bendover wrote a quote from: "Repeat a lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth" --
OK..this is called Red Herring...How do you intend to prove that Global Warming is a lie?
I did say that the secondary school has higher IQ, didn't I?
This issue has nothing to do with being at Right or Left, it has to with being wrong and right, and the Republican Righ Wing being on wrong side agian, like Iraq war and many other issues..
-- Modified on 2/4/2007 8:49:47 AM
" LONDON (AP) — Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore's global warming documentary will be sent to every secondary school in England as part of a campaign to tackle climate change, the government said Friday.
Environment Secretary David Miliband and Education Secretary Alan Johnson announced plans to distribute Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth, on the day the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report was published in Paris. The report by leading scientists, said global warming has started and is "very likely" caused by humans. "
I guess reading that article made me believe that the every secondary student in UK has perhaps higher IQ than our Right Wing group here 
Maybe we can send and register some of these right winger folks from TER in 6th grade there, however they might fail all the classses there which would not be surprising...
You went straight to the usual end game where you guys call everyone that doesn't agree, stupid. Debate over.
**sigh**
Do you have any counterargument about global warming besides the fact that the damn liberals irritate you? I mean, it's not like liberals haven't suffered from conservatives calling them stupid, and in fact, calling them much worse names. You're welcome to make your point anyway rather than moaning about being oppressed.
arguing with someone that declares me stupid before I ever open my mouth.
"I mean, it's not like liberals haven't suffered from conservatives calling them stupid, and in fact, calling them much worse names."
I haven't. Are you saying it's payback? or self defense? Besides, I argue as a person not a group.
BTW, glad you think I'm "welcome" here.
Finally, any response to this post wouldn't be about any evidence pertaining to the science. His post was purely political, in pursuit of "consensus".
-- Modified on 2/4/2007 12:21:11 AM
With a handle like "RightWingUnderground, it makes it sound like your arguing in favor of a group. Also, I don't know why you'd take personal insult from something that was aimed at the group. You're apparently very well connected to it ideologically.
Now, that having been said, Right Wingers have opened their mouth.
It might have been purely political, but the Right's attacks on Al Gore about his movie have been very lowdown and quite political. I've been puzzled by it, and very frustrated with how they squirm out of the issue by Clintonizing him. Yes, I know he served as vice-president under you-know-who. It's apparent he didn't have much to say in anything that happened.
They should think about the issue rather than trying to sink his hypothetical presidential campaign.
How do you know what I'm doing when I'm not here?
I digressed to objections that I've read from other rightwingers here and elsewhere when I talked about attacks on Al Gore. No, I haven't seen you personally make those attacks here. I do remember two people doing it. Conservative parents barred Federal Way school in Washington from showing "An Inconvenient Truth." I think that's what the original thread was referring to. The especially stupid quotes:
"Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a schoolteacher."
Remember that one?
"From what I've seen (of the movie) and what my husband has expressed to me, if (the movie) is going to take the approach of 'bad America, bad America,' I don't think it should be shown at all."
And the movie doesn't say bad America, bad America. In any way.
This, I think, is what Knight1's original post was about.
Nothing new under the sun in this either...
It's a long-held method of national-scale opinion-warping, and has been proven to work...
"Repeat a lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth" -- Joseph Goebbels
bendover wrote a quote from: "Repeat a lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth" --
OK..this is called Red Herring...How do you intend to prove that Global Warming is a lie?
I did say that the secondary school has higher IQ, didn't I?
This issue has nothing to do with being at Right or Left, it has to with being wrong and right, and the Republican Righ Wing being on wrong side agian, like Iraq war and many other issues..
-- Modified on 2/4/2007 8:49:47 AM
All scientific consensus now is that it's over. It's happening. It's happening quickly, and the chance that it's caused by humankind is placed at above 90 percent. These aren't scientists paid off by environmentalists or liberals either. You could always take a bet at 9-1 odds though.
A little story. In prehistory, 750 million years ago and again at 580 million years, the entire earth froze over. It was a snowball all the way to the equator. The average temperature on the earth was -60 degrees, Fahrenheit.
However, volcanic eruptions raised the CO2 levels to 10,000 times what it is today. It went up to 12 percent. (Note: in the younger earth, there were many more volcanoes).
The hopeless, practically lifeless "snowball earth" suddenly became a hothouse within perhaps less than a few hundred years; it went from an average temperature of -60 to 120. The sun was much dimmer then, too.
This is what geologists have determined.
But there isn't ANY hope of turning this around until after true disaster strikes. Because even if America shut down EVERYTHING tomorrow, killed all our cattle, and turned into vegans over night we cannot stop this!
