Bring out your dead from global warming!
[clang]
Bring out your dead!
[cough cough...]
[clang]
[...cough cough]
Bring out your dead from global warming!
[clang]
Posted on 09/22/2005 10:19:52 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Global warming = Bullsh*t
Bullsh*t = methane
Hmmmm? ;-)
I wonder how the green house gasses were eliminated after medieval times? Maybe we could do the same today.
Over Population will do the same thing as the article predicts
Bank on it
"Environmentalism is the religion of choice for urban atheists." - Rush Limbaugh
I was speaking with a leftist acquaitance of mine just the other day. He told me never to underestimate the evil power of men like Karl Rove.
By which my acquaitance meant that men like Karl Rove do, in fact, have control over even the sun's cycle.
Unrelated to gas, he also once asked, "Is y'all got any of that URIMATIC acid? (muriatic?).
HAHAHAHA! Now that's funny. Reminds me of the other day when that guy was trying to say he was "evolving", mutating into a creature of the dark because he felt he had better vision in the dark than all other humans.
Read the bible. The end is spelt out much better. No guessing. Man will be around to witness the end of life on this earth.
Or, perhaps, a dam was built to create the reservoir which initially flooded the bridge. Now, the dropping water level has exposed it again.
I think the people using the reservoir are exceeding it's capacity to refill itself, and relied on an unstable water source to fill it. It has nothing to do with global warming however. The formation and melting of glaciers is not a constant, never changing cycle. there are periods of cooling, which forms the glaciers, then melting, and thus, they melt. Some day we will get a cold snap and they will grow like the dickens again. Some places in the world this is happening, while in others, they are near the end of their cycle. It's these that Global warming fear mongers use to scare the sheeple.
Oh, then...
Nevermind.
I'm a red-blooded proud conservative, but I've come to the conclusion that manmade global warming is probably a real concern. CO2 has gone up a good deal since the start of the industrial revolution, and temperatures have gone up one degree in the last hundred years. It's not enough to say for sure that the industrial revolution has caused global warming, but the hypothesis shouldn't be rejected out of hand either.
So what's to be done about global warming?
Looking at human history, a degree or two warmer than it is now would be a good thing. We'd get longer growing seasons. We'd need to use our technology on mosquitos and even storms. (We can spot developing storms, and reputable scientists have speculated on ways to nip them in the bud.)
Otherwise, we go to nuclear fuel, biodiesel, and algae farms to suck up the excess carbon dioxide. We figure out new ways to put out coal mine fires, which are a huge source of CO2 release. (Coal mine fires in China put out as much CO2 as every vehicle in the United States.) We encourage free enterprise in the third world, so that third worlders move away from inefficient and destructive slash-and-burn agriculture.
There are a lot of very interesting developments on ways to limit emissions and way to get back the emissions that are out there. We have time and a lot of good ideas, and I expect this whole problem will be corralled with a net positive effect on earth.
Not so fast. The human causation of global warming is a kind of bullsh*t. The conclusion that the right response to global warming is to destroy capitalism or deindustrialize is an even fouler smelling kind.
But global warming itself is a list of temperature measurements which shows an increase over time, and is a fact. The projection that it will continue is a scientific hypothesis which may or may not be true, but is no more bullsh*t than any other untested scientific hypothesis.
Could, might blah blah blah.
Global warming will tighten resource constraints in some places, and loosen them in others. Did anyone think to ask how many wars global warming might prevent? If African nations become more able to feed themselves (and I have no idea if they will), might not governance and civil stability become better there?
Just asking.
Global warming is a myth.
I thought it was Bush's fault ...
global warming itself is a list of temperature measurements which shows an increase over time, and is a fact
Aren't there as many scientists that disagree, as agree, with this "fact"?
There may have been an increase in temp in some areas of the world, but there has also been a decrease in other parts of the world, yes?
And like Rush pointed out the other day, while commenting on something he had read, there may be some ice caps (or did he say glaciers, or icebergs - I can't remember) that are melting, but others have decided not to participate. How can that be explained?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.