USA Today doubts anthopogenic warming

cawacko said:
Uh-oh, is this beat the retard night? Seriously y'all, please leave uscitizen alone. I hope you are not a Republican tinfoil you insensitive slut. Because uscitizen needs help from our goverment and not let him rely on charity.
Click to expand...

well if I make it just a few more years yall can pay for my medicare. I have already paid for my SSI.
 
Damocles said:
I can't see why it is so important. Is there anybody here who would argue against less emissions from power sources? Who actually think pollution is good for us in some way?
Click to expand...
What matters is the manner the anthropogenic warming theory is being used to force changes. Emission control is all well and good, but how that is achieved makes a huge difference. If, (WHEN) it is shown that human emissions are NOT a significant part of GW forcing, we can also evade the unnecessary expense of trying to sequester carbon emissions, and other high-cost ideas that are useless in the face of natural forcing compared to human caused forcing. It is too reminiscent of the 1970s when ideas for fuel efficiency led to mandates for ridiculously low speed limits (what 55 did to the trucking industry cost us all over the years) and ideas for emissions control led to fuel inefficient engines with congress-mandated add-ons. Instead we should have been (as now) developing engines to be fuel efficient at reasonable highway speeds, and in the process result in cleaner burning engines.

I have been a strong proponent of developing renewable, clean fuels and non-consumptive energy sources since LONG before AGW came along crying doom. As a society we screwed the pooch big time when we abandoned the call for renewable fuels in the 70s. But, because the economy caught up with the cost of fuel, we abandoned the idea as too costly. We are paying for that mistake now. We need to push for energy independence - which will require development of alternate fuels and energy sources to have a chance of succeeding - and this time continue to push even when (as is inevitable) our economy catches up with fuel prices again.

But we do not need politically motivated pseudo-science to help.
 
Damo, did you read about how clearing the skies of europe has lead to even greater warming, perhaps half of the total warming over there? Very interesting unintended consequence
 
tinfoil said:
Damo, did you read about how clearing the skies of europe has lead to even greater warming, perhaps half of the total warming over there? Very interesting unintended consequence
Click to expand...

Can you fucking hear yourself? There have been many studies & reports like the one you reference here, tying various activities of man to heightened warming, which you dismiss without a thought. As soon as ONE study comes out saying 'well, we really need more pollution,' you eat it up with a spoon.

I guess man CAN influence the temperature, eh stirfry?
 
How about it, stirfry? I'm eagerly awaiting the spin here. I can't wait to see how it's so absurd that people actually thought man could influence temperature, but ONE STUDY is suddenly gospel to you (one study which, btw, states that the temperature since 1980 has risen much more than was expected from greenhouse gases alone - something which seems to contradict a few other arguments you've been making).

How about just admitting that you're a stupid hack who knows nothing about science? That might be easier at this point.
 
Onceler said:
Can you fucking hear yourself? There have been many studies & reports like the one you reference here, tying various activities of man to heightened warming, which you dismiss without a thought. As soon as ONE study comes out saying 'well, we really need more pollution,' you eat it up with a spoon.

I guess man CAN influence the temperature, eh stirfry?
Click to expand...

Not by cutting CO2 emmissons you cocksucker. LMAO
 
Onceler said:
How about it, stirfry? I'm eagerly awaiting the spin here. I can't wait to see how it's so absurd that people actually thought man could influence temperature, but ONE STUDY is suddenly gospel to you (one study which, btw, states that the temperature since 1980 has risen much more than was expected from greenhouse gases alone - something which seems to contradict a few other arguments you've been making).

How about just admitting that you're a stupid hack who knows nothing about science? That might be easier at this point.
Click to expand...


fuck you you little faggot. You can't do shit but call IPCC. Go suck a cock
 
Damocles said:
I can't see why it is so important. Is there anybody here who would argue against less emissions from power sources? Who actually think pollution is good for us in some way?
Click to expand...

That depends. Pollution in the Troposphere and lower Mesosphere, or pollution in the upper Mesosphere and in the Stratosphere?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top