Posted on Fri, 05/16/2008 - 20:14 — by joincalifornia
I don't believe in global warming because I am old enough to remember these same self-styled activists proclaiming that we were entering a period of global freezeing 30 years ago. And before that there was Rachel Carson and "Silent Spring" advocating the prohibition of DDT which resulted in the deaths of 1 million people from malaria.
Global warming is generation's junk science. And like its predecessors it is going to cause real suffering all over the world. The corn that has been diverted to ethanol might result in food shortages from which millions of people will starve.
We need to drill in Anwar and we need to develop the astonishingly rich recent discovery in North Dakota. We need to stop putting trillions of petrol dollars into the pockets of unstable governments that despise us and threaten our national safety.
And the last thing our economy needs is to put the cudgel of "environmental fees" into the hands of cash strapped local governments. Those "fines" are nonsense and will be quickly passed on to the consumers, in the form of higher prices. The environmental movement has gone so far beyond common sense or any scientific basis as to pose a genuine threat to the American economy and to our national defense, and they do absolutely nothing to change the temperature of the earth (which is cyclical and which has cooled over the past 10 years, one of the many facts, the extremists bury and hide from the public).
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 291
Report backrow
"applauded the proposed fees as a significant first local step toward reining in a worldwide problem." So the Bay Area is going to "study" the issue with YOUR MONEY which will be a model for the saving the planet. Sure thing (?). (Or rather.... how to STEAL from Others...and feeel Noble about it) If the world is still here in 15 years she can claim she saved us...but will need more of your earnings to continue to do so. Didn't that used to be called an Extortion racket? Only they weren't so obvious back then.
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 291
Report backrow
Stanfords Professor Paul Erlich, One of the key founders of the Enviros.... found that there is no need for embarrassment...regardless of how wrong, stupid or harmful your expert thesis turns out to be.
His "brave", influential book Population Bomb began, "The battle to feed all of humanity is over ... hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death." In 1969, Ehrlich added, "By 1985 enough millions will have died to reduce the earth's population to some acceptable level, like 1.5 billion people." The same year, he predicted in an article entitled "Eco-Catastrophe!" that by 1980 the United States would see its life expectancy drop to 42 because of pesticides, and by 1999 its population would drop to 22.6 million. In the mid-seventies, with the release of his "The End of Affluence", Ehrlich incorporated drama into his dire prophesies. He envisioned the President dissolving Congress "during the food riots of the 1980s,"
see.. http://www.overpopulation.com/faq/people/paul-ehrlich/
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 437
Report chewy
I hope I don't sound too much like “Chicken Little,” but the population bomb may have been guilty of just being a little premature. Exponential population growth still may be the greatest threat to the viability of the human race
There is no argument that earth’s resources are limited. Especially water. Even now in 2008 we have Florida and Georgia fighting over water resources. At least they probably won’t nuke each other to settle the dispute, but I’m not so sure of the rest of the world.
As nuclear technology proliferates, and as nations compete for limited resources of food, water, and energy for their citizens, we may be just unlucky enough to reach a point of critical mass. Human history tells us that we are pretty smart, but unfortunately, we are not very wise. It only took the death of one man to unleash the catastrophic deaths of millions in WWI. Just take a look at all the countries that are allied now. The human race has been around for about a 100,000 years, not too long in geologic time. I hope we can be smarter and luckier than the dinosaurs.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 860
Report Clayton
Global warming is a hoax, and many people are figuring that out. It is a political gambit by Al Gore for political power, (power that he could not win in an election).
Scientifically the theory is the result of irresponsible and probably erronious predictions by pseudo scientists who are paid to manipulate data to create the scare. What other branch of science would accept a prediction of a 60,000 cycle on the basis of 200 years of data, half of which is very inaccurate? How many branches of science would allow schools to dismiss tenured intructors for no other reason then disagreement with the one flimsy theory that brings in the big grant bucks. How many other sciences would a allow a "documentry" of fictious facts to be promoted as honest work. And we have debated this before, Al Gore's movie is more fiction then fact. No polar bear actually drowned to make his movie.
Politically the effort to promote global warming resembles, in practice, the efforts of Hitler and the Nazis to promote the science of Eugenics. This should not be surprising since both Hitler and Gore are socialists, both are power hunger megla-maniacs with no regard for honesty. But then back bencher, you have not been respectful of the truth either.
It only took the death of one man to unleash the catastrophic deaths of millions in WWI. It took quite a bit more then the death of a Prince to begin WW1. But you knew this didn't you? You also know of Malthus, and that his predictions have always be countered by technology. Technology, not restricted by the like of you, could feed the population of the world. But environmentalists like you would prefer the starvation of millions rather then wasting world resources to feed them.
THen we get back to your role model Hitler, whose aim really was improving the life for the people on earth, he only had to remove a few billion to do it.
Unlike him, you and Gore are not going to get the chance.
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 437
Report chewy
Same old tired, meaningless, Claytonisms........ "None of this is true because I said so." You got to do better than that, dill weed.
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 437
Report chewy
I respect your opinion, but science 30 years ago, is light years away from today's science. Here is something to consider if you wish. This is an excerpt from New York Times about the findings of the IPCC, a prestigious U.N. group. I note that "Backrow" is cynical about people who write books for profit. I don't blame him. The more sensational the claims of the author, the more books he sells. Well anyway, these guys don't sell books......
New York Times: [On Feb. 2, 2007, the United Nations scientific panel studying climate change declared that the evidence of a warming trend is "unequivocal," and that human activity has "very likely" been the driving force in that change over the last 50 years. The last report by the group, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in 2001, had found that humanity had "likely" played a role.
The addition of that single word "very" did more than reflect mounting scientific evidence that the release of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases from smokestacks, tailpipes and burning forests has played a central role in raising the average surface temperature of the earth by more than 1 degree Fahrenheit since 1900. It also added new momentum to a debate that now seems centered less over whether humans are warming the planet, but instead over what to do about it.]
The fact the IPCC doesn't claim to have an absolute answer to the question, but instead offers a scenario of a “very likely” human generated component to global warming, adds credibility to their science. Anyway, good enough for me.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 860
Report Clayton
Global warming is a hoax created by power hungery liberals who can not get fairly elected. To wit, the climate is cooling not warming. But let Meteorologist Anthony Watts outline the details for you. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2025932/posts
Of course those religiously committed to Al Gore and his Church of Global Warming; i.e. the Faith of Socialism will reject Dr Watts and just one more of the "minority" of nay-sayers. THe minority is growing friends, your faith is false.