Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'TM Lounge' started by Manny Laureano, Nov 11, 2005.
I'll resist the tempation to say "I told you so".
Democrats; your turn..............
I feel the same way about health insurance. Not only can the doctors not tell me *when* I'll get sick, they can't even guarantee that I *will* get sick. Since paying health insurance premiums will stunt my personal economic growth, I think I'll cancel my health insurance...
Very funny, John, very funny...
The analogy doesn't hold because you're assuming that the Kyoto accord will actually come in handy. It does nothing. Any effects from the accord won't come into play for about 50 years, that's just the way it works. The earth doesn't turn on a dime. Second, the effects of the accord are miniscule. You'll have a 2% change at best and you'll screw over economic systems everywhere...
...the countries where the worst pollution is happening, namely China and India. And guess what? THEY got a big pass on being part of the accord. Not fair.
We have a planet that is supporting 7-plus billion people, all of whom breathe out (say it with me): CO2. Not counting all the animals raised to feed the hungry children of these folks. Well, not China, anyway, they have a pretty strong abortion policy or at least they used to.
I have a pretty strong notion that mankind has a knack for surviving through natural inclinations of the species. Things may not happen during our lifetimes the way we want them to but they happen. Look at how nature has a fantastic way of rejuvenating itself after natural disasters. I believe man has the same inclination for survival. We just may not be the generation that gets to see it.
For those who are not afraid of reading a scientific paper, here is the link to the most in depth paper that totally disproves the global warming theory.
Oh, and by the way, it has been reviewed and approved by 17,000 scientists!
Nobody said it would be easy........
(bonus point if you can quote the following line from the Sheryl Crow song)
All life -- the billions of humans, the animals we raise, plants, all that -- takes part in a closed carbon cycle. Yes we all exhale carbon dioxide, but our survival depends on plants, that we either eat directly or feed to our livestock, and the plants use photosynthesis to convert carbon dioxide back into oxygen.
Greenhouse gas accumulation occurs when we dig up carbon sources -- coal or oil -- and burn them, putting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
It doesn't matter. Ultimately, you "win." The Kyoto Accord will fail, as will any other attempted remedy based on personal sacrifice. Environmentalists are simply competing for Holier-Than-Thou Brownie Points (redeemable for Told-You-So Vouchers in the future!). If you want to back a winning pony, always bet on the horse that promises an SUV in every driveway and a plasma-screen TV in every pot.
OK, so you only told a part of the cycle. If one looks at the thorugh paper
I referenced you will read this at the end of the authors' dicsussion:
"Human activities are believed to be responsible for the rise in CO2 level of the atmosphere. Mankind is moving the carbon in coal, oil, and natural gas from below ground to the atmosphere and surface, where it is available for conversion into living things. We are living in an increasingly lush environment of plants and animals as a result of the CO2 increase. Our children will enjoy an Earth with far more plant and animal life as that with which we now are blessed. This is a wonderful and unexpected gift from the Industrial Revolution."
There is no hand waiving here. The authors carefully show the real data on global ground and atmosphere temps, the ocean levels and the effect of CO2 on plant life.
As CO2 levels rise plant life increases leading to more biodiversity until the CO2 in the atmosphere reaches an equilibrium.
Also, mankind has lived through much warmer periods in the past 3000 years with no evidence of globally reaching reductions in human or for that matter animal or plant life.
The science just doesn't support any reason to fear gloabl warming and a lot of respected scientists, including Frederick Seitz, the former president of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. are willing to sign their names to such.
Well, I'm with you on SUV's. Wait, let me say that better: I think the SUV bought by someone who has no intention of going out were you would really need something like is not my cup of tea. I don't get the Hummer thing or the gigantic vehicle like for someone who's never going to go near a rough wooded area or planning to haul lots and lots of stuff. I just don't get it, frankly. But to each his own.
I think the market for that sort of thing is going to die out pretty soon. Why? Look at how people have freaked out over the temporary post-Katrina gas prices. Suddenly folks were skittish about feeding those things. That's what I like about the free market.
Anyways, good reading you.
Every time I read Manny I feel I know him or would like to. Rush is right(just a prod)