Obama says climate change deniers ignoring science

[jballscalls]

Originally Posted by fast4522

Do you recall here at PA when Obo won his second term, time to put your seat belts on? Besides no one gives a rats ass about your bogus claims of global warming anyway, when the money becomes very scarce we will use the ax to reduce the need.

No I don't recall.

To me global warming isn't about money, it's about the planet. Do you think all of our waste and constant growing population and consumption is good for the planet? I don't know how it can be, but maybe it is. I'm not versed well enough to know. Clearly it's something you've studied exhaustively to have already formulated an opinion on.

also, no reason to get nasty with your "rats ass" comments. Just trying to have a dialogue.

[fast4522]

Originally Posted by jballscalls

No I don't recall.

To me global warming isn't about money, it's about the planet. Do you think all of our waste and constant growing population and consumption is good for the planet? I don't know how it can be, but maybe it is. I'm not versed well enough to know. Clearly it's something you've studied exhaustively to have already formulated an opinion on.

Liberals clearly have a problem with reality, sure there are parts of every country that have many times over the number of people that there once was. There are country's that are bone dry of water that have always been dry and now overpopulated without the ability to grow grain or sustain food for their people this is not our problem period. A big clue for you is we do not feel their pain. As a kind person your always going to be for the underdog, and when it is about our moneys don't be too surprised many of us are quick to say FO.

[jballscalls]

Originally Posted by fast4522

Liberals clearly have a problem with reality, sure there are parts of every country that have many times over the number of people that there once was. There are country's that are bone dry of water that have always been dry and now overpopulated without the ability to grow grain or sustain food for their people this is not our problem period. A big clue for you is we do not feel their pain. As a kind person your always going to be for the underdog, and when it is about our moneys don't be too surprised many of us are quick to say FO.

This debate shouldn't be about money, it should be about finding out what is happening to our planet and then taking steps to remedy that. If there's nothing happening, then clearly there don't need to be any steps taken. But it seems that a bulk of the research indicates something is happening. Maybe those 93% are wrong? It is good to listen to the 7% (those are #'s i've heard, i'm sure they're wrong) but eventually actions have to be taken if things stay so one sided on the research

[fast4522]

Originally Posted by jballscalls

This debate shouldn't be about money, it should be about finding out what is happening to our planet and then taking steps to remedy that. If there's nothing happening, then clearly there don't need to be any steps taken. But it seems that a bulk of the research indicates something is happening. Maybe those 93% are wrong? It is good to listen to the 7% (those are #'s i've heard, i'm sure they're wrong) but eventually actions have to be taken if things stay so one sided on the research

This debate is over, the current President now avoids the subject and is the new reality.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by jballscalls

This debate shouldn't be about money, it should be about finding out what is happening to our planet and then taking steps to remedy that. If there's nothing happening, then clearly there don't need to be any steps taken. But it seems that a bulk of the research indicates something is happening. Maybe those 93% are wrong? It is good to listen to the 7% (those are #'s i've heard, i'm sure they're wrong) but eventually actions have to be taken if things stay so one sided on the research

With all due respect, you cannot be this naive. Global warming is 97% about wealth redistribution and 3% about the environment.

[TJDave]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Global warming is 97% about wealth redistribution and 3% about the environment.

While it is true that spending necessary to combat climate change would result in massive wealth redistribution, doing nothing will accomplish the same result. Mother nature has her way of leveling the playing field. Wealthy countries will have nowhere to hide.

[davew]

Originally Posted by jballscalls

This debate shouldn't be about money, it should be about finding out what is happening to our planet and then taking steps to remedy that. If there's nothing happening, then clearly there don't need to be any steps taken. But it seems that a bulk of the research indicates something is happening. Maybe those 93% are wrong? It is good to listen to the 7% (those are #'s i've heard, i'm sure they're wrong) but eventually actions have to be taken if things stay so one sided on the research

93% as a number is wrong - poorly designed survey

Al Gore speech at Bali in 2007 (the United States sucks, wrecking the world propaganda urgency - moral imperatives)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HeTA1S7TXM
"a realitively small group of people can change the world to come...."

