Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

At Last. Exactly How the Media SHOULD be Reporting Global Warming...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: At Last. Exactly How the Media SHOULD be Reporting Global Warming...

    Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
    Right so just as the show pointed out you're now not even listening to advisors who worked for republicans just because you think climate change is a hoax.
    Because those Republicans aren't really Republicans. Case in point is George W Bush. Did you know that he helped a Syrian resistance group trying to over-throw the Syrian government and that this resistance group has connections to SocialistInternational.org, a UK based org that wants nothing less than world government?

    Did you know that after we got rid of Saddam at the cost of thousands of lives of our servicemen and trillions of dollars, the person they voted to be president of Iraq just happened to be a vice president of SocialistInternational.org? What kind of Republican would sacrifice our lives and trillions of our dollars and then let a far left socialist get elected? That's a fucking joke!

    I've got more examples of how our government is working with SocialistInternational.org in rebuilding nations in the Middle East. (Obama admin included).

    Anyway, my point here is that who you think are Republicans aren't really.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • Re: At Last. Exactly How the Media SHOULD be Reporting Global Warming...

      Oh right how could I not see that a republican President and people working for them are not real republicans unless you say they are.
      One of the guys worked for Reagan I suppose he's now a filthy traitor as well.

      Oh well Reagan had a good run as a republican icon but having a head of the EPA who thinks climate change is man made has just destroyed him.
      What a shame.
      Last edited by PeterUK75; 06-25-2014, 06:21 AM.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • Re: At Last. Exactly How the Media SHOULD be Reporting Global Warming...

        Originally posted by kramer View Post
        I see you ignored my last bitch-slapping of you. Was I bothering you too much?

        As far as Watts, he has a few peer reviewed papers.

        And if you don't want to bother with a low brow guy, why do you bother with us lower-brows? Why aren't you in a science forum where you can discuss radiative physics with real climate scientists?
        Well you are still in your underwear in the basement with a tin foil hat on.. You have yet to prove a conspiracy...

        Lets look at you Anthony Watts:
        Has given no proof of even a Bachelors Degree...

        On you Peer Review:
        One of the named authors:
        Climate Audit blogger Steven McIntyre said he was puzzled about being listed as a co-author of the paper, qualifying his involvement as "very last minute and limited" and admits to not having "parsed" parts of the Watts study.

        The same week that Watts released his analysis,[48] University of California, Berkeley physicist Richard Muller released an update to the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) study. Leo Hickman of The Guardian writes that Watts was consulted on the methodology of the study and had stated, "I'm prepared to accept whatever result they produce, even if it proves my premise wrong."[51] Watts had furnished Muller's team with data accumulated by volunteers. "As a reflection of my increased confidence, I have provided them with my surfacestations.org dataset to allow them to use it to run a comparisons against their data."[52] Chair of the BEST group, Richard Muller, responded to Watts' concerns, "First, there were issues around station quality - Watts showed that some of the stations had poor quality. We studied that in great detail. Fortunately, we discovered that station quality does not affect the results. Even poor stations reflect temperature changes accurately."[53] Watts has since backed off his position, saying the study is of no value because its parts have not been peer reviewed, "When the science and peer review is finished, the results are likely to look different."[54] Watts said that much of the BEST data should be thrown out, "...there is no adjustment procedure in place to fix this, [...] BEST tries to solve it, and I applaud them for the attempt. But without knowing the history of the station, even their methodology doesn't deal with it"
        So the best in the world you have got is an uncertified blogger who accepted money from lobby groups.. Has released information which was quickly proven to be irrelevant.. Lads I don't have to even engage in this one... The guy is as big as joke as ye are..

        Blue Doggy, This is the reason you are asking your questions... The deniers are using every crackpot and snake oil merchant they can find... They have run out of credible scientists so they are using this guy...
        If they had better you would think they would use it...
        for a more detailed refutal: http://www.skepticalscience.com/watt..._critique.html

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • Re: At Last. Exactly How the Media SHOULD be Reporting Global Warming...

          Originally posted by CowboyTed View Post
          Well you are still in your underwear in the basement with a tin foil hat on.. You have yet to prove a conspiracy...
          I'm not trying to prove a conspiracy. You're the one bringing it up because you don't like what I say. It's a typical liberal tactic, sort of like playing the race or gender card when the heat (for your ilk) gets a little too hot in the kitchen.

          Originally posted by CowboyTed View Post
          Lets look at you Anthony Watts:
          Has given no proof of even a Bachelors Degree...
          Last time I checked, James Hansen has no degree in climate science. Same with Michael Mann. Yet they are referred to as climate scientists by the main stream (mainly left wing) media.