China is just emerging as an industrial-power, and they have WAY MORE worker-drones than Europe or America had during our industrial awakening, also, their culture is far more ruthless when it comes being "world-players" and I think that just as soon as we reduce ourselves as a nation to our humble, green, anti-war ways that we so cherish, they will be poised to mass-expantion on the technology-front (mostly due to stealing it from us!) And we will become their puppet! As they pump 100 fold the amount of CFC/methane/radio-active waste into the eco-system then we ever could have, just wait until THEY string wire from one end of their country to the other and power up that "grid"! When the Chinese-commoner discovers convienience-lust as America did in the 50's this whole Global-bullshit sceme will crumple under their weight as they drive the earh to scortching it's inhabitents...
We need to be focused on many other things as a nation, but we will bring ourselves low on this one "cause" and become the world's footstool in 10 years,,, mark my words!
You wont' see this in any models, Ben, but if the trend continues above a certain point, there could be a runaway greenhouse effect. In which case, the earth could very well look a lot like Venus, where a cool night is 700 degrees. Worrisome is the fact that the warming is happening so rapidly. It would be better to try to slow it down at least, while we have the social organization that might do it.
You're right about China, Ben, but for our country, the writing is on the wall. Hate to sound like an abject pessimist here, but the US cannot keep it's leadership in the world no matter how obsessively it tries. Forget it.
Why? Look at it: we have spent into an enormous national and personal debt, the dollar is declining, we're dependent on China to keep underwriting our debt, our education system is a shambles, our industrial base is deteriorating, our oil and energy reserves are now negligible, much of our farmland had been destroyed, we've lost the respect of the world, our leadership has criminally squandered a few golden opportunities for world respect, our infrastructure from the Roosevelt administration needs rebuilding, we're stuck in Iraq, and we have an aging population. Add to that: IMO, I don't think the US is going to fare well with global warming.
We might eventually solve our problems and regain ourselves as a country, but we won't be a leader in the world. That will be clear within a decade, two decades tops. It then becomes a matter of how stable the country will stay once the bad news is delivered.
Ignoring global warming so that we can keep being a leader is-- a loser.
We are facing the spectre of increasing competition for an ever-diminishing resource: oil. With the developing economies in India and China, and the world's peak in oil production projected to occur in a decade or so, we are very likely to find ourselves oil-starved. I can only imagine what the political consequences of that are going to be world-wide.
I still consider that hypothetical. The estimates I've heard run from 2 years ago to 400 years from now.
The one thing we are definitely out of is cheap oil.
So I don't think we'll be the next Venus, the concentrations there are higher that our potential. Even if we "liberate" every carbon molecule on this planet, I doubt we'll approach Venus... But it is gonna get damn uncomfortable here, that's for sure...
I can't argue much with your chain of demise regarding the deconstruction of us as a superpower, I could see that back when Clinton was disassembling our military, we were going to NEED that stuff soon and he was selling it for scrap-metal... It may have been "outdated" by American standards, but it still made us an increadable fighting machine on a world-standard.
We are now militarly bankrupt, and the cost of rebuilding is more that we as a nation are willing to bear, and even if we were agreeable as a people to do it, we no longer have the resources, work-ethic, credit, or educated-workforce to do the job, we've out-sourced out future...
This is why I've spent many years becoming pertol-independant. I however assumed we would see $10 per gallon gas by now, and I was wrong on that, but I think it's because the world is "artificially" proping us up currently until they finish draining our wealth... All theAmerican forien-holdings would become worthless if they desolved us into EUs overnight, this is just a slow blood-letting of our economy while we are focused on "self-rightousness" and what's "fasionable" as a people...
I knew not to build my house upon the shifting sand, and the best way to secure wealth is to give the outward appearance that you haven't any... I pity the fool who sits under a $1,000,000 mortage, 3 car payments, two kids in college, alimony to his previous wife and all his stored wealth in mutual-funds, it'll all be worthless by the time he ever pays it off! When "Big-Mother-Gov" gets thirsty for more tax-dollars, she's going to open his vein for a drink, not mine!
I've sure noticed that my "skills" are in demand as of late! (Without getting specific, I'll just say that "energy" and "efficency" are a big part of my life's-work) All of a sudden America woke up from her drunken-energy-lust, and is trying to atone for her sins in a senseless scramble... It sure is good for business! (Although I only engage the economy at a "hobby" level these days, I have the luxury of that choice...)
