|
|
|
|
pbjosh
Aug 1, 2002, 12:36 AM
Post #26 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 22, 2002
Posts: 1518
|
jmlangford - if you need absolute proof of everything then you'll never _know_ jack. It sounds to me like you've got a convenient excuse on your hands for living with largess.
On the other hand, waste not want not seems like a sound enough principle for me, be it from a moral, environmental, or whatever other standpoint you want.
I have no absolute proof that the sun will rise tomorrow, that evolution occurs, that we are increasing the rate of global warming or that my girlfriend loves me, but I take the fact that couloirs are the driest they've been in years to mean that something's effecting them, the fact that suburban's on the road piss me off as another que not to drive one and the fact that she hasn't dumped me as a clue that she loves me and I'm going to go out on a wing and take for granted (gasp!) that the sun will be up in the morning good as always.
How much proof of somethings do you need, and how desperately do you need to defend your ways - seems you clearly feel guilty about them if you're so strapped to defend them?
josh
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Aug 1, 2002, 1:30 AM
Post #27 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Well, I don't drive a Suburban, I drive a little Toyota Corolla. I don't doubt that coluoirs are drying up. I don't doubt that the earth's temperature is rising slightly. I don't waste or live high on the hog so to speak. I turn off all unused lights in the house. I have some solar lighting. Heck, I even carry other people's trash out of the wilderness when I find it. I just am not willing to swallow the environmental rhetoric hook, line and sinker, and in the process, totally disrupt the American way of life that we have fought so long and hard for. Just because I like to live in a little comfort does not mean I am a squandering, wasteful, bum like you insinuated, Josh. What you are saying is that we should disrupt the entire United States economy(Which the proposed regulations including the Kyoto Accord would do)based on some unproven theories and assumptions. Everybody is getting so personal on this thread-I have nothing against anybody here-I am just surprised at the "hate" getting thrown my way because of a difference of opinion. Cheers.
P.S.I am going to get a Suburban as soon as I can afford one. No, not to be a non-caring, wasteful pig, but to keep my precious wife and three young children a little safer on the road. But no, I shouldn't care about them. That makes me selfish guy that doesn't care about the rest of the world. I should sacrifice the safety of my family because of the unsubstantiated claim that humans are ruining the earth and that Suburbans are the cause. Makes sense to me!
[ This Message was edited by: jmlangford on 2002-07-31 19:32 ]
|
|
|
|
|
russman
Aug 1, 2002, 2:24 AM
Post #28 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 2, 2000
Posts: 2848
|
I have been watching this thread all day and first I must say WOW This topic is deffinatley not where Jody figured it would lead too.
I will admititly say that I am not one that keeps up on enviornmental issues (too many new fanatics pop up daily with a new way we are killing the earth). But I will also say that it also takes the whole EARTH to help ruin it. The Ozone may be thinner in North America, and the US may make huge amounts of pollutants, but am I not wrong that the ENTIRE earth is part of the problem?
Wether we are in the US or in the Land Down Under, South Africa or Mexico City, anyplace that people use fossil fuels of any kind, anyplace there is manufacturing we are all helping destroy it.
As someone said earlier, can't we all just agree to disagree? Jody lives his life, and I am quite sure we can't change his way of thought. I live mine the exact same way. Life in Alaska is different even yet for wildtrail, and I am sure that living in Sydney is quite a change from what we are used to also.
I hope we can start to either not make this such a personal battle towards Jody and start to talk respectivley toward each other...or I ask that those who are showing thier distain for my friend Jody in the numerous PMS he has recieved, send some of your nasty PMs my way and ease up off his back.
______________
http://www.contrabandent.com/...ib/ruinkai/troll.gifThe Russmanhttp://www.contrabandent.com/...ib/ruinkai/troll.gif
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Aug 1, 2002, 2:34 AM
Post #29 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Russ for president!
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Aug 1, 2002, 2:53 AM
Post #30 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
*sigh* Jody, it looks like you've found my 'other' weakness .. lol, I'm being sucked in again! help!
Okay, first my confessions, I havent thoroughly checked the links and references mentioned throughout this thread, so I'm basically taking everyone for their word here (dangerous and naive of me, I know). Also, I have long been a die-hard tree-hugging hippy chick who realizes that some aspects of her daily existence dont reconcile nicely with her enviro-political beliefs. *And* I dont always do as much homework as I should on every subject that I encounter, which is why I'm doing the confessions up front.
ANYWAYS, I have actually found this debate to be rather enlightening. Although I was initially outraged at the thread, I must admit that there's a lot to be said on either side of the debate, and it's interesting to see the economic arguments from people like Wildtrail and Jody, as opposed to energy-backed scientists. I say Kudos to Jody for starting the thread, and to the those contributing intelligently from sound sources.
I've learned a lot and plan to follow up to develop some solid and educated opinions myself. I'll be back in a few days when this sucker makes topic of the week .. hehe .. until then, just to throw my own .02 in the jar, I personally tend to err on the side of caution, and my priority is more about protecting Mother Earth than sustaining America's economy. Yes, yes, I realize how much I stand to lose if the economy keeps hurting, but I cant stand the thought of what my grandkids might stand to lose if we dont stop polluting. All theory, no proof .. sorry, Jody .. just one more humble opinion.
Also, I would encourage anyone flaming Jody or wildtrail in PM to take a minute to check some of their other posts on the site ... from what I've read, it's not like these guys are out to spoil the environment, just some good critical thinking on the topic. In fact, it saddens me to realize that some people are taking this so low as to attack these guys personally for their beliefs .. "to each their own" is as steadfast in my home as "waste not, want not". .. okay, okay, I'm going now .. got some homework to do!
[ This Message was edited by: clymbr_chk on 2002-07-31 19:57 ]
|
|
|
|
|
offwidth
Aug 1, 2002, 3:01 AM
Post #31 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 17, 2002
Posts: 188
|
I don't think that it is possible to say with certainty what the ultimate effects of all of these green house gasses will be.
However, what little I know about chemistry, I beleive it is safe to say that these emmissions will contribute to the
warming of the planet.
Somebody had mentioned that we put 7 million tons of this stuff into the atmosphere while nature puts in 200 million tons of the stuff. That's means 3% of these gasses are
man-made.
I have a mathematics background, and I see the Earth's weather and climatic patterns as a really complex chaotic dynamical system. Because of this complexity it is impossible to tell before hand what the effect of this 3% will be. We can only
guess, and all of our guesses will be different.
There is a simple model that looks at the dynamics of two populations, one predators and the other prey. As the system evolves you can see how the two population's numbers oscillate back and forth (much like the temperture of the Earth). But if you go in and change the number of one of the populations however
slighly, the population numbers no longer oscillate but instead one of the species will go extict.
So it seams that we are rolling the dice by pumping all of these gasses into the atmosphere. Maybe nothing will happen, or maybe the U.S. will become a big desert and Canada will become the bread basket of the world, eh?
But if something bad does come from this, by the time we see it it will be too late to do anything about it.
[ This Message was edited by: offwidth on 2002-07-31 20:09 ]
|
|
|
|
|
marcel
Aug 1, 2002, 3:08 AM
Post #32 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 30, 2002
Posts: 523
|
I feel vindicated knowing that Dr. Patrick Michaels gets his pay from the coal companies. As the saying goes "only time will tell". So lets all sit back and take a look at this in 10, 20, or even 50 years. I think a few people making comments here will have egg on their faces, just as I did when I bought into the pro Vietnam War rhetoric 30 years ago.
[ This Message was edited by: marcel on 2002-07-31 20:14 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Aug 1, 2002, 3:15 AM
Post #33 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Hey clymber_chk, I am sorry to have ruined your otherwise stellar opinion of me! I really enjoy discussing these subjects-don't get me started on gun control though, I might blow a fuse! I appreciate the intelligence you brought to the debate from the other side...maybe you can rub off on some other people.
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Aug 1, 2002, 3:33 AM
Post #34 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Just searching for the solid truth Stu. I happen to have read a couple of books by the late Dixie Lee Ray, Trashing the Planet and Environmental Overkill. They really opened my eyes to a lot of the misinformation being foisted upon us by the environmental activists. I was almost 180 degrees(no warming pun intended) from the stand I have now on the issue. Thanks for your intelligent response, Stu. Things are actually starting to look up in this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
marcel
Aug 1, 2002, 4:05 AM
Post #35 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 30, 2002
Posts: 523
|
Since it looks like some of your facts are coming from Dixie Lee Ray I figured I'd give you a few tidbits about her. A friend of mine worked for her when she was a Governor of Washington State. According to him she had two dogs that she let piss on her carpet and draperies within her office. He told me she and her office almost always smelled like dog piss. From her stand on nuclear power, and from the billions of dollars she cost electric rate payers, not to mention she smelled like piss, I can see why she had a grudge against environmentalist. I'd suggest you look into how much money that woman cost you and everyone else on the west coast before you defend her points of view.
