An Inconvenient Truth - Page 3

Billcat · 30-01-2007, 22:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

A bit like some things developed for the space race which weren't necessarily needed in space but became useful in other areas later.

A lot of great technology came out of the space program. Also, the government of the USA put a huge emphasis and considerable money into the education of scientists and engineers, which has been a huge benefit to the USA since the 1960s.

Billcat · 30-01-2007, 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

If we tackle it and there is a problem - we may well solve the problem.
If we tackle it but there wouldn't have been a problem - we still don't have a problem.
If we do nothing and there is no problem - we still don't have a problem.
If we do nothing and there is a problem - we've got a problem.

That old gem is worth an award of Karma! A very pragmatic approach.

grannyclaret · 30-01-2007, 22:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

Here's a trailer.

This is a scary prospect.

That realy makes you think!

Lampman · 30-01-2007, 22:25

Buy or rent the DVd on Amazon.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/An-Inconveni...?ie=UTF8&s=dvd

There's the link!

My final word on the subject use Google to fully research the pros and cons then make your own mind up don't be led by the nose by others.Wherever they may be.

jambutty · 30-01-2007, 22:55

There are many ski resorts in the Alps that are green instead of white. Anyone like to explain that?

They haven’t just been reported, cameras have shown the green slopes underneath the ski lifts.

WillowTheWhisp · 30-01-2007, 23:02

Kilimanjaro is looking a bit less white on top too.

jambutty · 30-01-2007, 23:17

Don’t forget that massive chunk of the Arctic ice cap that broke away a few weeks ago and is heading southwards albeit very slowly. Less than 5 miles a year.

It was reported to be larger than the Isle of Man and most of it will be under water. 90% isn’t it? So that’s one heck of an ice cube.

Billcat · 31-01-2007, 15:02

Intersting article in the news this AM. Heard it from several sources. Looks like the Bush administration has been attempting to suppress some science.

"Federal scientists have been pressured by the White House to play down global warming, advocacy groups testified Tuesday at the Democrats' first investigative hearing since taking control of Congress. .....At the House hearing, two private advocacy groups produced a survey of 279 government climate scientists showing that many of them say they have been subjected to political pressure aimed at downplaying the climate threat."

Here's the link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070131/...ngress_climate

Looks like suppression of scientific opinion is the only tactic left to those senior administration officials when they find no credible research to back up their position!

bullseyebarb · 01-02-2007, 18:49

Despite media reports to the contrary, there is no scientific consensus on global warming.

Two new books, "Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years," by physicist Fred Singer and economist Dennis Avery was released just before Christmas. "The Chilling Stars", by Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark and former BBC science writer Nigel Calder is due out in March. Neither attributes human activity to global warming.

"Science" magazine has written that humans are responsible for less than 1% of the "greenhouse effect." So, even if we banned the use of all fossil fuels worldwide, it would still leave 99+% of the "problem" completely unaddressed.

An older book, (1997), "You Don't Say" by Fred Gielow, reprints and sources comments made by prominent members of the Left around the world. A fun read. However, if people like this ever got total control over our lives, I am afraid it wouldn't be much fun at all. The UN Biodiversity Assessment specifies that we assume a "peasant level of subsistence." Oh, won't that be fun?

Extreme environmentalism is akin to communism. It's all about excessive government regulation and control by elites.

steeljack · 01-02-2007, 18:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by bullseyebarb

Extreme environmentalism is akin to communism. It's all about excessive government regulation and control by elites.

on this we agree , karma due

LancYorkYankee · 01-02-2007, 19:09

I agree also Barb, Karma done!

Brian

Billcat · 01-02-2007, 20:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by bullseyebarb

Despite media reports to the contrary, there is no scientific consensus on global warming.

That is just out and out wrong. There is indeed a very strong consensus. Make all the claims you wish, bullseyebarb, but you are dead wrong in this instance - or just choosing not to accept reality.

There are certainly some folks with differing views, but consensus does not require that everyone agrees. For example, there is a very strong consensus that the USA landed men on the moon, but there is a small group that does not agree.

According to wikipedia and other sources, Fred Singer has financial ties to ExxonMobil, so he's not exactly a disinterested party. He's also pretty well-known as a hired hand for the tobacco industry. He argued that tobacco was noted bad for one's health, from what I understand, and that the ozone hole was not real. Pretty obvious that this Singer is a quasi-scientific gin for hire. Also, if he has something serious to say, why has he not written an article for peer review? The same queston should be asked of Svensmark and Calder. Could it be that, as sometimes happens, their "science" just won't pass muster?

Regarding the claim about Science Magazine, would you please provide a link to the place on their website where one can find this citation?

Lots of claims, bullseyebarb, but sadly lacking in hard evidence.

Isn't it funny how folks like that first denied that there was any scientific truth to global warming but, in light of a very real consensus said global warming was "real but man had nothing to do with it," to "man has only a small impact on global warming?" Nice quality of "science" this group employs. What next? Perhaps, "Won't it be nice to have an oceanfront homes in Arkansas and Oxford?" These guys are welcome to their opinions, but opinion is not science, and they are clearly fighting a rearguard action is a losing cause. Meanwhile, they are providing excuses for failure to address the problem. Nice, really nice mess to leave to our children and grandchildren!

Oh well, there are always some who see Rome burning and decide to tune their violins!

Billcat · 01-02-2007, 20:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by steeljack

on this we agree , karma due

Elites like the oil industry?

jambutty · 01-02-2007, 20:20

The pro’s and anti global warming supporters will argue until they are all blue in the face and neither will convince the other that they are right and the other is wrong.

On the other hand time will tell who has got it right.

If I may quote WillowTheWhisp

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp
If we tackle it and there is a problem - we may well solve the problem.
If we tackle it but there wouldn't have been a problem - we still don't have a problem.
If we do nothing and there is no problem - we still don't have a problem.
If we do nothing and there is a problem - we've got a problem.

steeljack · 01-02-2007, 20:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billcat

Elites like the oil industry?

no , the elites I had in mind were the PC commie pinkos, the liberal lefties , folks like the ACLU (Anti Christian Lawyers Union ) the minority groups who are allways telling us and demanding we follow down their yellow brick roads to Nirvana , the bicycle coalitions that shut down downtown areas on the last Fridays of every month with their antics (where the heck are the fire trucks with their pumps when you need them). The groups who jump up and down and stamp their feet when the NYC Irish cultural council says we dont want to play with you , (Boo Hoo)
The groups who demand the removals of Christmas Nativities but say a Menorah is OK .

oh yeah , forgot to mention I drive a full- size Dodge pick-up truck