Not talking about global warming because few people have anything conclusive.

But considering the US consumes an immense amount of oil for no reason other than the lifestyle we're accustomed to demands it, I dont think starting changes is a horrible idea. It wouldn't take but a small series of events for the economic and milatary issue that our oil dependence is to force drastic changes on us, which Im sure we would like even less.

 

You're missing one minor issue.... it's the Bush Administration proposing this, not some hippy-nanny group. "Global Warming" just plays into things.

Since you went off on a tangent and layed the blame at a pretty ridiculous target, let me offer a theory that probally comes closer to home.

Oil companies are getting towards the limit of what they can
charge for oil. We essentially are at a point where we want to pull power out of the middle east by cutting the amount of money we send them by buying massive quanities of oil. Best way to counter the influence of the middle east and find a form of energy where companies can clear larger amounts of money (the planet MUST have energy), is to devise ways to send oil prices through the roof to the point where it makes sense to use alternate sources of energy where the profit margins are superior to what it is in oil. But you can't actually say that because you'll get people up in arms. "National Security" doesn't quite have the same ring as "Global Warming", since you simply can't say we're going to shift profiteering on the world's energy supply from middle east intrests to the US.

Nuclear energy arguably is the cheapest form of fuel. Ethanol and other alcohol based fuels can be made here in the US, and all the profit kept here instead of being sent to the middle east or countries that don't support US policy. Also, why should some sheik have billions in cash and lots of power when instead, we can keep the billions for our own executives and stockholders.

You have a conservative administration headed by an oil executive and a head of a large energy comglamerate playing 2nd bananna (or the man behind the curtain) pushing automotive hybird technology, development of alternative fuel sources, has been eager to jack up fuel economy standards, has openly praised foreign automakers while scorning (and not even meeting with) domestic automakers for 6 years! You have a government that one hand doesn't want to raise taxes on gasoline with money going into the treasury to finance the deficit, but almost encourages fuel prices to spiral upwards, while the money goes into the pockets of investors, executives, and "blind trusts".

"Global Warming" is a great cover, isn't it?

There's plenty of things at work here. It's easy to go into the old kneejerk, blame Hippie-Liberal-Communists that the uneducated, unaware, and backwards folks tend to drift to since most politics is designed to play on the fears of the 70-75% of the population that doesn't vote and likes everything in soundbite sized pieces.

But as world and US history has shown over and over again, it's a convergence of things that tend to change things. It may take a single spark to set things off, and a single banner that makes things gel. But there's always alot more to the story, and alot more under the surface.

 

I think that you are thinking too narrow in terms of the earth's existence. Man has only been on this earth for a fraction of its existence. And of that time we have spent a fraction of that actually documenting temperatures. 400, 500, or even a thousand years is a blink of an eye in terms of earth's life so far. To talk of a trend that has only been happening for 100 years is like being given one piece of a puzzle and asked to figure out what the picture is.
The truth is that noone truly knows what is the cause of this "Global Warming". There are educated guesses from both sides of the fence but they are just that. Educated guesses.

 

actually, that's not really true.

Part of the problem is that there has been no consistency in terms of where the measurements have been taken. After the fall of the Berlin Wall -- somewhere between 150 and 200 Russian stations were taken offline-- now - I have to believe that impacts the average.

..and as I stated earlier in the thread - 20 years ago, many in the scientific community swore that we were going thru Global cooling.....and that dire consequences would occur as we went into another ice age.........well, that didn't happen.

Now...again -- I'm not an expert by any means.......but I don't trust everything I hear -- esp. when it comes to "Algore".........so I've been doing a lot of reading.........and all I'm saying is that we all need to be questioning the hysteria over Global Warming --esp. when you see what's happened to Scientists who have disagreed with Algore and company.

 

People in power want more power and will use whatever "blind" on the masses to get it.

I agree with you Guy, but I also see the liberal side pushing this subject for their own gain.

Unfortunately both the left and right are looking at this situation the wrong way and overall are doing a disservice to our once great country.

I really wish we had a third party that actually listened to the people.

I don’t know if any of you saw "Man of the Year" with Robin Williams last year, but it brings up a lot of good points about the people that govern our country.

I’m not trying to spout government conspiracy or anything, but the older I get the more I realize how little actually gets done on capital hill.

 

Fair enough. The problem I see with it is, what if it is true? There is still more data coming in every day that shows the planet is warming abnormally. 100 years from now most everyone on this board will be dead, and it will be easy to just write it off to ignorance, but the people living in 2107 are certainly more screwed because of actions (or lack thereof) we could have taken.