          Originally posted by CowboyTed View Post
          So the best in the world you have got is an uncertified blogger who accepted money from lobby groups..
          And your side has several magnitudes more of green NGO's throughout the world and many of them have been recipients of the $10 Billion (that's right, Billion) dollars spent on environmentalism over the last ten years.

          Lets see the Koch bros top this...



          Originally posted by CowboyTed View Post

          Blue Doggy, This is the reason you are asking your questions... The deniers are using every crackpot and snake oil merchant they can find...
          Long before Watts came on the scene, I was doing my own homework on this issue. Don't know if you noticed this but skeptics in general are more knowledgable on climate science than you faithful believers.

          Originally posted by CowboyTed View Post
          They have run out of credible scientists so they are using this guy...
          If they had better you would think they would use it...
          for a more detailed refutal: http://www.skepticalscience.com/watt..._critique.html
          There ya go Blue Doggy, listen to somebody who has to get his canned responses from a website specifically created for liberals to answer back to skeptics.

          If the science is so sound, why do the faithful believers need this site?
          Think about that...

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • Re: At Last. Exactly How the Media SHOULD be Reporting Global Warming...

            Here's a GOP State Senator showing the world how ignorant he is:

            During a Natural Resources and Environment Committee meeting Thursday, Smith, the Senate majority whip, said:
            As you [Energy & Environment Cabinet official] sit there in your chair with your data, we sit up here in ours with our data and our constituents and stuff behind us. I won’t get into the debate about climate change but I’ll simply point out that I think in academia we all agree that the temperature on Mars is exactly as it is here. Nobody will dispute that. Yet there are no coal mines on Mars. There’s no factories on Mars that I’m aware of.
            And he sits on a committee that makes decisions about the environment.

            Let me guess. He's a Republican. And not only that, the GOP is so pleased with him they made him one of their leaders. Probably because of his advanced grasp of science. Compared to his Republican colleagues, that is...

            Oh, and he owns a mining company. Not that that makes any difference.
            Last edited by jpn; 07-10-2014, 07:36 PM.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • Re: At Last. Exactly How the Media SHOULD be Reporting Global Warming...

              Originally posted by jpn View Post
              Here's a GOP State Senator showing the world how ignorant he is:

              During a Natural Resources and Environment Committee meeting Thursday, Smith, the Senate majority whip, said:


              And he sits on a committee that makes decisions about the environment.

              Let me guess. He's a Republican. And not only that, the GOP is so pleased with him they made him one of their leaders. Probably because of his advanced grasp of science. Compared to his Republican colleagues, that is...

              Oh, and he owns a mining company. Not that that makes any difference.
              What he is referring to is the climate change on Mars parallels that of the climate change on Earth. Both seemed to be gradually warming for a while. That, however, has stopped for the last 17 years. None of the catastrophic predictions by the alarmists over the last 30 years have been realized. How long does it take before someone admits they were wrong?

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • Re: At Last. Exactly How the Media SHOULD be Reporting Global Warming...

                Originally posted by CowboyTed View Post
                Well you are still in your underwear in the basement with a tin foil hat on.. You have yet to prove a conspiracy...

                Lets look at you Anthony Watts:
                Has given no proof of even a Bachelors Degree...

                On you Peer Review:
                One of the named authors:


                So the best in the world you have got is an uncertified blogger who accepted money from lobby groups.. Has released information which was quickly proven to be irrelevant.. Lads I don't have to even engage in this one... The guy is as big as joke as ye are..

                Blue Doggy, This is the reason you are asking your questions... The deniers are using every crackpot and snake oil merchant they can find... They have run out of credible scientists so they are using this guy...
                If they had better you would think they would use it...
                for a more detailed refutal: http://www.skepticalscience.com/watt..._critique.html
                Personally, I think Freeman Dyson is a reputable scientist, and while he doesn't deny the globe is getting warmer, he isn't buying into the hysteria, that seems to be part and parcel of this entire man made global warming hysteria. For it really is hysterical, for it has moved into politics.

                My contention has always been, and still is, that we may be using limited human knowledge to create models that are giving the wrong conclusions, and those conclusions have been the sort that create hysteria. For instance, we know that the sun is getting hotter, and this has been going on for at least decades. Now, is this a consideration in global warming, or is the only consideration rising co2 levels, which humanity is a contributing factor, due to modern economies based upon fossil fuel burning? Then there is the flora on this earth that is also related to what the co2 levels of earth will be, yet this is not included either. And that does have great significance.

