PDA

View Full Version : Blot out the Sun - Obama's Climate Plan


rockdawg21
04-08-2009, 08:44 PM
He really should go back and retake 3rd grade science.

http://greenhellblog.wordpress.com/2009/04/08/obama-climate-plan-blot-out-the-sun/

Obama climate plan: Blot out the sun
April 8, 2009

President Obama’s science advisor John Holdren has suggested that we consider blotting out sunlight to reduce global warming, according to an Associated Press report.

Holdren would shoot particles into the atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays back into space– I sure hope plants and people don’t need those rays for say, photosynthesis or vitamin D production, respectively. And what would be the other unintended consequences?

Holdren, of course, is a people-hating population control fanatic, anyway, so perhaps he’s hoping to killing two birds (or half the population) with one stone.

Oh… and what about all those solar power projects Obama keeps talking about? Don’t they need as much sunlight as they can get?

So many questions, so few brain cells for Holdren to work with.

Full AP Report

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D97ECHLG1&show_article=1

AP Newsbreak: Obama looks at climate engineering

Apr 8 10:55 AM US/Eastern
By SETH BORENSTEIN
AP Science Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - The president's new science adviser said Wednesday that global warming is so dire, the Obama administration is discussing radical technologies to cool Earth's air.

John Holdren told The Associated Press in his first interview since being confirmed last month that the idea of geoengineering the climate is being discussed. One such extreme option includes shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun's rays. Holdren said such an experimental measure would only be used as a last resort.

"It's got to be looked at," he said. "We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table."

Holdren outlined several "tipping points" involving global warming that could be fast approaching. Once such milestones are reached, such as complete loss of summer sea ice in the Arctic, it increases chances of "really intolerable consequences," he said.

Twice in a half-hour interview, Holdren compared global warming to being "in a car with bad brakes driving toward a cliff in the fog."

At first, Holdren characterized the potential need to technologically tinker with the climate as just his personal view. However, he went on to say he has raised it in administration discussions.

Holdren, a 65-year-old physicist, is far from alone in taking geoengineering more seriously. The National Academy of Science is making climate tinkering the subject of its first workshop in its new multidiscipline climate challenges program. The British parliament has also discussed the idea.

The American Meteorological Society is crafting a policy statement on geoengineering that says "it is prudent to consider geoengineering's potential, to understand its limits and to avoid rash deployment."

Last week, Princeton scientist Robert Socolow told the National Academy that geoengineering should be an available option in case climate worsens dramatically.

But Holdren noted that shooting particles into the air—making an artificial volcano as one Nobel laureate has suggested—could have grave side effects and would not completely solve all the problems from soaring greenhouse gas emissions. So such actions could not be taken lightly, he said.

Still, "we might get desperate enough to want to use it," he added.

Another geoengineering option he mentioned was the use of so-called artificial trees to suck carbon dioxide—the chief human-caused greenhouse gas—out of the air and store it. At first that seemed prohibitively expensive, but a re-examination of the approach shows it might be less costly, he said.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Tyburn
04-08-2009, 09:07 PM
He really should go back and retake 3rd grade science.

http://greenhellblog.wordpress.com/2009/04/08/obama-climate-plan-blot-out-the-sun/



Full AP Report

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D97ECHLG1&show_article=1
are you sure these particals dont just reflect the heat...but let most of the light through :huh:

County Mike
04-08-2009, 09:09 PM
What a maroon!

rearnakedchoke
04-08-2009, 09:22 PM
What a maroon!

Is that said in a Bugs Bunny voice? In that case, you gotta add the 'ultra'

NateR
04-08-2009, 09:33 PM
And we're going to pay for all of this how?

Obama should realize that if he kills off too many Americans to appease the EcoNazis, then he won't have anyone left to tax to pay for all his economic stimulus plans. :rolleyes:

Crisco
04-08-2009, 09:53 PM
We should call the Persians... Their arrows can block out the sun... It would be relatively cheap...

rockdawg21
04-08-2009, 09:54 PM
And we're going to pay for all of this how?

Obama should realize that if he kills off too many Americans to appease the EcoNazis, then he won't have anyone left to tax to pay for all his economic stimulus plans. :rolleyes:
I think Obama's icy heart will freeze us long before global warming will bake us.

Crisco
04-08-2009, 10:00 PM
I think Obama's icy heart will freeze us long before global warming will bake us.

the NWO is in power now brother the money will come from somewhere.. Slave labor perhaps.

