Got your attention???
Admittedly, do I know enough about global warming to prove/disprove the theory? Of course not...BUT, do I believe it is the source of intensifying hurricanes, warming temperatures, polar ice caps melting, etc.? Not yet...
And here's why.
First, just today, here's news out of Kenya, via CNN:
"Air pollution may be just the thing to fight global warming, some scientists say.
"Prominent scientists, among them a Nobel laureate, said a layer of pollution deliberately spewed into the atmosphere could act as a 'shade' from the sun's rays and help cool the planet."...
And...
"The American scientist [Tom Wigley, a senior U.S. government climatologist] said a temporary shield would give political leaders more time to reduce human dependence on fossil fuels -- main source of greenhouse gases. He said experts must more closely study the feasibility of the idea and its possible effects on stratospheric chemistry.
"Nairobi conference participants agreed.
"'Yes, by all means, do all the research,'" Indian climatologist Rajendra K. Pachauri, chairman of the 2,000-scientist U.N. network on climate change, said.
"But 'if human beings take it upon themselves to carry out something as massive and drastic as this, we need to be absolutely sure there are no side effects,' Pachauri said."
Of course, we must do the research!!! So how are these scientists going to fund their pollution of the Earth? Well, Britain has a great idea:
"Hard-working families face crippling new bills as the Government fights global warming with a raft of stinging taxes.
"Typical families with two children could have to pay up to £1,300 more every year, according to estimates."...
And...
"Prof Julian Morris, environmental economist at Buckingham University and director of the International Policy Network, said: “I’m afraid it will be Sun readers who will be most affected by these changes.
“'The price of their cheap flights will rise, making a short break abroad more costly.'
“'The cost of visiting their family will rise, because of increased petrol duty.'
“'And people will effectively be forced to buy energy-saving televisions and long-life lightbulbs by a nannying Government. Their whole way of life will alter forever.'”
If you're a sane person, you HAVE to find this INsane, right??? Taxing people to raise revenue to fight GLOBAL WARMING? Since when is it the role of government to raise money for scientists by taxing its citizens??? Can't scientists fund their research through the private sector like EVERYONE ELSE, instead of forcing the government to raise money for them? This echoes Missouri's Amendment 2 which inconceivably just passed and makes cloning constitutional. Embryonic stem-cell research has proven a "Bridge to Nowhere", which is why there's no private sector funding for it. Solution? Legislate it.
Disgraceful. But I digress. That topic is worthy of a LENGTHY discussion later...
Need more evidence of the craziness of global warming?
Check out Alternate Energy Sources, which claims global warming causes or increases the risk of the following:
1) lung disease
2) cardiovascular problems
3) cancer
4) injury from flying debris
5) intestinal disease
6) economic hardship
7) starvation
8) spread of infection
9) overpopulation
10) war
According to the site, it also discriminates against poor people and the elderly.
How devastating! Solution? Well, it's twofold:
"Therefore government- and private citizen policy around committed relationship, rather than individual competition, is a prime recipe for dealing with the health effects of global warming."
Yes! Eliminate competition and have the government take care of us!
If anyone cares to point out the evidence on this website, versus the supposition, please do...
Still not convinced???
The state of California SUED auto manufacturers over global warming back in September.
"'Global warming is causing significant harm to California's environment, economy, agriculture and public health. The impacts are already costing millions of dollars, and the price tag is increasing,'" Attorney General Bill Lockyer said."
Where is the EVIDENCE??? This is just another empty statement! He has no support for this claim...and, why single out six car manufacturers (as the article points out)? Why not sue people who don't "recycle, reduce and reuse?" Why not sue global warming hypocrites who roll into Berkley with a pollutant-heavy motorcade? Or, why not sue Hollywood liberals who claim to be Earth crusaders but fly around in private jets???
I feel like this is a popular topic and one that will be revisited soon. This should be enough to digest for now...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
Is your main point that global warming does not exist, or that we don't have a good answer for the problem or way to deal with the global warming problem?
I can whole-heartedly agree that its a very complex issue, and does not have simple answers or easy answers.
I think that part of the problem with the government/free market is that the free market doesn't solve every single issue (like the government deciding that we need special child labor laws, or the government deciding to make it illegal to say kill somebody and simply steal their money.) Yes, I realize these are sort of ridiculous examples, but the free market argument doens't cover every contingency. Many would say that the free market created the global warming issue, so maybe it can't solve it by itself.
