***Please could a moderator*** delete the post 484884

It's stretching the thread because I managed to stick 2 images side by side and I'm having trouble reading the posts in this thread on my laptop.

Thanks very much.

Done..did it help?

---

Reality Internet Personality

***Please could a moderator*** delete the post 484884

It's stretching the thread because I managed to stick 2 images side by side and I'm having trouble reading the posts in this thread on my laptop.

Thanks very much.

Done..did it help?

Perfect. Thanks Es.

---

flaming balloons

Just for the sake of it, Es, let's say I'm right: the U.S. and Australia, etc., won't play along and won't pay to save you.

What then? What do you do then? How long can you afford to let China go exempt?

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Just for the sake of it, Es, let's say I'm right: the U.S. and Australia, etc., won't play along and won't pay to save you.

What then? What do you do then? How long can you afford to let China go exempt?

So your argument is that the US is doing it now, but they are not going to stop because China will do it in the future?

Am I the only one that sees something wrong with what you are saying?

---

Reality Internet Personality

Just for the sake of it, Es, let's say I'm right: the U.S. and Australia, etc., won't play along and won't pay to save you.

What then? What do you do then? How long can you afford to let China go exempt?

Now there’s a question. If America, the world's greatest contributor to the world greenhouse gas problem, refuses to change, how can anybody expect China to stop growing rich and becoming the greatest polluter Earth has ever known?

In the UK we talk about “choice’s”. Should we have wind farms or nuclear power stations? Should we get into cars, or not? Into airplanes, or not? How is this going to have any fraction of an affect on what the ‘End of world is nigh’ camp are bleating about and ‘Oh dear the ice is melting, the sea level is rising’.

OK, you see a problem coming. So what are you proposing to do (not you Rush, the ‘bleaters’) apart from change nothing at all about your lifestyle, and apart from carrying on with this useless BOINC modelling, which for SETI is totally irrelevant to Climate, so why are you not BOINCing Climate Change?

---

flaming balloons

Just for the sake of it, Es, let's say I'm right: the U.S. and Australia, etc., won't play along and won't pay to save you.

What then? What do you do then? How long can you afford to let China go exempt?

So your argument is that the US is doing it now, but they are not going to stop because China will do it in the future?

Am I the only one that sees something wrong with what you are saying?

There's nothing wrong with what I'm saying. I've said that the U.S. isn't going to bear the brunt of the costs because it's extremely expensive and won't cut emissions enough to make a difference.

You seem to want to argue about what should be: The U.S. should bear the brunt of the costs. The U.S. should cut because it emits the most. The U.S. should lead the world in cutting emissions. Should, should, should.

Maybe the U.S. should, but so what, that's just an opinion call. China should treat its people better. It should allow them to be free. It doesn't. Shoulda, woulda, coulda.

What do you do if it doesn't? How long will you let China have a free pass? Further, do you think they'll cut if it begins to impact their fledging economy?

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Now there’s a question. If America, the world's greatest contributor to the world greenhouse gas problem, refuses to change, how can anybody expect China to stop growing rich and becoming the greatest polluter Earth has ever known?

Hence my point. They won't. They'll talk about (and probably accept) per capita cuts, still emitting more in absolute terms more than anyone has ever seen.

OK, you see a problem coming. So what are you proposing to do (not you Rush, the ‘bleaters’) apart from change nothing at all about your lifestyle, and apart from carrying on with this useless BOINC modelling, which for SETI is totally irrelevant to Climate, so why are you not BOINCing Climate Change?

This is why I've said they had better quit wasting time and energy begging gov't for already failed "solutions."

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Incredible. Just incredible. The latest posts in this thread read like the squeals of a child caught stealing candy from the candy jar.

So: The real world facts don't fit with what is believed is wanted, so just "make up whatever fiction you like" and also add lots of finger pointing so that the whole issue becomes mired in a muddled mess?