Al Gore Nobel Peace prize speech 2007 - climate crisis threat - eleventh hour...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhAYP_m4k0w

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by TJDave

While it is true that spending necessary to combat climate change would result in massive wealth redistribution, doing nothing will accomplish the same result. Mother nature has her way of leveling the playing field. Wealthy countries will have nowhere to hide.

Seriously?!? How will wealth redistribution be accomplished by doing nothing? How is Mother Nature going to level the playing field? Why would wealthy countries need to hide? Have you written a letter to the head of China asking them to stop their pollution? Have you downsized your carbon footprint as a show of contrition for your past wayward ways? Or are we to do as you say and not as you do?

[TJDave]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Seriously?!? How will wealth redistribution be accomplished by doing nothing? How is Mother Nature going to level the playing field? Why would wealthy countries need to hide? Have you written a letter to the head of China asking them to stop their pollution? Have you downsized your carbon footprint as a show of contrition for your past wayward ways? Or are we to do as you say and not as you do?

I don't care what we/you do. I have not downsized my energy needs other than to increase efficiency when buying new products and have no intention of doing more. I'm on life's downside and plan to be dead long before my ankles have a chance to get wet or my comfort is compromised.

The effects of climate change will cost the world plenty and will affect everyone's pocketbook. Those that have more will pay more.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by TJDave

The effects of climate change will cost the world plenty and will affect everyone's pocketbook. Those that have more will pay more.

How? Even if one believed in global warming being man made, why is a warming world worse than a cold world? The answer is obvious. It isn't.

[RunForTheRoses]

I wish there was less bluster and more straight forwardness on this issue. I've watched the first episode of Year of Living Dangerous:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brvhCnYvxQQ

and it is a bit tendentious but undoubtedly some of it is true. It is very well produced, especially in its cinematography and I would recommend all to watch. Over the last 150 years humans have definitely been impacting the environment. However, many anti-capitalists have joined the movement and guess what? their solution is anti-capitalist in nature. Also, there seems to be an exploitation of climate changing over time as it ALWAYS has and some using it for ideological gains. Remember the Dust Bowl? Remember that icy glacier called Greenland was once Green Land? Plus there's the hockey Stick controversy.
Also, there is the issue is global warming (now climate change, especially after the cold weather this week in the US) necessarily bad? In human history the Ice Age was a very major bummer.
Finally, who is to be sanctioned? Should the US castrate itself while China and India go on unimpeded? Those nations spew much more pollution.

I would really like to investigate this issue in a dispassionate way. Any book recommendations?

[fast4522]

We live in a time our understanding of things comes into sharp focus. At the same point in time we have our government and elected officials lie about every single event because it is better for them. The money problem is so extensive around the world and not just here global warming means jobs, and big money to be made from its investments. The real problem Al Gore and his crew have is they can't own people with this swindle, they can buy some or enough so far to enrich their investments but largely those where desperation has taken over. Europe is about to burn from its debt, I say let it go.

[HUSKER55]

I am going to say this again. If the climate is in so much danger then why didn't the dems do something about it when they had control?

There would be no unemployment then.

[TJDave]

Originally Posted by tucker6

How? Even if one believed in global warming being man made, why is a warming world worse than a cold world? The answer is obvious. It isn't.

Try August in Palm Springs. Air conditioners run 24/7...and can't keep up. Want to guess what that costs?

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by TJDave

Try August in Palm Springs. Air conditioners run 24/7...and can't keep up. Want to guess what that costs?

That's your response??

Hint: The desert in summer is hot. Man wasn't meant to occupy a hot, stifling desert. If global warming raised the temps in Palm Springs from 118F to 120F, would anyone really notice?