What are you doing against Global Warming

Originally Posted by Encephalon

Unless, of course, you're one of these creationists who think we coexisted with dinosaurs and rode them like pretty little horsies.

LOLBMSWAS

I can't believe they decided to let their "the devil put the fossils there" ideology down! These guys just keep getting more and more entertaining as time goes by.

On another note, I for one am a supporter of ecologist movements. I ws born in a rural area and going back there to see that more and more of it is being thrashed in the name of profit or 'progress' really pisses me off.

Dear Token,

What in god's name are you blathering about?

Love,
Whinehurst.

P.S. I am of the mind that all these hardcore environmentalists who are trying so hard to preserve the ecological status quo in the name of Mother Nature don't realize that Mother Nature has no need for ecological status quo. Mother Nature doesn't care if an ecosystem changes or not. Mother Nature's an uncaring bitch who'll kill a few hundred thousand living creatures with a hurricane and not even apologize. Nature's whole deal is to adapt to change.

And just because it might adapt an ecosystem that doesn't support humans, that doesn't mean it'll be a system that doesn't support life. My point is you can't change the fucking environment. You can't. Ever. It's gonna do what it's gonna do weather you like it or not. You can go cry to high heaven about the benefits of recycling pig shit, but in the end it won't do shit.

We are powerless to manipulate this planet. we are at the whim of nature. deal with it.

Didn't anyone ever teach you how food gets to the grocery store?

Global Warming is a big crock . That is all I have to say about it.

Regardless of whether or not you "believe in" Global Warming (which is really asking whether or not you believe in SCIENCE), recycling and saving energy and such are all good ideas:

Fossil fuels are a limited resource. No amount of sticking your head in the sand (hur hur) will change that. The fact is there aren't any renewable sources of energy right now that look like they're able to meet the energy demands of our global economy. Conserving energy is just a smart thing to do, in light of that.

Originally Posted by ramoth

Regardless of wether or not you "believe in" Global Warming (which is really asking wether or not you believe in SCIENCE), ...

I beg to differ.

Originally Posted by Gechmir

I beg to differ.

Request denied, in adequate information.

C'mon Gech.

What do you want me to say? I've already attacked the issue on a fuckload of fronts. It's hardly an argument of believe in science or not. It's an amalgam of politics and science, creating a source for bias in research. I've read journals stating warming is happening and I've seen others that state it is NOT happening, making references to doctored data which was used to fuel the debate on the warming side of the aisle.

I'm sure the next line would be "find me a link to one". Well that ain't gonna happen. They're in the library stacks back at A&M, pertaining to masters and PhD research.

Inadequate information? Hey, I've got an idea -- read the thread =V Or peruse older global warming topics. I've said my piece in those on the science end of things. If you want, I'll start playing the record alllllll over again.

So I notice there's way too much high-fives going on in this thread. (and Gechmir mostly for himself)

In the words of Stephen Colbert, "The consumers have spoken, and Global Warming is real." An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore, Ann's an idiot, oh no! Am I doing anything about Global Warming? Not aside from wasting breath talking about it on the internets.

Also, in before infraction.

Originally Posted by Gechmir

What do you want me to say? I've already attacked the issue on a fuckload of fronts. It's hardly an argument of believe in science or not. It's an amalgam of politics and science, creating a source for bias in research. I've read journals stating warming is happening and I've seen others that state it is NOT happening, making references to doctored data which was used to fuel the debate on the warming side of the aisle.

I'm sure the next line would be "find me a link to one". Well that ain't gonna happen. They're in the library stacks back at A&M, pertaining to masters and PhD research.

Inadequate information? Hey, I've got an idea -- read the thread =V Or peruse older global warming topics. I've said my piece in those on the science end of things. If you want, I'll start playing the record alllllll over again.

I've got access to libraries that would have that same information. Care to cite some papers?

I'm not saying this to be a dick and challenge you, I'm just curious. And no, I didn't read the thread in depth, you're right. I skimmed over it but didn't see any links or anything, so I assumed it was all just talk.

