43% of Americans are Dumb

1. 60

   tobey100posted 15 years ago

   Bring on the climate change.  A change might do us good.  By the way very few folks are aware there's a big difference between climatology and environmentalism.  the suffix 'ology' denotes 'science' from the greek.  'ism' denotes 'belief'.  One denotes science.  The other a belief system.  Which one ya wanta go with?

   replyreport
2. 60

   d camp rantposted 15 years ago

   WOW! I don't know what article you read,but here are some FACTS-
   the earth heats and cools in cycles. In the 70's(during Carter)
   there was a huge "global cooling" scare, there was this scientist that said we would all be in another ice age right now, if we didn't dump TONS of carbon in the oceans. that same scientist is currently serving the Obama addmin.
   
   there are far more dangerous gasses than co2, like nitrous oxide which warms the planet 296 times more than co2. also, there is methane which warms the planet 23 times more than co2.
   why is nobody talking about this?
   
   then there is the whole IPCC e-mails being released, admitting their numbers are not accurate, and not to publish other scientist that have contradicting evidence. before that however, we sent several scientist to the ice caps(about a year ago) they found that the sensors used to gather info were out of calibration, misplaced, some were missing,some were broke.
   Sattelites have picked up huge chunks of ice that were supposed to be smaller or melted away have actually grown since Gores movie. I could go on and on.
   
   now, let's look at some other FACTS-
   
   
   who stands to gain from global warming? - government- by being able to control and tax. look at the cap and trade bill.
   Obama wants to pay other Countries for the "pollution" that we created. and tax companies that go above the limit GOV sets. but of course you can BUY carbon credits from Jeffery Immelt if your company does go over.if it is sooo bad, why are you able to buy more?(permission to pollute)
   
   even if America went 100% green, that would'nt stop India or China from polluting.
   
   the globe has warmed 0.74 degrees in the last 100 years, here is a list of the top 10 enviromental special interest campaign donations from 2000-2004
   1. john kerry
   2. al gore
   3. paul wellstone
   4. barbara boxer
   5. bill bradley
   6. mark udall
   7. jay inslee
   8. jeanne shaheen
   9. jean carahan
   10. barack obama- wait, i thought he was against lobbyist?
   
   add all this together and it does'nt take a scientist to figure out this is about money and control. is it a coincidence Immelt has all these worthless carbon credits, but when this passes they will be worth billions?(Immelt is on Obamas advisory board)
   is it a coincidence that GM was forced to take bailout money and now they are making green cars?( wait, i thought obama didnt want to run the car industry?)
   why is the media and our government totally ignoring the Anglia story? atleast slow down before we go spending TRILLIONS of dollars on something that may be false.
   
   if all this is'nt enough to make you say ...wait a sec......
   if it was such a crisis, why is it when evidence came forward that we were cooling right now and to be prepared for a big winter,did they go and change the name from global warming to climate change? why do they all fly around in jets(causing more damage) instead of using e-mails or a telephone? hmmmmmm
     is it possible you are the 43% of america that is stupid? or are you a guy that is just misinformed by political spin?

   replyreport
   1. 71

      rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      Do you think perhaps that the rates that the cooling and warming in their rapidity could have skewed the conclusions of his study at the time?  Since he is serving the Obama administration that must also be one of the facts to dispute the theory.

      replyreport
   2. 71

      rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      So we should ignore the CO2 gasses instead of including them with the rest?

      replyreport
   3. 71

      rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      So mishandeling of emails and some dirty politicians is proof that the phenomena is not happening?  Kind of throwing the baby out with the bath water is what you propose.  For convenience or vanities sake?

      replyreport
   4. 61

      William R. Wilsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      Not worth responding to.  Please study the science, not the editorial pages.

      replyreport
   5. 71

      rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      What does this have to do with the theory?  Another politician trying to gain from a crisis is news to you and therefore drop the whole thing? Just look at the auto emmissions testing as the model for this farce.  I agree that the politicians are not the answer but ignoring the phenomena is foolish.

      replyreport
   6. 71

      rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      So we should not go green because no one else will go along with us? Boy I wish we had this kind of understanding when we went to wars without other countries equal participation.  Kind of a stick in the eye argument wouldn't you say?

      replyreport
   7. 71

      rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      Once again you tie the scientific theory to the politics as a dispute against the theory?  When has there not been a dirty politician using whatever means to further their agenda? Have you thought maybe there is some truth to this phenomena that adds credibility to their agenda and therefore a win, win for them?

      replyreport
   8. 71

      rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      The rest of this speaks of conspiracy theories and political subterfuge and not to the theory that is the issue.  Are there discepencies? Sure! Is there reasons to doudt the plan of attack? Absolutely!  But disputing the science for the convenience of crushing political gain is not what we need to be involved in.  What we need to be involved in is getting to the bottom of if and how we should fix it based on science and not political posturing.

      replyreport
3. 76

   mythbusterposted 15 years ago

   Wow, there are 18 pages in this thread - which started out as a possible warning about global warming/climate change but moreso, as a social commentary on Americans and their lack of belief in the possibility of global warming destroying our earth.
   
