| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 83145 | 2007-09-20 23:04:00 | Climate change caused by man ? | wmoore (6009) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 593530 | 2007-09-25 16:13:00 | Waste . . . no matter how or why it's committed, is sinful . What I was trying to say and possibly under emphasized was that the foods that would go to feed hungry people usually don't get to them as they mold and rot on docks, storehouses and through the interventions of greedy and non-philanthropic persons, gets destroyed . It's a supply-and-demand scenario artificially created by not allowing foods to the market to keep the prices up . The Biafra reference was just showing that there are people who live in constant almost-death or now-dying-while-falling-to-the-ground situations and the true curse there is birth in an already burgeoned society of disease, malnutrition and birth defects usually fomented by poor nutrition and variety in the local diet of leaves, dirt and used tires . Most ecofreeks are hypocrites to the max with the exception of very few, and their fake humility gags me as they rally for earth friendly solutions and retire to their estates with acres of irrigated lawns and multiple cars and chauffeurs and huge wood-burning fireplaces . I am talking about the talking heads from Hollyweird and those upper crust echelons of our glam, glitter and politically aspirant societies . While I don't condemn them for gluttony which is bad enuff, I do condemn them for two-faces and their "let them eat cake" attitudes . Unabated wastefulness is a major link in the world's food shortage chain . . . . . . and even if there was a worldwide redistribution of food, I bet it wouldn't be allowed for reasons of politico-socio malfeasance, ineptitude and general suspicion or creating shortages to pump the prices to the max . Using foodstuffs as fuel for our vehicles is so wrong . . . it's gotta be one of the worst ideas ever generated . To fuel just the US's cars at the 75% compliance level would require every arable acre in the US to be planted with just bio-fuel plants . . . no matter if it's rapeseed or corn . . and that's wrong . Using foods as weapons to create political strife and forced capitulation of the masses to new and more dangerous regimes by little despots and political hacks cause more misery and death than any lack of land to grow food . The land is productive enough even if the growing seasons are shifted somewhat and the acreage is diminished . The world can and is totally capable of being fed to full bellies right now and in the foreseeable future if there wasn't the nasty human element involved . Given that the humans in charge aren't gonna change their ways, we would then have to independently import all our food (corn, wheat, sunburned sheep and melanoma-laden beef) from NZ or Australia . The UVA/UVB controversy is still running, and I know about the Southern Cross Syndrome, but I still allude to the fact that it is not the ONLY mitigating factor . Aleuts and Eskimos have the sun from TWO sources . . . the almost direct, above the head and by the reflective from-the-snow, but they are primarily covered in heavy sealskin and walrus furs most of the year . . . . yet as such they develop higher than normal basal cell melanomas that are not just limited to sunstrike areas . Their actual sunshine hours are for shorter periods, day-wise, and the angle of sun impact is much more oblique because of higher latitudinal position too . Go figger! |
SurferJoe46 (51) | ||
| 593531 | 2007-09-25 19:52:00 | Probably getting a bit off topic here; but it's kinda related. I don't think you really got what I was trying to point out. It's not a third world thing (Joe, I take your point about the corruption & waste involved with that scenario). It's more a new, rising economies thing. The demand for western style food, in China, India etc. for their new middle classes is starting to create demands that will impact on our "western" societies. What zqwerty said about grain being diverted to biofuel is also correct and adds to the situation. |
jcr1 (893) | ||
| 593532 | 2007-09-25 22:16:00 | Probably getting a bit off topic here; but it's kinda related . I don't think you really got what I was trying to point out . It's not a third world thing (Joe, I take your point about the corruption & waste involved with that scenario) . It's more a new, rising economies thing . The demand for western style food, in China, India etc . for their new middle classes is starting to create demands that will impact on our "western" societies . What zqwerty said about grain being diverted to biofuel is also correct and adds to the situation . What doesn't make sense is that you feel these Oriental countries are forming a MIDDLE CLASS? C'mon . . . it's the middles that are being destroyed for the new class distinction of (2---only two) classes . . . the very rich and the very poor . I don't think it's a middle class being created, but less-than-dirt-eaters is more like it . . . and many steps below the crust . With NAFTA ( . citizen . org/trade/nafta/" target="_blank">www . citizen . org) and Fair Trade going for a global exercise, it's creating masses of high tech people in established lands as the new dirt farmers . Maybe geeks will be exempt for a while . . . as long as they are useful . If you level the playing field worldwide, then you get nothing but hoi polloi service industries to the moguls and bellringers of the P . O . S . H . Higher Classes . It's just the way of the new sensitivities trend to spread the misery equally to all people but those with the big money . . THEY are exempt . And . . sorry to say, NZ does not raise a wake on the sea of disenchantment to the rest of the world . I admire your austerity, sincerity and desire to stay isolated from these things, but the big city is a-comin' to youse guys too . |