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Aug 1, 2002, 4:15 AM
Post #36 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Marcel
But that still doesn't take away from some of the solid evidence she cites in her books.(I'll bet she smells worse than piss now!)Still, you are only attempting to discredit my sources instead of defending your stand.
Cheers,
Jody
|
|
|
|
|
crimpinfool
Aug 1, 2002, 4:36 AM
Post #37 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2002
Posts: 16
|
Since jmlangford seems to know very little about science and how it is conducted, it seems a few things need pointing out. First, to anybody looking for proof of global warming as a function of human-generated pollutants, you will have to get used to disappointment. In science, there is no certainty. Gravity is a theory, not a fact. Quarks, photons, and evolution are theoretical. Global warming is a theory, plain and simple. All we have to work with is data, and the differences in public policy proposals and the debates on this forum lie in the interpretation of that data, not the data itself.
That said, any conclusions we make must attempt to make sense of the most data in the most parsimonious way. That is what science does. The scientist cited from U.Va that started this post is one scientist with one interpretation. He is, probably by his own admission, on the fringe of the scientific community. The overwhelming number of geologists, climatologists, biologists, etc. would disagree with Dr. Michaels. As a member of the scientific community, I can say that one way we typically evaluate competing theories is through converging evidence (i.e., numerous studies using different procedures result in the same conclusions). The evidence in the case of global warming strongly converges on human activity as an important cause. Certainly, it is not the only cause, but it seems to be a vital one. Perhaps more importantly, it is a factor that is under our control.
I disagree with environmentalists that say we are destroying our planet. We are only destroying the planet as we know it (and as it is able to support us). In the end, the planet will exist despite significant warming. Human life, however, depends on our ability to control our hedonism. Global warming may not destroy your favorite ice climb today, but if we fail to think more clearly about how we use our resources then your grandchildren may never know ice climbing. So why not drive a Suburban? Because the bulk of the evidence and the vast majority of interpretations point to fossil fuels as an unneccesary pollutant that dirties our air, erodes our atmospheric health, encourages desertification, and places undue economic stress on people and industry around the world trying to adapt to a changing environment.
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Aug 1, 2002, 4:43 AM
Post #38 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
While I'm not really contributing to the 'facts' here, I think it's interesting to consider the reasoning behind my enviro-political beliefs.
Personally, I admit that I havent done tons of research on the topic. I just know what 'feels' right and what
'sounds' right to me, but I've never really put any critical thought into why I believe what I believe.
More info, more reseach, less flaming about dog pee and such .. .. and Jody, this has done nothing but improve my opinion of you. While I cant say that it's changed my opinion on anything, I always appreciate a person or thread that provokes some thought.
Edit: Just wanted to add a "wow" in response to crimpinfool's comment.
[ This Message was edited by: clymbr_chk on 2002-07-31 21:49 ]
|
|
|
|
|
wetrocks
Aug 1, 2002, 4:48 AM
Post #39 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2002
Posts: 102
|
Wow............ I'm amazed how some people still think, but it's not their fault. This important topic needs discussion because so many respected people, astro turf groups and corporate scientists tend to grey up a lot of the "facts."
I have a simple question to ask that goes beyond just global warming: how do we sustain an infinitely expanding economy in a world of finite resources?
Hummmmmmm. Are you thinking about how much you comsume? What are you leaving for the future....is it just waste and pollution?
When climbing we generally always pick the safest option to cut down the risk of us killing/hurting ourselves. Yet, when it comes to decreasing the risk of devastating our planet, we don't choose the safest option.
If anyone is interested in some very basic facts of what's happening to the climate in B.C. and Washington state (there's no finger pointing as to why it's occuring) here's a start: http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/pac/climate/ccprint_page/ccindicator_print.html
"Both the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the US National Academy of Science have concluded that the global atmosphere is warming. Moreover, they agree that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years can be attributed to human activities that release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere."
Any questions?