Are the real "pushers" in all of this the Marketing people whom push for ever more extravagant, expensive and rampant consumerism? And all just to "drive the economy"? With the poor consumers then victimised between Marketing brainwashing them into wanting ever more and the "Greenies" shaming them with their excesses? The power of Marketing should not be underestimated.


Going to the strange analogy of matches, flame throwers and burning the school down: The reality of NOW is that the USA is venting by far the largest flamethrower. (Is there also an anti-education message there against "skool"?)

A more appropriate analogy is with that of a sinking ship. The most effective way to stay afloat is to plug all the leaks starting with the largest leak first.


To try to clear up some of the introduced befuddlement:

Global Warming: "in common usage, "global warming" generally implies a human influence" My understanding has been that "Global Warming" refers only to the unique period of warming since the Industrial Revolution. Looks like that definition is now becoming blurred to include all periods of natural warming aswel as Human forced warming. There have been many warming and cooling cycles with global temperature change in past millennia. However, since Man walked the Earth, there has never been anything nearly as rapid as is being experienced now.

The analogy with smoking is that smokers continue to smoke despite very clear and graphic evidence that they are bringing about their early death. They also discomfort and endanger everyone else in the vicinity around them, usually with complete disregard to those others. Tobacco industry money and intimidation muddied the real issues for decades. There is a strong parallel with this for the oil/coal/gas industry money that is spreading FUD, and with the continued extravagant burning of fossil fuel.

Moving to a more "green" economy does not mean 'no economy'. I've already referenced that the existing economies can "go green" for just the cost of 1% of GDP. Personally, you can reduce your emissions. At a corporate level, steps can be taken to become "carbon balanced". What's even better, is that it will cost you less to be more green... (Note that the costs there are not only just fuel costs...)

Kyoto may not have been a complete success, but there is enough there that (slowly) positive action is starting to happen as implied in that last link. More political push is required to speed up the positive work.


The blind selfishness and apathetic fatalism shown in the last few posts is a good example of why there must be a politically driven solution to steer to a more green economy. We literally need to save our planet, starting NOW.

The developed countries get their chance first to develop "green technology" and green methods. That tech can then be sold (or pushed) onto the developing countries before their emissions get out of hand, including China. There is a double bonus in that controlling the emissions will also lead to cleaner technology all round avoiding the worst of the sort of pollution that the industrialised nations have suffered.

Alternatively, if you'd rather just roll over and die, then please do it now.


Lobby your Politicians to stop Global Warming, and lobby them NOW.

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Incredible. Just incredible. The latest posts in this thread read like the squeals of a child caught stealing candy from the candy jar.

Well now, that comment is guaranteed to enhance your argument and win friends isn't it?

There are two things that I want to mention...

Chris, the whole point of a 'Cafe' is that people choose what they want to talk about. What is 'not' wanted in a 'cafe' are people who try and dictate what can and can't be discussed (within the mod rules of course).

Do you ever have a haircut? Did you ever talk about the weather with you hair dresser, or did he/she just make it plain that the only subject for chat was 'hair'?

If so, I suggest you change your hairdresser.

The 'threads' keep you safe. If you don't like the subject, stay out of it.

---

flaming balloons

2. All of you who have contributed to this thread are quite clearly of well above average intelligence, highly educated, and able on the most part, to speak eloquently about an issue you strongly believe in, and fight your corner.

I have posted here on occasion, and I don't fall into any of those descriptions...lol

I'm not " highly intelligent ". I muddle through as best I can with the information available...

High School education only....

My eloquence has been subject for debate a few times...lmao

All in all, I do think you are right, Chris. Most of the people here ( the forums in general ) seem to be pretty well educated. But when passions run high ( especially on a subject like this ) even the most educated will occasionally resort to stomping their feet and demanding something be done.

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

You aren't ‘elping your position wit’ t’is emotional tirade... BTW, I wrote it like t'is, you know, because it's 'ysterical. Rig't?

