Dems refuse honest debate on global warming

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by saltyone, Apr 24, 2009.

Page 3 of 4
  1. LSUMASTERMIND

    LSUMASTERMIND Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Messages:
    12,992
    Likes Received:
    2,461
    :hihi: Hes probably more concerned with the menu at the buffet.
     
    LSUMASTERMIND, Apr 27, 2009
    #21
  2. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    Sure he is, but that is largely because of his base. I tend to agree with red that most people who reject man made global warming do so on political grounds and then try to use political arguments to reject the science of it all.

    I also tend to think that there are actions we can take that are superior to cap and trade... like simply taxing emissions, but that would mean far fewer red and white beans for me. That is not acceptable. The polar bears can suck it.
     
    LSUsupaFan, Apr 27, 2009
    #22
  3. SabanFan

    SabanFan The voice of reason

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    1,247

    Not me. I just believe that the notion that mere men can affect natural law is preposterous. 7/8ths of the planet isn't even inhabited.

    The sun laughs at us.
     
    SabanFan, Apr 27, 2009
    #23
  4. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    The term "natural law" is in itself a political one.

    In geologic time, the human footprint is very small . . . but it ain't invisible. In human time, our impact on nature is immense. Our rivers are dammed, the Mississippi delta no longer functions as a delta because of levees, we grow plantations in the desert, we can't eat fish in the Ouachita River because of mercury contamination, it's hard to drill a water well and get safe water anymore, spanish moss has all but disappeared from Louisiana cities because of acid rain, . . . and our glaciers are almost gone and the poles are shrinking because of global warming. In 65 million years, nature will reclaim everything many times over, but in human time we can mess things up a lot if we aren't careful.

    On the contrary, the ocean is densely inhabited. You are cherry picking one species. Even the poles and the deserts are inhabited by life.
     
    red55, Apr 27, 2009
    #24
  5. KyleK

    KyleK Who, me? Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Messages:
    9,109
    Likes Received:
    3,366
    You are the one cherry picking. You know good and well that this whole debate is about human impact on the environment/global warming....or maybe you weren't cherry picking and we can infer that you are blaming the supposed global warming on fish farts? :hihi:
     
    KyleK, Apr 27, 2009
    #25
  6. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    We're talking about global impact of human-induced warming. Are you suggesting that planetary warming only impacts areas where humans live? :huh:

    The atmosphere covers the entire planet, you know, . . . oceans, poles and deserts included.
     
    red55, Apr 27, 2009
    #26
  7. SabanFan

    SabanFan The voice of reason

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Fish use Right Guard?:confused:
     
    SabanFan, Apr 27, 2009
    #27
  8. SabanFan

    SabanFan The voice of reason

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Yes, I know. But the humans who are supposedly doing all of the damage only occupy part of the 1/8th that is land mass. You can narrow that down further by considering how much of that land mass actually holds humans and their polluting machines. It's probably less than 1%. Yeah that's gonna do some damage.

    One freakin' volcano eruption probably has more of an effect than a thousand years of pissant humans burning stuff.
     
    SabanFan, Apr 27, 2009
    #28
  9. saltyone

    saltyone So Mote It Be

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,647
    Likes Received:
    483
    saltyone, Apr 27, 2009
    #29
  10. KyleK

    KyleK Who, me? Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Messages:
    9,109
    Likes Received:
    3,366
    beat me to it. :lol:

    Mt St Helens is but one example of how Mother Nature makes us humans pale in comparison. To make it more fun for the libs, this link is from their pals at MSNBC!

    Mount St. Helens top Washington polluter
    Up to 250 tons of sulfur dioxide a day plus haze

    I guess we should fine Mother Nature!
     
    KyleK, Apr 27, 2009
    #30
Page 3 of 4

Share This Page