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Aug 1, 2002, 4:53 AM
Post #40 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
The overwhelming number of geologists, climatologists, biologists, etc. would disagree with Dr. Michaels.
On what do you base this assertion? Just the verifiable facts, please.
BTW, thank you for your response. This thread is actually starting to get fun. (Although I am still in the minority here.)
|
|
|
|
|
crimpinfool
Aug 1, 2002, 5:56 AM
Post #41 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2002
Posts: 16
|
jmlangford,
Unfortunately, pollsters have not conducted any comprehensive surveys of opinions in the scientific community (thank god, just more annoying phone calls).
BTW, if everyone wants to drive their Suburbans, then why not support the development of alternative fuel sources. Electric cars are not the answer. The require charging which requires the burning of fossil fuels for electricity, plus they dump all kinds of toxic chemicals into our environment when we dispose of them. Hydrogen has been successfully developed for use in the BMW 7 series. It generates far less pollution, requires fewer resources to gather, and is generally more useful in larger vehicles.
I am getting the distinct impression that much of the support for global warming stems not from any real disregard for the environment, but rather from individuals' inability to let go of their Suburbans and a fear among some that stricter regulation will hurt the economy. As somebody else pointed out, climactic change could drive operating costs for industry and consumers through the ceiling resulting in economic destabilization. Just imagine the problems that will arise when the Alaskan oil pipeline begins to sink into the softening permafrost (hint: think environmental and economic nightmare).
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Aug 1, 2002, 6:18 AM
Post #42 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
alright, last post I'm making to this silly thread.
1) the US is notorious for using an astounding amount of energy per capita. Therefore the actions of US citizens are disproportionately harmful to the global climate. Again, this is not a subject open to debate -- it is a fact.
2) theories in science are routinely overturned and refined, but to claim that gravity is a "theory" akin to that of evolution is a bit of a stretch. Drop an object, watch it fall down. This is less subject to debate than the beak of the finch.
Personally I bike to work because it's faster and more fun than driving a goddamned car. Of course when I do drive, I drive a Toyota pickup that gets moderate (24mpg city) gas mileage and has good collision safety. But I don't drive much.
Regardless of whether cyclical fluctuations in the Earth's temperature or gross abuse of fossil fuels and other climate-influencing emissions are to blame, I was very unhappy that the ice didn't much form at Willoughby last winter. That sucked...
|
|
|
|
|
dmon
Aug 1, 2002, 11:40 AM
Post #43 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2002
Posts: 216
|
So much that has been said in this thread is junk. It can't possibly all be replied to. But I'll try.
Crimpinfool said that gravity is a theory, not a fact. Ever known it to fail, brother? There is such a thing as certainty in science, next time you fall off the rock try to tell me about the "theory of gravity". Maybe that sprained ankle is theoretical too, huh? I must admit I didn't read the rest of your post after reading this crap - I just couldn't take anything you wrote seriously.
Jody, lets talk world wars (or the first one at least). Some might say that it was only the sinking of the Lusitania that brought the US into the war. The first 2 years were just a sort of warm up for the main event - America saving the world. Maybe if you'd come in earlier thousands of lives would have been saved. These things work both ways. Don't think I'm not grateful, but you can't have everything your way.
The US provides one third of the world's food. We'll stop exporting ours to you then shall we?
The "best medical research institutes in the world" are mainly staffed by foreigners. This issue has been of great interest to the american scientific community - the fact that the US just isn't producing the scientific strength that it used too.
Anyway, enough US bashing. There are many good things about your country and your way of life - please remember that this doesn't give you the right to do as you please. We do indeed share the earth. Lets be responsible about it.
Can't be bothered writing any more, except this. I hope you remember this debate in thirty years time, when you can't go outside without really strong sunscreen. When your grankids can't play in the park because the smog and UV radiation is too bad. Remember your strength in standing up to the environmentalists, and be proud...
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Aug 1, 2002, 7:41 PM
Post #44 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Quote: 1) the US is notorious for using an astounding amount of energy per capita. Therefore the actions of US citizens are disproportionately harmful to the global climate. Again, this is not a subject open to debate -- it is a fact.
We also disproportionately produce more than our share of the world's goods and services. Kind of a good trade-off there?
I think people are forgetting that I am not denying that a little warming is taking place. I am just not ready to buy into the theory that we humans are the main culprits. I will give up a few freedoms(voluntarily, I hate the government, etc. telling me what to do)if I am ever convinced that we are causing this "meltdown".
