Yo Mobius take a look at the lunacy of your side We have about five more years at the outside to do something.” • Kenneth Watt, ecologist “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” • George Wald, Harvard Biologist “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” • Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist “By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.” • Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation.” • Denis Hayes, chief organizer for Earth Day “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” • Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….” • Life Magazine, January 1970 “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” • Kenneth Watt, Ecologist “Air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” • Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” • Kenneth Watt, Ecologist “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” • Sen. Gaylord Nelson and this classic: “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” • Kenneth Watt, Ecologist
What are the odds that it was a coincidence that Earth day is celebrated on Lenin’s birthday AND the very first celebration of Earth day coincided with Lenin’s 100th birthday?
The unfortunate truth is that neither side can convince the other because both sides think they are right and both sides think the other is using mistaken or misused statistics. Which is the one area both sides are right about. Which of course contributes to the unfortunate truth that neither side can convince . . . . . . . . .. If you want to see a model of the future of this argument review the Jewish/Palestinian argument over the land of Israel.
Sorry my friend there were no two sides of the agrument on whether Hitler, Mussolinni and Tojo were right or wrong and that they had a valid argument THEY WERE SIMPLY WRONG and had to be destroyed. There was no grey area or other side of the story when Galileo said the earth revolves around the sun he was correct. Same thing here we are responsible for global warming are we are not, we are simply not. After reading my post, if you did, and saw the insanity of these liberals trying to blame man for the earths climate and being consistantly wrong EVERY time since the 1900's and still think there is two sides join Mobius at the loony farm.
The point of my post was not about who was right or wrong; it was that each side's position was set in concrete and could not conceive of allowing themselves to consider the other sides argument, statistics, or points. Your reply could not have been crafter better to prove me right.
You have no point or no point that makes sense. As I said before that the earth revolves around the sun is not open to discussion. There is not another side and only one side of the argument is right. The certain thing here is we have been measuring the earths temperature and other dynamics somewhat accurately and I mean somewhat accurately for less than 30 years. The earth is 4,500,000,000 years old and no one no one can possibly tell me they know that man is controlling something so dynamic and complicated as the earths climate. Obama actually said in his inaguration now that he is the POTUS the seas will now stop rising, how arrogant and God like. Dont let the door hit you in the ass Obama you absolute horror of a human being.
Just lost another scientist that was on your side, you are losing your army Al Gore oh I mean Mobius. http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/01...-my-tenured-faculty-position-at-georgia-tech/
Well can't argue that one - you nailed it. No, we know more about the earth's climate than just the last .000000667% (30/4,500,000,000) of the earths age. But I'm sure you're very practiced at ignoring what you don't want to recognize. No sane person is saying man is controlling earth's climate; but sane people do admit man is effecting earths climate. No person can look at smog and say that isn't true to some extent. The argument is about how much - not if - man is effecting earths climate. I'll state it again for the third time - that would be the same number that comes after 'The' and before 'Stoogies'. People are so locked into their position that they can't look at anything that's contrary to 'their truth'. What makes you one of those people is that you say we are limited to only 30 years of data - and yet you will reject the idea of looking at alternate data measuring techniques. Read my signature.
