Global Warming

[lanikai]

it is totally sad to surf in sewage debri.. I have seen the flora in the ocean change.. plus long line commercial fishing boats altering the food chain, more and more shark attacks in the last 25 years..all for commercial profit.. local fishermen cannot make a living anymore.

Man's inhumanity to Man .. another species self destructing..

"Malama the Aina" ... "Take care of the Land".. the "Life of the land is so precious" .. else, what can we leave for future generations ??? more than just electronic games I hope..

[fakemaster]

Definitely a lot of pollution. No man made global warming though.

[HauteHippie]

The emails are something else...

From: Kevin Trenberth, US Climate Expert

Date: Monday, 12 Oct, 2009

The fact is that we can't account for the lack of

warming at the moment and it is a travesty that

we can't.

(In an email debate over a BBC report on the apparent

dip in global warming since 2001)

Translation: "Mother Nature isn't cooperating with our agenda, goddammit! What the [censored]'s wrong with that [censored]? I thought she was a good liberal like us?"

It'd be hilarious, if it wasn't such a, well, a travesty itself.

[cornerstone]

On a more serious note (oh, okay - who am I kidding... )

It's more the kind of thread where people that have already made up their minds throw mud at each other rather than aiming to reach any kind of consensus, although I do like the idea that the whole global warming debate might be settled in a RWG thread.

Wherever you have vested interests you start to get people paying for their own research (i.e procuring the data they want), lobbyists, and manipulation of the facts. The oil industry has data to say everything is sweet, the environmentalists tell us we'll all die in flames tomorrow. It just makes it harder to discern the 'facts' (if indeed, anyone actually has a handle on the world's future climate).

I did read an interesting thing in the Superfreakeconomics book, where they're suggesting that global warming or no global warming - the solution really might not be that complex or expensive. Volcanic eruptions spew pollution into the atmosphere and are shown to lower global temperatures. Adding more pollution to block sunlight may be a cheap solution then

[Demsey]

Great thread. Nothing more to add of any significance, but just to echo;

In 1975 the EPA mandated (politcal) that all new model US built or imported automobiles would be equipped with catalytic converters to reduce fluorocarbon emissions. Fine. Not throwing a gum wrapper on the ground is fine too.

Five years later when Mount St. Helens blew her top, as far as the atmosphere was concerned? It was as if the catalytic converter was never invented.

What bothers me most about this whole debate is the importance 'mankind' engraciates himself with, with regard. The use of said same as a political tool is as underhanded as platforming; "I will cure cancer as your President". In the first 100 days.

We are as influential as Bob's Arctic ferns. I'm sure they had a high opinion of themselves too. Like the good people of Herculaneum.

@ 'cornerstone'

Who are you again? I don't remember you from the old RWG. Did you change your SN? You remind me of the one moderator there who thought about banning me. He was smart. Too.

@ 'chieftang'

You're awesome. I had some othert stuff typed but it was gay (not that there is anything wrong with that) so I deleted it. Suffice; awesome.

@ 'lanikai'

The Earth loves you. But you knew that already.

@ 'fakemaster'

Love you man. I stuck up for you on 1.1. They summarily told me to '[censored] off'. Like that was going to work.

@ 'slay'

I would love to go drink with you. You have conviction. I would pity the fool that gave me sh*t in your presence. Are you 'slayer' (K)?

@ Bob

Couldn't fault you in a million years. I think you have what it takes to be an Australian. Which is basically an Alaskan, with a tan, and a non-folding knife.

Please consider;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyxuVFzKypU