What are the options to "tackle global warming"

[steve74baywin]

Yeah, as someone on here I think once said, the truth lies in the middle. It might have been LivonJG or Velo.
I think as usual it is over hyped to cause a desired reaction out of people. That might be called politics.
Most of us Humans could deal with a rational argument and would be willing to make changes as necessary. Why does it always have to be such a circle jerk? Politics

If it was stated that lighting such a device, call it X, in my back yard 1000 more times would mess things up so much that whole town would become sick and die, I probably wouldn't light X even one more time.
How about the rest of you? We are a random sample on humans. Is there any on here that would keep lighting it?
If we just got truth instead of extra BS to create an opportunity to make more laws, all would be well.

[turk]

That's right. Exaggeration is the point of the Earth Day predictions ^^. Most of those had nothing to do with improvements since. There's still smog in L.A.. Earth day didn't improve it. Common sense 364 days did slightly though. Same with everything else. Perspective is everything. Which means, hold your horses. Nobody wants to kill the planet just because they don't buy the hype.

[Amskeptic]

Nobody wants to kill the planet just because they don't buy the hype.

That might be generalizing a bit right there. There truly are people who do not care. Much of human development has only come about because people really do have to push hard against the inertia of the comfortable status quo.
It is a truth that people have died in the service of getting us to grow up, striking coal miners and nuclear power plant whistle blowers and civil rights workers, and the current predicament of humans on Earth is no different.
Colin

[turk]

But don't you see the exaggerations? C'mon man! We can go on like this forever. It's going to come out very soon, that most of the global warming hysteria is just that, in my opinion. Are you aware the BBC funded the white wash exoneration of the Climategate players' fudging? Yeah, that's right. Conflict of interest in impartial reporting anyone? Try to be honest. Look at baywin74steve's precise comment ^^. That's it in a nutshell. If you can't agree with that, or at least see the sense in it you're a fanatic. A true-believer. Might as well get behind one world religion, government, and all that hokum too.

[glasseye]

C'mon man! We can go on like this forever. It's going to come out very soon, that most of the global warming hysteria is just that, in my opinion.

So, if we're all agreed to disagree, why don't we just STFU about this topic for, say five years?

[turk]

Why? Don't get involved if you don't want to. What's so hard about that?

[ruckman101]

Exaggeration? More likely understated, in my opinion. And how do you white-wash benign statements taken out of context and fanned into a controversy by those whose interests are to discredit the reality?

Gonna light device X up that thousandth time? When that's all you know?, and every time you have in the past your lucrative profits double? Gotta get the profit motive into that model. Especially if you have the money to flee the disaster, dumping the responsibilities and costs of the consequences onto those left behind.


neal

[turk]

Exaggeration? More likely understated, in my opinion. And how do you white-wash a benign statement taken out of context and fanned into a controversy by those whose interests are to discredit the reality?

Gonna light device X up that thousandth time? When that's all you know?, and every time you have in the past your lucrative profits double? Gotta get the profit motive into that model. Especially if you have the money to flee the disaster.


neal

Maybe if you are of a like mind, glasseye has a tip for you. No sir. Exaggeration is the apt word. Everything I listed above there ^^ is grossly exaggerated. Reality is there is nothing benign about skewing and misrepresenting. That's fraud. Straight up. Now, BBC is hardly the impartial news source it pretends. It's just another mill for lazy minds to get opinions from.

[ruckman101]

I agree. It is fraud to skew and misrepresent in an effort to protect your profits at the expense of everyone else.


neal

[ruckman101]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110424/ap_ ... water_grid

It can be done.



neal

[turk]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110424/ap_ ... water_grid

It can be done.



neal

"it" in this case only marginally associated with man-made climate change theory; more a water way pollution topic; but good. I suspect they can use collected rainwater for the toilet bowls, with a sign clearly stating "Not Drinkable!"

[ruckman101]

...self-sustaining in the energy, water and waste use,....


neal

[turk]

...self-sustaining in the energy, water and waste use,....


neal

But it doesn't have anything to do with "self-sustaining" the climate. The climate is "self-sustaining" regardless. Climate changes because it's not static. If it was, to use your Van Jones quote's logic, it would be "dead", like all the "fossil fuels" we found living uses for. Ah, the humanity.

[ruckman101]

The less dead dino burned, the less greenhouse gas emissions.


neal

[turk]

The less dead dino burned, the less greenhouse gas emissions.


neal

Yes. The level of enlightenment is illuminated in ironic contrast by your comment.