   As the discussion continues through this thread, we see people from all over commenting on international trade routes, the heat in Texas, mention of the KYOTO protocol, (and distracting but perhaps the BEST IDEA in this thread) the fact that MISHA's "coffee maker is set up to start making coffee at a certain time".....and much more - but little mention of human behaviors and WHY people should stop exploiting the environment.
   
   IF the hype about global warming/climate change is just HYPE, so be it - we should still change the ways in which we interact with our environment - not because we're killing the earth so much but because WE ARE KILLING OURSELVES!
   
   If climate change is not hype then we should still stop exploiting and damaging the environment - not because we're killing the earth so much but because WE ARE KILLING OURSELVES!
   
   Most forum discussions here and elsewhere where environmental issue threads are present provide such distracting statements that nobody speaks on the fact that all people from all countries shouldn't be killing themselves through misuse of the environment or exploitation of resources. It's amazing to me how humans can speak on everything and all the objects in the world yet still not discuus, with any intensity or rationality, their behaviors, especialy if these behaviors are killing them/us.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      William R. Wilsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      I approve of this message. 

      replyreport
      1. 60

         d camp rantposted 15 years agoin reply to this

         i gave you facts and all you did was attack me instead of debate the facts. how bout you stop using all that horrible electric your wasting with all these posts; and make a difference.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            William R. Wilsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

            Bring some science instead of things you gleaned from Worldnut daily and Fox News. I don't have time to argue with you - you've obviously not taken the time to educate yourself about the most basic science and you tried to make this political first off.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               d camp rantposted 15 years agoin reply to this

               here is some science- the earth has warmed 0.74 degrees over the past 100 years.
               all the things they want to do to fix the problem will change the co2 emissions by less than 10%; but give all governments total control over our lives.
               there are gasses that do more harm than co2, but nobody talks about those(wouldnt it help to go after the real problem?)

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  William R. Wilsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                  You are right, .74 degrees celsius.  The problem is not so much what we've see so far, but what we are in for.  The North polar ice cap is melting, sea level is rising, animals are shifting their ranges.  As the warming increases these things will continue too.  Weather patterns will change unpredictably.  This will affect agriculture and flooding.  Sea level will continue to rise.  Billions of people will run out of fresh water.
                  
                  Are the planned solutions good solutions?  Probably not.  I don't like big government either.  But some solution is required. 
                  
                  And we go after CO2 because it has increased the most and because we have the capability to cut it back.  Methane would prove much harder to control.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     d camp rantposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                     no 0.74 degrees farenheight, and there are about 31,000 scientist that agree with me, and are not being allowed to publish what they found. the solutions GOV. have will reduce co2 by less than 10%. so you want to waste 1.4 trillion dollars(our childrens future) on something nobody's sure about, evidence of "fudgeing" the numbers your scientist use has come forward. Gore was on t.v. the other day saying the caps are melting and they are not. the truth is they melt a little and then grow again a few months later. polar bears numbers are rising too. all the while other countries will not stop.....

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        William R. Wilsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                        Sorry.  0.74 degrees celsius, more than 2 degrees fahrenheit. 
                        
                        31000 scientists?  Are you talking about the OISM petition project?  That is fraud.
                        
                        http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/4381
                        
                        http://www.skepticalscience.com/global- … sensus.htm
                        
                        http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2009/0 … -be-wrong/
                        
                        http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar … -malarkey/
                        
                        http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2009/07/ … were-real/
                        
                        http://144.16.65.194/hpg/envis/doc97htm … si422.html
                        
                        http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?ti … d_Medicine

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           d camp rantposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                           no i'm talking about the 31,000 scientist that have come forward and said they have been shunned by the sicence communtiy for asking logical questions. in science;the debate is never over, it is a scientist job to question. that alone should be enough of a red flag to put a hold on spending a trillion dollars we do not have. not to mention, how does giving money to under-devloped countries for our "alledged" particapation solve this hoax? do you know anything about carbon credits? or the smart grid? look into those, and you may start to see the bigger picture.