Anyway - if your point is that the whole issue is some scare tactic that doesn't exist, well, Id have to disagree with that. Again this is rather simplistic, but if you simply chart the population of humans (the whole species) through time you can clearly spot major events (like the rise of agriculture, the black plague, and the industrial revolution) We've been causing a lot more pollution, and there's a whole lot more of us. The biggest problem is that if we sit around and wait until the damage we've created is completely unmistakable - then it will also likely be completely irreversible (think about the ammount of time it takes to cause an oil spill, and the ammount of time/money/energy etc it takes to clean up the oil spill)
1) you're assuming that human beings could be the only possible source of "global warming"...
2) you say "we've been causing a lot more, pollution, and there's a whole lot more of us..." - well, these scientists in Kenya seem to believe that dumping your trash outside your house will combat global warming, so it doesn't seem definite, at least to some, that pollution and global warming have a direct correlation. Also, the fact that there's more people on this planet is not a bad thing - people whine about overcrowding all the time but, technically speaking, there's A LOT of room on this planet for people to live. Whether they want to live there, I guess, is a different story...
"Admittedly, do I know enough about global warming to prove/disprove the theory?"
Lets be careful not to mix up a scientific hypothesis versus a theory. A theory is a complex model that has already stood up to scietific rigor and is throroughly peer reviewed. It's basically accepted science that's stood the test of time and scrutiny (much like the Theory of Relativitity, Evolution, etc). It's not open to political interpretation or argumentation - you need data to disprove it.
"Of course not...BUT, do I believe it is the source of intensifying hurricanes, warming temperatures, polar ice caps melting, etc.? Not yet..."
These are concepts that are borne out of the standard weather model we've used for decades, and there's plenty of evidence that the same process has occured multiple times in the past with the same results. The sea level is higher this year than it was last year, which is not up for debate.
"And here's why.
/snip
Prominent scientists, among them a Nobel laureate, said a layer of pollution deliberately spewed into the atmosphere could act as a 'shade' from the sun's rays and help cool the planet."...
I'm thinking you didn't really read the article. They're not saying our current pollution will help save us, they're saying if we don't do something immediately, we may be stuck with a matrix style solution to buy us more time. They're talking about deliberatly seeding the upper atmosphere with thick pollution to block out the sun. This was proposed as a wake up call, and is deliberately extreme. From the same article:
"It was meant to startle the policymakers," said Paul J. Crutzen, of Germany's Max Planck Institute for Chemistry. "If they don't take action much more strongly than they have in the past, then in the end we have to do experiments like this."
Now to pick up where you left off....
"And...
"The American scientist [Tom Wigley, a senior U.S. government climatologist] said a temporary shield would give political leaders more time to reduce human dependence on fossil fuels -- main source of greenhouse gases. He said experts must more closely study the feasibility of the idea and its possible effects on stratospheric chemistry.
"Nairobi conference participants agreed.
"'Yes, by all means, do all the research,'" Indian climatologist Rajendra K. Pachauri, chairman of the 2,000-scientist U.N. network on climate change, said.
"But 'if human beings take it upon themselves to carry out something as massive and drastic as this, we need to be absolutely sure there are no side effects,' Pachauri said."
Did you read the same passage I did? This tells me that we're talking about a massive undertaking, not a logical effect of somthing that's already occuring.
"Of course, we must do the research!!! So how are these scientists going to fund their pollution of the Earth? Well, Britain has a great idea:"
Let me cut you off - scientists don't impliment solutions, they conduct research. Some of the largest corporations in the world who are capable of funding such research have market interest to see it fail (ie; philip morris and exxon mobile). We'll get into this more as you make your laissez-faire assertion below.
"Hard-working families face crippling new bills as the Government fights global warming with a raft of stinging taxes.
/snip
“'The cost of visiting their family will rise, because of increased petrol duty.'
“'And people will effectively be forced to buy energy-saving televisions and long-life lightbulbs by a nannying Government. Their whole way of life will alter forever.'”
If you're a sane person, you HAVE to find this INsane, right??? Taxing people to raise revenue to fight GLOBAL WARMING?"
If you're an informed person, you realize this is one of the only ways to accomplish more immediate action in the market.
"Since when is it the role of government to raise money for scientists by taxing its citizens???"
I have no idea where this surprise comes from. The government is one of the biggest funders of scientific research (aside from the military, which alone makes it the #1 contributer). Your statement here is a non-sequiter as well. The government is not increasing taxes to raise money for research, it already pays for that. It is increasing taxes on things that pollute, to make them less appealing choices for consumers. Gas will continue to be "cheap" for long after it's effects are irriversible for the next 10,000 years. The market alone is too slow and has to much too lose by acting on it's own.
