The Truth, Still Inconvenient

[Canadiens1131]

Originally Posted by the iron horse

My interpertation.

This "world system" (governments and social orders) is indeed
a world gone wrong.

The earth is fine and doing well.

Spoken by someone with fingers in ears many miles from the coast at sea level.

You should chill out with more Dutch hydro engineers, Iron, might expand your worldview a few cubic liters.

[the iron horse]

Originally Posted by Canadiens1131

Spoken by someone with fingers in ears many miles from the coast at sea level.

You should chill out with more Dutch hydro engineers, Iron, might expand your worldview a few cubic liters.

I can't.

I'm busy cutting (with a gas powered chainsaw) firewood for the winter.

[PhilsFan]

use axes. more rugged and american.

[the iron horse]

Originally Posted by PhilsFan

use axes. more rugged and american.

If I had eight hours to chop down a tree, I'd spend six hours sharpening my axe.

~Abraham Lincoln

[PhilsFan]

"If I had eight hours to chop down a tree, I'd spend seven hours drinking."

- PhilsFan

[Dfit00]

That way you would only work one hour, one the effects of working at a young age perhaps?

[financeguy]

Personally, I wouldn't attempt such a venture as chopping down a tree without large quantities of tobacco, alcohol, and indeed cheese sandwiches with which to fortify myself beforehand.

[the iron horse]

Originally Posted by financeguy

Personally, I wouldn't attempt such a venture as chopping down a tree without large quantities of tobacco, alcohol, and indeed cheese sandwiches with which to fortify myself beforehand.

You might be a country boy yet financeguy

Take care

[deep]

.

[Diemen]

That appears on an electronic billboard I pass by on my way home from work. Apparently they've decided to pull it, as it was just done for "research" purposes.

Way to elevate the discussion, Heartland!

[purpleoscar]

I agree. They shouldn't stoop to the level of the warmists.

[Diemen]

I assume you have examples of the "warmists" comparing climate change skeptics to mass murderers?

[purpleoscar]

Originally Posted by Diemen

I assume you have examples of the "warmists" comparing climate change skeptics to mass murderers?

Too easy. I can tell you avoid the climate depot website which posts copious amounts of vitriol created by warmists. Then there's the basic assumption that skeptics are destroying the world. What's more of a mass killing when including the entire planet? Weren't there documentaries and movies that depicted floods and natural disasters from a 6 degree increase in temperatures? Aren't children scared of mass extinctions of the polar bears? There were even attempts to say that recent earthquakes were the result of melted ice caps. If anything global warming campaigners have made the general public feel like they are terrorizers of the planet. We are supposed to drown the Maldives as well..

I've already posted that video that jokes about blowing up skeptics which is closer to the uni bomber's actual point of view. Then you have James Hansen that wants all coal plants to be shutdown now. Doing that would have the economic effect of the great leap forward by Mao. So there is some justification for the billboard even though I think science works better in the long run. Also pointing out the failure of cap and trade in Europe to slow CO2 increases would help also. To really make a dent in CO2 production you really need to destroy the economy. Some skeptics like the idea of fighting fire with fire but the best offense is the truth. I'm glad Ross McKitrick asked the billboard to be taken down. Propaganda like that just makes warmers have fodder for complaining.

I think Svensmark does plenty of damage to the AGW theory without name calling. Science is all that's needed. BTW I'm glad I'm called a skeptic by you instead of a denier which has ridiculous connotations to the holocaust. I'm in the camp that CO2 causes minor warming and natural factors need to be studied more than they are now to develop better predictions. The recent Met office prediction of a dry spell in England is a perfect example on how near term predictions fail badly.

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by purpleoscar

Too easy. I can tell you avoid the climate depot website which posts copious amounts of vitriol created by warmists.

So you're saying that Climate Depot doesn't engage in the same kind of vitriolic tactics?

[purpleoscar]

Originally Posted by Diemen

So you're saying that Climate Depot doesn't engage in the same kind of vitriolic tactics?

The UN started with the tactics and Climate Depot exposes their tactics (which is not hard to do) and when extremist opinions appear they show links and emails of the propagandists so the general public can vent their anger. Since skeptical scientists undergo career damage (shown in the climate gate emails) there is an opportunity to expose the bullying. The only thing I don't like is that some people will use the emails for death threats but then again this has already happened to skeptical scientists so it's fun to see warmists cry foul when they are the past masters. The best thing about the site is when skeptical science is published it appears there so it doesn't get ignored.

