Global Warming Debate

[erps]

and the 10 warmest years have all occurred since 1995.

10 warmest years ever?

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by erps

10 warmest years ever?

The paragraph discusses 100 years, the chart 150.

[RAGNAR]

Originally Posted by BentSailor

Try the word "axiom"

I had no problem with your misuse of the term. I figured you understood that since there's no other term for the three fundamental truths at the core of all thought, it was wrong of you to make synonyms out of "premise" and "axiom" in that exchange.

As for proving things on your request - I'm still waiting on your proof that you offered yourself. You got as far as a hypothetical remember.

Not clear on what you're talking about.

But more importantly: given the distinction you think you can draw between yourself and Plato because you two differ in particulars, I wonder if by "hypothetical" you refer to valid abstraction. If so, we may have a glimpse into why we've been going back and forth as we have.

And leave off the "majesty" bulldust. Your the one making demands about one others MUST do...

Oh?

I'm against compelling peaceful citizens, you find duties and obligations for everyone everywhere, including forcing people to vote.

Who's the one making demands on his fellow man?

But if the "Majesty" thing strikes too close to the bone, your peasantness, I can drop it, NP. (Pol Pot thought himself as one of the People. His disdain for ceremony didn't stop him from unleashing hell on anyone he thought would oppose his vision -- often preemptively.)

(I hope you're not thinking that by making everyone vote, everyone will be OK with whatever statist measures comes at them, or that the state would be justified in imposing its will by any means necessary We'd have to add "Behaviorism" to the rest of the cliches you agree with.)

[NICHOLSON58]

JACKDALE that's a pretty myopic look at history. Try these slightly broader looks.

http://www.sailnet.com/photogallery/...ry.php?cat=649

The earth has been a lot warmer and a lot colder. It runs in cycles. Don't blame yourself or anyone else. There is pleanty of very good reason to conserve hydrocarbons for the feedstocks needed for things other than fuel. Fuel, in fact, is probably the worst first use for oil. We need to conserve. we need to find other means to propel our vehicles and heat homes. The last thing we should do is let politicians micromanage technology, mandate technical solutions, and especially to tax (read - micromanage) carbon. Government should manage policy- not technology. Great example is CAFE. great results without mandating what you drove. The only failing was to bow to ANY special interest group to exempt any vehicles. I drive a 4-cyl S10 (trucks exempt) that gets only 17 mpg. My mother's Sedan DeVille pulled my Jon boat from Naples to Grand Rapids and got 28 mpg. It gets over 30 without the boat. Style, economy and power and it is both heavier and greater frontal surface area than the truck with more than twice the engine. Try that with a Preas. Our current administration would like to force us all to drive an electric hybred while foresaking all other technology and will, in fact, subsidize the insanely expensive battery made form rare earths and other scarce and toxic stuff from China. They also ceased all research assistance to hydrogen fuel cell research. How dumb is that? Force CAFE to higher standards and let the nerds figure it out! Let the best technology win! That's the American way.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by NICHOLSON58

JACKDALE that's a pretty myopic look at history. Try these slightly broader looks.

http://www.sailnet.com/photogallery/...ry.php?cat=649

The earth has been a lot warmer and a lot colder. It runs in cycles. Don't blame yourself or anyone else. There is pleanty of very good reason to conserve hydrocarbons for the feedstocks needed for things other than fuel. Fuel, in fact, is probably the worst first use for oil. We need to conserve. we need to find other means to propel our vehicles and heat homes. The last thing we should do is let politicians micromanage technology, mandate technical solutions, and especially to tax (read - micromanage) carbon. Government should manage policy- not technology. Great example is CAFE. great results without mandating what you drove. The only failing was to bow to ANY special interest group to exempt any vehicles. I drive a 4-cyl S10 (trucks exempt) that gets only 17 mpg. My mother's Sedan DeVille pulled my Jon boat from Naples to Grand Rapids and got 28 mpg. It gets over 30 without the boat. Style, economy and power and it is both heavier and greater frontal surface area than the truck with more than twice the engine. Try that with a Preas. Our current administration would like to force us all to drive an electric hybred while foresaking all other technology and will, in fact, subsidize the insanely expensive battery made form rare earths and other scarce and toxic stuff from China. They also ceased all research assistance to hydrogen fuel cell research. How dumb is that? Force CAFE to higher standards and let the nerds figure it out! Let the best technology win! That's the American way.