"Can't scientists fund their research through the private sector like EVERYONE ELSE,"
It's not a scientists job to raise funds, nor should they have to. Have you thought of a world that only has private funding for research? There would be no incentive to research any drugs except those that deal with the side effects of an excessive lifestyle (like high cholesterol, obesity, diabetes, etc). If you think this isn't the case then look at project Bioshield in the good ole' US, which is attempting to simulate market incentives that don't exist to protect us from a biological attack (or worse things, such as pandemic flu). While it is failing in that regard, that more points to a weakness in free market economy than the government. If huge incentives are not enough to entice this kind of research, what in the world would make the free market economy do better?
You miss the entire point of most research, which is not designed to impact the world financially. It's all well and good that you're well fed and happy, but someone needs to fund research into things that don't affect those with money. The market lacks foresight, and strictly reactive. Let me know how that works when you're infected with a super bug, your families beach front property no longer exists, or god forbid something as complex and devastating as a large asteroid crashing into the earth. These things may sound ridiculous but they have all happened right here on earth, and each of them will happen again as certain as the earth will keep rotating. Ask your grandparents how things went for them in 1918.
"instead of forcing the government to raise money for them?"
Scientists don't force anyone to do anything.
"This echoes Missouri's Amendment 2 which inconceivably just passed and makes cloning constitutional."
This has no place in this conversation. It does not echo the above statements in any way, and beyond that is a gross oversimplification of the issue in question. Did you even read your link? They're talking about cloning single cells, which is perfectly legal on the federal level. They do this in order to comply with the issue of only working with the present sample of cells they're allowed.
"Embryonic stem-cell research has proven a "Bridge to Nowhere", which is why there's no private sector funding for it. Solution? Legislate it."
You're making some very big leaps here. Aside from the fact your link is about a literal bridge in Alaska, it is an indefensible claim to say anything has been "proven" about stem cell research. The moment there are significant breakthroughs the private sector will jump all over this, but they avoid it now due to "ethical" concerns (companies have PR to worry about).
What about something like CERN? Quantum physics? Or the expiremental fusion reactor in France? Where would nuclear energy be now without significant government investment in the manhattan project? Understanding the basic mechanics of our universe down to fundamental particle interaction is not something that has a market interest. Neither does going out to space. You take your free market arguments so far I wonder if you know what the depression is, or the new deal. Maybe you could ask your grandparents if after they survived the pandemic flu of 1918 whether they enjoyed the great depression that true laissez-faire governmental support got them?
/snip
"Need more evidence of the craziness of global warming?
Check out Alternate Energy Sources, which claims global warming causes or increases the risk of the following:
1) lung disease
2) cardiovascular problems
3) cancer
4) injury from flying debris
5) intestinal disease
6) economic hardship
7) starvation
8) spread of infection
9) overpopulation
10) war"
Maybe you've never considered the effects of a shifting warm band across the world will do. Maybe you've never lived in an area where lung disease is near epidemic due to pollution from cars and factories. Maybe things like how disease spreads in warmer climates isn't something you're familiar with.
"According to the site, it also discriminates against poor people and the elderly."
That's right, because people with money can walk away from their houses on the cape and go to their house in the mountains. Is it somehow surprising to you that people with money are insulated from the many ills that exist in the world?
"How devastating! Solution? Well, it's twofold:"
I'm glad you can have such a careless and brazen attitude about people dying because they didn't have the fortune that you've had in life.
"Therefore government- and private citizen policy around committed relationship, rather than individual competition, is a prime recipe for dealing with the health effects of global warming."
Yes! Eliminate competition and have the government take care of us!"
Current planning and suggestion put out by the government involve such terrible suggestions as checking in with elderly people who live alone. The gaul of the city to provide public meetings so that individuals in a community might form a relationship and be more prone to help people in times of crisis. Aside from that, they are not asserting to eliminate competition, they are saying for this specific set of issues, cooperation is more useful. When you are 80 years old and on a respirator and live alone, let me know when the market comes to save you.
"If anyone cares to point out the evidence on this website, versus the supposition, please do..."
This is not an issue of rhetoric. You can't argue away health issues.
"Still not convinced???
The state of California SUED auto manufacturers over global warming back in September.
"'Global warming is causing significant harm to California's environment, economy, agriculture and public health. The impacts are already costing millions of dollars, and the price tag is increasing,'" Attorney General Bill Lockyer said."
Where is the EVIDENCE???"
It is something that will be presented in court if you want to find out. They'll have piles of statements and balance sheets to prove the preponderance of the evidence. Just because the enitirety of the case wasn't spoon fed to you in the article you read doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist.
"This is just another empty statement! He has no support for this claim..."
How do you know this? The very fact they got in court means they have something - it seems you're the one making baseless claims.
"and, why single out six car manufacturers (as the article points out)?"
