Global Warming Hitler Fervor
rose-colored-coolaid wrote:Besides, I don't think anyone here is arguing against drilling.
I am.
We need to leave the carbon in the ground.
It'd be fine if sequestration would work, but the costs are inherently high due to the need to compress the CO2 gas to around 100 atm, and there's some doubt that there is enough suitable reservoir capacity to pump it into if it was scaled up.
Meanwhile, the IPCC climate change models are being consistently shown to be too conservative (apart from on right wing blogs, where robroy has found evidence that CO2 is vital to preventing the next ice age):
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2008/2 ... 5333.shtml
The water-vapor positive feedback to radiative forcing has now been found to be larger than previously estimated.
The geological sequestration of CO2 is what cooled our climate off from the hothouse Earth in the Eocene era, and we are rapidly digging up that carbon and reversing the clock.
Comments
A very common story.
I crack up every time I hear about it. It's funny, as long as nobody uses this manufactured concept to start controlling my life or using my tax dollars. Then it is NOT funny.
When I hear about people wanting to stop global warming by reducing CO2 emissions I think of them as people who want to stop the buildup of rainclouds by reducing the amount of rain.
BTW, rainclouds ARE reduced by rain itself. If you get my drift...
The world is a dangerous place, always on the edge of destabalization but kept in check by fear of superpowers.
I've been saying five things for the last year or two:
1. This thing could get as bad as, or worse than, the great depression (GD).
2. The GD ended with WWII.
3. The US is a form of worldwide empire with "colonies" like South Korea, Taiwan, India, Etc.
4. As the world economy collapses, countries like NK will be both desperate and emboldened to take military action against one of our colonies in near proximity. The result could actually ultimately end up with a hot war fought on US soil. I"m talking about the 50 states.
5. Somewhat related to the four but more domestic in scope, expect a serius uptick in domestic violence, divorce, murder and various other crimes.
There will be rioting by next Tuesday or Wednesday. The only thing left for debate is how bad it will be. As our country (and the rest of the western world) is perceived to be more and more impotent, expect interesting twists on the five above.
We are living in interesting times.
Fixed that for you.
If you believe this is an accurate analogy, you have proven that you do not understand the issue.
Lets see what we've been hearing from Sarah Palin and the right-wingers lately. There are "real americans" and "anti americans". The American media' should ``take a great look at the views of people in Congress and find out, are they pro-America or anti-America?'' There are "real" parts of Virginia and parts full of liberals. Obama is a socialist and quite possibly a terrorist
I think I see where you are coming from
I am not talking about "real vs anti-americans" and other campaign rhetoric. I am talking SPECIFICALLY about blaming an economic crisis on a group, as I said in my post.
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&um=1& ... y+mortgage
I disagree, but like you I am only making an assertion with nothing to back it up. So let me fix that.
The analogy applies. Just as rain follows rainclouds, CO2 follows Global Warming.
http://www.affordablehousinginstitute.o ... small1.jpg
The whole thing is just a power struggle anyway though. People just like to control other people and keep their job going:
http://nov55.com/gbwm.html
Besides, it's getting colder now.
http://www.isthereglobalcooling.com/
I've got over a hundred links that I have saved and read (many more that I didn't save) and all I have to do is look at the meat of the articles to realize the body of evidence is on the side of what are called "global warming deniers". It's not even close. The alarmists were just hoping to do a quick kill of all public debate in the court of public opinion before the "deniers" got the word out that it was a bunch of malarky.
They weren't fast enough, thank God.
So, then - this doesn't qualify as "nationalistic fervor"? The chants of "USA, USA" and signs proclaiming "America First"?
Americans love and die for their country, not their elected servants/leaders.
And again, we are talking about blaming specific groups for an economic crisis, not nationalism. Without nationalism, a country cannot survive. But like all good things, it can be overdone. I have seen none of that in this election cycle. "Nationalistic Fervor" goes far beyond simple chanting at an election ralley.
