plankton, which is, after all, only our primary oxygen supply. Personally, I think we're screwed. It's the old 80/20 rule. Only 20% or less of the population need be fucktards to block any real solutions from happening. I find it a bit unfathomable that folks like FW are willing to fuck their own kids in the ass with regards to the planet they'll have to live on in order to indulge in their contrarian personality disorders and fit in with their fellow fucktard tribal members, but hey, what could an atheist possibly know about this kind of moral decision, let alone good parenting? You'd think they'd err on the side of caution, particularly given the stark physical evidence today, but I guess that's for pussies. As this shit comes down, don't look for the fucktards to wake up and smell, well, anything having to do with reality. They'll hunker down even harder, waving their bibles, ranting about prophesy, recycling worn scraps of junk science...pretty much what they're doing now, only a lot louder. The good news is that our future planet will probably mandate a substantially reduced population. Edited December 1, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete_H Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Shit, I'd argue the even larger problem is over-population, which creates the demand for the infrastructure responsible for industrial emissions as well as tangible pollution and demand for limited resources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johndavidjr Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 FW (perhaps too much television?) thinks there's a NASA study underway regarding soot in the arctic. Actually, it was completed three or four years ago. The two (2) researchers involved believe that sooty snow caused up to 19 percent of the Earth's total warming to date. "Greenhouse gases, which trap outgoing energy, are primarily responsible for the remaining temperature increase and are considered the Earth’s most important overall climate changing mechanism." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 The good news is that our future planet will probably mandate a substantially reduced population. true. start with yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 This entire discussion is stupid. I don’t understand why one would not want to error on the side of caution? Even if a little bit is true about global warming/climate, that is still enough information to do something about it…..right? Please answer this…… If global warming is 100% true. What would be the reasoning for change? How would moving away from big oil and coal benefit this county financially? What is the financial agenda for the liberals who push global warming change? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gertlush Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Would anyone give a shit about Al Gore if he didn't have this bandwagon to jump on? I'm just glad it's all the fault of goverment and oil companies and that we have nothing to do with it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Shit, I'd argue the even larger problem is over-population, which creates the demand for the infrastructure responsible for industrial emissions as well as tangible pollution and demand for limited resources. True, but the religious version of fucktard have successfully quashed formerly successful population control programs in places like Mexico and India, and there are still plenty of folks right here who seem to be pumping more than their fair share of new little engines of consumption and waste production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 (edited) Would anyone give a shit about Al Gore if he didn't have this bandwagon to jump on? I'm just glad it's all the fault of goverment and oil companies and that we have nothing to do with it Sooo....Al Gore's to blame because he was successful at getting the word out about the effect of our own individual behavior? The populace was supposed to, you know, already JUST KNOW what the aggregate effect of their individual lifestyles? Do you ever post anything that actually makes any sense at all? OH, and BTW, regarding your second statement: that can be found nowhere in Gore's or anyone else's thesis, for that matter. We're all to blame...that's been the mantra from day 1. Edited December 1, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gertlush Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 According to your earlier statement we've known about this for decades. Kyoto was mid-90s.. we must have known something then? Notice these problems never get "solved", hell who wants to get a real job. Being against global warming is like being against beating baby seals. It's easy, it makes you look good and you don't have to do anything. So I take it you won't be driving up to Lillooet this winter? Oh wait, driving is 1.1% of emissions so that's fine. You won't be flying anywhere? oh, flying is 0.2% of emissions so it's not a big deal. You'll downsize your house & take the bus to work? No it's easier to talk about windmills and electric cars 20 years down the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 According to your earlier statement we've known about this for decades. Kyoto was mid-90s.. we must have known something then? Notice these problems never get "solved", hell who wants to get a real job. Being against global warming is like being against beating baby seals. It's easy, it makes you look good and you don't have to do anything. So I take it you won't be driving up to Lillooet this winter? Oh wait, driving is 1.1% of emissions so that's fine. You won't be flying anywhere? oh, flying is 0.2% of emissions so it's not a big deal. You'll downsize your house & take the bus to work? No it's easier to talk about windmills and electric cars 20 years down the road. it's not TTK's fault - it's all the "other" people - fucktards one and all (a group with which he, of course, denies his own membership in) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 I've been fighting windmills since 1605. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete_H Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Shit, I'd argue the even larger problem is over-population, which creates the demand for the infrastructure responsible for industrial emissions as well as tangible pollution and demand for limited resources. True, but the religious version of fucktard have successfully quashed formerly successful population control programs in places like Mexico and India, and there are still plenty of folks right here who seem to be pumping more than their fair share of new little engines of consumption and waste production. But its my right as a god-fearing christian to father 15 children to fill my fleet of pre-purchased minivans with jesus fish emblems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 They are harmful to the environment. They kill birds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 [video:youtube]lvvRHhsQhi8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=a-path-to-sustainable-energy-by-2030 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 it's not TTK's fault - it's all the "other" people - fucktards one and all (a group with which he, of course, denies his own membership in) too crass and simple - much of the solution has to come from outside ourselves as individuals - i can't invent a more fuel efficient car, but i can buy one - i can't convert the country to accomodate electric cars, but i can buy one - the solution requires governments, corporations and consumers all to play a part, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 [video:youtube]xe85OaacwB8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Libtards will similarly bring our soaring national pride down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 I read that in Time Magazine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 (edited) [video:youtube]lvvRHhsQhi8 12 tons of supersonic love-for-Gaia comin atcha Edited December 1, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Need to get the carbon back in the ground. What is most efficient method? Use solar/wind/water power, make lots of solid carbon from atmospheric CO2 and methane. Bury solid carbon Use of excess power permits overcapacity - during times of high wind or sunny days when supply exceeds demand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bug Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Shit. I just logged on after a brief absence from spray and you already have 15 pages of "stuff". Thank God its not about anything important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Then the archaea can eat the buried carbon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 what we need is a real rain to wash all the scum off the streets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Population growth is good for environment. Replace cars with pedicabs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.