NateR
04-08-2009, 10:26 PM
Slave labor perhaps.

Ironic that it's going to be a black man who re-institutes slavery.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPHPYgpPb3Q

Well, technically he's only half-black, so the desire to enslave all of America must come from his white genes. :rolleyes:

Crisco
04-08-2009, 10:41 PM
Ironic that it's going to be a black man who re-institutes slavery.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPHPYgpPb3Q

Well, technically he's only half-black, so the desire to enslave all of America must come from his white genes. :rolleyes:

Fing Honkey's

Buzzard
04-09-2009, 02:20 AM
That is only one of many plans, not the sole plan. It is not only just one scientist who has researched this.

Personally, I feel that if we were ever to get to a point where we needed to do something that drastic, it would already be too late.

logrus
04-09-2009, 02:36 AM
You guys make it sound like the Gov has never in its existence funded anything new age or revolutionary.

Yup your right Obama is the first Pres to ever fund a project that went nowhere.

timmyja
04-09-2009, 09:45 AM
I'm sure by now I have established myself as no genius, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my arms around the idea of this "polar ice-cap mirror" theory. I'm pretty sure, if I remember right, that the most direct sunlight strikes a fairly large protion of the Earth called "the equator." The latest theory on global warming that I have heard is that if the polar icecaps melt, it won't be the "waterworld" scenario, but the Earth will overheat because the polar icecaps cannot reflect the sun's rays back into space. It seems to me that the poles, north and south, are both pretty dark places. I was just wondering if anybody could really explain that theory in laymen's terms

thx

rockdawg21
04-09-2009, 03:04 PM
That is only one of many plans, not the sole plan. It is not only just one scientist who has researched this.

Personally, I feel that if we were ever to get to a point where we needed to do something that drastic, it would already be too late.


You guys make it sound like the Gov has never in its existence funded anything new age or revolutionary.

Yup your right Obama is the first Pres to ever fund a project that went nowhere.
If you blot out the sun, you block plants' abilities to take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen. Without this natural cycle, nothing on Earth would survive, not even bacteria. This is simple 3rd grade science, nothing more than common sense.

NateR
04-09-2009, 04:25 PM
If you blot out the sun, you block plants' abilities to take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen. Without this natural cycle, nothing on Earth would survive, not even bacteria. This is simple 3rd grade science, nothing more than common sense.

Yeah, this is like a crazy plot of some evil, mad scientist in a James Bond movie. Unfortunately, the villains are the guys running our government.:sad:

rockdawg21
04-09-2009, 04:28 PM
Yeah, this is like a crazy plot of some evil, mad scientist in a James Bond movie. Unfortunately, the villains are the guys running our government.:sad:
Ironically, Mr. Burns did this to Springfield on an episode of the Simpsons. I mean, seriously, is this what we've resorted to doing? How juvenile of an idea.

NateR
04-09-2009, 04:35 PM
I'm sure by now I have established myself as no genius, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my arms around the idea of this "polar ice-cap mirror" theory. I'm pretty sure, if I remember right, that the most direct sunlight strikes a fairly large protion of the Earth called "the equator." The latest theory on global warming that I have heard is that if the polar icecaps melt, it won't be the "waterworld" scenario, but the Earth will overheat because the polar icecaps cannot reflect the sun's rays back into space. It seems to me that the poles, north and south, are both pretty dark places. I was just wondering if anybody could really explain that theory in laymen's terms

thx

There's actually evidence that the polar ice caps are expanding, not shrinking. There is also a group of over 600 scientists (and growing) who claim that the entire "global warming" thing is bunk. So, in the face of so much conflicting evidence and contradictory theories, it's best to just say that none of these people have any idea of what they are talking about.

Personally, I think the flaw in global warming is that it is based on an Evolutionary timetable. We've only been measuring the melting of the ice caps for maybe a century, so saying that it's become rapidly accelerated is just speculation. If you go by the young earth theory (which is what the Bible would support), then the glaciers have probably only existed for a few thousand years (probably from the Great Flood in Genesis) and they've probably been melting since then. So if you take the amount that the glaciers have receded over the course of a few thousand years and stretch it out over billions of years, then of course any melting we observe today is going to appear frighteningly accelerated.

What global warming amounts to is just a bunch of alarmists and opportunists trying to cash in on artificially-produced mass hysteria.