Incredible. Just incredible. T’e latest posts in t’is t’read read like t’e squeals of a c’ild caug’t stealing candy from t’e candy jar.

To you, maybe. One could easily make t’e same case about your post.

So: T’e real world facts don't fit wit’ w’at is believed is wanted, so just "make up w’atever fiction you like" and also add lots of finger pointing so t’at t’e w’ole issue becomes mired in a muddled mess?

Ummmm, no. You see, lots of people don't agree wit’ you (evidence: t’e articles and posts in t’is t’read). T’ey don't t’ink Kyoto is effective (evidence: no one met t’eir Kyoto targets). T’ey don't t’ink your solution is c’eap (evidence: C’ina, India, and Russia demanded exemptions because t’ey didn't want to pay for it). T’ey don't t’ink it makes sense for t’e U.S. to take t’e brunt of t’e expense for no net gain (evidence: C’ina will out pace U.S. emissions).

Are t’e real "pus’ers" in all of t’is t’e Marketing people w’om pus’ for ever more extravagant, expensive and rampant consumerism? And all just to "drive t’e economy"? Wit’ t’e poor consumers t’en victimised between Marketing brainwas’ing t’em into wanting ever more and t’e "Greenies" s’aming t’em wit’ t’eir excesses? T’e power of Marketing s’ould not be underestimated.

W’o said it s’ould be? As ‘as been said before, it isn't "rampant consumerism," buying SUVs and Learjets t’at is t’e problem, t’e problem is t’at everyone on eart’ would like a simple first world lifestyle. C’ina doesn't come anyw’ere near t’e U.S. for lifestyle, yet t’ey will beat t’e U.S. in emissions in two years.

Going to t’e strange analogy of matc’es, flame t’rowers and burning t’e sc’ool down: T’e reality of NOW is t’at t’e USA is venting by far t’e largest flamet’rower. (Is t’ere also an anti-education message t’ere against "skool"?)

More accurately, t’e reality of NOW is t’at t’e U.S. doesn't care w’at YOU t’ink. It's very simple: for all your ‘and-wringing, t’e U.S. ‘as no intention of paying t’e costs you t’ink it s’ould w’en t’e net reduction is negative. No one in t’eir rig’t mind would spend exorbitant amounts of money over t’e next two years, just to see total net emissions rise, regardless. W’at is effecting t’e temperature? Total emissions. If w’at you say is true, t’e only way to save t’e eart’ is to cut w’at? Total emissions. W’y would t’e U.S. gut its economy to see total emissions rise?

A more appropriate analogy is wit’ t’at of a sinking s’ip. T’e most effective way to stay afloat is to plug all t’e leaks starting wit’ t’e largest leak first.

We can use your s’ip analogy if you like: T’e s’ip is sinking because t’ere are lots of little leaks. It will take 50 - 100 ‘ours to go down. In two ‘ours, t’e second biggest leak will become t’e biggest leak. In t’e next ten ‘ours, t’at leak will dwarf t’e prior biggest leak, so t’at even if you patc’ t’e prior biggest leak, it doesn't matter, t’e s’ip still goes down. Get it? T’e s’ip still goes down.

Substitute years for ‘ours (t’e timeline for Kyoto ‘aving any effect at all)and patc’ t’at second ‘ole first and guess w’at? T’e s’ip still goes down.

T’e analogy wit’ smoking is t’at smokers continue to smoke despite very clear and grap’ic evidence t’at t’ey are bringing about t’eir early deat’. T’ey also discomfort and endanger everyone else in t’e vicinity around t’em, usually wit’ complete disregard to t’ose ot’ers. Tobacco industry money and intimidation muddied t’e real issues for decades. T’ere is a strong parallel wit’ t’is for t’e oil/coal/gas industry money t’at is spreading FUD, and wit’ t’e continued extravagant burning of fossil fuel.

