The United States of Esoterica

Official forum of binnallofamerica.com
It is currently Sat Jul 21, 2018 1:44 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 8:50 pm 
Offline
CFR Fat Cat

Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:48 pm
Posts: 425
Location: The Forzen Tundra
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/prog1.htm#suspend

Excerpt from the site.

Quote:
Suspending Disaster: The Myth Of Global Warming
Green groups such as Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, the World Wildlife Fund and Earth First are using their influence to persuade people that an environmental disaster of historic proportions is just around the corner. As Barbara Mass of the Pan African Conservation Group succinctly puts it: "I think we're going to drown in our own muck."

Environmentalist thinking is now widely accepted in the West. However, many scientists argue that what the Greens say about global warming and pollution is wrong. Professor Wilfred Beckerman, a former member of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, was himself an enthusiastic environmentalist until he started examining the facts. He told Against Nature: "Within a few months of looking at the statistical data, I realised that most of my concerns about the environment were based on false information and scare stories."

According to Piers Corbyn, Director of Weather Action, many scientists do not accept the idea that pollution is causing global warming. Environmentalists claim that world temperatures have risen one degree Fahrenheit in the past century, but Corbyn points out that the period they take as their starting point — around 1880 — was colder than average. What's more, the timing of temperature changes does not appear to support the theory of global warming. Most of the rise came before 1940 —before human-caused emissions of 'greenhouse' gases became significant.

According to the Greens, during the post-war boom global warming should have pushed temperatures up. But the opposite happened. "As a matter of the fact, the decrease in temperature, which was very noticeable in the 60s and 70s, led many people to fear that we would be going into another ice age," remembers Fred Singer, former Chief Scientist with the US Weather Program.

Even in recent times, the temperature has not behaved as it should according to global warming theory. Over the last eight years, temperature in the southern hemisphere has actually been falling. Moreover, says Piers Corbyn, "When proper satellite measurements are done of world temperatures, they do not show any increase whatsoever over the last 20 years."

But Greens refuse to accept they have could have been proved wrong. Now they say global warming can involve temperature going both up and down.

"Global warming is above all global climatic destabilisation," says Edward Goldsmith, editor of the Ecologist, "with extremes of cold and heat when you don't expect it. You can't predict climate any more. You get terrible droughts in certain cases; sometimes you get downpours. In Egypt, I think, they had a rainfall for the first time in history — they suddenly had an incredible downpour. Water pouring down in places where it's never rained before. And then you get droughts in another area. So it's going to be extremely unpredictable."

Scientists also point out that nature produces far more greenhouse gases than we do. For example, when the Mount Pinatubo volcano erupted, within just a few hours it had thrown into the atmosphere 30 million tonnes of sulphur dioxide— almost twice as much as all the factories, power plants and cars in the United States do in a whole year. Oceans emit 90 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, every year. Decaying plants throw up another 90 billion tonnes, compared to just six billion tonnes a year from humans.

What's more, 100 million years ago, there was six times as much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as there is now, yet the temperature then was marginally cooler than it is today. Many scientists have concluded that carbon dioxide doesn't even affect climate.

Although many environmentalists have been forced to accept much of the scientific evidence against global warming, they still argue that it is better to be safe than sorry. So they continue to use global warming as a reason to oppose industrialisation and economic growth.

_________________
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. "Mostly Harmless"

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:38 pm 
Offline
Friend of the Illuminati

Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 2:23 pm
Posts: 1859
Location: Arkansas
It is amazing how many carbon emmissions we are producing on the rest of the planets in the solar system. That does have to be the answer to why the rest of the planets are heating up also, right?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:01 am 
Offline
British Royal

Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:03 pm
Posts: 973
I'm not so sure either way yet on global warming. There are compelling arguments for both sides. I tend to think that we are in a natural warming cycle, but are helping it to be worse than it should be.

Even if it turns out pollution from mankind is not contributing, it doesn't mean we should keep doing it. An example is second hand smoke. There are arguments pro and con as to the hazards. Chicago recently started a smoking ban in most public places. Will it save peoples lives? Maybe, maybe not, but we can now go out to dinner or for a drink and breath fresh, smoke free air.

So like, the smoking ban, environmentalism may not save the planet, but it will make it a nicer place to be. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:04 am 
Offline
CFR Fat Cat

Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:48 pm
Posts: 425
Location: The Forzen Tundra
Primus wrote:
It is amazing how many carbon emmissions we are producing on the rest of the planets in the solar system. That does have to be the answer to why the rest of the planets are heating up also, right?


SUV Smog travels a long way. :wink:

_________________
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. "Mostly Harmless"

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:06 am 
Offline
Friend of the Illuminati

Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 2:23 pm
Posts: 1859
Location: Arkansas
I'm for conserving and cleaning up the environment, but the left wings way of doing it will do nothing but cost Americans jobs and make products more expensive. That counter-productive if you ask me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:07 am 
Offline
Friend of the Illuminati

Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 2:23 pm
Posts: 1859
Location: Arkansas
afeent1 wrote:
Primus wrote:
It is amazing how many carbon emmissions we are producing on the rest of the planets in the solar system. That does have to be the answer to why the rest of the planets are heating up also, right?