[ This Message was edited by: jmlangford on 2002-08-01 12:47 ]
|
|
|
|
|
topher
Aug 1, 2002, 8:15 PM
Post #45 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2002
Posts: 477
|
THIS, is to MR. USA. America is not the best country in the world!!! Having lived there, and many other places i can say this, it is how ever one of the most wealth. the one thing i want to know is when canadians where over helping you fight terorism, and one of you pilots killed 4 of our soliders in so called "friendly fire" why there wasnt more action take in. and if you where the best country in the world you would have to worrie abot terorism because you would keep out of every one eleses buissnes.
|
|
|
|
|
wildtrail
Aug 1, 2002, 8:34 PM
Post #46 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2002
Posts: 11063
|
This is still going? Enough already people, please.
No more arguements. I'll agree with topher. The USA isn't the best country on Earth. Now, I don't know this by personal experience, but my best friend is a professional chef that has traveled the world (literally) and has said there are countries out there that kick our ass as far as living conditions, etc. However, like he said, somethings are better here, some things are better there. It is all a toss up. I can tell you one thing that I have learned from others. Canada kicks the s--- out of the USA on education (which many countries do) and HEALTH care (something that is important to me due to having a cancer survivor wife).
Its all heresay. You say tomato, I say tomato, right? Hell, let's call the whole thing off. This is getting silly.
Regards to all!
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
phillycheese
Aug 1, 2002, 8:45 PM
Post #47 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 11, 2002
Posts: 584
|
topher, at least americans know how to spell. and what the hell does us/canadian relations have to do with global warming???
|
|
|
|
|
biggernhell
Aug 1, 2002, 8:51 PM
Post #48 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2002
Posts: 563
|
Jody- Don't worry about pissing me or anybody else off. You seem like good people and a difference in opinion does'nt change that. I enjoy the knowledge that a little give and take of ideas gives on this subject. And if people get excited over it, what the hell? Its an important subject that everybody who can see past the end of their own nose
is very passionate about.
Peolpe (and I admit that environmentalists are the worst) who hld very passionate beliefs about something tend to do so in a black or white frame of mind. If you even start to dissagree with most of them they assume you are their the anti-christ. This is the problem that I have put alot of time into lately. This all good or all bad thing does nothing but undermine attempts at cooperation and and keep us from solving sh it.
Jody holds a view that is backed by scientific hypthesis. So does everyone who believes the opposite. Including biggernhell.
In my Anthropological experience I have found that reading a couple of books along one line, or even just one can totally change the way that you view a subject. The problem is that 9 out of 10 times you can find an equally compelling book from an equally qualified author that says the opposite. Then where are you? As Sam Kinison used to say. "Sticky, broke and confused". All your left with to trust is your personal experience and your gut. I'm probably going to look into the books that JM suggested and I hope tht a few of you out there will to. Because I'm sure he's going to be checking out all of the global warming links that have been posted here as well.
[ This Message was edited by: biggernhell on 2002-08-01 13:59 ]
[ This Message was edited by: biggernhell on 2002-08-01 13:59 ]
|
|
|
|
|
biggernhell
Aug 1, 2002, 9:03 PM
Post #49 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2002
Posts: 563
|
Oh, and ergophobe, you are my hero. I would never have taken the time to post all of the good info you did. You're fighting the good fight awfully hard. Thanks I appreciate it.
|
|
|
|
|
wildtrail
Aug 1, 2002, 9:15 PM
Post #50 of 228
(13664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2002
Posts: 11063
|
Jon,
I said before I left the thread. I guess I'm not too good at that because people like you keep saying good things.
I agree with you Jon. Environmentalists are the worst. They'll walk over everything to debate their little "issue". You are right, they see things only in black and white and that is what makes them wrong. The world is not a black and white place. Not even with gray areas. It is full of color. The problem with most environmentalists is that they are very, very small-minded. They have one belief, and they stick to it no matter what, completely missing every possible angle. Recongnizing every possible angle is the true search for the truth. How many theories in the history of man were renounced due to its absurdity? Only to later be true.
Evironmentalists would better serve their purpose by knocking off their BS "I'm right, you're wrong" garbage, see the angles and colors of life, and and search for the truth. You're right, Jon. The tip of our noses aren't too far out, now are they?
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