‘e’ ‘e’. I t’ink you are doing your position a disservice by demonstrating an emotional attac’ment to yet anot’er ideological position and editorializing.

Moving to a more "green" economy does not mean 'no economy'. I've already referenced t’at t’e existing economies can "go green" for just t’e cost of 1% of GDP. Personally, you can reduce your emissions. At a corporate level, steps can be taken to become "carbon balanced". W’at's even better, is t’at it will cost you less to be more green... (Note t’at t’e costs t’ere are not only just fuel costs...)

Except, as noted previously, just because you say it's c’eap, and quote people w’o agree wit’ you, does not mean t’at it actually is c’eap. Frankly, it's not c’eap. Again, if it actually were t’at c’eap, t’e measures likely would ‘ave passed wit’out muc’ debate, or t’is discussion. Were it as c’eap as you say, C’ina, India, and Russia would not ‘ave even demanded exemptions, nor t’reatened to opt out. T’ey know t’at t’e actual costs are brutally expensive. T’at's w’y t’ey would ‘ave killed Kyoto wit’out exemptions.

Kyoto may not ‘ave been a complete success, but t’ere is enoug’ t’ere t’at (slowly) positive action is starting to ‘appen as implied in t’at last link. More political pus’ is required to speed up t’e positive work.

More ‘appy t’oug’ts on your part. No one made t’eir Kyoto targets and your c’aracterization is misleading. "Kyoto may not ‘ave been a complete success," would ‘ave stated more accurately as "Kyoto ‘ad no success w’atsoever in cutting total emissions." W’y? Because it's really expensive to do t’at.

T’e blind selfis’ness and apat’etic fatalism s’own in t’e last few posts is a good example of w’y t’ere must be a politically driven solution to steer to a more green economy. We literally need to save our planet, starting NOW.

Except t’at well, t’e term "blind" is applied to t’e wrong parties. You are "blind" if you t’ink Kyoto or Son of Kyoto will save you. T’e evidence is clear: t’e "politically driven solution" (Kyoto) failed. Any politically driven solution (‘e’) t’e doesn't cut total emissions will fail your goals. Any politically driven solution t’at requires t’e consent of t’e victim to be s’attered will fail.

T’e developed countries get t’eir c’ance first to develop "green tec’nology" and green met’ods. T’at tec’ can t’en be sold (or pus’ed) onto t’e developing countries before t’eir emissions get out of ‘and, including C’ina. T’ere is a double bonus in t’at controlling t’e emissions will also lead to cleaner tec’nology all round avoiding t’e worst of t’e sort of pollution t’at t’e industrialised nations ‘ave suffered.

A’. T’ere you go. Market solutions. Economic solutions. T’ose mig’t work, but you better get going on t’em. By t’e way, do you t’ink ‘uge corporations and global companies are going to develop t’is tec’nology, or do you t’ink Greenfarce, DirtFirst!, or Sierra Sc’lub will do it. Frankly, you need Greenfarce et al to get on it. But t’ey won't. T’e'll decry t’e corporations, all t’e w’ile praying to Jeebus t’ey come up wit’ an economic solution.

Lobby your Politicians to stop Global Warming, and lobby t’em NOW.

‘e’, more gov't like Kyoto? Count me out.

Folks, lobby your Politicians to stop people w’o t’ink like Martin from getting t’eir way, and lobby t’em NOW. You ‘aven't lived until you've seen energy prices quadruple from w’at t’ey are now...

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Or do you all just enjoy a bit of cerebral jousting as a means of passing the time?

That's all it is to me. A break from law skool.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

300th post ;p

300th post ;p

Very good and welcome.

So what are your views on (Human caused) Global Warming?

Cheers,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

300th post ;p

Very good and welcome.

So what are your views on (Human caused) Global Warming?

Cheers,
Martin

Pictures of Sammie!

It's all her fault!