Those graphs look exactly like the temperatures in my house. The thermostat has is set and there are highs and lows. That works really well in a CLOSED, SELF-REGULATING SYSTEM. However, the close system disappeared during the industrial revolution when we started to release stored CO2 from fossil fuels. The system is no longer self-regulating. In addition, the growing population is also releasing more respiratory CO2.



It is like me opening all my windows expecting the furnance to operate normally. (I live in Canada.)

We are f**king with Mother Nature, forgetting she bats last.

Wishful thinking about technology is not going to solve the problem.. This is a lifestyles issues, that requires lifestyle solutions. Or you can kiss the American Way goodbye.

[BentSailor]

Originally Posted by RAGNAR

I had no problem with your misuse of the term. I figured you understood that since there's no other term for the three fundamental truths at the core of all thought, it was wrong of you to make synonyms out of "premise" and "axiom" in that exchange.

See what I mean. I didn't make synonyms out of the two - it was done some time ago and they are synonyms by dictionary definition. I showed this at the time and you still argued it.

In other words, as I said, you're the one arguing with the dictionary on the definition of English words so it should come as no surprise you debate every fact put in front of you.

Not clear on what you're talking about.

Selective memory then - the axiom definition was part of the same debate. Again, not surprising.

But more importantly: given the distinction you think you can draw between yourself and Plato because you two differ in particulars, I wonder if by "hypothetical" you refer to valid abstraction.

I draw a distinction between Plato & myself because I disagree with his conclusions and his reasoning. But hey, don't let someone who knows their own thoughts say what they are, RAGNAR has a habit of dictating what you believe so he can tear down the strawman...

If so, we may have a glimpse into why we've been going back and forth as we have

Because I'm too stubborn to add you to my ignore list and you spout drivel constantly?

I'm against compelling peaceful citizens, you find duties and obligations for everyone everywhere, including forcing people to vote.

Who's the one making demands on his fellow man?

Not I. I have no ability to compel or demand anyone vote - that would be the laws of Australia enacted by the representatives the people of Australia voted in.

The again, I don't expect logic from you anymore.

But if the "Majesty" thing strikes too close to the bone, your peasantness, I can drop it, NP.

It has no bearing on me personally. It is simply a reflection of your childish approach to debate. Seriously, name-calling is how you makes your point?

(Pol Pot thought himself as one of the People. His disdain for ceremony didn't stop him from unleashing hell on anyone he thought would oppose his vision -- often preemptively.)

Uh huh. I'm being compared to Pol Pot... how very pathetic. Is Godwin's Law going to be invoked soon?

(I hope you're not thinking that by making everyone vote, everyone will be OK with whatever statist measures comes at them, or that the state would be justified in imposing its will by any means necessary We'd have to add "Behaviorism" to the rest of the cliches you agree with.)

Never stated such, but you only made two other claims as to what I believed in that post - you needed to add at least one more for the lucky number three, right?

[RAGNAR]

Originally Posted by BentSailor

See what I mean. I didn't make synonyms out of the two - it was done some time ago and they are synonyms by dictionary definition. I showed this at the time and you still argued it.

Both of these non-points were addressed at the time, so I don't see what you mean.

And since you seem to need to be reminded of the obvious: (i)synonyms aren't perfectly interchangeable, (ii), given the context, you may want to consult a dictionary of philosophy for the relevant meaning of these terms.