                           replyreport
                           1. 61

                              William R. Wilsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                              I'm pretty sure you've got your facts mixed up a bit. Google "31000 scientists" and you'll get links to the OISM petition on the first page.  Like I said - that's a fraud.  Most of those signatures are 10 years old or older, many are fraudulent, and many are from people who have a bachelors degree in a science but are not practicing scientists.

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 d camp rantposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                                 wow, thats hardcore searching right there, first click, first page. the fist page goes to the highest payer;not the truth. try digging a little deeper.
                                 the facts are simple; not everyone is in agreement,the ones that have logical questions are being silenced, the ones that stand to gain billions of dollars and total control are saying we have to do this NOW,QUICK,HURRY, LOOK OVER HERE!!!
                                 try looking at more than just sites that agree with your opinion.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 61

                                    William R. Wilsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                                    Ok Dcamp, where did you get your figure of 31000 that matches up so perfectly with the OISM petition? 
                                    
                                    And I think most of the people who write here can tell you that google doesn't rank by pay. 
                                    
                                    Look, I've been studying and debating this for years.  The OISM thing is more than 10 years old - I knew exactly where you got that number when I saw "31000." 
                                    
                                    "try looking at more than just sites that agree with your opinion."
                                    
                                    You said it, now go and do.

                                    replyreport
                                 2. 71

                                    rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                                    Whether or not we agree with the issue the politicians are d*&king it up as usual.  The track record for these types of tactics have had great success.  It got us into Iraq with the WMD scare and the great wall street bailout debacle. 
                                    
                                    They have found a way and we the blind and misinformed are left to react as usual.  It would be ashame however if we treated this as the boy who cried wolf and missed an opportunity to correct a potentially devastating catastrophe.

                                    replyreport
                           2. 61

                              blue dogposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                              the conservative estimate on the rocket that crashed into the moon  was $79 million, usd, taxpayer currency.  they're still waiting final analysis to see if it destroyed the little white golf ball, you know the one, first giant steps and leaps and all that. 
                              
                              i don't know anything about the carbon credits.  or the smart grid. could you tell me?
                              
                              but before you do, go spend a day on a melting glacier - pick one, they're in numerous locations but going fast - and then tell me about credits and grids.

                              replyreport
4. 60

   TysonFaulknerposted 15 years ago

   I don't doubt that the earth may be getting warmer, but what bothers me is that people think that we are causing it.
   
   Everyone wants to blame all our cars and pollution, but they overlook the biggest source of damaging radiation to the earth, the SUN!

   replyreport
   1. 53

      JHTRazorposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      As of a couple weeks ago, 2009 was on pace to have the second most sunspot-free days of this century.  I think 1913 was the only year with more sunspot-free days.
      
      There appears to be a strong correlation between sunspots and temperature.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      William R. Wilsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      The sun has not increased in intensity enough to account for the warming of the past century.  If you track global temperature with sunspot activity over the past decades you'll see very little correlation. 
      
      http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c … e-data.png
      
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Satel … atures.png

      replyreport
      1. 92

         Paragliderposted 15 years agoin reply to this

         Even those who refuse to accept any connection between fossil fuel consumption and climate change might at least accept a connection between fuel consumption and fuel reserves - as in, you can only burn it once, then it's gone. You don't need to be a climatologist to accept that one!
         So we should be conserving what we have, while investing sensibly in renewable and clean alternatives.

         replyreport
5. 61

   JYOTI KOTHARIposted 15 years ago

   Green house gases and carbon emissions cause global warming and climate change. Mr. Sun is responsible for heat and energy but not for global warming.
   
   CFC is also responsible for climate change as it affect Ozone layer and allows harmful cosmic rays to come in to the earth.
   Consumerism has affected the most and contributed to the global warming as a root cause.
   