SUV Smog travels a long way. :wink:


Sort of like the fleet of SUV's and planes Al Gore had for the premieres of his movie and for the live earth concert?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:59 am 
Offline
C2C 1st Hour Pop-In Guest

Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:27 pm
Posts: 15
That article is from 1997, though. Its implication that many scientists discredit global warming is no longer accurate. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the G8+5 National Science Academies, the National Research Council, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Society, etc... all agree that human activity plays a significant role in the global climate, which is currently in a warming trend.

Please note that I'm not making a political statement here, I'm not interested in a superficial "right v left" global warming debate.

I'm simply pointing out that some of the information in the article is outdated and no longer representative of contemporary climate science.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:16 am 
Offline
C2C Regular

Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:26 pm
Posts: 67
Location: Chocolate City (new orleans)
I don't know about global warming, but I really hate saying we are in a cycle,

What cycle? It seems like one would have to know what the cycle is before saying we in it.

Hey were in a wegit.
Whats a wegit?
I don't know, but we're in one.

sound stupid doesn't it?

_________________
Former Coast Rider - Timothy Brooks


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:50 am 
Offline
CFR Fat Cat

Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:48 pm
Posts: 425
Location: The Forzen Tundra
My biggest issue with the Global Warming religion (and it has become a religion) is that they tie anything and everything that happens with the weather as global warming.

Hot summer - Global Warming
cool summer - Global Warming
extra rainfall - Global Warming
drought - Global Warming
cold winter - Global Warming
warm winter - Global Warming
hurricane - Global Warming
no hurricane - Global Warming
Borat success - Global Warming

I happen to think we are in a warming cycle completely beyond our control.

_________________
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. "Mostly Harmless"

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:26 pm 
Offline
Merovingian
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 6:29 pm
Posts: 4803
If it motivates people to Care about what they are doing - - - I don't care if it is cyclical or man made.

I'll take the Green Myth.

_________________
You Can Not Expect of People What They Have Not Yet Learned . . . .Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:33 pm 
Offline
C2C Regular

Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:26 pm
Posts: 67
Location: Chocolate City (new orleans)
New News story -10 July 2007 - 'No Sun link' to climate change

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6290228.stm

_________________
Former Coast Rider - Timothy Brooks


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 2:35 am 
Offline
Y2K Profiteer

Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 3:15 am
Posts: 2186
Location: Buffalo,NY
eben wrote:
I don't know about global warming, but I really hate saying we are in a cycle,

What cycle? It seems like one would have to know what the cycle is before saying we in it.

Hey were in a wegit.
Whats a wegit?
I don't know, but we're in one.

sound stupid doesn't it?

I believe "the cycle" is if by some way the warm current waters ceased flowing toward Europe, Europe would enter a mini-ice age. Current studies suggest that it is a possibility and that this current conveyor belt in the North Atlantic is unpredictable. Since the end of the last ice age, the arctic ice cap has continued to melt, allowing fresh water into the North Atlantic. If too much fresh water enters the ocean (thereby diluting its salt content and keeping it less dense) it would not sink and join the return currents at the bottom. It would remain where it is, blocking the warm currents from entering, and altering the climate of Europe.

_________________
When the mob governs, man is ruled by ignorance; when the church governs, he is ruled by superstition; and when the state governs, he is ruled by fear. http://countdowntoapocalypse.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:01 am 
Offline
C2C Regular

Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:26 pm
Posts: 67
Location: Chocolate City (new orleans)
Fazer wrote:
eben wrote:
I don't know about global warming, but I really hate saying we are in a cycle,

What cycle? It seems like one would have to know what the cycle is before saying we in it.

Hey were in a wegit.
Whats a wegit?
I don't know, but we're in one.

sound stupid doesn't it?

I believe "the cycle" is if by some way the warm current waters ceased flowing toward Europe, Europe would enter a mini-ice age. Current studies suggest that it is a possibility and that this current conveyor belt in the North Atlantic is unpredictable. Since the end of the last ice age, the arctic ice cap has continued to melt, allowing fresh water into the North Atlantic. If too much fresh water enters the ocean (thereby diluting its salt content and keeping it less dense) it would not sink and join the return currents at the bottom. It would remain where it is, blocking the warm currents from entering, and altering the climate of Europe.



Ok, this is an effect, what is the cause for the ice cap melting?
I don't think we can view weather records for maybe the last 100 years and come up with a pattern that would constitute a "Cycle".
I would think before we can say we are in the "Cycle" we have know what the "Cycle" is. I also think we should not jump on the Global warming bandwagon, but I don't think we should dismiss it. I think we should be spending allot of time and money into figuring out what going on. As of now I believe there 2 main theories for climate change the "Cycle" and Global Warming is there evidence for both? I don't know. We should investigating these yet it seems taboo and nobody really wants to.

_________________
Former Coast Rider - Timothy Brooks


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:14 am 
Offline
British Royal

Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:03 pm
Posts: 973
Here is some info on Warming cycles


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:50 am 
Offline
CFR Fat Cat

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 12:22 pm
Posts: 430
Location: Hypergalactic Bypass near you
Here in God's own Health Spa, Whitewater, Wisconsin, we are currently under a foot of snow in early December. I think it's safe to say the whole thing is a bunch of hooey. Not that getting off the petroleum-based transportation system wouldn't be a bad idea, but I don't think scaring people with a phony weather catastrophe is the best way to do it. People can look out the window and judge for themselves.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group