Why Climate Change is Worse Than We Thought

a reply to: Greven

The internet owes more to the discovery of alternating current than anything else.

You imply the internet can be done with macramé and fetishes.

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: Greven
Where is your citation to back your previous claims?

Or are you like a child, who cannot back what you say?

I mean, after all, that's what you were going on about... adult thought and such.

I don't argue with walls, it makes me feel and look and sound stupid.

BTW you know how google works right?

Try it, everything I said is there at your finger tips in mere seconds.

In fact it would take more electricity for me to link it than for you to google it.

I thought you were worried about the co2 problem.

You are demanding I waste energy, your entire world is a sham.

So, you are like a child, then.

Pouting that someone called you out on a claim and unwilling to step up to the plate.

Recall, you wrote this:

originally posted by: johnwick
Yes because Hansen didn't say " hide the decline" in relation to the fact his already bs fudged numbered model was showing the same 20 plus year decline in temps that has been recorded at present right?

You cannot show this because it didn't happen. You are misremembering the specifics and conflating things, whether intentionally or not.

You fail to do basic research and fail to admit when you are wrong, if indeed you bothered to look it up after making the remark.

Now you are simply trying to cover your butt through snark and ridicule. Pathetic behavior.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: Greven

The internet owes more to the discovery of alternating current than anything else.

You imply the internet can be done with macramé and fetishes.

Al Gore invented the internet and climate!

And socks with odor-eaters built in. (I think)

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: Greven

The internet owes more to the discovery of alternating current than anything else.

You imply the internet can be done with macramé and fetishes.

Which was invented in the U.S. - a country that owes its existence to governments sending out expeditions and settlers. How far back do you want to go?

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: johnwick
Beez..... He is a zealot class climate believer.

Stop wasting your breath, he believes making poor people poorer will magically save the world, we couldn't end even if we tried our hardest.

Reason and logic don't matter.

His oracles told him that carbon taxes will punish those evil corps for polluting the world.

The obvious fact the corps will pay nothing and the poor will pay it all is not a concept he can even grasp.

I mean, it is simple " economictheory" to him.

We charge the corps, they pay.

Though the part where they just raise the rates to offset the charges is obvious to most that can add.

To an agw zealot, you are speaking dutch in China.

Where is your citation to back your previous claims?

Or are you like a child, who cannot back what you say?

I mean, after all, that's what you were going on about... adult thought and such.

I don't argue with walls, it makes me feel and look and sound stupid.

BTW you know how google works right?

Try it, everything I said is there at your finger tips in mere seconds.

In fact it would take more electricity for me to link it than for you to google it.

I thought you were worried about the co2 problem.

You are demanding I waste energy, your entire world is a sham.

Just don't try to argue. Some people refuse to believe that the earth has had Co2 levels of anywhere between 180(at the time of the ice age-wait a minute..)-7000ppm. We are at 403, and people want to go lower...how low though? 150 or lower? Say goodbye to all plant life then.

originally posted by: JacKatMtn
a reply to: beezzer

If the efforts were not tainted by profit margins, we could get alot done... most folks that have lived through the crying indian of the seventies for pollution, the eighties concerns with nuke power to the 90's EPA and this latest crisis of a changing climate, have at least in my acquaintance showed an interest in altering their life practices, to less impact our environment... which is good...

It's those whose only goal is to become RICH on what should be an honest global effort to maintain our big blue marble that have held up any progress.....

Those are the same folks who preach green whilst living in mansions, flying in private jets, yet feel justified in their massive footprint because they spread the word....

We (USA) could be some much further along if our gov't didn't protect those with the deepest pockets... IMO we should be at least 50% done with transition from old school rail to maglev tech to move goods... think of the reduction in carbon footprints if were that far along..

Like another poster said, it's become a petty argument, which in the end may be part of the plan? who knows...

Until there is an honest effort, without profit involved, this is where we will always be herded... into the same petty arguments?

Spot on.

I want cleaner industries.

I want less pollution.

I want a greener world.

Making poor people poorer..... It does none of these things.

Carbon credits where 100 percent of the money goes towards these things, OK let's talk.