Scientists talked of a global cooling in the 70s because they didn't have the instrumentation nor the ability to make substatial computer models showing the effects of what increased greenhouse gas in the atmosphere would do. We have come a far with with technology. Does it mean global warming is really happening? Dunno. I am not trying to say the possibilty for it not happening doesn't exist. I am certainly no scientist. I am very open to either possibilty, just playing devil's advocate. It just amuses me how many of the guys on here have drawn their own conclusions on the subject based off of an article they have perhaps read, and an internet movie they have seen. Ever see the 9/11 conspiracy movies on youtube? They look pretty convincing too.

 

You of course know what happened to many gov't scientists, right? They were MUZZLED by the administration. Prevented from saying things like "global warming" or "climate change".

If you read actual scientific reports, you won't get hysteria, but sober reasoning and logic. Most are VERY conservative in their claims (i.e., tend to understate rather than overstate). But if you're reading things like: "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming...", that's OBVIOUSLY going to have a political slant.

I know of SO many people (car enthusiasts) who are very quick to dismiss "global warming" simply because they despise Al Gore. Stupid to let hatred or disrespect of someone else drive one's own thought process! We all need to get over the politics and coldly and objectively look at the science.

In any case, the Camaro wouldn't be in such dire trouble if they'd done what I told 'em and made it lighter-weight, based on the Solstice instead of a fricking CADILLAC!

I'm all for jacking up CAFE standards AND (more importantly) applying them EQUALLY to non-work trucks/SUVs instead of giving them a huge break.

 

HERE HERE!!

 

Perhaps if Carbon Dioxide weren't one of the worst greenhouse gasses there was, the arguments for IT as the cause of global warming would be more convincing. Its simple mathematics really. If "X" gas will trap "x" amount of heat, but gas '"Y" traps 4x as much heat per unit measure, then why is gas "X" the one being focused on? The answer is because gas "Y" (Water vapor) is a natural occuring event and people would have a hard time believing that they need to keep water evaporation to a minimum. But to Joe public, Carbon Dioxide emissions, which people know to be a deadly gas if inhaled, has a pre-existing negative connotation and its easy for the media and special interest groups to latch onto that and play out their little scare tactics for their own gain. People fear what they don't understand. And people just don't seem to understand that without carbon dioxide, life would not exist on the scale that it does.

 

I don't think anyone on here keeps up with stuff like that.

I agree. It sucks that something like this has become more politics than science.

I agree with this, but what constitutes a work truck? My dad is a welder, and drives his 95 Sierra everyday. He needs that truck for work, but it wasn't bought as a work truck.

 

Carbon Dioxide has the potential to stay in the atmosphere for extremely longer durations of time than water vapor. Methane is a more disastrous greenhouse gas, but we aren't releasing methane into the atmosphere like we are C02.

No smart person would argue C02 is evil or bad. It is bad when the balance it is in starts to fall apart though.

 

Well stated. I agree fully.

 

Something else could be to blame for this hysteria known as "Global Warming"...

http://www.aip.org/pnu/2003/split/642-2.html

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17977



I remember the 70's when we were told that we we going to freeze because of the same crap that they're using to chicken little us today.....

http://jcgi.pathfinder.com/time/maga...944914,00.html

http://mysite.verizon.net/mhieb/WVFossils/ice_ages.html


George Will said it best...

 

well, since this topic has switched to a discussion on global warming.. i might as well contribute

firstly.. i read this recently and found it interesting:
just another theory to throw out there.. if mars is actually warming up quicker on mars than here.. it's probably related to solar activity, thus the same is likely for earth

also.. everyone is freaking out over such a slight general increase over the last 100 years...

the earth has been warming and cooling in cycles for millions of years.. what is happening now is no different than ancient pre-history

here's another good tidbit from a meteorologist i know:

everyone talks about melting ice.. glaciers etc... sure that may be true in the Arctic near the north pole.. but did you know that our souther ice cap over antarctica is actually increasing in size?

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/in...ming-snow-job/
http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/20...uthseaice.html
http://www.nasa.gov/lb/vision/earth/...t/sea_ice.html
(Yet nasa grudgingly, in the article, doesnt make the leap in terms of global warming..yet the 'fact' remains..)
http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=199

 

What if global warming is caused by the sun becoming hotter?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...s-warming.html