We're burning things especially coal and oil. You make a big mistake thinking that this isn't creating it. "Free" seems to be a substitute word here, but it's not accurate.
BTW, I don't believe for an instant that Clinton disassembled our military. Link? Reference? Cite something here.
The problem in Iraq is not that our military wasn't effective. It was terribly effective. The problems came after "Mission Accomplished" remember?
The idea that our military could be continuously effective in a long mission in a volatile country on the other side of world was simple stupidity and arrogance. It wasn't that we didn't have by far the greatest military in the world. We had the stupidest politicians at the highest level.
Even if Bush were a master statesmen and general, it would have taken 5 years to properly prepare for a project like Iraq-- that's if it's rushed. As we have learned, the military victory was the easy part.
I suspect your aware of how CO2 is "released" when a fuel is consumed, I won't waste my time doing a "Jeremy Bender" on you and educating you to the obvious...
Have you stopped to consider HOW the carbon molecule became trapped in the coal or crude oil in the first place?? There is a principle of carbon exchange that most are not taking into consideraton s they model global warming... What happens to plant-life as CO2 become more consentrated in the atmosphere? It grows fast and "HUGE"!
I have my reasons for not openly discussing my "crops" that I grow, but let's just say it's rather high-yeilding per sq.ft., (lol!) And thus, I grow only in greenhouses, I run my CO2 level at over 5000PPM, and watch amazing things happen to plantlife... My "CO2" is bi-product to electricity produced from spent-veggie-oil, so the sulfer is a bit uncomfortable on the nose, but surely is tolarable. BTW, I "need" alot of off-grid electricity, since I grow year around in a rather cold climate... I heat a large percentage of the "greenhouse" with waste-heat from bo-diesel to electric production, which in turn powers grow-lamps, and so the cycle continues... However, without an outside fuel-source, it would be impossible to sustain... Years ago, I chose used deep-fryer oil as my fuel-of-choice, mainly because it was free, overly abundant, and pre-harvested... I can tell you that after several years of this, it was the PERFECT choice, and often I'm faced with the problem of storing all the extra fuel my "suppliers" force on me! Life without petolium-based fuel is an absolute BLESSED existance! On many levels... And as of late, thanks to Al Gore's scare-tactics, I find that I'm in far more demand for what I know than I'm willing to put the time into... I never set out to "save the planet" and I don't believe we can be saved ["humans" won't be saved, but I suspect this rock will always be floating in space, just not with us on it anymore!], maybe extended a few years, but never saved... Why do you think I chose "Ben Dover" as my user name?? It's because of my fatalist views and kissing our asses goodbye, lol! And the hobby is just a nice way to enjoy some hot-girls on our wat to extinction... But I never really had a reason to voice these things until recently being put on this board and seeing all the vain-persutes that you people here think is paramout in importance, sheesh!
You might want to consider I know a thing or two about light bulbs, their construction, the heat v/s light they cast, life-cycle, what consetrations of what colors of light produce specific grow-patterns in certain plants... I use ALOT of bulbs, and am always looking at lighting technology... And I see absolute fool-hearty folly in the compact-florescent movement to no where that "Incomplete Trurh" has socially-fueled in this country! If people are looking for a REAL soulution to over consumption, then why C/F?? Why not White-L.E.D.?? WAY more efficent, longer life-cycle, far less polutants released in the production, and sand-based materials, so it'll desolve back into the terra-firma when it's life-cycle is spent!
I don't make these statments about energy, lightbulbs, CO2, and bio-mass fuel out of my ass, as in "Jemery Bender logic", But I've got the time and experence invested in these unusual fields to answer based on proven information...
This is why I question the graphs and chats Gore tosses up on the screen, because he is only looking at the linear-effect of CO2 on the atmosphere... I've had to consider these issues on a macro-scale and I find ALOT of variables not adressed in "An Incomplete Truth"...
I've considered "stepping out" on this board with exactly what it is I do, to bring some validity to the things I say, especially since this is a community that already looks at one illegal-activity as an "alternative-lifestyle"... But I suspect it's becoming obvious considering that I was born and raised in a hippie commune in the late 60's, lol! ("green-life" just comes naturally, but for completely different reasons than anti-global-warming folly... But it's nice to see the rest of the world finally waking up from it's stuper)
-- Modified on 2/5/2007 11:27:28 AM
I have to counter that the CO2 locked in fossil fuels has either been locked out of the atmosphere for at least 300 million years (forever) or if it's actually abiotic, it has never been in the atmosphere to begin with.
But either way, you might as well say that we're creating it. If what we're releasing was accumulated over 100 million years, it's significant.