Revenue generation for an already over bloated burocracy...... I will pass.

a reply to: beezzer

10 million for the invention of the most efficient electric car? The vast majority of our electricity is produced by polluting, finite resources, so that wouldn't really save us, so on to the next point...

10 million for the most efficient power source? Efficient as in "cheapest to produce"? Well we all ready have that, and it's contributing to the problems we are facing, plus 10 million to established energy industries isn't even pocket change to them - what would stop them from paying anyone who invented a power source that would kill their hundreds of billions of dollars a year industry a hell of a lot more then 10 million to not release it to the public?

Plus, it would require quite a bit of money to R/D a sustainable power source that would cover our exponentially growing population/industry, probably quite a bit more then what 10 million would cover. Not to mention, what is more attractive to our current social norms? 10 million for a one time invention, or revenues in the billions, annually? Sadly, most would choose the billions, even if it spelled absolute doom for their children/grandchildren.

a reply to: Greven

A government that gave land to cronies and sold land to speculators, not settlers.

The US was the best of all possible worlds, until 1913 or The War to Prevent Decentralization of Government 1860-1865.

Bakunin said the US already had anarchy in the 1800's, back when industrial revolution began the capitalization that enabled the internet.

Government will be the scourge of non mega rich human life. AGW is the scourge of freedom in the name of rule by the propagandists.

a reply to: Wardaddy454
Why are you even posting in a discussion forum if not to discuss?

Argument is pretty bloody important to discussion.

If you refuse to argue, if you refuse to engage and defend what you write - why even post?

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: Greven

A government that gave land to cronies and sold land to speculators, not settlers.

The US was the best of all possible worlds, until 1913 or The War to Prevent Decentralization of Government 1860-1865.

Bakunin said the US already had anarchy in the 1800's, back when industrial revolution began the capitalization that enabled the internet.

Government will be the scourge of non mega rich human life. AGW is the scourge of freedom in the name of rule by the propagandists.

You are the propagandist.

You are trying to doom us all. Seems to be working pretty well in the U.S.!

Which is good for that destructive goal, since the U.S. has a grip on the world like no other.

POP QUIZ: NAME EVERY CARBON TAX IN EFFECT (Don't worry, this answer will be pretty short!)

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: Wardaddy454
Why are you even posting in a discussion forum if not to discuss?

Argument is pretty bloody important to discussion.

If you refuse to argue, if you refuse to engage and defend what you write - why even post?

Is calling someone a child important to discussion as well? Way to maintain your credibility.

originally posted by: Syyth007
a reply to: beezzer

10 million for the invention of the most efficient electric car? The vast majority of our electricity is produced by polluting, finite resources, so that wouldn't really save us, so on to the next point...

10 million for the most efficient power source? Efficient as in "cheapest to produce"? Well we all ready have that, and it's contributing to the problems we are facing, plus 10 million to established energy industries isn't even pocket change to them - what would stop them from paying anyone who invented a power source that would kill their hundreds of billions of dollars a year industry a hell of a lot more then 10 million to not release it to the public?

Plus, it would require quite a bit of money to R/D a sustainable power source that would cover our exponentially growing population/industry, probably quite a bit more then what 10 million would cover. Not to mention, what is more attractive to our current social norms? 10 million for a one time invention, or revenues in the billions, annually? Sadly, most would choose the billions, even if it spelled absolute doom for their children/grandchildren.

Oh sure, just go ahead and pee in my Cheerio's!

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: johnwick
Beez..... He is a zealot class climate believer.

Stop wasting your breath, he believes making poor people poorer will magically save the world, we couldn't end even if we tried our hardest.

Reason and logic don't matter.

His oracles told him that carbon taxes will punish those evil corps for polluting the world.

The obvious fact the corps will pay nothing and the poor will pay it all is not a concept he can even grasp.

I mean, it is simple " economictheory" to him.

We charge the corps, they pay.

Though the part where they just raise the rates to offset the charges is obvious to most that can add.

To an agw zealot, you are speaking dutch in China.

Where is your citation to back your previous claims?