                What if, as Dyson suggests, we could reduce co2 levels by simply using intelligence, and changing the way we farm, the way we manage land, including the destruction of the great co2 scrubbers, called rain forests? Why is it that we only go after economies? Could it be for the simple reason that a few can make great profits, increase their own personal wealth by this method, over that of another method.

                Yet we act as if the only interrelationship involved here, in an ecosystem, is fossil fuels and co2 production. That reducing fossil fuel use is the only solution, when we have spent little time, if any in looking at other ways to reduce co2 levels? We know the earth is greening under these higher co2 levels, and that is a very positive thing, given that we lost much of the green earth with development and civilization.. There seems to be some sort of balance here that the earth does, and it has its own ways of managing things, like co2 levels. For a greening earth means more co2 is being pulled out of the atmosphere, and this is being addressed by nature itself. Perhaps we need to follow nature's lead, and give her some help? By planting flora that pulls a lot of co2 out?

                Why is it that we have chosen only to address the co2 in a tunnel vision manner? Is that actually intelligence at work, or is it done in this manner because this is the best way for a few to profit greater? For if we were really serious about this, if this is such a disaster awaiting us over the horizon, we wouldn't just go after fossil fuels which would greatly hurt modern economies(economies sustain human life). We would be more intelligent about it and include the flora, which could work to reduce levels without trying to wreck economies. For eventually, we will move off of fossil fuels anyways. Intelligence lies in not depressing economies, but instead removing co2 by land management, and any other means of co2 removal, that stimulates an economy, instead of depressing it.

                The climate was gonna warm up anyways, before it cools again, into an ice age, for this is its natural cycle. And life will do as it always has and adjust, which means species are lost, and species are gained. We know this is the fact of the matter, and to think that we humans can control natural cycles is the height of egotistical thinking. We think far too highly of ourselves and our abilities.

                IMO, the only reason gov'ts are trying to involve themselves is for just more control, for what good is power if you cannot control others? The profit driven men then position themselves to profit from what this control will yield, and they want to make sure their plans come to fruition, so they will throw gas on the hysteria.

                Do I trust in the science? I do not. I cannot put trust and faith in a field that has always been a tentative field, that is subject to change, overnight. Limited knowledge can be a very dangerous thing, and is.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • Re: At Last. Exactly How the Media SHOULD be Reporting Global Warming...

                  Originally posted by jpn View Post
                  Here's a GOP State Senator showing the world how ignorant he is:

                  During a Natural Resources and Environment Committee meeting Thursday, Smith, the Senate majority whip, said:


                  And he sits on a committee that makes decisions about the environment.

                  Let me guess. He's a Republican. And not only that, the GOP is so pleased with him they made him one of their leaders. Probably because of his advanced grasp of science. Compared to his Republican colleagues, that is...

                  Here's a Democrat congressman making the above Republican look like a genius:

                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnk0tIqsbYM

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • Re: At Last. Exactly How the Media SHOULD be Reporting Global Warming...

                    Originally posted by Commodore View Post
                    Oh I'm sorry, I didn't know you spoke for all global warming advocates.
                    So, which of us global warming advocates do you think are advocating a socialist solution? You seem to just be repeating the mindless rejoinder offered by some idiot on FOX or Rush. I believe that most of us who think something needs to be done would very much like to see a free market solution. This solution could include useful subsidies to green energy companies and customers (kind of like the subsidies given to the fossil fuel industry). The market has almost made coal obsolete. Not only is natural gas pushing it out of the market, but the cost of green alternatives are approaching cost parity. All we need is a little bit of a push and we are there.

                    BTW, the arguments about us not being able to fix this problem because of China and India are complete crap. China, especially, is fully aware of the problem in burning fossil fuels (just go to Bejing some nice summer day). They are spending money like crazy trying to develop alternatives. All the deniers focus on is that China is still building coal-fired plants but that is only because they can't develop alternatives as fast as they need in order to support their economic growth. India is in the same boat. They want clean energy. Wouldn't it be nice if the US was a major purveyor of this technology? I'd hate to trade dependence on foreign oil for dependency on foreign technology for clean energy.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • Re: At Last. Exactly How the Media SHOULD be Reporting Global Warming...

                      The free market will solve all. We need a sustainable energy source that will remain stable in price and availability. Coal isn't it, because it is too dirty and cleanup costs have to be factored in. Cleanup costs for nuclear also too high. Petroleum sources -running out and ever more costly to extract. That leaves filthy hippy technologies. Sorry, righties.

                      If climate change caused by humans is true, and it is ignored, then nature will cull the human race. Once the population is down to numbers that can be sustained, or made extinct, then the ecosystem will re-balance. I don't see what all the fuss is about. Unless one has children.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?

                      Working...
                      X