Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
I don't know why you nikkahs are still arguing wid deez mofo for?!! Buddhists are not suppose to get attached to debates know wat im sayin? I know I is debating right now, but gangsta is always rite know wat im sayin?
Not sure where you "heard" that, but it's 100% balderdash. How exactly does the CO2 escape the earth's gravity? And why does the rest of the atmosphere not go with it?
And yes, I'm perfectly willing to accept the overwhelming *mountain* of evidence that man-made carbon emissions are drastically speeding up climate change. In the entire history of the earth that science has been able to uncover, no other period of warming/cooling comes close to the breakneck pace we're currently seeing. Is it possible it's got nothing to do with man's activities? Yes, it is. But as I've said several times, I'm not willing to bet the planet that you're right and I'm wrong.
Where does the mindset come from that says "it's perfectly okay to continue to rape the planet and pollute it to our hearts' delight"?? I don't get that. Especially from self-described Buddhists and people who are supposed to be able to think for themselves.
I will keep on wallowing in my own superstitious delusion of global warming is caused by men's activities. Sigh... not that I am driving less or anything I don't have much of a choice her living in East Auckland
Hands up who is sick of Guy C pretending he hasn't already made his mind up and doesn't plan changing it?
Mods please, this one is dead.
what is dead? the myth that climate change is a myth?
No, sadly that myth is alive and well. I meant this thread is dead. I say that because, for some time on this thread, it's been clear GuyC has a view (climate change sceptic) that he is not going to move from any time soon, because he has been given more than enough resources and reasoning to accept climate change is caused by man and should be acted on and yet he maintains his sceptical position. Of course he is perfectly entitled to that position. But in regards to this thread there is nothing else to contribute to the OP, who as I say, has clearly already taken a firm view, and further 'debate' is nothing but a charade.
I will keep on wallowing in my own superstitious delusion of global warming is caused by men's activities. Sigh... not that I am driving less or anything I don't have much of a choice her living in East Auckland
Beautiful spot to live ... and as good a place as any I know of to practice
A good place to start would be to take a look at the back of a 1 dollar Federal Reserve note.
You mean where is says Novus Ordo Seclorum? So what? These Latin words mean "New order of the ages." (NOT New World Order). Charles Thomson, a statesman involved in the design of The Great Seal of the United States, proposed the phrase to signify the beginning of what he called "the new American Era," which he said began in 1776 with the signing of the Declaration of Independence. No conspiracy, move along please.
One thing many deniers succumb to is the conspiracy mindset, because once world opinion is against them, then the small group of deniers must admit to being wrong or somehow, a hidden conspiracy is working to hide the truth. This is a slippery slope and one that resists logical argument, since any evidence can be explained away as just the other side working behind the scene.
Good point, this is something I am wary of.
It's puzzling to me, this belief in a shadowy conspiracy of scientists/politicians/socialists/whatever, because the evidence through history is that humanity simply finds it impossible to cooperate for more than a few years at a time across cultures
It is certainly not the scientists who are at the top of "the conspiracy", the same goes for most politicians. The people at "the top" are family...like a crime family.
and even then the ones in charge spend more time fighting among themselves than working toward the same goal.
Sure, they might have "family arguments", but at the end of the day, "they" (at the top) do have shared objectives.
You might as well get a bunch of cats together and tell them to all share that one mouse you toss into the room. The thought that any world-wide collection of humans can sustain a conspiracy of this magnitude is ludicrous.
The bunch of cats analogy does not apply. There's far more mice than there are cats, so the "fat cats" aren't worried about starving. What they are worried about, however, is that the mice might realize one day that they're just cat food.
A good place to start would be to take a look at the back of a 1 dollar Federal Reserve note.
You mean where is says Novus Ordo Seclorum? So what? These Latin words mean "New order of the ages." (NOT New World Order). Charles Thomson, a statesman involved in the design of The Great Seal of the United States, proposed the phrase to signify the beginning of what he called "the new American Era," which he said began in 1776 with the signing of the Declaration of Independence. No conspiracy, move along please.
What about the 13 stars (forming a star of David)?
