heckofajobbrownie Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Yes, and did you know that defoliation of the Earth's surface especially including the rain forest is a major contributor to the green house gases that scare you so? WSS Are we moving to this now? Another basic statement of fact? You still haven't answered either one of your two questions. Give it a try. Take the stick out of N and put it in D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Sorry. No I don't know what your graph portends . Let me guess: taxes are the answer! Go ahead and tell me. Second yes, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to agree that there is at least some kind of scientific consensus that believes the conditions are just as your video says. By that I mean it's not implausible that most research scientists tend to believe it at this point. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Are we moving to this now? Another basic statement of fact? Ohh that was just Because some idiot, ahem, pointed out that plants use carbon dioxide. Possibly he wasn't aware that they also exhale oxygen. He might possibly be unaware of the problem that deforestation poses.... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Ohh that was just Because some idiot, ahem, pointed out that plants use carbon dioxide. Possibly he wasn't aware that they also exhale oxygen. He might possibly be unaware of the problem that deforestation poses.... WSS No, he's not. The point wasn't about photosynthesis, of course. It was that deniers claim to deny that excess CO2 is even a problem, and tell you that it's plant food and natural, and then wonder what the problem is. I'll give you a nice example of what I'm talking about . Twisting posts to make them mean something different so that you can attach an impotent swipe to them is probably not the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 And I'm just guessing here, but would you agree that the vast majority of research scientists investigating climate change are employed by the government of countries all around the world? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Sorry. No I don't know what your graph portends . Let me guess: taxes are the answer! Go ahead and tell me. Second yes, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to agree that there is at least some kind of scientific consensus that believes the conditions are just as your video says. By that I mean it's not implausible that most research scientists tend to believe it at this point. WSS So then what do you want to do about it? If that's what you accept as what's coming in the future, what do you think we should do about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 No, he's not. The point wasn't about photosynthesis, of course. It was that deniers claim to deny that excess CO2 is even a problem, and tell you that it's plant food and natural, and then wonder what the problem is. I'll give you a nice example of what I'm talking about . Twisting posts to make them mean something different so that you can attach an impotent swipe to them is probably not the way to go. No, the way to go is to not make completely ignorant statements like he does. Someday you wont be around to wipe his butt. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 I thought you were alleging that I didn't know how photosynthesis worked. So tell us what you want to do... And that's a graph of the declining cost of Chinese solar panels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 And I'm just guessing here, but would you agree that the vast majority of research scientists investigating climate change are employed by the government of countries all around the world? I wouldn't think so. I'd guess that most of them are employed by universities and research outfits. If you take a look at the list of one of the IPCC working groups you're probably going to find they're almost all working out of research branches of universities. The first few names I put in Google searches came up as the University of Illinois, University of Berlin, University of Gothenburg, Cornell, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 I thought you were alleging that I didn't know how photosynthesis worked. So tell us what you want to do... And that's a graph of the declining cost of Chinese solar panels. I hope you didn't think I meant you. Of the flaws I might atrribute to you my friend, ignorance of your own ideological platforms isn't among them. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Yes, it's all just an ideological crusade. I'm working off the script I got at HQ. So ...what do you want to do? And I've already put in your application for work here, since it's a huge concern and I'm glad you raised it, and care so much about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 No, the way to go is to not make completely ignorant statements like he does. Someday you wont be around to wipe his butt. WSS Are you saying I know less about science then you know? Or that u don't know about it at all? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Yes, I'm pretty sure Woody was aware of photosynthesis, Steve. They do teach it in 7th grade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Are you saying I know less about science then you know? Or that u don't know about it at all? Really? I'm assuming if you did know, dip shit, that you might not have asked why in the world would I mention the defolion of the planet. ---psst Heck, You missed a spot WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 I'm assuming if you did know, dip shit, that you might not have asked why in the world would I mention the defolion of the planet. ---psst Heck, You missed a spot WSS Honestly this is worse than Cal... Do you really think you know more than me about science? Honestly. I'm not a genius by any means but I'd have to give the edge to the college kid studying engineering over the performer with a theater degree... I'm sorry if I don't respond to every snarky passive comment you make about shit that's been covered before or is pretty damn obvious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Honestly this is worse than Cal... Do you really think you know more than me about science? Honestly. I'm not a genius by any means but I'd have to give the edge to the college kid studying engineering over the performer with a theater degree... I'm sorry if I don't respond to every snarky passive comment you make about shit that's been covered before or is pretty damn obvious It was your own question, dunce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Putting going out of way to be dicks aside ...what should we do? What's your idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Putting going out of way to be dicks aside ...what should we do? What's your idea? Let me get back to you. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Just as I suspected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 Just as I suspected. Don't get your panties in a bunch darling. I've been busy lately, shouldn't be wasting this time. ... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted February 15, 2013 Report Share Posted February 15, 2013 Oh, Steve. It's Valentine's Day. Let's not fight. ...Chocolate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 15, 2013 Report Share Posted February 15, 2013 Oh, Steve. It's Valentine's Day. Let's not fight. ...Chocolate? IPA...... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted February 15, 2013 Report Share Posted February 15, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 15, 2013 Report Share Posted February 15, 2013 [ Don't worry buddy boy I'll get to it, I really am busy. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 15, 2013 Report Share Posted February 15, 2013 Let me take a couple minutes here. We're using your video as gospel, right? And I do believe that a good portion of the scientific community believes just that way right now. ( That's not saying that the consensus might not change in 510 or 20 years but who knows) Now what I wanted to do and possibly will, is go through the video and point out where your buddy says we need really serious measures. Add that complete cooperation from the international community is imperative. And that he, like me, doesn't see the political will coming up any time soon. And that be dire warnings are inevitable even as we speak. But don't worry, you don't have to fume over any of that but here are a couple things I think, and have thought, might help. ( And lest you think I'm some sort of Pollyanna I do understand that there are probably obstacles to these couple ideas that may be insurmountable) Here are two. Since production of energy and need for energy are going to be pushed to the limit as more and more people want things we should have been building nuclear reactors decades ago. Except for politics and hyperventilation over Six Mile Island we could have had 80 percent or more of our energy produced this way. And something I suggested years ago after a conversation with a buddy from Ohio Edison. There's no reason we shouldn't have been replacing incandescent sodium vapor mercury vapor it cetera lighting with Led. Schools, malls, shopping centers, street lighting, stadiums you name it we could save probably 80 percent of the power we use. I wouldn't mind seeing a more vibrant turn toward natural gas powered vehicles either. But try not to get too upset if a minor tweaking of the United States emissions doesn't come close to being what's needed to slow down the deadline. And perhaps, in private, try and resign yourself to the fact that the exploding population really really complicates all of this. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted February 15, 2013 Report Share Posted February 15, 2013 So: 1) Go back in time and build more nuclear reactors, or start building more today. 2) Retrofit public lighting to make them more energy efficient. 3) Encourage natural gas vehicles. All nice, but you're not even close to being close to making a dent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 16, 2013 Report Share Posted February 16, 2013 3 Mile Island But yes, nuclear power in general is a good idea. Also yes again, it seems like the general public is not well informed about nuclear power Also, fuck Greenpeace. With their stupid anti nuclear ads... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 16, 2013 Report Share Posted February 16, 2013 Also, for Cal (anyone else can chime in if they'd like) I just have a few other science related questions for you, if you don't mind answering. 1) What do you believe the origin of the universe was and/or how old do you think the Earth is? 2) Do you recognize evolution and the process of natural selection? 3) Do you think there is life on other planets? Intelligent life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 16, 2013 Report Share Posted February 16, 2013 3 Mile Island Duh... Sorry; brain fart. I'm playing in Detroit in a few.. WSS But yes, nuclear power in general is a good idea. Also yes again, it seems like the general public is not well informed about nuclear power Also, fuck Greenpeace. With their stupid anti nuclear ads... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 16, 2013 Report Share Posted February 16, 2013 So: 1) Go back in time and build more nuclear reactors, or start building more today. 2) Retrofit public lighting to make them more energy efficient. 3) Encourage natural gas vehicles. All nice, but you're not even close to being close to making a dent. Nothing the United States can do unilaterally will make a dent. And that's even if the politicians could find the will to implement anything. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.