   Thanks,
   Jyoti Kothari

   replyreport
6. 0

   oldenuf2nobetterposted 15 years ago

   I think the figure of 43% is too conservative.

   replyreport
7. 0

   Denno66posted 15 years ago

   The magnetic poles are shifting.

   replyreport
8. 0

   lyricsingrayposted 15 years ago

   YEH we win 46% of canadians are YEH wooooooo, wait uh :

   replyreport
9. 61

   William R. Wilsonposted 15 years ago

   An excellent look at the "hide the decline" email.
   
   http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Br … ce-problem

   replyreport
10. 38

    xboxps3wowposted 15 years ago

    I thinks its real, but I really don't care about it.... Its just a normal cycle of our planet earth.

    replyreport
11. 67

    athulnairposted 15 years ago

    global warming is a serious issue and all human beings are responsible for it. so we should join our hands together for the better living of our future generation by  reducing our carbon footprint.

    replyreport
12. 60

    bojanglesk8posted 15 years ago

    I blame it on MySpace/Facebook.

    replyreport
13. 60

    Danny R Handposted 15 years ago

    43%, I could have sworn it was more like 85%!!!LOL

    replyreport
14. 60

    Christian Murphyposted 15 years ago

    I'm approximately 40 feet above sea level.  Does global warming mean I will be sitting on approximately 1000 feet of water frontage in 30 years?  Boy are my kids going to be happy!!!

    replyreport
15. 68

    SparklingJewelposted 15 years ago

    again, i say...climates are changing, earth is changing but you don't make things right by paying off others...that's a scam...
    
    people everywhere do need to do things better concerning polluting,
    
    but science is theory...a real scientist will tell you that...it is a continuing learning situation
    
    who in their right mind is going to pay others off because of theories and scams that a few claim as fact...get real

    replyreport
16. 67

    Portamenteffposted 15 years ago

    Ice melts and refreezes year after year. That doesn't mean the earth is warming. Upon hearing my views on climate change, people ask me "Don't you care about polar bears?" I say "have you ever seen a polar bear?" I lived in Alaska for four years. Trust me, it's not warming up there. Polar bears can swim hundreds of miles. they are not in danger at all!

    replyreport
    1. 79

       livelongerposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       I see you've done a tremendous amount of study and analysis to arrive at such a well-thought-through conclusion.

       replyreport
17. 61

    ColeenBposted 15 years ago

    There's no doubt that the climate is changing. The question is whether it's due to natural cycles that would occur regardless of what humans do, or whether pollution is causing it. I'm sure that both play a part, but I suspect that Mother Nature is the bigger player here.

    replyreport
18. 60

    Jay Sposted 15 years ago

    I will not deny that things are changing.  My question however is how much is caused by man and how much is the Earth doing it's thing.  I will not argue the fact that the human race has caused damage.  The question is, "Are we really ready to change our lifestyle?  Are we willing to stop using fossil fuels?  Are we ready to start living off the land again?"  Don't hurt yourself trying to answer those questions rationally because the reality is that we aren't!!!

    replyreport
    1. 71

       rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       Not until we have paid for every last drop of oil they can extract from the earth.

       replyreport
19. 60

    NotRushposted 15 years ago

    I think the question should be more about are we speeding up the global warming process.  If you don't believe in global warming then you probably don't believe in the ice ages, dinosaurs, or that the earth is billions of years old.  That's a whole different debate.  Global warming is real and has been going on for millions of years.  The same can be said about global chilling also known as ice ages.  It's a natural cycle that we may be speeding up.  The numbers from scientists on both sides are probably all fudged up so who really knows.  I know when I was a kid it snowed a lot during the winter then it seemed so snow a lot less.  The past two years it seems to be picking up again so there is something going on.  Did we cause it?  I don't know.  It makes sense but it's not that simple.  For all we know nature could be trying to start a new ice age and global  warming could actually be saving us from a deep freeze.  Just have to wait and see and enjoy the ride.

    replyreport
    1. 57

       Sab Ohposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       Remember back in the 70s the big panic was the coming Ice Age. There was the same kind of 'unquestionable' scientific 'proof' and all that then.

       replyreport
20. 67

    Mishaposted 15 years ago

    People never learn

    replyreport
21. 61

    mikelongposted 15 years ago

    There is a proven process that takes place when enough fresh water from melted glaciers enters into the polar seas....
    
    I don't know how many here understand the oceanic currents, but global warming, leading to the melting of large amounts of fresh water in polar regions, can lead to the shut down of this circulation system...which does lead to colder environments the further one moves away from the equator...depending on the specific oceanic current that is shut down, albeit temporarily (it depends on how much fresh water dilutes the very heavy/salty waters found at the higher latitudes......
    
    The mini ice age was no joke........

    replyreport
    1. 57

       Sab Ohposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       "I don't know how many here understand the oceanic currents"
       
       Nobody but you, of course

       replyreport
22. 61

    mikelongposted 15 years ago

    Of course Sab....

    replyreport