What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
58 Comments
- timmyblog, on 10/29/2007, -4/+45I find it funny that the administration as well as all of the current "front-runners" in the Replublican party keep reminding us of these mystical terrorists that are out there waiting to bomb our local wal mart or grocery store. We have no idea how they get this information, or how they stop these attacks, but they do it and we have to trust them.
And yet, when it comes to something with hard facts, and scientific studies backing it, they tell us it's a myth? Or that we exaggerate it, or that it's a bunch of liberal cooks who make up all this global warming bullsh**. And yet 24% of the country still believe everything they say and think that Republicans and Bush are doing a good job. Coincidentally, that same percentage of Americans actually think the sun revolves around the earth so I guess we can only draw two conclusions from that. - sensoukami, on 10/25/2007, -1/+34Okay, I HATE this *****...Not for the "it's by Republicans" or the "it's about Global Warming" but just the whole "let's have highly paid experts do a lot of real work and research and then ignore their findings because it's inconvenient."
And I say that in the most non-partisan sense possible, because ALL politicians / parties do that *****, and it really has to stop. You don't like the research, then find legitimate flaws with the methodology / math behind it. You don't just get to go "oh, well, I don't like that so I'll edit it out". Pisses me off no end... - hawkeye17, on 10/26/2007, -3/+31Even though you'd think that the Disgust Meter would have bottomed out long ago when it comes to Bush Co., they find new ways to lower the bar on an almost daily basis. It's their only talent. Well, that and damaging the future of our country as much as possible in the next 14 months.
- bowens44, on 10/26/2007, -2/+16This administration is just unbelievable , what's even more unbelievable is that there is still about 24% of the people who support these arrogant , ignorant, science hating morons. Our country is breing run by flat-earthers.
- luskin, on 10/26/2007, -6/+17I'm pretty sure by now that most Republicans are doing their best to ***** up the entire world, America included.
- ZenMojo, on 10/25/2007, -2/+11You mean this truth...may be an inconvenient one?
- sivsta, on 10/25/2007, -0/+6Its still there lol
- throop77, on 10/26/2007, -3/+8Its weird how speculating about global warming is considered fear-mongering by some. Yet, speculating about imminent terrorist attacks or weapons of mass destruction is not. It seems like there is sketchy evidence on both accounts... I guess it depends on your agenda.
- sensoukami, on 10/25/2007, -2/+6Ummm...No. There is absolutely ZERO science for the Flat Earth, there is plenty of Science around Global Warming. Note, I'm a Global Warming sceptic in the sense I want competing theories to be heard out and I want open discussion about it. I'll agree that there are no shortage of left-environmental types who have jumped on this bandwagon for their own agendas, but that doesnt' mean they are wrong. For politicians to just rip out stuff that doesn't agree with their agenda is NOT science, and I'm against that ***** no matter what the political affiliation...
- JoeVet, on 10/25/2007, -0/+4This is why intelligent people do not get their science information from politicians or the popular media. Unless its a peer reviewed source its not science. Its sad that not even the president of the United States is able to present the scientific facts in an objective fashion.
- skews13, on 10/26/2007, -1/+5it's amazing the intellect,of this administration.they're smarter than climatologists,the head of the cdc,the company of generals that have since left for one reason or another,and on,and on.maybe after they are all voted out of office next year.they can find jobs at nasa.i'm sure they are bound to be smarter than rocket scientists.
- wil2200, on 10/25/2007, -0/+4do you need any more proof that these guys are the symbol of everything evil
- jackspade, on 10/26/2007, -3/+7What really pisses me off is why the hell didn't Dr. Julie speak up and let us know these asswipes in the WH edited her testimony. Nobody has any integrity anymore.
- 68024, on 10/26/2007, -2/+5It's sad to see that scientists aren't being taken seriously by both the government and a seemingly large part of the population.
This type of event is on a different scale than the human scale, which is part of the problem of making people aware and getting them out of their ignorance. Just like bacteria are very small- this is very big. But the fact that people don't see it means to the average Joe- it's not there! Everything must be A-ok.
Even though some of the smartest people on the planet using well-proven scientific techniques say that according to their measurements, there's a high enough likelihood that we're at risk to have cause for concern. - JoeVet, on 10/26/2007, -1/+4Is that the new GOP recruiting slogan?
- drtyrell, on 10/29/2007, -0/+3The assault on the scientific community that studies climate over the brief space in time that we have any metrics are losing out to the world banks who have discovered that hype and fear herds nations into real taxes on fake issues. The so called Carbon Tax has been designed to address a completely fraudulent threat created by the same institutions that fund the scientists who need grants and donations to survive. Every scientist who has had the courage to combat this hoax has been excommunicated from the scientific community and had their funding halted entirely.