---

So what are your views on (Human caused) Global Warming?

I don't know about Global Warming, but I do know that it is well into December, and here in the UK the swallows are still flying, when they are usually flying 2000 miles south at this time of year, and the butterflies are still flying, when they normally are not flying at all at this time of year.

Whether it's caused by humans or not, things are definitely a bit queer as far as I can see.

Just to make things interesting I'm going to add some religion, just for your souls:

Amos 8.11

There will come a time when I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread or a drought of water, but a famine of truth.

---

flaming balloons

Or do you all just enjoy a bit of cerebral jousting as a means of passing the time?

That's all it is to me. A break from law skool.

Well there you go folks. You've all had the piss taken out of you. Now you all know where you stand...

Well, that was surmised from her opening gambit with:

Climate of Fear
Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence.
BY RICHARD LINDZEN

Note that Lindzen has been discredited many times over regarding climate issues. From my reading around, Lindzen's main strategy seems to follow the old quote of:

"A fool can ask more questions then a wise man can answer."

Interspersed with a bit of mud slinging and a lot of FUD. Otherwise, little substance there.


And perhaps this is a fair quote in kind for her seriousness (or lack of):

(From the Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, Douglas Adams)
Number Two: I have declared war on the next continent.
Ford Prefect: Declared war? But there's no one even living there.
Number Two: Yes, but there will be *one day*. So we've left a sort of open-ended ultimatum.
Ford Prefect: What?
Number Two: And blown up some military installations.
B-Ark captain: Military installations, Number Two?
Number Two: Yes, sir. Well, *potential* military installations.
[pause]
Number Two: All right. *Trees*. And we interrogated a gazelle.

Added with an occasional "I can't believe Humans could possibly cause Global Warming" and more recently drifting into Futilitarianism.


At least it is good idle practice in arguing the case whilst avoiding getting too 'academic'! This thread also now lists a few good links for arguing the case for and against although we really could do with a few more good links for the 'against'.

It's also stirred a couple of good questions that I'll be looking into further.


As for wasted effort... Nah, this little spat is 'for fun'. It's an interesting eye-opener for two examples of the Amerikan way at least.


Meanwhile and much more seriously, for some time now I've been in discussion with my MP and also others in Parliament regarding Global Warming and associated issues, with positive results. Very glad I'm not in politics!

So how do we educate against sentiments such as this example?


Fun arguing?

Regards,
Martin

[edit] A few typos [/edit]

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

So what are your views on (Human caused) Global Warming?

I don't know about Global Warming, but I do know that it is well into December, and here in the UK the swallows are still flying, when they are usually flying 2000 miles south at this time of year, and the butterflies are still flying, when they normally are not flying at all at this time of year.

Just one snippet from today's news:

Warming seas drive shoreline species north

[... Cut to avoid American misinterpretation and hurt sensibilities ...]

Just to make things interesting I'm going to add some religion, just for your souls:

Amos 8.11

There will come a time when I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread or a drought of water, but a famine of truth.

Well, looks like we are set to get the famine in the land also:

Drought, pandemic and waste Water prices have rocketed, and temperatures have nosedived with a premature slowing of the Gulf stream...

(Also from today's news.)


Cheers,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

[... Cut to avoid American misinterpretation and hurt sensibilities ...]

"Aye, there's nawt more queer than folk."

(A Yorkshire saying saying - use "strange" instead of "queer", folk=people, Aye=Yes, nawt=nothing)

---

flaming balloons

Well there you go folks. You've all had the piss taken out of you. Now you all know where you stand...

Were you making a pun on this article?

Pee-cycling

Although small-scale urine separation has been practised for centuries (pee has been used in industries ranging from textile dyeing to blacksmithing, for example), it is something of a minority pursuit today. Modern experiments started in Sweden in 1994 ...

Other villages have followed suit and Sweden is now the urine-separation centre of the western world...


Looks good!

Cheers,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)