In other words, as I said, you're the one arguing with the dictionary on the definition of English words

All dictionaries aren't alike. In fact, post ~1922, when the current intellectual mindset finally reached the OUD, one has to proceed with great caution, making sure that the concepts the words should denote haven't been perverted. (Pointing tho the fact that words evolve doesn't address my point.)

so it should come as no surprise you debate every fact put in front of you.

Which facts?

Selective memory then - the axiom definition was part of the same debate. Again, not surprising.

Cheap. Almost as cheap as the arguments you've offered for the rights you want the state to have.

I draw a distinction between Plato & myself because I disagree with his conclusions and his reasoning.

That's irrelevant to the points I've made.

But hey, don't let someone who knows their own thoughts say what they are, RAGNAR has a habit of dictating what you believe so he can tear down the strawman...

Sorry to tell you, but within the context I've denoted you and Plato are simpatico. (Admitting who you are is the first step, BS.)

Because I'm too stubborn to add you to my ignore list and you spout drivel constantly?

Nope. Try again.

Not I. I have no ability to compel or demand anyone vote - that would be the laws of Australia enacted by the representatives the people of Australia voted in.

You're playing games.

Where would the people's representatives, or the people themselves get these powers?

The again, I don't expect logic from you anymore.

by your definition of logic, you're right -- and thanks!

It has no bearing on me personally. It is simply a reflection of your childish approach to debate. Seriously, name-calling is how you makes your point?

That's not name calling. That's telling you that you have an outlook on the human experience that even our academics are slowly rejecting.

Uh huh. I'm being compared to Pol Pot... how very pathetic. Is Godwin's Law going to be invoked soon?

Same principles, you just apply them less diligently. Problem is that left unopposed, principles march to their logical endgame. That's why the West continues to move to the Left overall.

[erps]

However, the close system disappeared during the industrial revolution when we started to release stored CO2 from fossil fuels. The system is no longer self-regulating. In addition, the growing population is also releasing more respiratory CO2.

Still a closed system and still a self regulating one. The earth will continue to warm and cool long after our short time here has passed.

Our biosphere is the global sum of all ecosystems. It can also be called the zone of life on Earth, a closed (apart from solar and cosmic radiation) and self-regulating system.[

Biosphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We are f**king with Mother Nature, forgetting she bats last.

Wishful thinking about technology is not going to solve the problem.. This is a lifestyles issues, that requires lifestyle solutions. Or you can kiss the American Way goodbye.

Could be. And yet the alarmist continue to drive cars, use electricity and fly commercial jet planes for vacations and their annual meetings on climate change. "Do as I say, not as I do" is not a good leadership style.

[erps]

Earlier on respiration you indicated it had no effect:

Human respiration is part of the carbon cycle - it is recycled.......Thus, there is a closed loop, with no net addition to the atmosphere.

Now you say it does?

The system is no longer self-regulating. In addition, the growing population is also releasing more respiratory CO2.

which one is it?

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by erps

Earlier on respiration you indicated it had no effect:



Now you say it does?

Yes, I can be convinced when presented with facts. But that does not mean that this is acceptable.

which one is it?

The self-regulatory ability of the system has been compromised in a number of ways:

1) We are adding to CO2 levels with a massive increase in the burning of fossil fuels.

2) Increased population is likely playing a part as well.

3) A revolution of rising expectations on a global scale is exacerbating the problem.

3) We are destroying C02 sinks including forests and oceans (Check out Man-made Carbon Dioxide Emissions Collect in Oceans, Putting Marine Life at Risk: Scientific American for ocean impacts)

4) The albedo effect (Albedo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) has been thrown out of whack.

While the CO2 cycle was a closed system, the earth is not. The sun is the source of our energy. One of the downsides of using the energy stored in fossil fuels, wood, dung ( a common heat source in some countries) is the released CO2. Solar, wind, tidal and other more direct sources of energy from the sun do not have that problem. But they are not without their own problems.

BTW - like James Lovelock, I am not opposed to nuclear energy, with appropriate safeguards.