just use the chilled woes on the warming and well all be comfy

Yea, who needs a planet we can live comfortably on in 50 years if our CEOs today can't continue to make obscene amounts of money today? I mean, it's just insane. If destroying the environment is a side effect of helping the rich continue to get richer after their own avarice and stupidity caused this economic crisis in the first place, well then by golly and gee-whiz that's a sacrifice we're willing to force on our children and grandchildren.

/Approves

Economic woes make those efforts unnecessary.

/earlier link

OMG Al Gorebal Warming is a Lie!!!!

And the Credit Crunch is a Secret Muslin plot to steal the election!

Neither one really exists!

Kome: that's a sacrifice we're willing to force on our children and grandchildren.

What's the big deal about making this planet better for our children and grandchildren anyways? It's not like they'll know who we are, or respect who we were, or respect what we were about. I say fark everyone but myself, the planet is going to die somehow, might as well live it up while WE'RE here.

No global environmental agreement has ever been agreed during a recession.

We are farked.

Eh, if we poured some government money into the problem and dealt with it in a Manhattan Project or Apollo like mentality, we would spur science and engineering while creating tens of thousands of sustainable jobs, all to say nothing of the tangential benefits of using renewable/green energy sources like weening off foreign oil to the point we could get the energy component of factors of productions low again, spurring growth on the production side too.

"and [we choose to] do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win..."

-JFK 12 Sep 1962

firefly212: Eh, if we poured some government money into the problem and dealt with it in a Manhattan Project or Apollo like mentality, we would spur science and engineering while creating tens of thousands of sustainable jobs, all to say nothing of the tangential benefits of using renewable/green energy sources like weening off foreign oil to the point we could get the energy component of factors of productions low again, spurring growth on the production side too.

"and [we choose to] do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win..."

-JFK 12 Sep 1962

"Go out and shop"

George Bush

PartTimeBuddha: No global environmental agreement has ever been agreed during a recession.

We are farked.

It's cool. We're just buy some Carbon Credits.

Well, up here in the decreasingly-frozen North, we have two party leaders trying to push environmental issues as ways to bolster the economy. The Liberals and the NDP are both pushing investment in alternative energy and taxing pollution while reducing income taxes as ways to keep our economy strong. Their plans are very interesting.

It's definitely possible to tie environmental issues in with a strong economy. At least in a theoretical sense.

/Still now sure how I'm voting on Tuesday

firefly212: Eh, if we poured some government money into the problem and dealt with it in a Manhattan Project or Apollo like mentality, we would spur science and engineering while creating tens of thousands of sustainable jobs, all to say nothing of the tangential benefits of using renewable/green energy sources like weening off foreign oil to the point we could get the energy component of factors of productions low again, spurring growth on the production side too.

"and [we choose to] do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win..."

-JFK 12 Sep 1962

I've been arguing the same thing for ages now.

firefly212: Eh, if we poured some government money into the problem and dealt with it in a Manhattan Project or Apollo like mentality, we would spur science and engineering while creating tens of thousands of sustainable jobs, all to say nothing of the tangential benefits of using renewable/green energy sources like weening off foreign oil to the point we could get the energy component of factors of productions low again, spurring growth on the production side too.

"and [we choose to] do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win..."

-JFK 12 Sep 1962

The economic situation is a huge opportunity. Since personal austerity will be all the rage, now is the time to switch to a carbon taxation system away from an income taxation system. If people need to save money, it's in their control to conserve.

Tax more of what you want less of (carbon), and tax less of what you want more of (income).

The economic growth incentive will be to upgrade your house (re-employ displaced construction workers), minimize energy consumption (encourage manufacturing of low-energy alternatives), install local energy generation (promoting manufacturing growth of solar heat, PV, and wind, as well as employing consultants, installers, plumbers, and electricians).

Plant a garden, grow a portion of your own food.

Think of this crisis as a peak oil dress rehearsal. Take advantage! If you're not sure how, ask your parents or grandparents. This way of living isn't foreign to us as a civilization, it's quite familiar.

Enter the, "The world is a'dyin!"

"Is Not!!!..."
"Is Too!!!..."
"Is Not!!!..."
"Is Too!!!..."

...argument.

