Barak Obama - Heir Apparant

[Felix The Assassin]

Here is a non US link about the carbon credits.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover031307.htm

[Chewbacca]

How does "Al Gore capitalizes on Human-Made Global Warming" = "Global Warming is not caused by Humankind's carbon emissions"?

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca How does "Al Gore capitalizes on Human-Made Global Warming" = "Global Warming is not caused by Humankind's carbon emissions"?

First of all, the ice core data taken in 1985 shows that carbon emmissions have risen and fallen over the last several thousand years - even when there was no man-made industry to cause it. So rising CO2 levels is not a man-made event.
Secondly, CO2 levels rise after global temperatures, not before. In other words, rising CO2 levels are a result of increased temperature, not the cause of those temperatures.

http://mises.org/story/2795

[Chewbacca]

How does the climate's changed before make it so that Human's industrialization has no ill effect?

Why not be safe rather than sorry when it comes to the condition of the whole planet?

Would not the logic "pollution changes the enviroment" make any reasonable person cautious about any sort of massive amounts pollutants in the enviroment.

Obviously I'm skeptical, that's why I ask so many questions. So until somebody proves human's emmissions do not negatively impact the climate we should be the safest and cleanest stewards as our faculties provide us.

[Variol (Farseer) Elmwood]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca How does the climate's changed before make it so that Human's industrialization has no ill effect? Why not be safe rather than sorry when it comes to the condition of the whole planet? Would not the logic "pollution changes the enviroment" make any reasonable person cautious about any sort of massive amounts pollutants in the enviroment. Obviously I'm skeptical, that's why I ask so many questions. So until somebody proves human's emmissions do not negatively impact the climate we should be the safest and cleanest stewards as our faculties provide us.

You worded that much better than I did.

..and I really like your use of the word "steward".

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca How does the climate's changed before make it so that Human's industrialization has no ill effect? Why not be safe rather than sorry when it comes to the condition of the whole planet? Would not the logic "pollution changes the enviroment" make any reasonable person cautious about any sort of massive amounts pollutants in the enviroment. Obviously I'm skeptical, that's why I ask so many questions. So until somebody proves human's emmissions do not negatively impact the climate we should be the safest and cleanest stewards as our faculties provide us.

The message from Al Gore and cohorts is that man-made emmissions and industry are responsible for the rise in CO2 levels, which in turn is partially responsible for global warming.

The ice core samples disprove both of these messages. If man-made industry is responsible for rising CO2 levels, then how do they explain the proven history of escalated CO2 levels that obviously occurred when there was NO man-made industry? The answer is obvious - rising CO2 levels is a cyclical phenomon that has been occurring long before mankind could possibly have had any impact on it. So industry certainly is not the cause of it.

Why not be "responsible" and control emissions anyway? Nobody is suggesting not to do that. But the message being sent out is completely different - the message is that mankind is causing the rise in CO2 levels, which scientific data conclusively disproves. Industry may be one contributing factor, but it certainly is not the sole cause.

As I said before, when you manipulate the data, you taint your message. When you taint part of your message, the whole message becomes suspect.

[Variol (Farseer) Elmwood]

Yes, but those who made the movie about what you're saying , (can't remember the name) have admitted that they have "stretched the truth" or "made mistakes" as well.

I guess when people want to get their point across it's human nature to exaggerate.

I'm glad you said that we should be responsible. That's the only thing I was getting at earlier. Let's not put the blinders on and say everything is fine.

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Variol (Farseer) Elmwood Yes, but those who made the movie about what you're saying , (can't remember the name) have admitted that they have "stretched the truth" or "made mistakes" as well. I guess when people want to get their point across it's human nature to exaggerate. I'm glad you said that we should be responsible. That's the only thing I was getting at earlier. Let's not put the blinders on and say everything is fine.

The problem I have with Gore and Moore is that they deliberately twist and manipulate the data to exaggerate their personal POV. And the fact that Gore actually won the Nobel Peace Prize for a film that has proven inaccuracies and is narrated by a man who admits he has lied about the dangers and impact of global warming in an effort to "increase awareness" just stuns me beyond belief.

"But isn't the message a noble one and, therefore, a worthy cause despite these few inaccuracies?"

I suppose so. By the same token, there should be no criticism of George W. Bush and the War in Iraq. So what if he "exaggerated" the claims of WoMD? Isn't the goal of removing a tyrannical dictator who is slaughtering innocent citizens a worthy one? So let's just agree that the end justifies the means, even if the message is twisted and tainted to achieve that end? NO? I didn't think so.

[Variol (Farseer) Elmwood]

Yes, to me, a lie is still a lie. I think it's fine in situation where you may not want to offend someone like: "yes. that's a nice dress" etc.

I think the truth of the threat is really enough. I feel it comes down to laziness. I see people on my court never put out blue bags for recycling. It's all black trash bags. I'm sure they tell themselves some nonsense to ease their conscience.

We don't have children, but that doesn't mean I'm going to mess everything up for the younger generation.

[SpiritWarrior]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca How does the climate's changed before make it so that Human's industrialization has no ill effect? Why not be safe rather than sorry when it comes to the condition of the whole planet? Would not the logic "pollution changes the enviroment" make any reasonable person cautious about any sort of massive amounts pollutants in the enviroment. Obviously I'm skeptical, that's why I ask so many questions. So until somebody proves human's emmissions do not negatively impact the climate we should be the safest and cleanest stewards as our faculties provide us.

This has been my view of it. If there is even a possibilty of danger in your home, and your kids could be in danger as a result of this, you work to find solutions. Even if some dismiss it as "being paranoid" you figure it can only help to be safe rather than sorry. At the end of the day, if your fears are correct...