Al Gore may believe every word he speaks, but the facts are simply in complete contradiction to the evidence. The World Banks are trying to create the next level of taxed repression on the people of this planet in order to further degradate and control their ability to move against them in a time of crisis otherwise known as tyranny.
Here are some very simple facts about how the hoax is done, and how the truth makes their claims impossible. Consequently numerous scientists (who no longer have funded work) have offered to challenge the governments around the world to contest their claims, and no group has shown up to a single debate.
Fraudulent claims:
Carbon dioxide creates / promotes global warming. Nothing could be further from the truth. Carbon dioxide makes plant life thrive. The plants on our planet right now evolved with Carbon dioxide levels 10 times what they are now. Scientists who have put plants inside Carbon dioxide tents have noticed a huge spike in their overall growth, girth, and oxygen output. Scientists have calculated that if we burned all the fossil fuels available on Earth at once, there would be no measurable threat to mankind on day 2 of the experiment. Plants everywhere would triple in size and oxygen output.
The polar ice caps melting proves that global warming is real, and therefore is a threat to our temperature and sea levels. Scientists at the poles who aren’t worried about government funding have been studying the ice melting history for decades. They have discovered that the ice nearer to the center of the poles is actually less than 100 years old, indicating and PROVING that our caps melt nearly down to the center every single century. They put out a report in the early 90s documenting this exact fact.
The temperatures are going up every year. Wrong, they are staying relatively the same, if not getting cooler. How can this be? Those who wish to perpetuate the hoax in lieu of the global tax benefit, are taking temperature samples from within cities, which are known as Urban Islands. They get this name because they are built on cement landscapes that are .5 Celsius hotter than the rest of the surrounding terrain. Through out a single year the temperatures are chaotic, going up and down throughout the monthly calendar. Those who “need” to report spikes, simply take samples of lows in the beginning of the year and highs at the end of the year. They also have been caught red handed selecting only the hottest peaks globally to sustain their data sets. Despite being caught by the handful of honest scientists, this is never reported publicly.
True Facts About Climate Control Mother Earth Style:
Plants love Carbon dioxide. They make more oxygen, and grow greater photosynthesizing surfaces.
More heat means more clouds. If there was a sudden spike in global warming, the level of vapor evaporation would also spike. When this happens you get more clouds. More cumulus clouds.
Clouds reflect Radiation. Cumulus clouds reflect massive levels of radiation from the sun; radiation that causes heat, thus blocking it out, this causing cooler temperatures, and more freezing ice. Al Gore misrepresented this fact in his film when he illustrated rays going through clouds strong enough to hold them in, bouncing off the ocean, and miraculously getting trapped underneath. A child can figure out that if a cloud can trap a ray, it can block a ray BEFORE it enters, and that indeed is the truth. Gore’s graphic / mechanic for global warming is fraudulent at its core.
The planet Earth is a perfectly balanced living being. It goes through natural cycles of heating and cooling. It has suffered greater annoyances than man and survived to create a perfectly inhabitable climate for creatures to thrive in for hundreds of millions of years.
The sun is also going through a small stage of heating, which is causing all planets in our system to endure hotter temperature SPIKES, esp. those that don’t have atmospheres like Earth. These spikes could be responsible for momentary hot spots on Earth IF a corona happen to blast Earth on that particular week. None of the suns behaviors to date are effecting Earth’s climate in a consistent global manner.
The head of NASA has publicly come out against the notion that global warming is real. This is no small feet for a person of his stature.
YES, we need to clean up the air. YES, we need to get off of oil, and onto Stan Meyers hydrogen engines. BUT, a TAX is not going to solve anything. It will cause further repression for the citizens of this world, and further drive them into a complicit life where facts simply don’t matter.
Does anyone remember the hype of the 70s? It was the next Ice Age (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling). - bratpack8, on 10/26/2007, -1/+3Remember these same people saved us from the ice age in the 70's and acid rain in the 80's. Believe people, we are doomed unless we give them billions and even trillions of dollars to save us!
- rz8472, on 10/26/2007, -2/+4This is why the Earth seemed to be cooling during those years - a phenomenon known as Global Dimming was and still is partially masking the effects of global warming.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7326949203 ...
There is no contradiction - bratpack8, on 10/26/2007, -1/+3Here's one article exposing the 'acid rain' myth. And wow, with plenty of data and research to back it up. What a novelty, eh?
