We are getting a name change.

I've noticed and wondered whats up. Either way it goes they're covered now.

 

When wasn't the climate changing?

Truth probably is that the northern hemisphere has had abnormally decent weather for the last 70 years.

 

Yes! This way no matter what happens the advocates can call "climate change" and justify lots of tax collection, regulation, and more government agencies and their spin off consultants. Many people will be too stupid to get past this baloney. They'll be looking to politicians - purveyors of generations of failed government programs - to make the sun cooler or warmer, make the ocean rise or fall, and make the winds blow or calm. Some day they'll probably want to include the "climate change" that occurs on other planets in the jurisdiction of these new government agencies.

 

Do any of you actually have any facts or are you just spewing conservative illogic? Personally, I'm at the point where I'm not convinced either way about global warming. I'm looking for more information but I guess that's the mode I operate in after being an engineer for 32 years.

The real question today is whether our action on air pollution should depend on whether global warming is true or not. Has anybody here ever spent an extended period of time in LA or the NJ refinery area on a really bad day? Is that the way you want to live? If so, fine. If not, why not work to improve air quality for the short term benefits while we continue to study the potential long term impacts?

 

Climate happens.

 

Maybe, but I dunno'.

Somehow that doesn't seem to have the same "ring to it", as the more familiar phrase. :laugh:

Ed

 

Maybe, but I dunno'.

Somehow that just doesn't seem to have quite the same "ring to it", as the more familiar phrase. :laugh:

Ed

 

Calling out the global warming farce for what it is does not equate to a lack of concern for the environment nor a reasonable and balanced approach to managing pollution against needed resources. God said, referring to the earth, that we were to "work it and take care of it" which means a balance of using the resources provided in the earth and yet not being wasteful and reckless in doing it.

There are a lot of people living in big cities like Los Angeles so they have a serious air pollution problem yet they also earn a living from and enjoy the benefits of living there. Refineries and petrochemical plants do emit pollution but they also make products we need and we already don't like the fact that some of them are costing more all the time. Much has been done in these areas and many others to reduce our pollution of our "working" the earth. But we need to keep the balance including the cost in mind as we make decisions about what we should do.

The problem is that many of approaches that have been taken and those proposed are neither reasonable nor balanced. They are driven by the money to be made by consultants, suppliers, environmentalists, and lawyers, the power it provides to politicians, and the ignorance of those who think we can keep the cake and eat it too. They burden manufacturers with mounds on paperwork - that's what government inspectors really like to look at - and add huge costs to doing business which, of course, get passed on to consumers. Often these people don't even understand the technology involved because they never get their noses out of the volumes of regulations, tons of reports, and legal filings and litigation. Remember it is the same government than manages the Postal "Service" that thinks it's looking out for the environment. It's also the same politicians that think they can solve all of man's problems with more taxes, laws, and bureaucracy who think they can change the world's climate.

The "illogic" is in the Al Gore story which is something a lot of engineers can quickly spot when they have some additional information to use. Here's one possible resource that might help: The Great Global Warming Swindle - Part 1

 

I went to the 7th grade in a rural community (McLean, Texas - in the Panhandle) in 1955-1956. We started learning about CONSERVATION - the conserving of the stuff around us that others might need to use also. The name has changed a lot, but the idea is still the same. ALL THAT earth stuff ain't ours.

It turned out that 1955 was the coolest year 1928-2008. I was 12 in 1955. Thanksgiving I went to stay with my Maternal Grandmother. She lived by the Carbon Black plant west of Borger, Texas. The snow that fell early in the evening was black by morning. A little polution there making Carbon Black (used in numerous chemical industries, especially tire production).

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_black

 

If you think you have all the facts needed to call global warming a farce that's your prerogative. I'm just saying I don't. Beyond that I don't see the issue in doing things to reduce air and water pollution which would benefit the earth and its inhabitants either way. Based on your reply, I don't see why we aren't saying the same thing except for the political bias you insist on putting on this issue.

 

It is very clearly a political issue and like so many other issues it is one more tool used to accomplish an agenda which is a socialistic one world government. It is an opportunity to impose heavy taxes and relieve us of freedom.