by BurnTheShips 152 Replies latest jw friends
I thought a humanism like yours embraced the human capacity to acheive eudaimonia with an optimistic attitude towards the human future? Over the long term, human history has been on an inexorable upward arc and your painting shows the different aspects of trade, industry, and exploration.
BTS
The painting depicts the fall of Icarus.
What a quaint mythological story.
BTS
Gregor, Beks, are you capable of having an intelligent discussion on a subject without charging the other side with zealotry, botism and the like? Have you actually done your home work on this issue, or are you just towing the party line?
As I said above, I'm not arguing. I have read on this subject a lot actually and I find myself in the company of very qualified scientists who simply see no proof of man caused GW. It was the late Michael Crichton who drew the comparison of your movement to a religion. Am I capable of having an intelligent discussion on (this) subject without charging the other side with zealotry...? Yes. But not with zealots.
Yes. But not with zealots
And zealots are zealots because you have dubbed them so. Very handy.
I found this, among many articles, to be helpful. Crichton makes some excellent points on the subject.
http://www.crichton-official.com/speech-our environmentalfuture.html
click on his speech "The Case for Scepitism on Global Warming"
Boy this one again!
This has been debated to exhaustion in several threads before. All of the same factors that encourage skepticism are restated, with the added emphasis on the last two years cooling trends to bolster the skeptics. Then the name calling and dismissive statements by the devout.
As has been eloquently stated this is not an all or nothing position that people suspicious of government backed and highly politicized statements, hold. Thank you freewilly.
It should be stated again here that the earth has always experienced fluctuations, even in recent history. In CO2 and temperature (and there does not seem to be a consitant connection to either). And will cntinue to do so.
When scientists say "there is no need to debate it, the debate is over", when did this actually take place? It just blows my mind that people who have come out of the Cult environment with their eyes mostly opened cannot see the trappings of this concensus mumbo jumbo. "Make no mistake This Genreation will by no means pass away.....!"
It's not thatre is no consensus, but consensus of what, who has defined it? What makes a consensus? The concensus argument only holds water for a majority of scientists and not all. Since when does might make right or the majority hold the right position? Only position? The only "consensus" (equivalent to "True" Christian for example) is that we humans are behind it, (Anthropogenic "Climate" change) Yes and it can be shown from many sources, news articles, published statements etc where that word is sed to dismiss debate. However, Not all scientists believe that it is GHG or CO2 related.
Who can deny that humans who number 6 billion plus have not had an effect on the environment, even atmospheric temperature? Hudge cities with ashphalt jungles and black tar roof's that release stored heat into the cool night period, millions of miles of roads, cleared forests for building materials and fuel, vast highly reflective grasslands and prairie converted to heat absorbing agrcultural uses, diversion of rivers to grow crops and yes the burning of fossil fuels and other sources of polutiuon......all is a result of our presence here.
With all of that, Why do we want to chase CO2 emmisions that "may" not be responsible or may only be a small factor beside all others?
Because we on some level know that the only real solution to give immediate relief to the present panic is to Euthanise half of the planet!
Population control and resource management including enviuronmental initiatives to preserve biodiversity should be the top priorities.
Dealing only with CO2 emmisions is like standing under a falling bolder and holding up an umbrella.
Frank75
the only real solution to give immediate relief to the present panic is to Euthanise half of the planet!
Any volunteers?
Why not just wait for Yellowstone to blow?
Population control and resource management including enviuronmental initiatives to preserve biodiversity should be the top priorities.
Exactly.
GW is not the be-all, end-all issue. This is:
http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/e-sermons/weedplan.html
The problem I have is when they invent endemic species out of thin air. For example, around here it is the Florida Panther that is in danger of extinction. That's bullshit. The Florida Panther is the same animal as the western US Cougar/Mountain Lion. Felis Concolor. Same animal and overall it is not endangered. In fact, they brought Texas Cougars into the area to interbreed and add a little vigor to the local cat's bloodlines. It's the same animal. Also, they are saying there are only 100 left in the wild. I don't buy that either. We've got cats swimming across the bay to barrier islands now. We've got cats eating peoples dogs and goats. That has never happened before. I saw one not 500 feet from my property line last year. There's a bunch of them now. There is an entrenched interest in maintaing the perception of problems even when these get resolved. A lot of people's livelihoods depend on there being a problem.
BTS