What about the 13 arrows?
What about the 13 leaves?
What about the 13 layers of the pyramid?
What about the all-seeing eye?
What about the eagle?
What about the owl?
Also, didn't the Bavarian Illuminati also begin in 1776?
What about the 13 stars (forming a star of David)? What about the 13 arrows? What about the 13 leaves? What about the 13 layers of the pyramid? What about the all-seeing eye? What about the eagle? What about the owl? Also, didn't the Bavarian Illuminati also begin in 1776?
What about them? There were 13 states when the US was formed. The eye represents God. Every time I hear this ridiculous conspiracy theory, I wonder who's behind it. The Bureau of Engraving & Printing? The Federal Reserve? The engravers who make the plates? The actual paper currency itself? What's the big conspiracy here? Are the $1 bills somehow spying on us? It's just silly. It's ink on a piece of paper.
Concerning the NWO theory. I believe there was a similar conspiracy theory in the 1980s concerning the UN. Its now 2011 and does the UN control the world ? I think that says it all about these type of theories. :rolleyes:
Concerning the NWO theory. I believe there was a similar conspiracy theory in the 1980s concerning the UN. Its now 2011 and does the UN control the world ?
Concerning the NWO theory. I believe there was a similar conspiracy theory in the 1980s concerning the UN. Its now 2011 and does the UN control the world ?
They're working on it!
The UN can't even decide whether the toilet paper roll goes up or down at headquarters. I'm not too worried about them implementing world government.
Concerning the NWO theory. I believe there was a similar conspiracy theory in the 1980s concerning the UN. Its now 2011 and does the UN control the world ?
They're working on it!
Yeah they really had lots of control when they stopped Bush invading iraq, oh sorry they didn't did they, at that time it must have been the bush world order BWO. :nyah:
In my opinion the UN is a lame duck not a supreme controlling power in the world.
I only have so much time that I would like to spend posting on this forum, so I would like to stay on-topic from now on. I will not be responding to any more comments regarding the NWO as this is not the main issue of this thread, I will only be responding to the comments regarding Global Warming.
They pump out the same rubbish that other conspiracy theories do.
In fact I am sure these conspiracy theories are just cut and paste from the same sources, that can never be found. Read the conclusions from the guy who debunked this movie its amazing how stupid these film makers think the general public are. No PROOF or reliable SOURCES to back up their claims, which is usually the case for conspiracy theories.
This thread is now 2 weeks old. What have we learned?
We've learned that Guy thinks he is being open-minded, even though he's into (whether he realizes it or not) conspiracy thinking. And gee, these conspiracies...like the symbols on the dollar bill...how long has that one been a conspiracy...well, since I'm a kid I've been hearing it...and I'm now 62 years old.
We've also learned that -- according to some here -- that someone who is still open-minded about climate change ought to change their mind about such a huge topic in just a few days. Well, that's not reasonable.
We've learned that the people out there who are into not believing about climate change are very good at stringing together info and videos to make their point. I wonder why, exactly, they are so anti-climate change.
We've learned that there are three groups of people on this issue. People who believe in climate change and want to do something about it. People who believe in it but don't really want to do anything about it. People who still have questions in their minds. People who don't believe in climate change but only because that's what wackos like Sarah Palin have told them to believe. And people who don't believe in climate change for valid reasons (at least to them). Oh, and also the conspiracy thinkers.
I doubt there's much new here to say after this 2 week thread. Frankly, almost everyone already has made their mind up...for whatever reason.
I thought the video you posted was somehow connected to the NWO, right ? maybe I am wrong, please correct me if I am wrong @GuyC
The person who uploaded the video did include the word "NWO" in the video title, however, the video which they uploaded is comprised of two parts: a debate and a documentary. In neither the debate, not the documentary, are the words "new world order" mentioned.
This is the absolute last comment on this thread which I will respond to regarding NWO.
