Global Warming?

[Johnp33]

I also try to live in the least controlled manner posible I live in an unincorporated area, no by-laws.
I have found over the years that when the media tries to tell me that the sky is blue I had better look, they seem to have a bias, and when ever someone talks about high moral values they seem to have a list of lies to follow.
They change there high moral values at the whim of the highest donor, a position one year changes the next.
I was taught that life is a bunch of choices and if there are pearly gates you should try and live so you do not have to say, you are sorry to many times, when they read the list. I do not care if you are black or purple, queer or straight, what you do in you own personal space is you business, and none of mine. As long as you do not invade my family, or friends space, I do not care what you do. Most every time I hear of someone that knows what everyone else should do, time will show they are a lying pipe of excrement.
I have some work to do but you play safe!

 

[houstonscott]

Wow, don't know what to say Rob. I don't know if I should laugh or cry, I guess I feel sorry for you. You just sound like an old liberal/progressive who was just handed his hat and shown the door. Sorry it had to be me. Oh, I don't take medications by the way, sorry to stick that you too. Another tactic is to earn enough in a lifetime to not be effected. The only threat to someones freedoms in the USA are old liberals trying to control our lives and taking our liberties. My bet is that's exactly who you are....No one cares about your carbon footprint, and your life style doesn't make you better than anyone else. You just don't get it....

HS

I'll say this one last time, the problem with this planet is pollution, man made pollution. It is destroying our oceans and our planet. I've given reams of proof on this, (coal pollution for example) but I'm just tired of the nonsense. I've given direct links to the API paying to muddy the waters of CC but in the end no one is going to change who doesn't want to. If we address pollution we address CC but we don't want to address pollution we want to keep going our sloppy messy ways and thinking our actions are not affecting anything. Well they are, the WHO says that pollution is giving us cancer and costing billions of dollars in medical expenses but how many seventy year old people here are drug free? Is that you HS? I'll bet it's not. We have no idea how to take care of our own health much less the planet, the pharmaceutical companies pull us one way and the energy companies pull us the other. We think we're free? I think we might as well be behind bars!

Right now I'm off the grid, zero footprint and in two months I'll have so much alternate energy that I will be heating my house this winter with it and payback of two to three years. So, you know what? I no longer give a fiddle, life is too short and I'm set even if the grid stops working tomorrow. I'm 67 and take no medicine, pay no medical bills and have no health issues, so tell me again who's free and who's being lead around by the nose.
So all of you nay sayers keep nay saying and let me know where that gets you in 5 years when oil prices are still leading you around by the rings in your noses as your health depreciates because you don't know how to live a healthy life. Make sure you keep blaming the nebulous "they", just like you are now.

I'm just not getting into this any longer I have solar trackers to design, something that I can see a difference in and a benefit from.

People have no idea what freedom is. Freedom is autonomy from those individuals and groups that want to control you. Now tell me who's in control and who isn't. But let's not think for ourselves , let's listen to some jamoke yelling on the radio who forms our opinions for us.

We have the worst medical care in the world, are number 27 in education (below Cuba) and use 25% of the world's energy.

If we got any stupider as a people we would forget how to stand erect!

Rob

 

[crash325]

There is a lot more to this report if you care to read it.

U.N.'s Global Warming Report Under Fresh Attack for Rainforest Claims

By Gene J. Koprowski

Published January 28, 2010

FoxNews.com

Amazon Rainforest

A view of the Amazon basin forest north of Manaus, Brazil. A U.N. report stated that global warming is threatening the forests -- a statement that was recently discredited. (Phil P. Harris / Wikipedia)

A United Nations report on climate change that has been lambasted for its faulty research is under new attack for yet another instance of what its critics say is sloppy science -- adding to a growing scandal that has undermined the credibility of scientists and policymakers who back the U.N.'s findings about global warming.

In the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), issued in 2007 by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), scientists wrote that 40 percent of the Amazon rainforest in South America was endangered by global warming.

But that assertion was discredited this week when it emerged that the findings were based on numbers from a study by the World Wildlife Federation that had nothing to do with the issue of global warming -- and that was written by a freelance journalist and green activist.

The IPCC report states that "up to 40 percent of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation" -- highlighting the threat climate change poses to the Earth. The report goes on to say that "it is more probable that forests will be replaced by ecosystems ... such as tropical savannas."

But it has now been revealed that the claim was based on a WWF study titled "Global Review of Forest Fires," a paper barely related to the Amazon rainforest that was written "to secure essential policy reform at national and international level to provide a legislative and economic base for controlling harmful anthropogenic forest fires."

EUReferendum, a blog skeptical of global warming, uncovered the WWF association. It noted that the original "40 percent" figure came from a letter published in the journal Nature that discussed harmful logging activities -- and again had nothing to do with global warming.

Read more: U.N.'s Global Warming Report Under Fresh Attack for Rainforest Claims | Fox News

 

[crash325]

There is a lot more to this report if you care to read it.

U.N.'s Global Warming Report Under Fresh Attack for Rainforest Claims

By Gene J. Koprowski

Published January 28, 2010

FoxNews.com

Amazon Rainforest

A view of the Amazon basin forest north of Manaus, Brazil. A U.N. report stated that global warming is threatening the forests -- a statement that was recently discredited. (Phil P. Harris / Wikipedia)

A United Nations report on climate change that has been lambasted for its faulty research is under new attack for yet another instance of what its critics say is sloppy science -- adding to a growing scandal that has undermined the credibility of scientists and policymakers who back the U.N.'s findings about global warming.

In the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), issued in 2007 by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), scientists wrote that 40 percent of the Amazon rainforest in South America was endangered by global warming.

But that assertion was discredited this week when it emerged that the findings were based on numbers from a study by the World Wildlife Federation that had nothing to do with the issue of global warming -- and that was written by a freelance journalist and green activist.

The IPCC report states that "up to 40 percent of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation" -- highlighting the threat climate change poses to the Earth. The report goes on to say that "it is more probable that forests will be replaced by ecosystems ... such as tropical savannas."

But it has now been revealed that the claim was based on a WWF study titled "Global Review of Forest Fires," a paper barely related to the Amazon rainforest that was written "to secure essential policy reform at national and international level to provide a legislative and economic base for controlling harmful anthropogenic forest fires."

EUReferendum, a blog skeptical of global warming, uncovered the WWF association. It noted that the original "40 percent" figure came from a letter published in the journal Nature that discussed harmful logging activities -- and again had nothing to do with global warming.

Read more: U.N.'s Global Warming Report Under Fresh Attack for Rainforest Claims | Fox News

 

[houstonscott]

What cleans up the environment is a free republic form of government. Capitalism and private property rights. Small governments and low taxes. For the people of a country to turn its efforts to cleaning the environment they must first have enough profits to turn efforts that way. Poor countries pollute. They are still trying to feed their people. Rich countries clean up and have the excess to do so. Access to cheap energy is key to that. A free market and capitalism is what gives people the distance from basic needs, food, energy, transportation, water, sewage, lights, when those things are basic the clean up can start. Oil, gas, and coal make this place the envy of the world, and we are not giving it up to chase some mythical unicorn alternative fuel source. It also takes a person of great leadership, the same person created the clean water act, the clean air act, the EPA, the endangered spices act and got us cleaned up. His name was Richard Nixon.

HS