7 Comments:

At 9:59 am,  Don said...

Being the scientific type, and no doubt an unrepentant fucktard, I still have not seen a sober and compelling exposition of this climate change, what directions it is going in, what is its scale, and what are its causes. Every article I have managed to see (including those in Scientific American, which I admit I subscribe to) depends to some degree on assumptions already held by the reader. Can you point me to anything that is not so clearly agenda-driven as most articles (including the one you linked)? From my conversations with other engineers, who share my natural skepticism (i.e. we think like engineers), I get the impression that the West and the US in particular are being led by the likes of Al Gore into an extremely clever carbon-credits scam with only a tenuous basis in legitimate concern. (I don't hate Al Gore and don't mean to pile on him too much, but he is from the same class of criminals that have long been running and ripping off this country such as the families Bush and Kennedy etc. His speech at Bali looked to me like another step in his career as a con man -- more or less filling the role of the roper in this case.) (Yes, you may now say I'm mad, it's quite possible.)

 

At 11:03 am,  $Zero said...

i'll bet Don still thinks that the jury's out on industrial pollution and its possible negative effects on the environment and civil populations.

Love Canal was probably just some sort of natural environmental fluke of some sort that's been occuring on planet earth for eons before man ever lit his first fire or sculpted his first wheels.

(let alone threw out his first bag of garbage from his latest shopping spree)

sorry, Don.

i couldn't resist the smartass opportunity.

somebody has to take up the slack here in Zen's comments since he's no longer playing with us here anymore.

the bastard.

 

At 3:20 pm,  Dr Zen said...

and the article i linked was a fucking straight news report, you clown. its "agenda" was to report what was agreed at the meeting. what is wrong with you people? are you really just insane? something in the water?

 

At 4:28 am,  Anonymous said...

boots sez:

This may sound like total rubbish to you, but I suspect that much of the US opposition is based on a fear that the US will be asked to help pay for the assistance developing nations need.

From what I can tell as an observer here, the US economy has been fucked since the turn of the century but they are not about to admit it and continue printing unbacked currency in hopes that faith will spring eternal.

I think it may not be so much that the US is hiding its head in the sand on the environmental issue, but that it fears stepping forward because that may require it to admit things it's been hiding in the sand.

What the fuckever, once I've been elected "Benevolent Dictator Boots I" we'll make some fucking changes, but don't hold your breath on that one.

Global warming may necessitate swimming lessons for some.

 

At 6:43 am,  Don said...

I'm willing to appear an idiot because often, the "idiots" are merely those who refuse to go along with the crowd. There's no argument that there are short-term warming trends: melting polar ice, more temperate winters etc. My view is that these are assumed, without compelling evidence, to be results of human activity. Climatic cycles are long and deep and largely misunderstood. Despite all the so-called straight news reports, I have not seen a serious technical addressing of this controversy. It seems the scam artists have the likes of you well pegged, and we'll all be paying for it to no clear purpose, except to line the pockets of the carbon-credit traders.

Question: How many people have died as a result of proven man-made global warming, versus how many will die as a result of energy usage reduction if we take steps not proven necessary? (Remember, quality of life is proportional to energy usage -- reduced usage has a tradeoff in increased food costs, healthcare costs, unemployment etc.)

But you consistently take the low road. Get a fucking education.

 

At 6:47 am,  Don said...

And $Z, I'll violate my long rule that you're generally not worth responding to, to note that Love Canal was the result of criminal negligence on the part of an under-regulated industry. You're quite missing the point and displaying a remarkable shallowness to think anyone skeptical of the global-warming emergency would conversely ignore such clear consequences of human involvement.

 

At 8:45 am,  Dr Zen said...

"My view is that these are assumed, without compelling evidence, to be results of human activity. "

Your view is wrong. Climate cycles work over centuries, millennia. This is happening over years, decades. The correlation is extremely clear. If you were shown a graph of smoking vs lung cancer that was as clear, you'd laugh in the face of a smoking causes cancer denialist.

"Despite all the so-called straight news reports, I have not seen a serious technical addressing of this controversy."

I've never seen a quark either.

I'm done with you. The evidence is compelling, Don. You are like an evolution denialist who says "I don't believe it because I've never seen a monkey become a man." You're a one percenter, an irrelevance.

And yeah, it'll mostly be someone else dying. Until they want your resources and decide to fight for them.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home