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/blackstock3.html - pintomp3, on 10/25/2007, -0/+2there are plenty of users on digg who seem to think the same way, like xen0blue.
- bratpack8, on 10/26/2007, -1/+3Dude, you are so full of ***** about acid rain, where did you get that research, Greenpeace? Go read about it, read both sides, and then make an educated decision, like the rest of us did.
BTW, I live in Colorado, so maybe I'll have beach front property, overlooking you under the sea! Laughable dude. - inactive, on 10/26/2007, -0/+1If they have to omit volcanoes to show global warming their work isn't worth reading, much less editing.
- bratpack8, on 10/26/2007, -1/+2Here's one important thing to remember about science. Something isn't considered fact unless there is a massive consensus on the data. When it comes to global warming, just like it did with the coming ice age in the 70's and acid rain in the 80's, there was no consensus.
- inactive, on 10/26/2007, -0/+1If global warming is real why do they have to leave volcanoes out for their computer models to work?
You can believe in global warming or volcanoes, not both - inactive, on 10/26/2007, -0/+1There are no computer models that show global warming without omitting data from volcanic activity.
you can believe in global warming or volcanoes.
Not both. - izzybr, on 10/25/2007, -4/+5Did you see the part where I said 'do something about it now instead of speculating...' ? I'm saying we need action from congress, not someone from the CDC with wildly speculative theories on what could happen
And maybe this wasn't entirely clear, but there are a number of physical scenarios that could play out, and the biological ones would be largely dependent upon those (water temperature favoring growth of certain microbes over others, etc) so anything on the health effects is, like I said, wild speculation. - DavidYeah, on 10/25/2007, -5/+6Well, first of all I'm going to believe the scientists on this one. But I'll ask for your source on this anyway. I'm sure it's just soaked with science, and not just some right wing blog with no scientific references whatsoever.
- inactive, on 10/26/2007, -0/+1If global warming is real, why do they have to leave out volcanic activity?
There are no computer models that show global warming and include data from volcanic activity.
Not one.
You have to ask yourself "Are volcanoes real or is global warming?" - inactive, on 10/26/2007, -0/+1Please link me to a computer model that shows global warming without pretending that volcanoes don't exist.
thank you. - inactive, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1We should not act as if these scientists were telling us the truth.
The truth is that no computer model exists that uses volcanic activity in their data and shows global warming.
You can either believe in global warming or volcanoes.
Not both. - bratpack8, on 10/27/2007, -0/+1@ MacEnvy
CNN is a much more respected source? And the second link is from, surprise, the internet. But wasn't acid rain going to destroy us all, just like Gore-bull warming will? What's the next scare going to be? I want in on it so I can cash in with the rest of the politically connected idiots. - jgzman, on 10/25/2007, -0/+1Just out of curiosity, how qualified are you to interpret climatological data?
Do you know what the difference is between Climatology and Meteorology?
Are you familiar with ENSO-related phenomena?
But I do encourage you to check out the 'facts' yourself. While you are at it, what's the actual millage of your car? How much impact will your seat belts absorb if you hit something? How much Mercury is in the water coming out of your tap? What, precisely is in the little pills marked 'aspirin' in your bathroom?
How about you shut up, sit down, and let the intelligent and educated lead us, OK? - bratpack8, on 10/26/2007, -1/+2I'm not a Republican, but if you think there is a difference between the two parties, you need to go do some more research. Both parties crave power, both parties are tied deep into big business, lobbyists, and the military industrial complex, and both parties are figuring out how to make money (and keep their power) with this global warming thing. Once both parties do this, they will both agree that it's a problem. Even when it isn't. Remember the coming ice age in the 70's? How 'bout acid rain in the 80's? Both total BS, yet sooo many people feared the end was near unless we gave billions to politically connected groups to save us.
- bratpack8, on 10/25/2007, -0/+1Hey Silver Standard, don't bother these people with facts they 'conveniently' don't want to use! Don't you know how this propaganda works?
- graphictruth, on 10/29/2007, -1/+1To me, it all comes down to credibility when I cannot meaningfully assess the primary data myself. Climate Science is something of a black art, from all I'm able to understand, and any Climate Scientist will admit that, more or less cheerfully. So, yes, such predictions are in the realm of "educated guesses," and again, history is full of examples where such guesses were shown to be wrong.
Nonetheless, prudence suggests that acting AS IF current understandings of Global Warming are correct and doing as much as we can to change our ways toward a more sustainable lifestyle is not just a good idea, it's a good idea in itself.