SurferJoe46 (51) | ||
| 593533 | 2007-09-26 11:34:00 | I recommend the youtube links, but the other two are worth a look. I don't mind people having an opinion, but an educated one is one I can respect. Many people keep an opinion because it suits their political stance,rather than questioning and trying to find the truth. www.telegraph.co.uk epw.senate.gov www.youtube.com www.youtube.com |
limepile (96) | ||
| 593534 | 2007-09-27 07:05:00 | Thank goodness there are more 'no' people than 'yes' people here. There is hope yet that brains and common sense will prevail over insanity. Did you know that we have a Minister for Climate Change, David Parker? Despite the fact that there is no scientific consensus on climate change, the govt are trying to force this down our throats, without any room for debate whatsoever. We're all going to end up paying for this one way or another through this ridiculous carbon trading scheme, which will effectively be an industry run by bureaucrats with absolutely no environmental benefit whatsoever. Then we have the Green Party (basically full of eco-nazis spouting nonsense), who are pushing for the Dairy Industry to be included in the Carbon Trading scheme - who the hell is going to be out there measuring all those cow farts? What a complete waste of time, money and resources. Seems like ALL the political parties are pushing this in one form or another. I've lost faith in the lot of them. Not that I ever had much in them in the first place. |
legod (4626) | ||
| 593535 | 2007-09-28 01:19:00 | Despite the fact that there is no scientific consensus on climate change........ I'm afraid I have to disagree. Have a look here gristmill.grist.org Climate change is accepted in the scientific community based on over 3000 different studies around the world and brought together in the Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change report released earlier this year. ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu That report was the very careful and agonised conclusion of 1500 scientists. The reason people think there is no concensus is because there are some researchers who have different opinions - http://www.skepticalscience.com/ The reason they have such opinions vary and arise from anomolous research data, arguments over interpretation of data - and plain old pork barrel incentives - in other words some scientists are owned by oil companies. I blame our media for shallow reporting on climate change. Admittedly it is very complex but not imposible to explain. Instead any time a sceptic raises his voice, what he says is loudly reported as if it were a complete rebuttal of tens of thousands of other scientists. |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 593536 | 2007-09-28 02:49:00 | Let’s just stop and look for ourselves as to what is happening . Of course there is such a thing as “Climate Change”, otherwise we would still be in the “Ice Age” . :waughh: (Mind you, this morning I thought we still were) . But, what or who do we blame for this phenomenon? The “Grey Bearded Ones” with “Polar Necked Skivvies” and “Grey Shoes” would probably suggest “Dinosaur Flatulence” or the like . Speaking of which, I wonder how many Carbon Credits the disgusting flatulence displayed Mount Rupapehu cost the government, and how much warmer we'll be tomorrow because of this? And finally, how will we stop Ruapehu repeating this disgraceful conduct and what about the Carbon Credit loss incurred by Rotorua . That place puts out more carbon emissions the all the vehicles in the country put together . Tax it! That will fix! :thumbs: |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 593537 | 2007-09-28 04:27:00 | So all we need is for Krakatoa to erupt again, (and according to many volcanologists it will) as it will cool the atmosphere down a lot . From what I read it is growing again so it's only a matter of time . This from the earlier explosion . . . . . . . . The volcanic dust veil that created such spectacular atmospheric effects also acted as a solar radiation filter, lowering global temperatures as much as 1 . 2 degree C in the year after the eruption . Temperatures did not return to normal until 1888 . Remember it was 1883 when it blew it's top . So we try to save the world with a carbon tax, and boom, Krakatoa erupts and undoes all the work so called greenies pushed for . Yeah right . :lol: |
intel hunter (6666) | ||
| 593538 | 2007-09-28 09:35:00 | Absolutely IH. The crazy part is they're still arguing whether such an event would raise or lower temperatures by One or Two degrees. One thing for sure, “Fart Tax” ain't going to solve the problem and who the hell cares if the world is one or two degrees higher or lower on average? It's been up and down for hundreds off thousands of years. This (en.wikipedia.org) is worth a look. I’ll bet nature sorts it out in the end and Helen and her mates will have no impact what so ever! :lol: |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 593539 | 2007-09-28 10:34:00 | who the hell cares if the world is one or two degrees higher or lower on average? It's been up and down for hundreds off thousands of years . thing is that civilistaion has only been around a few thousand years, and in it's current state where the majority of the population lives on a coastline, ANY resulting sea level change could spell disaster . so i'd say ALOT of people care . then there's the loss of arable farmland, unpredictable weather patterns etc etc ideally, we'd keep the earth at the temperature it was during the 20th century, or maybe just at the beginning of the industrial age . . . . definetly don't want to slip into another ice age though (and you're right, fart tax is just a tax for the sake of tax) |
motorbyclist (188) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 | |||||