While I'm not glad Bush won re election in '04 anymore, I am still glad he won in '00. The Economy would be even worse if we had Kyoto killing what little manufacturing is left.

Is this a joke? What are America's "leaders" doing NOW to combat global warming? A: They are doing everything in their power to decieve the public into believing that it's a myth.

/apparently there is no more money in the budget for these lies?

Oldiron_79: While I'm not glad Bush won re election in '04 anymore, I am still glad he won in '00. The Economy would be even worse if we had Kyoto killing what little manufacturing is left.

kyoto would have destroyed all manufacturing by making them not sh][t all over the place.

corperate responsibility FTL.

unyon: The economic situation is a huge opportunity. Since personal austerity will be all the rage, now is the time to switch to a carbon taxation system away from an income taxation system. If people need to save money, it's in their control to conserve.

Tax more of what you want less of (carbon), and tax less of what you want more of (income).

The economic growth incentive will be to upgrade your house (re-employ displaced construction workers), minimize energy consumption (encourage manufacturing of low-energy alternatives), install local energy generation (promoting manufacturing growth of solar heat, PV, and wind, as well as employing consultants, installers, plumbers, and electricians).

Plant a garden, grow a portion of your own food.

Think of this crisis as a peak oil dress rehearsal. Take advantage! If you're not sure how, ask your parents or grandparents. This way of living isn't foreign to us as a civilization, it's quite familiar.

Dude... have you been reading the Liberal Green Shift plan? The bolded part is something that Dion said - almost word for word - in a debate last week.

California follows Kyoto, on its own, and while we're not Russia or China, in terms of growth and surplus money, we're sure not Iceland either.

We're still paying out more in federal taxes to those red states, thank you very much.

/would like some of it back now please.

Atypical Person Reading Fark: California follows Kyoto, on its own, and while we're not Russia or China, in terms of growth and surplus money, we're sure not Iceland either.

We're still paying out more in federal taxes to those red states, thank you very much.

/would like some of it back now please.

california is welfare for the red states.

Goldeneye007: Kome: that's a sacrifice we're willing to force on our children and grandchildren.

What's the big deal about making this planet better for our children and grandchildren anyways? It's not like they'll know who we are, or respect who we were, or respect what we were about. I say fark everyone but myself, the planet is going to die somehow, might as well live it up while WE'RE here.

I'm looking forward to when our future energy needs will be met by feeding rose petals to stallions splashing majestically through the water, pumping artfully concealed wave-motion generators. Evaporative cooling off the President's chest will dissipate waste heat during telepathic transmission of the Terawatts of charismatic power created....

Kome: Yea, who needs a planet we can live comfortably on in 50 years if our CEOs today can't continue to make obscene amounts of money today? I mean, it's just insane. If destroying the environment is a side effect of helping the rich continue to get richer after their own avarice and stupidity caused this economic crisis in the first place, well then by golly and gee-whiz that's a sacrifice we're willing to force on our children and grandchildren.

Apparently it is, which is one of the reasons I never had any. I'm not going to be a slave factory for the oligarchy.

That, and I hate the little farkers.

When Greenland is once again covered with trees we can then say the weather is back to normal.

Global warming is not a big deal. Helps agriculture. Global cooling, however, is deadly. It caused the last Dark Ages. Quit whining, Nancy Boys. The planet will do what it wants with the weather, like it or not. We'll muddle through...

Kome: Yea, who needs a planet we can live comfortably on in 50 years if our CEOs today can't continue to make obscene amounts of money today? I mean, it's just insane. If destroying the environment is a side effect of helping the rich continue to get richer after their own avarice and stupidity caused this economic crisis in the first place, well then by golly and gee-whiz that's a sacrifice we're willing to force on our children and grandchildren.

FIFTY YEARS????? What crap have you been reading??? At the current trend, the temperature will increase by less than one half of one degree centigrade in the next fifty years. You'll be fine in 50 years.

And just HOW is the the financial industry screwing up the environment????

Goldeneye007: What's the big deal about making this planet better for our children and grandchildren anyways? It's not like they'll know who we are, or respect who we were, or respect what we were about. I say fark everyone but myself, the planet is going to die somehow, might as well live it up while WE'RE here.

