Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#4261
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"David J. Allen" wrote:
>
> I've always thought this accusation against the US, that it, being a
> minority of the worlds population but uses a majority of the resources and
> produces a majority of the waste, was meant to pander to envy of and anger
> against the US.
>
> It requires one to believe that there is a fixed amount of wealth and
> limited resources that must go around fairly to everyone, and that the US
> wants an unfair share of it. This is completely false. The fact is that
> wealth is created by private and free enterprise and the US has always been
> (hopefully will continue to be) about free enterprise. It isn't a measure
> of greed or waste, but of entrepreneurialism and achievement.
>
> Ironically, it's the US that has led the way in cleaning up industry
> emissions and auto emissions. The tax the US places on it's own economy in
> striving for clean air and clean water is enormous. Finding newer
> technologies to reduce or illiminate pollution is great, but there's
> currently nothing that can replace oil as a source of energy without killing
> the world economy.
>
> And like it or not, it's the power of the US economy that has protected the
> world from despotism... from the ***** and from the Communists. And now
> from Islamic extremists. They are more dangerous than ***** or Communists
> because they understand that destroying the US economy is what will give
> them the ability to push back and defeat the "infidel" west and impose an
> Islamic empire. If you're looking for greed, look there.
Hear, hear! Or is it "here, here!"? In either case, right on, dude!
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
#4262
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"C. E. White" wrote:
>
> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
> > Wrong. The last 120 years have shown warming, and the hottest years on
> > record have all occurred in the last decade.
>
> There are a lot of problems with this claim. By biggest concern is the source of
> the data. A lot of the old data is being inferred from unreliable sources. The
> newer data is better, but it is not always corrected for changes in the micro
> environment around the reporting station.
>
> Even if the measurements are correct, the current global average temperature is
> not particularly high by historic standards. For instance, the current global
> average temperature is lower than during the period around 1200 AD.
>
> > Try reading peer-reviewed scientific journals then.
>
> The problem I see with your constantly making this argument is that "peer reviewed
> journals" select the articles they publish. If they don't agree with the author's
> idea, they don't publish the article, and the author can't claim the article was
> published in a peer reviewed journal. Since the people who control these journals
> are usually part of the liberal establishment, they are not predisposed to
> publishing articles that don't fall in line with their current biases. I suspect
> that if you were on the board picking articles to be published, you would
> immediately dismiss any article that challenged the global warming theory. In the
> end the articles published are chosen through a political process. Not everything
> can be published, so articles that don't agree with the biases of the people doing
> the choosing are left out. This is a viscous circle, dissenters from the popular
> liberal view are shut out, so the peer reviewed "evidence" piles up in favor of
> the "commonly accepted view" and this is used as a reason for continuing to shut
> out he articles that don't agree with the "commonly accepted view." In Galileo's
> time the Catholic church controlled defined the "commonly accepted view", today it
> is liberals and the liberal media. In neither case does this guarantee that the
> "commonly accepted view" is correct.
>
> Ed
Yep. Just like one of LP's favorite groups, the American Psychological
Association. They published a peer-reviewed paper written by some guys
(I spelled it right) from Temple Univ. When the paper started being
cited by pro---------- groups and funding for APA activities got
threatened, the APA officially denounced the paper. It had been peer
reviewed, so how could that be?
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
#4263
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"C. E. White" wrote:
>
> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
> > Wrong. The last 120 years have shown warming, and the hottest years on
> > record have all occurred in the last decade.
>
> There are a lot of problems with this claim. By biggest concern is the source of
> the data. A lot of the old data is being inferred from unreliable sources. The
> newer data is better, but it is not always corrected for changes in the micro
> environment around the reporting station.
>
> Even if the measurements are correct, the current global average temperature is
> not particularly high by historic standards. For instance, the current global
> average temperature is lower than during the period around 1200 AD.
>
> > Try reading peer-reviewed scientific journals then.
>
> The problem I see with your constantly making this argument is that "peer reviewed
> journals" select the articles they publish. If they don't agree with the author's
> idea, they don't publish the article, and the author can't claim the article was
> published in a peer reviewed journal. Since the people who control these journals
> are usually part of the liberal establishment, they are not predisposed to
> publishing articles that don't fall in line with their current biases. I suspect
> that if you were on the board picking articles to be published, you would
> immediately dismiss any article that challenged the global warming theory. In the
> end the articles published are chosen through a political process. Not everything
> can be published, so articles that don't agree with the biases of the people doing
> the choosing are left out. This is a viscous circle, dissenters from the popular
> liberal view are shut out, so the peer reviewed "evidence" piles up in favor of
> the "commonly accepted view" and this is used as a reason for continuing to shut
> out he articles that don't agree with the "commonly accepted view." In Galileo's
> time the Catholic church controlled defined the "commonly accepted view", today it
> is liberals and the liberal media. In neither case does this guarantee that the
> "commonly accepted view" is correct.
>
> Ed
Yep. Just like one of LP's favorite groups, the American Psychological
Association. They published a peer-reviewed paper written by some guys
(I spelled it right) from Temple Univ. When the paper started being
cited by pro---------- groups and funding for APA activities got
threatened, the APA officially denounced the paper. It had been peer
reviewed, so how could that be?
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
#4264
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"C. E. White" wrote:
>
> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
> > Wrong. The last 120 years have shown warming, and the hottest years on
> > record have all occurred in the last decade.
>
> There are a lot of problems with this claim. By biggest concern is the source of
> the data. A lot of the old data is being inferred from unreliable sources. The
> newer data is better, but it is not always corrected for changes in the micro
> environment around the reporting station.