Here are the facts: the Earth is warming up. The rate of warming has increased in the past century or so. This corresponds to the time of the Industrial Revolution, when we started dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases warm the planet (hence the name) — if they didn’t we’d have an average temperature below the freezing point of water. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which is dumped into the atmosphere by humans to the tune of 30 billion tons per year, 100 times the amount from volcanoes. And finally, approximately 97% of climatologists who actually study climate agree that global warming is real, and caused by humans.
Humans have been pumping ever-increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere every single day for the best part of the last 150 years. That's a fact. It's also a fact that that phenomenon is new and unique to the past 150 years. There is no denying that. Before that, the amount of human-produced CO2 was essentially nil.
Right, I don't deny any of that.
I just don't understand why it's so hard for some people to accept that there's even a possibility that all those trillions (maybe more than that) of tons of CO2 that the earth has never seen before at one time can and is causing the greenhouse effect (which, btw, is also fact - it exists and CO2 causes it).
If, by "some people" you mean me, then you are incorrect. I do accept it as a possibility. I do not (yet) accept it as fact.
Like I said, I'm just not willing to risk the chance that we're *not* causing a drastic increase in the natural warming cycle. I truly and fervently hope I, along with all those climate and other scientists, am dead wrong. I really, really do. But I don't think I am.
Instead of arguing about it, we should be looking actively at ways to reduce the human output of CO2, which I think we can all agree is not a natural thing in the grand scheme of the history of the earth.
Maybe you're right, let's assume you are. If so, what can be done about it? What can little old me do?
But in regards to this thread there is nothing else to contribute to the OP, who as I say, has clearly already taken a firm view, and further 'debate' is nothing but a charade.
Guy -- you seem to be the only one here who doesn't realize that there's virtually nothing left to say. And to be honest, although you may not realize it, in essence you have decided that's global warming is not a problem. It's subtly in any significant post you've made in this thread.
although you may not realize it, in essence you have decided that's global warming is not a problem.
You are basically suggesting that someone I have never met, who I communicate with on an online forum for a few minutes every now and then knows me better than I know myself. I would have to respectfully disagree.
It's subtly in any significant post you've made in this thread.
It might appear that way, I can understand why you think that way. There are 20 or 30 members on this forum who are happy to argue for the man-made global warming side, I am merely playing the devil's advocate.
At no point have I said "I am unwilling to accept the possibility that man-made global warming is true" nor any words to that effect.
What I have to say is the same thing that I've been saying. Whether or not you realize it, you dwell on conspiracy thinking. My degrees are in education and the geosciences, including meteorology. There will always be data that seems to contradict virtually ANY concept. At some point, one just has to say that they're satisfied with one position or the opposite. ALL the data will never point in just one direction. Are you going to read and post another 80,600,000 related articles (found on Google) before you make a decision?
Edison never thought he had invented the last light bulb. Darwin never thought he had figured out every aspect of evolution. At some point you have to take a stand and understand that perhaps you will be wrong.
(If these are)Facts: Earth's climate is changing Man is responsible Sea waters will rise Parts of the globe will experience different (unusual) weather and local climates will change to our(man's) detriment
Suggested Responses:(I have no trouble with any of these; moreover, I endorse them) Recycle Produce less CO2 by inventing technology which uses less Conserve resources Propagandize to above ideals
Problems I see in the "save" the earth movement: Chicken Little Syndrome ( much over-hyped "worst case scenario" projection in arguments of movement) Inflammatory rhetoric (man "rapes" the earth; poor people will stave ; the title of Gore's movie; New York will be under water; doubters are stupid, or evil, or are benefitting from chaos created; etc.) Large windfall to new, global "save the earth" industry ( from scientists to banner wavers) No reasonable addressing of emerging Third World countries inevitable desires for similar lifestyle (and the carbon footprint that will leave) to the West. There are billions of people who desire this and are working toward it ( fridges and cars are nice) Assertion that man is somehow the "other" on this earth. (What we are and what we do is natural, normal,and neither good nor bad) No real solution put forth to global warming, only big, unworkable dreams. (see my comment on the Third World)
Responses we can take in worst case scenarios: Move back from the shore when the water rises Find places on the earth which benefit from climate change(warmer climate= better crop yield) and plant there Continue to expound the virtues of conservation
Responses I will not take: Worry Force anyone to live in a manner other than the one they choose ( barring criminal behavior) Assert man is destroying or will destroy the earth Teach my children to fear a media generated , knee jerk , specter which the global warming movement asserts and propagates.