Seriously though, cite some journals. I'll go look them up. Drop your citations or leave the thread forever.

Global Warming is happening, but I believe humans have little, if anything to do with it. That said, we certainly shouldn't be doing anything more to encourage it, and it's definitely not a bad idea to conserve nonrenewable fuel sources, and research renewable ones.

Just because we aren't responsible for the earth warming up doesn't give us free license to shit all over the environment.

I don't, and i don't think anyone else, want to give the impression that i'm actually trying to shit on the planet. i'm actually all for renewable/ ecofriendly energy sources. I'd be happy to see nuclear power brought back (which is remarkable safe and clean if handled properly), or in lieu of that i'd like to see wind farms start popping up. If i could afford to buy a car i'd get a hybrid or a diesel engine for biofuel.

But i'm for these things not because i want to save the planet, but because they all have that "the-future-is-now" vibe to me. And that's always cool.

Honestly, I challenge someone to present an argument against energy conservation and researching of renewable energy. Seriously. Try me.

The question of Global Warming is best left to environmental scientists, and all of the literature I've read on the subject (most of it in general textbooks, not papers since that's not my area of expertise) suggests that humans are contributing to changes in our environment, many of which could have detrimental affects to our civilization (rising sea levels are a danger to coastal cities, for example).

ramoth, nobody's making an argument against energy conservation and renewable energy. we're not Eco-Villains. We're just saying this doom-and-gloom attitude about the planet withering away if we don't act fast is bullshit.

and if you're going to demand people present solid evidence of their perspective, you gotta ante up first. that's how people make intelligent arguments.

Originally Posted by whinehurst

ramoth, nobody's making an argument against energy conservation and renewable energy. we're not Eco-Villains. We're just saying this doom-and-gloom attitude about the planet withering away if we don't act fast is bullshit.

and if you're going to demand people present solid evidence of their perspective, you gotta ante up first. that's how people make intelligent arguments.

But the "doom & gloom the planet is dying lol" attitude is not even what I'm talking about. Oil is a limited resource -- we only have so much, and we will eventually run out. Taking every step you can to conserve oil and switch to something else just makes sense, and anyone who doesn't see doing that as an urgent priority is vastly short sighted.

It's not the planet that's going to wither away if we fail to act now to reduce our dependence upon oil, it's civilization! As an engineer, this is the only course of action that makes a lick of sense to me. Anything else smacks of irresponsibility.

Also, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It is a fairly widely accepted opinion that global warming and the activities of mankind are linked. I submit the existence of this very thread as evidence of that. If Gechmir is claiming otherwise he needs to ante up, not me.

So, fair enough ramoth. as i said, i'm all for switching to alternate energy sources; nuclear, wind, puppy dog farts - whatever power companies want to come up with. Thought i don't have much say in what power companies use to make power.

Cutting to the chase, we're talking about cars here (at least that's the first thought on peoples' mind) and as it stands there's not a whole lot that can easily replace gasoline. First you need an alternate energy source that can (inexpensively) completely take it's place. Nothing like that exists. Or if you want to make a fuel out of lollipops and wishful thinking then you gotta have cars that run on it, which no one will buy until people start making lollipop gas, which no one will make until people use it - which is a catch 22.

I have to say labeling this as an "urgent priority" and having people respond in kind will only lead to more short-sighted decisions; you know, kludge fixes and band-aids. Not the long term, efficient, elegant solution we need. And since this global-warming hype has only been around since...El Nino, then we can't expect to see any workable solutions for another several years. Until then, we actually have enough oil.

Also: if it were widely accepted that global warming were linked to mankind's actions, then it wouldn't be a controversial subject. I submit the existence of this very thread as evidence of that.

Originally Posted by whinehurst

Thought i don't have much say in what power companies use to make power.

Actually, I believe in many states you can choose your electricity company and there's usually choices between different kinds generators. I know my school here made us switch to some green power company and we have to pay on average an extra $10 a month to cover the difference for our utilities. =\