I was just talking to my husband about this the other day. Our culture has changed from one in which the American Dream is to see your children grow up to be better off than you were. It's instead changed to a culture of "live it up while you can and let the next generation clean up the mess." (e.g. social security)

I was over at my husband's grandparents' house and his grandmother made a snide remark about us having to figure out some way to survive the Depression now. America is full of bitter old farks that want to see their children suffer the way they have.

hitler was a hardcore liberal: alifornia is welfare for the red states.

Yet they have all this clout in Congress, 54 House seats. Seems like their reps are slacking off a bit.

Global warming is already inevitable at this point (well, barring drastic solar output changes). The effort to stop global warming was at best an effort to delay it. I say, bring it on.

In fact, let's convert our environmental resources into something actually useful, like preserving endangered species and minimizing pollution.

Oldiron_79: While I'm not glad Bush won re election in '04 anymore, I am still glad he won in '00. The Economy would be even worse if we had Kyoto killing what little manufacturing is left.

You know who else killed USA's involvement in Kyoto?

/no, not him...the other guy

Atypical Person Reading Fark: California follows Kyoto, on its own, and while we're not Russia or China, in terms of growth and surplus money, we're sure not Iceland either.

We're still paying out more in federal taxes to those red states, thank you very much.

/would like some of it back now please.

Yes, yes we would like it back now. I say we all get out the rollerblades and head for some of those states and take it back by force. We can pelt them into submission with blocks of tofu and fling wheatgrass shots on 'em. A Catholic friend from the Midwest assures me that's akin to tossing Holy Water on a demon.

/actually is too cold
//do yoga today, attack tomorrow!
///slashies with a jicama stick! |

mark12A: When Greenland is once again covered with trees we can then say the weather is back to normal.

Global warming is not a big deal. Helps agriculture.

no it doesnt.

it melts the icecaps and the melt-off stops the ocean currents which changes the ecological cycling of the planet.

warming also causes desertification...even in traditionally 'wet' places like eastern germany.

And I will hurt the first person to whine that global warming is endangering species itself. Maybe true (although lots of species have an clever coping mechanism for temperature changes that's often very effective: migrating), but it's moot since global warming is inevitable.

Crosshair: hitler was a hardcore liberal: alifornia is welfare for the red states.

Yet they have all this clout in Congress, 54 House seats. Seems like their reps are slacking off a bit.

i agree.

get to work, cali.

Hey peasants, aren't you glad we saved the planet for the children you can no longer afford to have?

That's good though, because we are leaving a period of global warming and entering one of global cooling. While this coincided with a natural Sun cycle, this was strictly man's fault.

Lamune_Baba Quote 2008-10-12 11:34:08 AM
PartTimeBuddha: No global environmental agreement has ever been agreed during a recession.

We are farked.

It's cool. We're just buy some Carbon Credits.

Carbon credit value only derives from international agreement. You have the voluntary standards and such but you need the FCCC imprimatur.

Hence, the farking.

Nemo's Brother: That's good though, because we are leaving a period of global warming and entering one of global cooling. While this coincided with a natural Sun cycle, this was strictly man's fault.

The believers will never accept that the sun cycles drive the climate. Even an ice age will not stop their belief

I poop too much

stirfrybry: Nemo's Brother: That's good though, because we are leaving a period of global warming and entering one of global cooling. While this coincided with a natural Sun cycle, this was strictly man's fault.

The believers will never accept that the sun cycles drive the climate. Even an ice age will not stop their belief

Sounds like a good old fashioned cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

mark12A: When Greenland is once again covered with trees we can then say the weather is back to normal.

Global warming is not a big deal. Helps agriculture. Global cooling, however, is deadly. It caused the last Dark Ages. Quit whining, Nancy Boys. The planet will do what it wants with the weather, like it or not. We'll muddle through...

Greenland was named Greenland not because it was covered with trees but as a Viking marketing ploy. They noticed that people hesitated to move to a place called Iceland so that's why they named it Greenland.

Global warming is not a big deal. Helps agriculture.

no it doesnt.

it melts the icecaps and the melt-off stops the ocean currents which changes the ecological cycling of the planet.

warming also causes desertification...even in traditionally 'wet' places like eastern germany.