Responses I will not take: Worry Force anyone to live in a manner other than the one they choose ( barring criminal behavior) Assert man is destroying or will destroy the earth Teach my children to fear a media generated , knee jerk , specter which the global warming movement asserts and propagates.
Well, bully for you. That's not my take on things though... In the same post you agree that global climate change exists and will cause massive disruption, yet you won't force anyone to live in a way other than what they choose (which is what we call "laws"), and you think global climate change is a "knee jerk specter which the global warming (sic) movement asserts and propagates."
Climate change may exist and I will not force anyone to do anything to stop it. Massive disruption may not be bad...only the next thing to deal with.
What would you do to "halt" it ? What laws would you create? who would enforce your edicts?
Would you have this same 'do as you wish' attitude if someone started to dump tonnes of aluminium sulphate in your local river, or if someone started dumping their rubbish in your garden ? I know I would try to do something to stop them.
This is a red herring. We have most of this sort of thing under control. People have learned (are learning) not to sh#t where they sleep. These are criminal activities.
How do you stop someone from making cars and fridges?
This is a red herring. We have most of this sort of thing under control. People have learned (are learning) not to sh#t where they sleep. These are criminal activities.
How do you stop someone from making cars and fridges?
Well if everyone just sits back and let things go on as they are I believe it will be the dead herrings we are talking about not the red herrings if you ask me.
I don't see your point about the cars or the fridges. The first can be made to be more environmentally friendly as they are trying with electric/hydrogen cars and the latter can be ran of cleaner energy such as solar power/wind .... If governments would invest more in these and other cleaner technologies then in the future I see no reason why we should be a slave to fossil fuels and the oil companies, and in order to get governments to invest in this, people can open their mouths and tell them to do it, instead of having a 'do as you wish, I don't care attitude'. But if your happy to have 'its a waste of time doing anything attitude', then fine, by all means have this. But this attitude has never achieved any positive change for anyone at anytime anywhere IMO. Therefore, I hope the majority of people do not share this attitude that you have.
Comments
Not sure where you "heard" that, but it's 100% balderdash. How exactly does the CO2 escape the earth's gravity? And why does the rest of the atmosphere not go with it?
And yes, I'm perfectly willing to accept the overwhelming *mountain* of evidence that man-made carbon emissions are drastically speeding up climate change. In the entire history of the earth that science has been able to uncover, no other period of warming/cooling comes close to the breakneck pace we're currently seeing. Is it possible it's got nothing to do with man's activities? Yes, it is. But as I've said several times, I'm not willing to bet the planet that you're right and I'm wrong.
Where does the mindset come from that says "it's perfectly okay to continue to rape the planet and pollute it to our hearts' delight"?? I don't get that. Especially from self-described Buddhists and people who are supposed to be able to think for themselves.
Namaste
Metta,
Guy
Metta,
Guy
What about the 13 arrows?
What about the 13 leaves?
What about the 13 layers of the pyramid?
What about the all-seeing eye?
What about the eagle?
What about the owl?
Also, didn't the Bavarian Illuminati also begin in 1776?
Metta,
Guy
Metta,
Guy
http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/articles/zeitgeist/part-three/
In my opinion the UN is a lame duck not a supreme controlling power in the world.
I only have so much time that I would like to spend posting on this forum, so I would like to stay on-topic from now on. I will not be responding to any more comments regarding the NWO as this is not the main issue of this thread, I will only be responding to the comments regarding Global Warming.
Thank you.
Metta,
Guy
In fact I am sure these conspiracy theories are just cut and paste from the same sources, that can never be found. Read the conclusions from the guy who debunked this movie its amazing how stupid these film makers think the general public are. No PROOF or reliable SOURCES to back up their claims, which is usually the case for conspiracy theories.
