|
|
Fri Aug 22, 2008 23:59 pm A new season? |
|
|
The biggest effect of global warming in my country is that the media release a lot of gas into the atmosphere talking about it, and they allow almost no exposure to the scientists who disagree with the premise, or agree that it's happening but don't think it's bad.
If it gets hotter, they blame it on global warming. If it gets colder, they blame it on global warming, because they claim it's supposed to get colder before it gets warmer. They blamed Hurricane Katrina on global warming (and by extension on President Bush, because everybody knows he's a major cause of global warming), even though meteorologists said that the storm was part of a regular 40-year cycle of severe hurricane activity that scientists have known about for years.
And they still have to explain why the 1930s were hotter than this decade.
The whole thing is a scam. In the late 1960s they told us that by 1980 there would be no more petroleum left anywhere in the world. In the 1970s they told us that ruination was imminent because the earth was cooling, the polar ice caps were going to expand, cover New York, and we wouldn't be able to grow enough food. Then this global warming thing came.
The funny thing is that no matter what they say the earth is doing, they always claim the same things cause it. Capitalism, prosperity and technology were depleting the petroleum in the 1960s, cooling the earth in the 1970s, and are supposedly warming it now. And the answer they always come up with is more government control over the decisions of individual people. I've seen it blamed on people eating bananas, on cow flatulence, all kinds of things that just happen to be related to things that so many greenies personally object to. I have never seen any of these things blamed on the volume of plastic used by the music industry or anything else that greenies personally like.
The whole global warming hoax is just another environmental scare fad started by people who want to eliminate capitalism. In a few years it will be disproven, just like Marxism, and they'll be scaring people with something else. That something else will be caused by the same things they say cause global warming.
Two questions: 1. Why would you believe a guy who flies a private jet around the world to tell people to limit their use of fossil fuels and then goes home to a mansion where just the pool house uses more carbon-based fuel in a month than an average American house does in a year? 2. If they can't predict the weather accurately for next month, why do you think they can predict what it will be like 25 years from now? |
|
Jamie (K) I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 24 Feb 2006 Posts: 4466 Location: Detroit, Michigan, USA
|
|
Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:49 am A new season? |
|
|
| Quote: | | The whole global warming hoax is just another environmental scare fad started by people who want to eliminate capitalism. |
You are capable of politicising almost everything under the sun, Jamie. I don't know where you get those ideas from. Do you derive them on your own or do you read something most people in this world don't?
| Quote: | | Why would you believe a guy who flies a private jet around the world to tell people to limit their use of fossil fuels and then goes home to a mansion where just the pool house uses more carbon-based fuel in a month than an average American house does in a year? |
Are you talking about your former vice-president? _________________ Non-native speaker of English
=================================
I intend to live forever - so far, so good. |
|
Daemon99 I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 21 Feb 2008 Posts: 370
|
 |
Sat Aug 23, 2008 13:52 pm A new season? |
|
|
| daemon99 wrote: | | Quote: | | The whole global warming hoax is just another environmental scare fad started by people who want to eliminate capitalism. |
You are capable of politicising almost everything under the sun, Jamie. I don't know where you get those ideas from. Do you derive them on your own or do you read something most people in this world don't? |
What makes you think it's me politicizing it? The environmentalists make these issues political, and when Marxism was discredited after the fall of the USSR, they migrated into environmentalism and try to use it for the same purposes they had been pursuing before. And it is all done through the political process. Whether the scare du jour is energy depletion, global cooling or global warming, they always claim it has the same causes, and they propose the same political "solutions".
Little by little, however, they're starting to look foolish in the United States. It's partly because the whole global warming hysteria is promoted by various celebrities who are enormous consumers of energy, often living in huge mansions and flying private jets to places where they give speeches demanding that "the little guy" decrease his energy consumption.
Another reason is that whatever environmentalists adamantly advocate, they later try to prevent. For decades they've been promoting "wind farms" as a (very inefficient) "solution" to America's energy needs. They got laws passed in some states requiring the power companies to produce at least 10% of their electricity through wind power. However, when the power companies try to comply with this regulation, the environmentalists prevent it by forbidding them to install the cables necessary to distribute the electricity. Sometimes they won't let them build the wind farm at all. So they want the companies punished if they don't produce wind power, and then they forbid them to produce the wind power. This all looks very foolish to people.
| daemon99 wrote: | | Quote: | | Why would you believe a guy who flies a private jet around the world to tell people to limit their use of fossil fuels and then goes home to a mansion where just the pool house uses more carbon-based fuel in a month than an average American house does in a year? |
Are you talking about your former vice-president? |
Yes. Here is a good comparison between Gore's house and Bush's house: http://www.canadafreepress.com/gore-bush-house.htm
Don't forget that Gore advocates regulating the emission of "greenhouse gases" by companies being forced to trade "carbon credits". Mr. Gore owns a majority stake in one of the companies that trade these "carbon credits", and so he profits handsomely from all this trading.
Environmental issues are one of the prime examples of how societies are affected by both what kind of literature gets translated and what kind doesn't. In the United States and England, there is plenty to read and see that explains various fallacies in Al Gore's theories and exposes the political and economic agenda behind what he does. Al Gore can run around saying, "The science is settled," but then a lot of scientists come out and oppose his claims (Gore refuses to debate with scientists). So we get balanced information here. They get the same information in the UK, and UK schools are under court order not to show Al Gore's movie without balancing it with material that explains the fallacies in it. However, in many countries the only information on this that people can get is translations Al Gore's assertions, and they don't get the opposing views. |
|
Jamie (K) I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 24 Feb 2006 Posts: 4466 Location: Detroit, Michigan, USA
|
 |
Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:54 am A new season? |
|
|
| Torsten, global warming is one of prime importance issues at present and all countries in the word are being effected by this. But in fact are existing a contradiction that poor countries which have exhaust gas emission less are being effecting more than rich countries which have exhaust gas emission much.If the average temperature rise about 3-4 degrees celsius, in Vietnam has about 22 milion people are lost habitat, and lost farm land in poor countries, famine, flood, an epidemic disease... |
|
Quangquang I'm new here and I like it ;-)
Joined: 17 Aug 2008 Posts: 13 Location: Vietnam
|
 |
|
| What do you make of the "Passive House" concept? | What should I do if I want to study in the UK? |