test
Page 3 of 3 [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age:78
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

10 Feb 2009, 8:27 am

TheAbided wrote:

The Global Warming farce has finally been shown to be what it really is...



The "in term" is now climate change. But Earth's climate has always changed over the long run (even in the medium run). The implication is that the nasty industrial nations of the world are the cause of the change and the change (no matter what it is) is for the worse.

Their answer is government regulation and taxation of industrial effort.

Riddle: What is a camel? Answer: A horse designed by the government.

Thomas Jefferson once said: If the government were to decree when we should sow and when we should reap, we would soon want for bread.

ruveyn



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age:78
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

10 Feb 2009, 8:28 am

TheAbided wrote:

The Global Warming farce has finally been shown to be what it really is...



The "in term" is now climate change. But Earth's climate has always changed over the long run (even in the medium run). The implication is that the nasty industrial nations of the world are the cause of the change and the change (no matter what it is) is for the worse.

Their answer is government regulation and taxation of industrial effort.

Riddle: What is a camel? Answer: A horse designed by the government.

Thomas Jefferson once said: If the government were to decree when we should sow and when we should reap, we would soon want for bread.

ruveyn



twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age:29
Posts: 4,229
Location: Boötes void

10 Feb 2009, 11:15 am

TheAbided wrote:
The funny thing is most scientists who once believed in "Global Warming", don't even use that term anymore. The evidence now a days is so overwhelming that global warming is not occurring, (just check out current ice levels and temperatures compared to the last few decades, yes, a few years ago we warmed up, but it definitely hasn't lasted very long) they have now switched to the term "climate change" instead, and admit global warming wasn't the correct term. The truth of course is that climate change is perfectly natural, and even though it is possible humans have altered the environment, there is no evidence at all that we have. CO2 levels have gone up, but there is no proof that it causes the Earth to warm up considerably, only theory. There is also theory that says it causes the Earth to cool down.

The Global Warming farce has finally been shown to be what it really is...

Scholarly citation or STFU.


_________________
* here for the nachos.


The_Cucumber
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2007
Posts: 665

10 Feb 2009, 8:21 pm

In my opinion we humans are affecting the general climate of the planet, that is undeniable. However the impact we have might not be nearly as much as what natural cycles are causing.

Another issue is that global warming has somehow become political. Once a scientific theory becomes political it become difficult for contrary opinions to be heard, even when they are correct.


_________________
The improbable goal: Fear nothing, hate nothing, and let nothing anger you.


monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age:54
Posts: 3,170

12 Feb 2009, 5:59 pm

The_Cucumber wrote:
In my opinion we humans are affecting the general climate of the planet, that is undeniable. However the impact we have might not be nearly as much as what natural cycles are causing.

Another issue is that global warming has somehow become political. Once a scientific theory becomes political it become difficult for contrary opinions to be heard, even when they are correct.


It has always been political. The idea that smoking cigarettes causes cancer was highly controversial and political because accepting that notion imperiled a large and powerful industry.



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age:54
Posts: 3,170

12 Feb 2009, 6:06 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Thomas Jefferson once said: If the government were to decree when we should sow and when we should reap, we would soon want for bread.

ruveyn


Quite true - a centralized government is not a good way to run every aspect of production. On the other hand, it can make sense for a central government to set rules on salmonella in peanuts and other foods, to limit acid emissions from factories and power plants, to protect endangered species, or to reduce other harmful externalities of production. Markets can be efficient, but when there are externalities that are not factored into the price of a good, then markets are irrational.