>
> Even if the measurements are correct, the current global average temperature is
> not particularly high by historic standards. For instance, the current global
> average temperature is lower than during the period around 1200 AD.
>
> > Try reading peer-reviewed scientific journals then.
>
> The problem I see with your constantly making this argument is that "peer reviewed
> journals" select the articles they publish. If they don't agree with the author's
> idea, they don't publish the article, and the author can't claim the article was
> published in a peer reviewed journal. Since the people who control these journals
> are usually part of the liberal establishment, they are not predisposed to
> publishing articles that don't fall in line with their current biases. I suspect
> that if you were on the board picking articles to be published, you would
> immediately dismiss any article that challenged the global warming theory. In the
> end the articles published are chosen through a political process. Not everything
> can be published, so articles that don't agree with the biases of the people doing
> the choosing are left out. This is a viscous circle, dissenters from the popular
> liberal view are shut out, so the peer reviewed "evidence" piles up in favor of
> the "commonly accepted view" and this is used as a reason for continuing to shut
> out he articles that don't agree with the "commonly accepted view." In Galileo's
> time the Catholic church controlled defined the "commonly accepted view", today it
> is liberals and the liberal media. In neither case does this guarantee that the
> "commonly accepted view" is correct.
>
> Ed
Yep. Just like one of LP's favorite groups, the American Psychological
Association. They published a peer-reviewed paper written by some guys
(I spelled it right) from Temple Univ. When the paper started being
cited by pro---------- groups and funding for APA activities got
threatened, the APA officially denounced the paper. It had been peer
reviewed, so how could that be?
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
#4265
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
> >What if we implemented the Kyoto treaty and many millions lost their
> >jobs and homes in the resulting recession/depression and then
> >discovered that the treaty did nothing to prevent the 'global
> >warming'?
> What if we did nothing and then found out it was too late?
>
> Kind of like a forest fire burning up to your property but you refuse to
> evacuate until you're 100% sure it's going to burn your house.
Nah. I'd allow the forest to be maintained properly near populated
areas so that it didn't wipe out whole residential sections like it did
in California. That would be a non-sequitur except (aside from the
damage to the environment caused by the fire, release of CO2, etc.) that
there are analogies to the CO2 issue as well, IOW - *K*eep *I*t *S*imple
*S*am.
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
#4266
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
> >What if we implemented the Kyoto treaty and many millions lost their
> >jobs and homes in the resulting recession/depression and then
> >discovered that the treaty did nothing to prevent the 'global
> >warming'?
> What if we did nothing and then found out it was too late?
>
> Kind of like a forest fire burning up to your property but you refuse to
> evacuate until you're 100% sure it's going to burn your house.
Nah. I'd allow the forest to be maintained properly near populated
areas so that it didn't wipe out whole residential sections like it did
in California. That would be a non-sequitur except (aside from the
damage to the environment caused by the fire, release of CO2, etc.) that
there are analogies to the CO2 issue as well, IOW - *K*eep *I*t *S*imple
*S*am.
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
#4267
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
> >What if we implemented the Kyoto treaty and many millions lost their
> >jobs and homes in the resulting recession/depression and then
> >discovered that the treaty did nothing to prevent the 'global
> >warming'?
> What if we did nothing and then found out it was too late?
>
> Kind of like a forest fire burning up to your property but you refuse to
> evacuate until you're 100% sure it's going to burn your house.
Nah. I'd allow the forest to be maintained properly near populated
areas so that it didn't wipe out whole residential sections like it did
in California. That would be a non-sequitur except (aside from the
damage to the environment caused by the fire, release of CO2, etc.) that
there are analogies to the CO2 issue as well, IOW - *K*eep *I*t *S*imple
*S*am.
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
#4268
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote in message news:<3FAF9170.6040702@computer.org>...
> st3ph3nm wrote:
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
There are ways to analyse temperature variations through the past, by
looking at ice core samples, and tree rings, and fossil evidence.
Having said that, accurate temperature readings have been around since
the mid 1800's, and there's a strong trend showing:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/observe/surftemp/
Cheers,
Steve
> st3ph3nm wrote:
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
There are ways to analyse temperature variations through the past, by
looking at ice core samples, and tree rings, and fossil evidence.
Having said that, accurate temperature readings have been around since
the mid 1800's, and there's a strong trend showing:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/observe/surftemp/
Cheers,
Steve
#4269
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote in message news:<3FAF9170.6040702@computer.org>...
> st3ph3nm wrote:
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
There are ways to analyse temperature variations through the past, by
looking at ice core samples, and tree rings, and fossil evidence.
Having said that, accurate temperature readings have been around since
the mid 1800's, and there's a strong trend showing:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/observe/surftemp/
Cheers,
Steve
> st3ph3nm wrote:
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
There are ways to analyse temperature variations through the past, by
looking at ice core samples, and tree rings, and fossil evidence.
Having said that, accurate temperature readings have been around since
the mid 1800's, and there's a strong trend showing:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/observe/surftemp/
Cheers,
Steve
#4270
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote in message news:<3FAF9170.6040702@computer.org>...
> st3ph3nm wrote:
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
There are ways to analyse temperature variations through the past, by
looking at ice core samples, and tree rings, and fossil evidence.
Having said that, accurate temperature readings have been around since
the mid 1800's, and there's a strong trend showing:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/observe/surftemp/
Cheers,
Steve
> st3ph3nm wrote:
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
There are ways to analyse temperature variations through the past, by
looking at ice core samples, and tree rings, and fossil evidence.
Having said that, accurate temperature readings have been around since
the mid 1800's, and there's a strong trend showing:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/observe/surftemp/
Cheers,
Steve