Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on February 16, 2014, 07:03:49 PM
-
As per John Kerry. Smells like desperation.
"In a sense, climate change can now be considered the world's largest weapon of mass destruction, perhaps even, the world's most fearsome weapon of mass destruction."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/16/secretary-state-kerry-lashes-out-at-climate-change-skeptics/
-
So he's saying that Bush was right about Iraq? They weren't all driving Priuses (Prii?) over there, were they?
-
So Kerry (not his real name, btw) is trying to out-biden, Biden?
While most of the US is trying to dig out of record breaking snowfalls and ice storms. In lots and lots of places in the US that don't get snow and ice.
:facepalm: :facepalm:
[popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn]
-
Scout, it's climate change. If it's too hot, it's man's fault. If it's too cold, it's man's fault. If it's just right, it's man's fault. That big fiery ball in the sky has absolutely nothing to do with the temperature of the earth.
-
Climate chaos! Didn't you get the email?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
-
If we judge WMDs by how many people they off I'd say that a communist party membership card is right at the top of the list, followed closely by the related thirst for power that shows off in places like DPRK and Africa where leaders withhold foreign aid and intentionally starve entire nations.
-
If we judge WMDs by how many people they off I'd say that a communist party membership card is right at the top of the list, followed closely by the related thirst for power that shows off in places like DPRK and Africa where leaders withhold foreign aid and intentionally starve entire nations.
Let's don't forget the District of Criminals =(
-
Been a while since we've heard from that ahole. Wonder where he had gotten off to. ;/
-
If we judge WMDs by how many people they off I'd say that a communist party membership card is right at the top of the list, followed closely by the related thirst for power that shows off in places like DPRK and Africa where leaders withhold foreign aid and intentionally starve entire nations.
No no no those are just cases where the right people were not in charge and not enough unbelievers were "cleansed"
-
Another case where the loser has run out of arguments, and resorts to false equivalence. Happens all the time.
Tea Party = Nazi Party
Poverty = Violence
AnyDamnedThing you disagree with = Racism
And now....
globular warminization = WMD
It seems to trivialize all those factors on the right side of the equation.
-
Personally, I'm not a skeptic of climate change. The climate changes all the time.
I don't have a doubt that humans DO influence the climate. I'm merely skeptical/agnostic of how much influence we have over the process. It could be a lot, could be little. The Earth has been here long before humanity came into existence, and will be around long after we're gone. Ergo, we should be concerned about how optimal the climate should be for humans. That's a tall order.
1. We can't accurately predict climate trends.
2. We don't have extremely accurate predictive models.
3. We don't know exactly how much of an impact we are making to those trends.
4. We don't know exactly how much it would cost to significantly increase or decrease our impact on climate trends.
I actually DO want good climate science. If we have global cooling issues, I'd like a spreadsheet of how much it would cost to heat up the climate by X. If we have global warming issues, I'd like a spreadsheet of how much it would cost to reduce said heat issues. To within say 10 to 20% accuracy. I know it's a tall order. But we shouldn't be basing our economy and laws on things we don't understand. I believe we should generally not pollute too heavily, so that we don't screw up our land for future usage. That's just common sense, and an economically viable consideration. That you could sell me on in a heartbeat. Especially with relatively good numbers to back up everything.
-
If we have global warming issues
Warming isn't necessarily bad.
-
China and the United States are the biggest sources of emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases that cause the atmosphere to trap solar heat and alter the climate. Scientists say such changes are leading to drought, wildfires, rising sea levels, melting polar ice, plant and animal extinctions and other extreme conditions.
Also in the Jakarta speech, Kerry said everyone and every country must take responsibility for the problem and act immediately.
"We simply don't have time to let a few loud interest groups hijack the climate conversation," he said, referring to what he called "big companies" that "don't want to change and spend a lot of money" to act to reduce the risks.
Kerry later singled out major oil and coal concerns as the primary offenders.
Bull snot! The U.S. government is one of the biggest CO2 emitters in the world and the DoD produces about 80% of those emissions. Not to mention that wasted food is high up on the list for CO2 emissions. Whether you believe in AGW or not is one thing but his statements are disingenuous at best.
-
Warming isn't necessarily bad.
A lot of people think El Nino is bad because of crop damage. If you have a billion dollars in lost crops but save 2 billion in heating costs because of a mild winter temperatures how bad is it, on the whole?
-
Been a while since we've heard from that *expletive deleted*. Wonder where he had gotten off to. ;/
Well, when he puts his foot in his mouth spouts off nonsense, the media usually covers it up and we don't hear it. So normally, we don't hear him at all.
-
If we judge WMDs by how many people they off I'd say that a communist party membership card is right at the top of the list, followed closely by the related thirst for power that shows off in places like DPRK and Africa where leaders withhold foreign aid and intentionally starve entire nations.
Don't forget the environmentalist movement. Banning DDT has killed tens of millions in Africa through starvation and disease.
-
Why science and politics don't mix.
Science should be debated amongst scientists, when a consensus is made, then let the political creatures battle it out.
