In the Rush to Help - Global Warming

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

The ship hasn't changed one degree. I have said from day one that I am an energy conservationist, for two reasons. I don't like pollution and I like to save money. I have told you, on multiple occassions, that the way to appeal to people when it comes to energy savings is through economic and pollution avenues. Global warming is natural. It is hard to convince people that this time its really different, when the same thing has happened since the first day of this planet.

My earlier comment about moving on, there is nothing to see, were obviously directed at Riss' funny story about the museum. The idea that there was a manmade global warming exhibit next to an exhibit showing climate change over history, is funny. It is really funny.

Melliedee, I would venture to say that I, personally, have a more energy efficient life than many of those who spend so much time yelling and screaming about the End of Days. My point is, and always has been, that more action, less talk, would be a more productive way of addressing the problem of pollution. All that hot air does nothing but add to the problem.

Of course it hasn't!

and I agree with your last point!

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by ryberg

Another difficulty with the tack of discrediting Dr Jeff because he's not a climatologist is that he happens to concur with climatologists. So you're still left with the problem of what they say, and maybe worse, since you've just implied that they're more qualified to pronounce on the topic.

But I understand that the tack then shifts to how climatologists only have models, not real science, or are all uniformly biased (the IPCC being a policy document, as you've noted), and so on.

And round and round it goes...

Steve

I have not said I am more qualified that Dr. Masters. I asked why you put so much stock in him. Everything in bold is true. Nice to see some progress.

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

I have not said I am more qualified that Dr. Masters. I asked why you put so much stock in him. Everything in bold is true. Nice to see some progress.

No, I wasn't saying that you said that you were more qualified than Dr Jeff.

But what's a bit more worthy of a is that you then agree with my assessment of your (what Jacko and many others would call) shift and dodge type of strategy, in the debate? (Searching for appropriately smiling, bemused emoticon, here...)

Steve

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

The ship hasn't changed one degree. I have said from day one that I am an energy conservationist, for two reasons. I don't like pollution and I like to save money. I have told you, on multiple occassions, that the way to appeal to people when it comes to energy savings is through economic and pollution avenues. Global warming is natural. It is hard to convince people that this time its really different, when the same thing has happened since the first day of this planet.

My earlier comment about moving on, there is nothing to see, were obviously directed at Riss' funny story about the museum. The idea that there was a manmade global warming exhibit next to an exhibit showing climate change over history, is funny. It is really funny.

Melliedee, I would venture to say that I, personally, have a more energy efficient life than many of those who spend so much time yelling and screaming about the End of Days. My point is, and always has been, that more action, less talk, would be a more productive way of addressing the problem of pollution. All that hot air does nothing but add to the problem.

Yet no one has questioned, that I know of, your personal energy efficiency. I've never claimed to sew my own hemp clothing with bluebirds landing on my finger while I feed endangered species organic tofu treats. You're probably right, all the recycling and special light bulbs in the world, times 1000, will do little to impact emissions.

That's why the seriousness of Marburger's report, which matches the claims of the IPCC, can go long way toward the kind of big changes we need in emissions standards from industry and transportation. Yes, we should all do what we can, but the actual folks who make the kind of decisions that could produce real results still need to be convinced! This report from the president's own adviser can help them without cries of political foul, imo.

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Yet no one has questioned, that I know of, your personal energy efficiency. I've never claimed to sew my own hemp clothing with bluebirds landing on my finger while I feed endangered species organic tofu treats. You're probably right, all the recycling and special light bulbs in the world, times 1000, will do little to impact emissions.

That's why the seriousness of Marburger's report, which matches the claims of the IPCC, can go long way toward the kind of big changes we need in emissions standards from industry and transportation. Yes, we should all do what we can, but the actual folks who make the kind of decisions that could produce real results still need to be convinced! This report from the president's own adviser can help them without cries of political foul, imo.

Wow, this woman is good, folks. This is a veritable cascade of statements!

Nice imagery in the first paragraph, too, I might add.

Steve

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Yet no one has questioned, that I know of, your personal energy efficiency. I've never claimed to sew my own hemp clothing with bluebirds landing on my finger while I feed endangered species organic tofu treats. You're probably right, all the recycling and special light bulbs in the world, times 1000, will do little to impact emissions.

That's why the seriousness of Marburger's report, which matches the claims of the IPCC, can go long way toward the kind of big changes we need in emissions standards from industry and transportation. Yes, we should all do what we can, but the actual folks who make the kind of decisions that could produce real results still need to be convinced! This report from the president's own adviser can help them without cries of political foul, imo.

Of course I agree entirely with what you say here...but I would also add that the little things add up quickly with simple home energy efficiencies and automotive energy efficiencies....from Environmental Defense here Read myths and facts here

Energy savings add up

U.S. households produce 21 percent of the country's global warming pollution. That's more pollution than the entire heat-trapping output of the United Kingdom. The good thing is that energy-conscious families can reduce their emissions by up to two-thirds. If every household in the U.S. made energy-efficient choices, we could save 800 million tons of global warming pollution—more than the heat-trapping emissions from over 100 countries. That would go a long way toward stabilizing our climate.
New and emerging technologies can also reduce our production of heat-trapping gases. By choosing green power, you can use electricity that produces little or no global warming pollution.