I should also point out that many of the ideas key to reducing Global Warming are also fine ideas from a National Security standpoint. For instance - my personal nightmare scenario has always been the huge petrochemical tank farms that seem to be uncomfortably near vital portions of every city. They are an obvious terror target - but more to the point, they are simply a disaster waiting to happen.
That strikes me as imprudent. We should have a more diffuse energy infrastructure.
Likewise, making alcohol fuel via fermentation doesn't just reduce carbon load, it eliminates a huge number of other toxins and industrial hazards. There's a reason why people strongly resist refineries anywhere near them. They are disasters waiting to happen, and constant emmitters of various toxins and carcinogens. We'd need far fewer of them if they were not producing automotive and jet fuel, and current technology is price competitive.
Furthermore, alcohol stills are so much safer (and cheaper) that we could have a widely distributed infrastructure brewing fuel from various waste products right at the source - thereby eliminating all exploration and recovery costs for that fuel, as well as transportation costs. Net result, cheaper fuel with lower net environmental impact and with inherently higher profit margins.
Oh, and BP is all over this, so it's pretty clear that at least one energy giant is not blind to all the lovely money that can come out of doing things more elegantly. And that, by the way, is the most succinct damnation of our current energy structure - it's bloody inelegant, with a lot of avoidable expenses and impacts. - bratpack8, on 10/25/2007, -1/+1Out of curiosity, how qualified are YOU to interpret this information? How intelligent are you to only believe one group of scientists (on the public dole) and not the others?
- pintomp3, on 10/26/2007, -3/+3what do global warming deniers, truthers, and creationists have in common? they deny the findings of the larger scientific community because it doesn't fit their agenda and insist that it's some conspiracy.
- bratpack8, on 10/25/2007, -1/+1I'm with you on the terrorists, but global warming environmentalists are the same thing. So the globe is warming, there is absolutely zero consensus that it is caused by man. The globe warms 1-2 degrees in next 100 years, that is going to cause massive disease's? Give me a *****' break. The CDC is just like all the other organizations that started with good intentions, they want to get bigger, and the way they do that is the same way the neocons get more powerful, spreading propaganda and fear about terrorists. In this case, let's try and scare the pants off of people about rising sea levels and warmer temperatures. Both groups want you scared so you think you need their help to protect you.
- OneHine, on 10/25/2007, -4/+4Knowing what the effects of global warming will be is precisely why we act to mitigate it.
- sivsta, on 10/25/2007, -4/+4buried for being a douche. Lets keep this thread environmental if we can.
- jebsilver, on 11/01/2007, -0/+0Want to cite a reputable source on these omissions?
- MacEnvy, on 10/26/2007, -1/+1There's no data in that article from after 1990, and it's from LewRockwell. Here, I'll help you out - this is an article with data from a decade later than yours, and from a much more well-respected source:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/04/19/acid.rai ...
And here's some history:
http://www.adkmuseum.org/acidrain/history.shtml
And as for your other question, I know this from living in the Adirondacks for 15 years and personally assisting with water quality surveys and speaking with DEC researchers. I'm sure your evidence is much better, though ... after all, you found it on the Internet! - 68024, on 10/25/2007, -1/+1Judging from your spelling of 'irrelevant' their jobs are nothing but that.
- pintomp3, on 10/25/2007, -2/+1are you refering to the CIA? or the military industrial complex? or new-cons? all of them?
- bratpack8, on 10/26/2007, -2/+1Global warming is real.
Signed
Acid Rain - trubble, on 10/25/2007, -3/+1Or the fact that there are "facts" to support both sides of the argument. Like a bunch of lemmings, we feel the need to jump on one side or the other without checking these "facts" out ourselves... Blind leading the blind
- MacEnvy, on 10/26/2007, -3/+1They were right about acid rain, and it was never solved because of people like you who didn't want to hear about it. Now there are several (for example) Adirondack lakes are succumbing to eutrophication due to crazy low-pH caused by acid rain from Midwest industry. NYS just won a court case against companies in Ohio for ***** everything up over here. This wouldn't have been necessary if we'd been able to deal with the problem 20 years ago instead of being politically hamstrung.
Thanks a lot, *****. I hope you live near sea-level. - iToke, on 10/26/2007, -3/+1Fine, make it about politics. I never thought it was about the environment anyway...
- inactive, on 10/25/2007, -2/+0You can get this message heard even louder if you skew it on
http://www.skewz.com/link/link_details/2118?sectio ... -
Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is