An example is one scientist recently voiced her opinion that skeptics should be psychologically treated:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/0...ess-statement/

Naturally once she was exposed the statements were removed. Right now a study is looking at economic depression as a solution to bring down atmospheric levels of CO2 down so now he's being exposed:

http://hauntingthelibrary.wordpress....lobal-warming/

There is so much material to go through the website is rarely stale.

[Dfit00]

Sending a death threat to a scientist is like not giving candy to a crying child.

Neverending economic growth destroys the environment and causes a lower quality of life in the long run. This is not only about global warming, it's about everything.

[purpleoscar]

Originally Posted by Dfit00

Sending a death threat to a scientist is like not giving candy to a crying child.

Neverending economic growth destroys the environment and causes a lower quality of life in the long run. This is not only about global warming, it's about everything.

Actually our quality of life (thanks to economic growth and new technology) is better than ever.

The reality is that green energy can only supply a small fraction of energy for decades so to only use that technology would be a huge economic catastrophe. Unless this moral question (should we really impoverish people?) is answered it will be the same hypocrisy. All talk but no doing. Cap and trade hasn't reduced CO2 in Europe so the only answer is to wait until green energy is good enough. Maybe some research and development funding will be necessary. Once the technology is ready for primetime there won't be a need for government to force it on the world population.

With all the debt crises in the world this subject will be the back burner. I don't see any major appetite for people to do this willfully and to be forced by politicians will simply lose votes for them. I think de-industrializing to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere would be so onerous that Mao's Great Leap Forward would look like a holiday instead. Hey at least North Korea has succeeded in turning the lights off. China has already said no to cap and trade and if politicians have no expectation that it will work they will only support it simply because their excuse will be that it increases the wealth and the power of government regulators.

[digitize]

I think this sort of debate begs to have mentioned the ideas of this man:

Derrick Jensen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mr. Jensen believes that civilized society, capped off by industrial civilization, is inherently unsustainable and will eventually crash. He advocates the purposeful destruction of it now, but says that the crash is eventually inevitable... it will just be more painful if put off until later. Interesting stuff.

(Jensen is not the first person to have such ideas, but I believe that his book Endgame is probably the most popularly represented depiction of the ideas.)

[purpleoscar]

People have been predicting end of the world scenarios for decades. When will people wake up? Extreme environmentalists look at "too many people" to include YOU and not them. You're just an ant to them. The general public don't care about book publishers and movie directors like James Cameron making more money than the average person talking about prosperity being bad for the environment. They need to lead us into noble poverty for us to follow.

Answer this question for me leftists: If leftists don't like austerity measures and the public finds austerity measures something to vote against what makes you think the public will accept far more stringent environmental austerity measures that force the public to abandon fossil fuels without a cheap replacement? See? This is why the argument is lost. In Quebec there are protests for tuition hikes despite having the lowest tuition in the country. What kind of protest would happen if those same individuals had to face energy bills without fossil fuels to make life so expensive to prevent jobs and procreation? Leftists can't handle austerity but they can handle the economic consequences of reducing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere? Not likely.

The Anti-Human Mindset Of Environmentalists - YouTube

[digitize]

Originally Posted by purpleoscar

Answer this question for me leftists: If leftists don't like austerity measures and the public finds austerity measures something to vote against what makes you think the public will accept far more stringent environmental austerity measures that force the public to abandon fossil fuels without a cheap replacement? See? This is why the argument is lost. In Quebec there are protests for tuition hikes despite having the lowest tuition in the country. What kind of protest would happen if those same individuals had to face energy bills without fossil fuels to make life so expensive to prevent jobs and procreation? Leftists can't handle austerity but they can handle the economic consequences of reducing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere? Not likely.

I completely agree with you... climate change believers are generally (though not universally) not much better than climate change skeptics at doing things to actually try to address climate change, and the economic consequences for dealing with climate change could potentially be monstrous. Though that is not a reasonable argument against climate change. A lot of people (myself included) who intellectually buy into climate change deny it in a different sense... we shove it off and ignore it and pretend it does not exist. And for that, we are at least somewhat reprehensible.