In a nutshell, used to be Universities did that until their fed and state funding started getting politically motivated. The findings made at the university would be debated at various scientific societies/conferences/publications.
-
In the newspaper, Kerry repeatedly demonized and attacked people who disagree with anthropogenic global warming, referring to them as a ". . . tiny minority of shoddy scientists and science and extreme ideologues . . . "
Reminds me of a quote from Gandhi - "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." Seems as if the global warming alarmists, in a panic at their falling credibility with the general public, are getting desperate and are ready to enter Stage 3.
-
In the newspaper, Kerry repeatedly demonized and attacked people who disagree with anthropogenic global warming, referring to them as a ". . . tiny minority of shoddy scientists and science and extreme ideologues . . . "
Reminds me of a quote from Gandhi - "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." Seems as if the global warming alarmists, in a panic at their falling credibility with the general public, are getting desperate and are ready to enter Stage 3.
So, what caliber for paper hockey stick?
-
In a speech to Indonesian students, civic leaders and government officials, Kerry tore into climate change skeptics. He accused them of using shoddy science and scientists to delay steps needed to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases at the risk of imperiling the planet.
This, from our head of Diplomacy?
I'm ashamed.
There seems to be a fairly regular cycle of CO2 in the atmosphere going back about 400,000 years. Although this is determined indirectly, there is no doubt about the cycle itself. It sticks out like a sore thumb.
There are irregularities and significant departures within and between each cycle, but there's little doubt that this cycling exists.
But from the fairly recent (200 years) of accurate measurements of global temperatures and CO2 content, we impute that the earth is warming and our political people go nuts, mandating things like compact fluorescent lamps and chanting the mantra about global warming.
This, from this very short sampling period... compared to 400,000 years.
Sorry, but I'm not about to panic over this so-called global warming from such a small, albeit accurate, sample. I'm all for conservation, just on general principles, but I dislike it when the compact fluorescent light on my back porch, which I'm being mandated to use, doesn't turn on because it was below zero.
It's the sample size that troubles me.
Terry, 230RN
-
Don't forget the environmentalist movement. Banning DDT has killed tens of millions in Africa through starvation and disease.
Scratch a green and you get??? I'm pretty okay with DDT ban in North America, but anywhere that the native bugs will kill you, let's go for it.
-
Been a while since we've heard from that *expletive deleted*. Wonder where he had gotten off to. ;/
John Kerry's job, if he knows it or not, is to make his predecessor's pathetic tenure as Sec State look good by comparison.
-
John Kerry's job, if he knows it or not, is to make his predecessor's pathetic tenure as Sec State look good by comparison.
Hmmmm.... <Terry drums fingers on table, scratches two day old beard, looks toward ceiling, thinking about that>
"Could be, could be," he mutters to himself.
<Terry decides he needs a shave>
-
John Kerry's job, if he knows it or not, is to make his predecessor's pathetic tenure as Sec State look good by comparison.
Thus far, I see a great deal of churn and very little butter. In his defense, admittedly, he was handed curdled cream.
-
In the newspaper, Kerry repeatedly demonized and attacked people who disagree with anthropogenic global warming, referring to them as a ". . . tiny minority of shoddy scientists and science and extreme ideologues . . . "
Like most neoLib progressive trash, Kerry is really talking about himself and his ilk.
-
This, from our head of Diplomacy?
I'm ashamed.
There seems to be a fairly regular cycle of CO2 in the atmosphere going back about 400,000 years. Although this is determined indirectly, there is no doubt about the cycle itself. It sticks out like a sore thumb.
There are irregularities and significant departures within and between each cycle, but there's little doubt that this cycling exists.
But from the fairly recent (200 years) of accurate measurements of global temperatures and CO2 content, we impute that the earth is warming and our political people go nuts, mandating things like compact fluorescent lamps and chanting the mantra about global warming.
This, from this very short sampling period... compared to 400,000 years.
Sorry, but I'm not about to panic over this so-called global warming from such a small, albeit accurate, sample. I'm all for conservation, just on general principles, but I dislike it when the compact fluorescent light on my back porch, which I'm being mandated to use, doesn't turn on because it was below zero.
It's the sample size that troubles me.
Terry, 230RN
As an FYI: .6-.7C of the 1C increase since the turn of the century can be attributed to instrument observation bias.
-
. . . But from the fairly recent (200 years) of accurate measurements of global temperatures and CO2 content, we impute that the earth is warming and our political people go nuts, mandating things like compact fluorescent lamps and chanting the mantra about global warming . . .
Quite simply, they do it BECAUSE THERE IS MONEY TO BE MADE. Government grants to academics who contribute to leftist progressive causes. Manufacturers of CFL bulbs. Carbon credits - an imaginary product - that .gov can mandate businesses purchase for real money. And on and on and on.
The whole "manmade global warming" industry is a scam that makes Bernie Madoff's shenanigans look like the antics of a two-bit scam artist in a New York alley with a game of three card monte . . .