Or are you like a child, who cannot back what you say?

I mean, after all, that's what you were going on about... adult thought and such.

I don't argue with walls, it makes me feel and look and sound stupid.

BTW you know how google works right?

Try it, everything I said is there at your finger tips in mere seconds.

In fact it would take more electricity for me to link it than for you to google it.

I thought you were worried about the co2 problem.

You are demanding I waste energy, your entire world is a sham.

Just don't try to argue. Some people refuse to believe that the earth has had Co2 levels of anywhere between 180(at the time of the ice age-wait a minute..)-7000ppm. We are at 403, and people want to go lower...how low though? 150 or lower? Say goodbye to all plant life then.

I have pointed that out many times. They won't listen to facts or logic.

It is a religion.

In Dino times, co2 factors higher, not once did out ofcontrol warming happen.

There is no proof it even can happen.

In fact higher co2 has always been present when the largest explosions of life andtropical paradise conditions existed world wide.

But why rely on known facts when we have fudged numbers and rigged comp models right..........

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

Is calling someone a child important to discussion as well? Way to maintain your credibility.

Perhaps you should bother to read this thread:

originally posted by: johnwick
You kids are so cute, thinking you know things when you don't, it is adorable.

Then you wouldn't look foolish, as you would have noted that I have restricted that particular remark to one individual.

But I'm sure it'll net you some brownie points.

originally posted by: johnwick
And that is the way grown folks talk.

a reply to: JacKatMtn

You're right. Can't really argue with the points you made.

But in the meantime, before we all die. . . I'm going to tinker with my home-made electric car. It's taking up garage space, with the Chrystler K car frame . Still trying to figure out the gearing issues.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: Wardaddy454
Why are you even posting in a discussion forum if not to discuss?

Argument is pretty bloody important to discussion.

If you refuse to argue, if you refuse to engage and defend what you write - why even post?

Is calling someone a child important to discussion as well? Way to maintain your credibility.

Stop using logic.

It irritates the illogical.

a reply to: Greven

So the real reason for carbon taxes is to punish the US?

Farmers and indigent consumers wanted to punish the industrialists for the tariff that fell most heavily on working class consumers and farmers. The solution they adopted was the income tax. That solution wasn't a solution anymore than Carbon taxes will make the climate do what we want it to.

(The tariff was pretty bad and should have been abolished directly)

If the climate will be a real problem, then we should return to what enabled the greatest improvement in living conditions and technological creation in the history of the universe, namely the laissez-faire economy.

originally posted by: johnwick

Stop using logic.

It irritates the illogical.

Please do apply the logical approach to defending this claim:

originally posted by: johnwick
Yes because Hansen didn't say " hide the decline" in relation to the fact his already bs fudged numbered model was showing the same 20 plus year decline in temps that has been recorded at present right?

Or give it up because you can't.

Admit it's wrong or conjure a way that your claim is right, I don't care, just stop deflecting.

originally posted by: Greven


POP QUIZ: NAME EVERY CARBON TAX IN EFFECT (Don't worry, this answer will be pretty short!)

There are still efforts, (they have retreated), but I have no doubt that someone in our elected Congress, will slide that into a bill that needs to pass...

This year? probably not.... but it will come when the situation is right.... you can count on that... most likely renamed by then...

Patriot Act was a honeypot, lost it's luster, now has a brand new name.. Freedom Act...

If we don't pay attention stuff like this happens...

We don't need more taxes to combat climate change, we need more honest corporate and gov't desire to do what most of the taxed folks do already... respect the planet, and not expect to make money off that effort...

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

Is calling someone a child important to discussion as well? Way to maintain your credibility.

Perhaps you should bother to read this thread:

originally posted by: johnwick
You kids are so cute, thinking you know things when you don't, it is adorable.

Then you wouldn't look foolish, as you would have noted that I have restricted that particular remark to one individual.

But I'm sure it'll net you some brownie points.

I stand by that remark.

You silly kidscrack me up.

You act like I should be somehow sorry for it.

I believe though anyone who stumbles into this thread will quickly see my meaning, and find it as enjoyable as I do.