xbl Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 We are pumping out absurd amounts of pollution, that is not in dispute surely? We are also using up the earths resources. This is another fact, right? Third fact, we are polluting the sea with rubbish and waste. Even these three basic facts, which cannot be disputed, surely indicate that perhaps we should try to minimise our impact? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 I'm still fucking raging that they banned CFCs 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 Either way, the solution lies with the human race to try and avoid a global outcome that would be catastrophic for our species. Who are you to say what is a catastrophe? If the market decides that rising ocean levels are desirable then so be it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 If the market decides that rising ocean levels are desirable then so be it. Didny think you were that gullable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 We are pumping out absurd amounts of pollution, that is not in dispute surely? We are also using up the earths resources. This is another fact, right? Third fact, we are polluting the sea with rubbish and waste. Even these three basic facts, which cannot be disputed, surely indicate that perhaps we should try to minimise our impact? What makes pollution "absurd"? That's just your subjective opinion. Why shouldn't the Earth be allowed to have a different air composition? So what if we're using up the earth's resources? It's not like anyone or anything else "needs" it. They can die if they really want. Who are you to decide what is the appropriate state for the sea? Why shouldn't we pump out our faeces and crisp packets into the sea? Why should we "try to minimise our impact"? Why can't we destroy the earth for our own ends? What's so great about this poxy planet anyway? It's just stuff. Which we use. End. I'm still fucking raging that they banned CFCs We should bring them back. Who are you to say what is a catastrophe? If the market decides that rising ocean levels are desirable then so be it. Rising sea levels are great. I like nothing more than watching the Dutch drown. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 (edited) did anyone watch david attenbourgh how many people can live on earth. http://www.bbc.co.uk...n_Planet_Earth/ Basically, the earth is already using more resourses than we have. You can't close your eyes to this, all the leading scietists agree, it's common sense not to use abuse the earths resources until we're all hungry. 1.2 billion struggle to get enough water every day. The most frustrating thing is that the technology and scientific knowledge is there to make the world more sustainable but the greed of the powerful who rule the world wont listen. This is not about climate change but it is a factor of the problem, and i coudnt be bothered starting a new topic. This is a serious matter, we're at a decision point, manage the earths resources sustainably and for every human on the planet or ignore all warnings and see what happens. We have to change our lifestyle as it's excesive and unsustainable. When will governments start looking beyond the next election. You need to keep in mind that the west doesn't really give a f**k about the 3rd world ,thats we we've spent Billions on Iraq and Libya protecting our natural resourses and buttons on famines. And we are trying to tell the 3rd world to control their energy output Africa, China ,South America and the Sub Continent where about 75% of the worlds population is?! These developing nations are going to keep industrializing at a phenominal rate(quite rightly) and there's nothing we can do about it,and as for the earths population, as heartless as it sounds, thats why we have famines and disease thats natural selection for you. And as far as us stopping global warming,,,IMO bullshit ,its getting warmer good!! that means miilions of sqaure miles of ice covered land and sea become available for plants trees, algea which will help reduce warming PS Remember its almost Christmas , so time for half the planet to turn on as many meaningless lights as they possibly can for a month. ETA just this week an climate... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100119087/uh-oh-global-warming-loons-here-comes-climategate-ii/ Edited November 25, 2011 by THE KING 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 (edited) Oldies, but always makes me laugh Fucking Greenpeace, get tore into them Monckton! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvufOvneJMk&feature=related Edited November 25, 2011 by Enrico Annoni 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 What makes pollution "absurd"? That's just your subjective opinion. Why shouldn't the Earth be allowed to have a different air composition? So what if we're using up the earth's resources? It's not like anyone or anything else "needs" it. They can die if they really want. Who are you to decide what is the appropriate state for the sea? Why shouldn't we pump out our faeces and crisp packets into the sea? Why should we "try to minimise our impact"? Why can't we destroy the earth for our own ends? What's so great about this poxy planet anyway? It's just stuff. Which we use. End. We should bring them back. Rising sea levels are great. I like nothing more than watching the Dutch drown. ^^^ trying too hard 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamamafegan Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 Anyone who thinks climate change is a farce and is non-existent is a complete and utter moron. That is all. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 Anyone who thinks climate change is a farce and is non-existent is a complete and utter moron. That is all. But why do/should you/we care is the more pertinant question... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 The climate is changing, that at least is not in dispute. What is in dispute is how much, if any of it, is down to human beings. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 What is in dispute is how much, if any of it, is down to human beings. No, actually, that isn't in dispute. You're right to say that what is in dispute is how much is man made, and how much is a natural trend. But to deny that we have any effect on climate change is lunacy. We are pumping out absurd amounts of pollution, that is not in dispute surely? We are also using up the earths resources. This is another fact, right? Third fact, we are polluting the sea with rubbish and waste. Even these three basic facts, which cannot be disputed, surely indicate that perhaps we should try to minimise our impact? Do you dispute any of that quote? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 No, actually, that isn't in dispute. You're right to say that what is in dispute is how much is man made, and how much is a natural trend. But to deny that we have any effect on climate change is lunacy. Do you dispute any of that quote? Well possibly lunacy. Possibly not. It will depend how much our actions have changed the climate percentage wise. How much climate change have we been directly responsible for? And how much would a reduction in human pollution change it for the better? I'm not for a minute saying that what we do has no effect, I just wonder how much effect it actually has. For instance Krakatoa caused climate change pretty much overnight and fairly dramatically and it was totally natural . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 The most important aspects of this debate are to: 1) Ignore the scientific consensus as it just gets in the way and of course they're all tools of Western governments/the green lobby/the Bilderberg Group 2) Reject anything but the most slavish devotion to the status quo on the rationale that there might be a volcano or something anyway If you do that you're well on your way to being a complete breast. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 (edited) For people who brand us "non believers" "morons" etc ... There are people far more knowledgable about the subject that you or I who have been researching this for a long time who believe it's all a bit of a myth Nothing wrong with a debate on the subject, but there is really no need for the name calling & petty insults. And trying to make out anyone who questions it as a right wing nut isn't going to make a difference They used to burn people for not believing the earth is at the centre of the universe, or the world being flat. So let's not turn this into a witch hunt eh? Edited November 25, 2011 by Enrico Annoni 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 For people who brand us "non believers" "morons" etc ... There are people far more knowledgable about the subject that you or I who have been researching this for a long time who believe it's all a bit of a myth Nothing wrong with a debate on the subject, but there is really no need for the name calling & petty insults. And trying to make out anyone who questions it as a right wing nut isn't going to make a difference They used to burn people for not believing the earth is at the centre of the universe, or the world being flat. So let's not turn this into a witch hunt eh? Yes. But as we have a "consensus" there's no need to listen to THEM. Our politicians have decided that green issues are the way to go and that's pretty much all about it. It just means that we all pay a bit extra(in tax of course) for gas and electricity and for running a car. But we are saving the planet I guess. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 For people who brand us "non believers" "morons" etc ... There are people far more knowledgable about the subject that you or I who have been researching this for a long time who believe it's all a bit of a myth Nothing wrong with a debate on the subject, but there is really no need for the name calling & petty insults. And trying to make out anyone who questions it as a right wing nut isn't going to make a difference They used to burn people for not believing the earth is at the centre of the universe, or the world being flat. So let's not turn this into a witch hunt eh? It's not a witch hunt. It's just an easy way to identify idiots and authoritarians. People who discount evidence that goes against their prejudices for the flimsiest of reasons - and even if those flimsy reasons also apply to those with whom they agree. Some doylum posted a "Lord" Monckton video earlier, for Christ's sake. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 It's not a witch hunt. It's just an easy way to identify idiots and authoritarians. People who discount evidence that goes against their prejudices for the flimsiest of reasons - and even if those flimsy reasons also apply to those with whom they agree. Some doylum posted a "Lord" Monckton video earlier, for Christ's sake. Like, say, the Greenpeace Activist who didn't actually look at the data herself and just took what they claimed as gospel truth? Consensuses (political, economic and scientific) can be wrong. History shows us that they often are. I have no doubt that humans are affecting the planet and much more so than other living organisms combined, but I'm not remotely convinced it's a bad thing or that the links are anything like as straightforward as groups like Greenpeace would have you believe. At most we are steering major naturally occurring phenomena down a marginally quicker path. The responses to these changes are subjective value judgements based on what people think the world should be like and for the most part. There's little credible evidence that the changes they demand will have any meaningful impact on the trend of climate volatility, or indeed that it would lead to a more "sustainable" or satisfying way of life for humans. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 Like, say, the Greenpeace Activist who didn't actually look at the data herself and just took what they claimed as gospel truth? Yes, absolutely. I don't doubt that there are zealots in any position. Consensuses (political, economic and scientific) can be wrong. History shows us that they often are. I have no doubt that humans are affecting the planet and much more so than other living organisms combined, but I'm not remotely convinced it's a bad thing or that the links are anything like as straightforward as groups like Greenpeace would have you believe. At most we are steering major naturally occurring phenomena down a marginally quicker path. The responses to these changes are subjective value judgements based on what people think the world should be like and for the most part. There's little credible evidence that the changes they demand will have any meaningful impact on the trend of climate volatility, or indeed that it would lead to a more "sustainable" or satisfying way of life for humans. This is one of those rare political occasions in which I think doing nothing isn't an option. And I think couching opposition to continued rapacious consumption of pollutants in some bizarre orientalist stance is just plain weird. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pink Freud Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 We are pumping out absurd amounts of pollution, that is not in dispute surely? We are also using up the earths resources. This is another fact, right? Third fact, we are polluting the sea with rubbish and waste. Even these three basic facts, which cannot be disputed, surely indicate that perhaps we should try to minimise our impact? That pretty much covers it. Can I just say how delighted I was to read that you and VT actually disagree on something. It gave me a (global) warm feeling. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.