And, as a typical Republican, you didn\’t listen. China and India are in full on growth mode. China is gobbling up resources like nobody\’s business. I seriously doubt that either of these countries would do anything to disrupt that growth they are currently experiencing. I don\’t know for a fact (do you?) why they have choose to ignore the facts and continue on the status quo. The next time I have a climate summit with them, I\’ll be sure to ask.
Yes, you are right. I can admit I am a Republican and damn proud of it. I also want to thank you for stepping in the doo I carefully laid out for you. I want to thank you for uncovering the truth, that China and India will not do anything that would hurt their economy. But, it is o.k. for the rest of the world to blame the U.S. for all environmental problems. So, the only solution is to destroy our economy. I want the same thing as you do, but I am not willing to have our country destroy its economy. Where is the fairness that liberals always talk about? Now, do you admit to being a liberal?
Ah, Mr. Recall, so clever. Why would you think I would be ashamed of being a liberal? Maybe you were out of the country on Nov 8th (maybe at one of those climate summits with China and India)
Anyway, back on point…so your argument is that regardless of the results, we should just continue to pollute and not look for better ways to do things? And more so, we should follow suit with the governments of China and India. How does looking for cleaning ways hurt us if in the long run we have more renewable resources? How does reducing our dependence on oil hurt us?
So, to sum up your argument…there is not global warming because China and India told us so, and we shouldn\’t look for cleaner solutions because China and India aren\’t.
A very cursory search of the internet found at least two published articles in peer reviewed journals that disagree with the idea that global warming is the fault of humanity. I have attached information at the bottom.
I am not a professional researcher, and I am no longer a college student. Because of this, I do not have the time or desire to barrage you with examples.
However, I have shown your statement \”…not one single example of a pier reviewed document that indicates global warming is a myth.\” to be false.
You cannot simply state something is true, and wish for it to be so. There IS debate over the causes, and there IS debate over how much (if any) human beings have affected warming.
So again, I ask, why should I be subject to draconian legislation over this? Simply because you believe it to be so?
Robert Essenhigh, E.G. Bailey Professor of Energy Conservation in Ohio State\’s Department of Mechanical Engineering
Published in: Chemical Innovation, published by the American Chemical Society.
“…a study published in the prestigious journal Science, a team of scientists led by Howard Conway of the University of Washington say the Ice Sheet may be headed for a complete meltdown in a process that started thousands of years, and there is no evidence the rate is accelerating.”
Source: Associated Press, \”Melting of Antarctic Ice Sheet Is Linked to Ancient History,\” New York Times, October 12, 1999.
I understand what you\’re saying, but I don\’t believe you can rely on information from seven years ago. Much has been discovered since then and these same scientists may have, in fact, changed their minds. I don\’t know this to be true; I\’m just saying the information you have cited MAY have been proven incorrect in the last seven years.
I completely agree with your assessment, and I wouldn\’t rely on data that old either.
I simply pointed out that a fast desk-top search proved UW wrong. I do believe that a deep search of current scientific research would show that many scientists have questions about the origin and end result of the current warming phase.
I was responding to UW\’s assertion that no \”pier\” (peer) reviewed articles were out there. Clearly, that is not true. Just as clearly, if personal opinion is the extent of UW\’s research, we should (perhaps) re-evaluate the assertion that the american public should be fiscally and regulatorily punished for global warming.
If humanity is the prime cause, and this warming is not a natural swing, and the 5% of greenhouse gasses we emit is the tipping balance, then I will submit to the regulations and costs.
I\’ll be honest- I won\’t do it gladly, but I won\’t revolt either.
I\’m not complaining about the price of gasoline, am I? :D
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Ummmmmmmmmm,like a typical liberal, you did not answer my question. Want to try again?
And, as a typical Republican, you didn\’t listen. China and India are in full on growth mode. China is gobbling up resources like nobody\’s business. I seriously doubt that either of these countries would do anything to disrupt that growth they are currently experiencing. I don\’t know for a fact (do you?) why they have choose to ignore the facts and continue on the status quo. The next time I have a climate summit with them, I\’ll be sure to ask.
Yes, you are right. I can admit I am a Republican and damn proud of it. I also want to thank you for stepping in the doo I carefully laid out for you. I want to thank you for uncovering the truth, that China and India will not do anything that would hurt their economy. But, it is o.k. for the rest of the world to blame the U.S. for all environmental problems. So, the only solution is to destroy our economy. I want the same thing as you do, but I am not willing to have our country destroy its economy. Where is the fairness that liberals always talk about? Now, do you admit to being a liberal?
Ah, Mr. Recall, so clever. Why would you think I would be ashamed of being a liberal? Maybe you were out of the country on Nov 8th (maybe at one of those climate summits with China and India)
Anyway, back on point…so your argument is that regardless of the results, we should just continue to pollute and not look for better ways to do things? And more so, we should follow suit with the governments of China and India. How does looking for cleaning ways hurt us if in the long run we have more renewable resources? How does reducing our dependence on oil hurt us?
So, to sum up your argument…there is not global warming because China and India told us so, and we shouldn\’t look for cleaner solutions because China and India aren\’t.
Okie Dokie.
A very cursory search of the internet found at least two published articles in peer reviewed journals that disagree with the idea that global warming is the fault of humanity. I have attached information at the bottom.
I am not a professional researcher, and I am no longer a college student. Because of this, I do not have the time or desire to barrage you with examples.
However, I have shown your statement \”…not one single example of a pier reviewed document that indicates global warming is a myth.\” to be false.
You cannot simply state something is true, and wish for it to be so. There IS debate over the causes, and there IS debate over how much (if any) human beings have affected warming.
So again, I ask, why should I be subject to draconian legislation over this? Simply because you believe it to be so?
Robert Essenhigh, E.G. Bailey Professor of Energy Conservation in Ohio State\’s Department of Mechanical Engineering
Published in: Chemical Innovation, published by the American Chemical Society.
“…a study published in the prestigious journal Science, a team of scientists led by Howard Conway of the University of Washington say the Ice Sheet may be headed for a complete meltdown in a process that started thousands of years, and there is no evidence the rate is accelerating.”
Source: Associated Press, \”Melting of Antarctic Ice Sheet Is Linked to Ancient History,\” New York Times, October 12, 1999.
I understand what you\’re saying, but I don\’t believe you can rely on information from seven years ago. Much has been discovered since then and these same scientists may have, in fact, changed their minds. I don\’t know this to be true; I\’m just saying the information you have cited MAY have been proven incorrect in the last seven years.
I completely agree with your assessment, and I wouldn\’t rely on data that old either.
I simply pointed out that a fast desk-top search proved UW wrong. I do believe that a deep search of current scientific research would show that many scientists have questions about the origin and end result of the current warming phase.
I was responding to UW\’s assertion that no \”pier\” (peer) reviewed articles were out there. Clearly, that is not true. Just as clearly, if personal opinion is the extent of UW\’s research, we should (perhaps) re-evaluate the assertion that the american public should be fiscally and regulatorily punished for global warming.
If humanity is the prime cause, and this warming is not a natural swing, and the 5% of greenhouse gasses we emit is the tipping balance, then I will submit to the regulations and costs.
I\’ll be honest- I won\’t do it gladly, but I won\’t revolt either.
I\’m not complaining about the price of gasoline, am I? :D
Ive got no problem admitting it, I have a small penis.
Hey Mr Recall, I hear you!! Me too, I have a small penis also.
Holy…. it must be an epidemic.