Thread: Calculate your contribution to destroying The Earth

I didn't score as well as I thought I would, but then the survey was quite biased. They don't take in to account that I live on a boat and many of the other things that I do (see my posting on Earth Day about what I do).

For me, it isn't about global warming which I think is a natural phenomenon, but more about respecting the environment; the same environment which gives us life. To me, it is all about balance, and we are way out of balance with our natural surroundings. I don't worry about it though, because the Earth will survive and fight back to survive. I just sit back and enjoy it happening; like the rise in temperature, sever storms, shortage of oil, floods, etc... I know most will think that it is wrong, but is it anymore wrong than destroying everything around you? To me, we are all part of the same being, and I don't worry about the final outcome so much, because it will balance itself out, but I do like taking care of my surroundings and that which gives me life.

53 for a family of three. I do it both for cost savings and also to help the
environment. I am one who does believe in global warming.

John

Originally Posted by Bruno

Since we are part of nature, it could be argued that whatever the results of what we do, it's natural.

Someone talking a little sense, hey?

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Well I have to say upfront I believe the whole global warming issue to be total BS in the first place,

It's not about belief. The facts are in, the evidence overwhelming and only ALL THE most reputable sources are giving out the straight goods. If you've formed an irrational 'belief' based on disinformation you should toss that out and start again. I respectfully submit some compact information from one of the greatest Environmental Scientists alive (or dead for that matter), Dr. David Suzuki. PLEASE (and I do mean 'pretty please') review the information enclosed in the following link. It will only take a few moments and I'm sure it will be educational to all. It was for me.

David Suzuki Foundation: Climate change : Science of Climate Change

X

I looked at his website and I saw, "The facts are in! NO discussion! Let MY conscience be YOUR guide..." Those are the Tennessee Road Apples I referred to in my previous post.
I am willing to look at compelling arguments. I am willing to rethink my position, IF I am shown new and radically different information. So far all I have seen is algore's wallet and waist expanding and a few shrill catch phrases. I am unimpressed. How many tens of millions has he made off this gig? Hasn't his bank account grown by something like a hundred million dollars while he sings "The sky is falling..."
And if we've already passed the 'tipping point' and we can really do nothing but watch the show, then let's build a few more Oil Refineries and watch the show while we pay a buck fifty for gas.
I have seen NO proof. I have heard THEORIES out the wazoo. I hear inpassioned pleas by the score. No proof.
Sorry.

Pretending I was form CA, I came to 34 for a 4 person household.

The global warming debate is far from over btw. It's funny how people say that the reputable scientists all agree with them, and the frauds don't.
Global warming has become a religion where there is no room for debate.
Or rather, it has become a football match where a small number of scientists are kicking the ball around, and millions are watching, getting upset over everything, with a hardcore group of hooligans knocking each other's brains out for supporting the wrong team.

Originally Posted by Brother Jeeter

I looked at his website and I saw, "The facts are in! NO discussion! Let MY conscience be YOUR guide..."

... and promptly pulled the wool back over your eyes without actually seeing any further ... by your own admission.

Originally Posted by Brother Jeeter

I have seen NO proof. I have heard THEORIES out the wazoo. I hear inpassioned pleas by the score. No proof.

The evidence was just beyond where you chose to stop looking.

I'd also like to humbly suggest that you gentlemen join me in reading the material included in my Critical Thinking signature link. I know I need it frequently. I like to scour it regularly with scepticism. I wish more people would also, but I guess it's true what they say about leading a horse to water.

Peace and Love be upon you all,

X

"... and promptly pulled the wool back over your eyes without actually seeing any further ... by your own admission."

See it however you CHOOSE, I admitted nothing.

"The evidence was just beyond where you chose to stop looking."

And how did you decide just where I chose to stop looking? There are thousands, yes I said THOUANDS of reputable scientists who disagree with the concept of "man made global warming." One of them is John Goodman, the man who FOUNDED The Weather Channel.
Junk science doesn't impress me. Neither do tears and hysteria.
Feel free to believe whatever you want, just extend the same courtesy to the rest of us, please.

Here's a bit that you seem to have missed, while you were deciding what I did, or didn't see:
"I am willing to look at compelling arguments. I am willing to rethink my position, IF I am shown new and radically different information."

Originally Posted by Bruno

. It's funny how people say that the reputable scientists all agree with them, and the frauds don't.
.

With all due respect my friend, I have only heard two people make such statements, and that would be Kantian Pragmatist and Xman. I've heard a lot of jokes and poking fun at one side or the other. I've also heard by most here, "This is the way that I see it, and this is what makes sense to me! Give me a reasonable argument and I may believe differently"! I know that I poke a lot of fun at global warming but in all honesty I am always open to a well reasoned argument that might change my mind!
As far as the religion statement, yes, I agree 100%!

I meant the hardliners of course. My statement was more a general observation about human nature in situations with a lot of emotional investment.

I am open to both sides of the debate, but given the vast amount of studies with wildly varying results, and the amount of data massaging to come to those conclusion (like the infamous hockey stick model) the only conclusion for me is 'we don't know'.

So while I do my best to limit the pollution I cause (for non GW reasons) I am not getting worked up about global warming.