Don't forget calls of kill him and the like. It feels like we're in bizarro land that the most angry, most vehement, most irrational people are the ones blaming everyone else of being Nazis.
CO2 transmits in the visible and has absorption bands in the IR, which is precisely what you need for a greenhouse gas.
Claiming that its not even worthwhile looking at it is simply ignorant of over a hundred years of physics.
GHGs lag instead of lead the ice age cycles of the past million years because the driver of those climate changes is Milankovich cycles and changes in solar insolation due to Earth's oribital dynamics. However, GHGs radiative forcing is required in order to produce the magnitude of change to produce the ice ages, since the Milankovich cycles alone cannot account for all of the temperature variation.
The major driver in the cooling since the Eocene optimum, however, has been capture of CO2 in rocks (with a secondary effect due to south america breaking off of Antarctica and the cold antarctic current isolating Antarctica).
CO2 is both released into the atmosphere as the Earth warms, and it warms the Earth up, in a positive feedback. Similarly, as the Earth warms, more H2O water vapor is in the atmosphere which warms the Earth up, in a positive feedback. As the Earth warms the poles melt, which decreases the Earth's albedo which warms the Earth up, in a positive feedback. All of these factors are both causes and effects. All that you've shown by showing that CO2 lags in the ice ages is that the primary driving cause is something else, it doesn't disprove the effects of CO2 as a GHG.
Unfortunately, the correlation between CO2 and temperature during the Ice Ages is often presented like it is simply causal, with implies CO2 rise causing the changes of the Ice Ages, but that isn't what science has ever suggested and isn't part of climate change theory.
Just don't start charging me for carbon credits just yet.
Just as rain follows rainclouds, CO2 follows Global Warming.
http://www.affordablehousinginstitute.o ... small1.jpg
The whole thing is just a power struggle anyway though. People just like to control other people and keep their job going:
http://nov55.com/gbwm.html
Besides, it's getting colder now.
http://www.isthereglobalcooling.com/
I've got over a hundred links that I have saved and read (many more that I didn't save) and all I have to do is look at the meat of the articles to realize the body of evidence is on the side of what are called "global warming deniers". It's not even close. The alarmists were just hoping to do a quick kill of all public debate in the court of public opinion before the "deniers" got the word out that it was a bunch of malarky.
They weren't fast enough, thank God.
Siberia is fairly cold most of the time.
If one does not account for their absence from the total picture one can get rather skewed results.
The whole global warming scam is nothing more than a power/control grab.
Oh, NO! You've scoured to the bottom of their devious plot.
1) Convince world that global warming exists by producing a series of testable, reproducible experiments
2) Lobby for cap and trade system whereby the highest polluters are forced to actually pay extra to continue polluting at a high rate.
3) Unsuccessfully attempt to get the Kyoto Protocol passed.
4) Run unethical/illegal "awareness" campaigns by telling people to properly inflate tires, turn off lights when they leave a room, and purchase better gas mileage cars (which would also unfortunately reduce our oil imports - DANG).
5) Create shows like Animal Planet, reminding people that actual wildlife used to live where they do now.
We have stop these people before they do some serious harm like legislate higher fuel efficiency ratings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLo5vgAHJBs
Yes.
Like anything, it's not unbelievable that a few people out there have some sort of power grab planned based on GW. But the vast majority of people are responding because they realize it's possible for us to do damage and they want to leave a better world not a worst one for coming generations. These people, who have seen so much happen lately that they can't control - wars, financial collapses, nuclear proliferation - are empowered by that fact that they can have an impact on one potential catastrophy by doing the little things. It's a good message, and that's mostly what's going on here. Not power grabs.
FWIW, you're worried that GW is a power grab...what about the obvious oil conglomerate power grab?
But at least we would save the planet.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/kidshome/
And, of course, this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdPSqL9_mfM
It is not the words that are all that similar. It is the culture of using children in such a way that gives a lot of people the creeps.