Metta,
Guy
We've learned that Guy thinks he is being open-minded, even though he's into (whether he realizes it or not) conspiracy thinking. And gee, these conspiracies...like the symbols on the dollar bill...how long has that one been a conspiracy...well, since I'm a kid I've been hearing it...and I'm now 62 years old.
We've also learned that -- according to some here -- that someone who is still open-minded about climate change ought to change their mind about such a huge topic in just a few days. Well, that's not reasonable.
We've learned that the people out there who are into not believing about climate change are very good at stringing together info and videos to make their point. I wonder why, exactly, they are so anti-climate change.
We've learned that there are three groups of people on this issue. People who believe in climate change and want to do something about it. People who believe in it but don't really want to do anything about it. People who still have questions in their minds. People who don't believe in climate change but only because that's what wackos like Sarah Palin have told them to believe. And people who don't believe in climate change for valid reasons (at least to them). Oh, and also the conspiracy thinkers.
I doubt there's much new here to say after this 2 week thread. Frankly, almost everyone already has made their mind up...for whatever reason.
This is the absolute last comment on this thread which I will respond to regarding NWO.
Thank you.
Metta,
Guy
Metta,
Guy
Metta,
Guy
Metta,
Guy
And that's okay. Believe what you wish.
So, we've established that you're a conspiracy theorist and global warming sceptic.
Good luck with that.
At no point have I said "I am unwilling to accept the possibility that man-made global warming is true" nor any words to that effect.
Metta,
Guy
http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm
Metta,
Guy
Edison never thought he had invented the last light bulb. Darwin never thought he had figured out every aspect of evolution. At some point you have to take a stand and understand that perhaps you will be wrong.
Metta,
Guy
Earth's climate is changing
Man is responsible
Sea waters will rise
Parts of the globe will experience different (unusual) weather and local climates will change to our(man's) detriment
Suggested Responses:(I have no trouble with any of these; moreover, I endorse them)
Recycle
Produce less CO2 by inventing technology which uses less
Conserve resources
Propagandize to above ideals
Problems I see in the "save" the earth movement:
Chicken Little Syndrome ( much over-hyped "worst case scenario" projection in arguments of movement)
Inflammatory rhetoric (man "rapes" the earth; poor people will stave ; the title of Gore's movie; New York will be under water; doubters are stupid, or evil, or are benefitting from chaos created; etc.)
Large windfall to new, global "save the earth" industry ( from scientists to banner wavers)
No reasonable addressing of emerging Third World countries inevitable desires for similar lifestyle (and the carbon footprint that will leave) to the West. There are billions of people who desire this and are working toward it ( fridges and cars are nice)
Assertion that man is somehow the "other" on this earth. (What we are and what we do is natural, normal,and neither good nor bad)
No real solution put forth to global warming, only big, unworkable dreams. (see my comment on the Third World)
Responses we can take in worst case scenarios:
Move back from the shore when the water rises
Find places on the earth which benefit from climate change(warmer climate= better crop yield) and plant there
Continue to expound the virtues of conservation
Responses I will not take:
Worry
Force anyone to live in a manner other than the one they choose ( barring criminal behavior)
Assert man is destroying or will destroy the earth
Teach my children to fear a media generated , knee jerk , specter which the global warming movement asserts and propagates.
Which is it?
Climate change may exist and I will not force anyone to do anything to stop it.
Massive disruption may not be bad...only the next thing to deal with.
What would you do to "halt" it ? What laws would you create? who would enforce your edicts?
How do you stop someone from making cars and fridges?
I don't see your point about the cars or the fridges. The first can be made to be more environmentally friendly as they are trying with electric/hydrogen cars and the latter can be ran of cleaner energy such as solar power/wind .... If governments would invest more in these and other cleaner technologies then in the future I see no reason why we should be a slave to fossil fuels and the oil companies, and in order to get governments to invest in this, people can open their mouths and tell them to do it, instead of having a 'do as you wish, I don't care attitude'. But if your happy to have 'its a waste of time doing anything attitude', then fine, by all means have this. But this attitude has never achieved any positive change for anyone at anytime anywhere IMO. Therefore, I hope the majority of people do not share this attitude that you have.
With Metta