Transportation By The Numbers

Transportation facts underscore the need for reform


Transportation is one of the biggest causes of global warming pollution in the U.S. Our inefficient use of roadways and public transportation are only part of the problem.
Check out our list of startling facts and figures.
Number of cars and light trucks on U.S. roads.
Total vehicle miles traveled in the U.S. in 2006.
Increase in the amount of miles driven since 1970 in the U.S.
Amount spent by local, federal and state governments on U.S. highways in 2005.
U.S. share of the world's population.
U.S. share of world's total global warming pollution from vehicles.

Percent of U.S. global warming pollution coming from transportation.
Number of states that have adopted California's global warming pollution limits on cars.
The Big Three car companies (GM, Ford and Chrysler) that have joined USCAP, a partnership calling for a US national cap on global warming emissions.
Number of federal bills passed to cap and reduce America's global warming pollution from all sources.

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Yet no one has questioned, that I know of, your personal energy efficiency. I've never claimed to sew my own hemp clothing with bluebirds landing on my finger while I feed endangered species organic tofu treats. You're probably right, all the recycling and special light bulbs in the world, times 1000, will do little to impact emissions.

That's why the seriousness of Marburger's report, which matches the claims of the IPCC, can go long way toward the kind of big changes we need in emissions standards from industry and transportation. Yes, we should all do what we can, but the actual folks who make the kind of decisions that could produce real results still need to be convinced! This report from the president's own adviser can help them without cries of political foul, imo.

There is so much money to be made from alternative energy, that it is inconceivable to believe there are not substantial resources being put towards the discovery of such.

Do you know why there are no changes to CAFE standards? It was blocked in Congress by the autoworker's union. It had nothing to do with people's belief in manmade global warming. Everyone wants to spend less on gas. If individuals are not willing to change their demands when it comes to goods, then little change in emissions are going to take place. China is the world's biggest polluter, these days. Why? Because people want cheap shit. So, although the hemp story was nice, if the individual isn't willing to make sacrifices, why would we expect businesses to make them for us? I offer that a person who quietly cuts down on his own energy use is far more useful than one who joins the chorus of doomsdayists, and doesn't do squat.

[dartay]

Originally Posted by Jacko

U.S. share of world's total global warming pollution from vehicles.

Percent of U.S. global warming pollution coming from transportation.

Please provide the scientific evidence for using "global warming pollution" as a statment of fact.

Oh yea....you can't.......

You can say CO2 emissions but you can't draw that conclusion other than innuendo.

Originally Posted by Jacko

Number of states that have adopted California's global warming pollution limits on cars.

You mean the one that was just overturned yesterday because no scientifc evidence could be shown?

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

There is so much money to be made from alternative energy, that it is inconceivable to believe there are not substantial resources being put towards the discovery of such.

Do you know why there are no changes to CAFE standards? It was blocked in Congress by the autoworker's union. It had nothing to do with people's belief in manmade global warming. Everyone wants to spend less on gas. If individuals are not willing to change their demands when it comes to goods, then little change in emissions are going to take place. China is the world's biggest polluter, these days. Why? Because people want cheap shit. So, although the hemp story was nice, if the individual isn't willing to make sacrifices, why would we expect businesses to make them for us? I offer that a person who quietly cuts down on his own energy use is far more useful than one who joins the chorus of doomsdayists, and doesn't do squat.

And I offer you the obvious better choice.....a person who quietly cuts down on his own energy use AND one who joins the chorus regarding doing something as a group that is effective for our society....go figure..yet another choice beyond the one that you propose.

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by dartay

Please provide the scientific evidence for using "global warming pollution" as a statment of fact.

Oh yea....you can't.......

You can say CO2 emissions but you can't draw that conclusion other than innuendo.

You mean the one that was just overturned yesterday because no scientifc evidence could be shown?

And you are also disagreeing with GW's top science advisor....sheesh ..you guys really got your heads in deep. Read more please.

[melliedee]

I wasn't implying that people "do squat" and you know it. I've already agreed ad naseum with the the personal effort for reduction in emissions and when I post links like Gore's list of 10 things "everyone" can do, I get laughed at. I'm trying here for the bigger picture, and until the full force of the white house is behind serious reductions, nothing will be done. You don't think the report is legitimate?

[dartay]

Originally Posted by Jacko

And you are also disagreeing with GW's top science advisor....sheesh ..you guys really got your heads in deep. Read more please.

No you post innuendo as fact so the hook, line and sinker crowd claps on cue.

All I ask is that you back it up.

[kirbyfan]

Originally Posted by melliedee

organic tofu treats

I hear those are nummy with guacomole.

[Cosmo]

Where's my Taser...

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by dartay

No you post innuendo as fact so the hook, line and sinker crowd claps on cue.

All I ask is that you back it up.

I have posted links ad nauseum ((I like that melliedee!) that source the vast preponderance of evidence AND our best scientists who widely believe the very complicated science that lead us to believe that there is a 90% probability that man is contributing to global warming in a way that is causing serious negative effects that we might be able to slow or even reduce based upon the actions we choose to take. You choose not to accept anythiing unless it is 100% fact...I think that is a very foolish position for you to take...cautious avoidance should be the order of the day on this issue......didn't you once say you were a scientist?