Because they have money I assume. They also may have very direct evidence of gross negligence or some other thing that makes them particularly ripe to lose.
"Why not sue people who don't "recycle, reduce and reuse?" Why not sue global warming hypocrites who roll into Berkley with a pollutant-heavy motorcade? Or, why not sue Hollywood liberals who claim to be Earth crusaders but fly around in private jets???"
Not only are you using stereotypes to justify your argument, this whole passage has nothing to do with your main argument. What does this have to do with global warming effects not yet occuring? Your disjointed argument style of tossing out tenously connected components of ultimatly unrelated topics may work in a fast paced conversation, but it falls very short in an argumentative essay. Maybe you're not elliciting the response you crave because it you have to argue against your passages point by point, specifically because they are not organized.
ugg boots cheap cupFrerne
ugg boots outlet cupFrerne
ugg sale uk cupFrerne
ugg sale uk NetWeiple
ugg sale uk NetWeiple
ugg uk NetWeiple
http://bootsuksalecheap.webeden.co.uk
Ugg boots NetWeiple
ugg boots uk NetWeiple
ugg boots cheap NetWeiple
http://buybootsuk.webeden.co.uk
ugg uk NetWeiple
UGG Outlet NetWeiple
cheap ugg boots uk NetWeiple
http://uggforsaleuk.webeden.co.uk
Red Robert Griffin III Kids Jersey axiotakix
Women's Eli Manning Jersey axiotakix
Doug Martin Pink Jersey axiotakix
http://www.nikeredskinsnflstore.com
Marshawn Lynch Women's Jersey axiotakix
Robert Griffin III Limited Jersey axiotakix
Green Aaron Rodgers Youth Jersey axiotakix
http://www.nikecowboysnflstore.com
ZesNiclesex Eric Decker Youth Jersey
Leonard Hankerson Women's Jersey
Sean Taylor Jersey
nutWhororog
Isaac Redman Youth Jersey
Russell Wilson Jersey
Jonathan Dwyer Jersey
drydayoutraro
Biansioni Mike Wallace Youth Jersey Antonio Brown Youth Jersey Victor Cruz Jersey
If you wish for to obtain much from this paragraph
then you have to apply such methods to your won web site.
Look at my web page; michael kors jewelry collection
I do not even know how I ended up here, but I thought this post
was great. I don't know who you are but definitely you're going to a famous blogger if you are not already ;) Cheers!
My web page: michael kors history
Oh my goodness! Impressive article dude! Thank you, However
I am having troubles with your RSS. I don't understand why I cannot subscribe to it. Is there anyone else getting similar RSS problems? Anyone that knows the answer will you kindly respond? Thanx!!
Also visit my web page - michael kors mens watches
Very descriptive post, I enjoyed that a lot. Will there be a part 2?
My web-site ... reality shows
Saved as a favorite, I really like your blog!
Also visit my weblog; michael kors watches
great put up, very informative. I ponder why the opposite experts of
this sector don't realize this. You must continue your writing. I am sure, you've a huge
readers' base already!
Also visit my web site ... ralph lauren outlet
I'm extremely impressed with your writing skills as well as with the layout on your blog. Is this a paid theme or did you customize it yourself? Either way keep up the excellent quality writing, it is rare to see a great blog like this one today.
Visit my web site - ralph lauren polo sale
Quality posts is the secret to attract the users to go to see
the website, that's what this website is providing.
Here is my weblog - Fake Ray Bans
great points altogether, you just won a emblem new reader.
What may you suggest in regards to your submit that you simply made some days in the past?
Any certain?
Feel free to surf to my blog post ... ralph lauren outlet store
Hi there just wanted to give you a quick heads up and let you know a few of the images aren't loading correctly. I'm not sure why but I think its a linking issue.
I've tried it in two different browsers and both show the same results.
Feel free to visit my homepage - Ray Ban Outlet
We stumbled over here different web address and thought I may
as well check things out. I like what I see so now i'm following you. Look forward to checking out your web page for a second time.
my webpage :: Polo Ralph Lauren Factory Store
Very quickly this website will be famous
amid all blogging and site-building visitors, due to it's pleasant articles
Feel free to surf to my web-site; Polo Ralph Lauren Outlet
That is very fascinating, You are an excessively skilled blogger.
I've joined your rss feed and stay up for in quest of extra of your excellent post. Also, I've shared your site in my social networks
my website - ray ban sunglasses sale
Hello there! Do you know if they make any plugins to
assist with SEO? I'm trying to get my blog to rank for some targeted keywords but I'm not seeing very good results.
If you know of any please share. Thanks!
Here is my web site - cheap christian louboutin
Post a Comment