Warmer air means more evaporation of ocean water, more clouds, more precip. Will rain patterns shift? You bet. But overall rain amounts will increase. A warmer, WETTER world.

It really is silly to INSIST that earth weather stay EXACTLY the way it is today. It's going to change no matter what we do. The global warming hype is mostly an effort by socialists to justify more government control of the economy.

aerojockey: And I will hurt the first person to whine that global warming is endangering species itself. Maybe true (although lots of species have an clever coping mechanism for temperature changes that's often very effective: migrating), but it's moot since global warming is inevitable.

I know. I have a plant that produces VOC's and the damn EPA is always fining me. I mean, I need to make money and the cleanup costs are tremendous for my business. Screw changing things. I don't care how many people in the town right downstream get cancer. I shouldn't have to change the way I do things because of other people. They could move if it mattered that much to them. The inevitable result of my factory is toxic compounds. Quit taking away my freeduhms!

/same argument goes for global warming in the public risk of overdoing atmospheric carbon production.

aerojockey: And I will hurt the first person to whine that global warming is endangering species itself. Maybe true (although lots of species have an clever coping mechanism for temperature changes that's often very effective: migrating), but it's moot since global warming is inevitable.

Oy. First thing, not as many species as you think have the ability to 'migrate'. What people like me are worried about is that the potential rate of change is not commensurate with species' ability to disperse or cope.

Second, this is further complicated by a certain amount of fragmentation due to habitat loss or barriers or simply existing discontinuities ie. suitable habitat may not continuous over a species' range. This has two effects - first is the obvious one in that if a species may have nowhere to go. Second, a suitable habitat may be out of reach - on the other side of a city or a mountain range, for instance.

So to sum up, species' mobility and dispersal ability varies greatly, and is modified by available habitat and connectivity. It's not as simple as relying on the idea that species "migrate".

As for your second point, while a certain amount of change might be inevitable, that does not mean we can avoid the worst of it. This is one of the big reasons why the IPCC used scenarios as a part of their reporting - what would likely happen under different conditions and different courses of action.

mark12A: Global warming is not a big deal. Helps agriculture.

no it doesnt.

it melts the icecaps and the melt-off stops the ocean currents which changes the ecological cycling of the planet.

warming also causes desertification...even in traditionally 'wet' places like eastern germany.

Warmer air means more evaporation of ocean water, more clouds, more precip. Will rain patterns shift? You bet. But overall rain amounts will increase. A warmer, WETTER world.

It really is silly to INSIST that earth weather stay EXACTLY the way it is today. It's going to change no matter what we do. The global warming hype is mostly an effort by socialists to justify more government control of the economy.

THIS
http://icoads.cdc.noaa.gov/people/gilbert.p.compo/CompoSardeshmukh2007a.pdf
Link (new window)

A pretty good editorial piece on why the goverment shouldnt be throwing money into an Apollo like project in regards to alternative energy.Link

fred_chan:
I was over at my husband's grandparents' house and his grandmother made a snide remark about us having to figure out some way to survive the Depression now. America is full of bitter old farks that want to see their children suffer the way they have.

No, all that means is your husband's grandmother is a bitter old fark who wants to see her children suffer the way she did.

Sure hope you don't make these kinds of sweeping generalizations on a regular basis.

Yaleforks: A pretty good editorial piece on why the goverment shouldnt be throwing money into an Apollo like project in regards to alternative energy.Link

I know. There are so many private companies that have gone to the moon. NASA is such a failure.

mark12A: Warmer air means more evaporation of ocean water, more clouds, more precip. Will rain patterns shift? You bet. But overall rain amounts will increase. A warmer, WETTER world.

It really is silly to INSIST that earth weather stay EXACTLY the way it is today. It's going to change no matter what we do. The global warming hype is mostly an effort by socialists to justify more government control of the economy.


Warmer weather also means drought, don't forget. One of the predicted changes is an increase in some of the extremes - wet places may get wetter, but dry places may get dryer. It's the latter that worries me the most - places already susceptible to drought (Sub-Saharan Africa, our own Midwest).

And of course earth weather changes. It's the rate of change that is of concern.

Fat-D: I poop too much
.
.
.
That's some carbon footprint your leavin' there.
.
.
/brownhouse gases.