NateR
04-09-2009, 04:36 PM
Ironically, Mr. Burns did this to Springfield on an episode of the Simpsons. I mean, seriously, is this what we've resorted to doing? How juvenile of an idea.

And we all remember what happened to him at the end of that episode. :Whistle:

Tyburn
04-09-2009, 05:43 PM
There's actually evidence that the polar ice caps are expanding, not shrinking.

Show it to me :ninja:

County Mike
04-09-2009, 05:54 PM
Show it to me :ninja:

This past winter was much colder than most I remember.

Global Warming is Bull Sh*t.

If they blast these reflective particles into space to block the sun that I love, I'll personally fly up there and destroy them all.

CAVEMAN
04-09-2009, 06:04 PM
:confused: This administration is truly full of WHACK JOBS!:rolleyes:

Tyburn
04-09-2009, 06:32 PM
This past winter was much colder than most I remember.

Global Warming is Bull Sh*t.

If they blast these reflective particles into space to block the sun that I love, I'll personally fly up there and destroy them all.
Yes...but thats a by product of the warming.

Warming will actually cause an ice age...thats how the warming naturally, subsides....If you'd done your own research, you would know this...Global Warming categorically ISNT about the earth getting hot, so we all bake to death :laugh: No decent Scientist would claim that. QUITE the Opposite infact.

Guess what other property Snow has :ninja: It reflects light and heat.

You dont need to put particals in the air...the Earth honnestly has this under-control :w00t:

County Mike
04-09-2009, 06:38 PM
Guess what other property Snow has :ninja: It reflects light and heat.

You dont need to put particals in the air...the Earth honnestly has this under-control :w00t:

But won't that just compound the problem? If we start getting an ice age, the snow will reflect the sun's rays and make it even COLDER.

I hate the cold! I like summertime with warm beaches and small bikinis.

KENTUCKYREDBONE
04-09-2009, 06:49 PM
:confused: This administration is truly full of WHACK JOBS!:rolleyes:

And this is even more evidence of that!

Tyburn
04-09-2009, 06:54 PM
But won't that just compound the problem? If we start getting an ice age, the snow will reflect the sun's rays and make it even COLDER.

I hate the cold! I like summertime with warm beaches and small bikinis.
Yes...its going to get MUCH colder. See...the Heat from Global Warming melts the Ice caps...the Ice caps release COLD water into the Ocean. The cold Water puts out the Gulf Stream...the Northern Hemesphere begins to freeze

The Ice reflects the Heat.

As the tempriture drops, the pole caps RE-Freeze, the Ocean levels drop, the gulf stream starts again...the Northern Hemesphere defrosts...and guess what? Global warming starts all over again.

Its a Natural cycle...all WE do is speed it up...that might make the planets reaction more harsh and more juddery...you know...if the gulf stream goes out SLOWLY there is not so many hurricanes...if it goes out Suddenly...Cold meets Hot to fast and they collide

But...the result...whilst devistating, possibly...to certain cities...it wont distroy the planet. It might Flood London, most of Britian...but that wont Distroy the planet will it??

people assume that the distruction of civilization and the distruction of the planet are the same thing...and they are not. Save yourself....but the planet isnt really in any danger...its been here before.

btw..this process takes a long time to happen...You may not even be alive by the time the next Ice Age really starts :laugh:

County Mike
04-09-2009, 06:59 PM
but then again, I might be around a long, long time.

Please allow me to introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and faith

And I was 'round when Jesus Christ
Had His moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Pilate
Washed his hands and sealed His fate

Vizion
04-09-2009, 08:08 PM
:confused: This administration is truly full of WHACK JOBS!:rolleyes:
You just say that because you hate black people :tongue0011:

Tyburn
04-09-2009, 08:11 PM
but then again, I might be around a long, long time.

Please allow me to introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and faith

And I was 'round when Jesus Christ
Had His moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Pilate
Washed his hands and sealed His fate
:laugh: pleased to meet you :laugh:

:ninja: but that is not your name :ninja:

Tyburn
04-09-2009, 08:12 PM
You just say that because you hate black people :tongue0011:
:huh: they arent ALL black are they :blink:

That would be discrimination against Whites :laugh:

timmyja
04-10-2009, 10:19 AM
There's actually evidence that the polar ice caps are expanding, not shrinking. There is also a group of over 600 scientists (and growing) who claim that the entire "global warming" thing is bunk. So, in the face of so much conflicting evidence and contradictory theories, it's best to just say that none of these people have any idea of what they are talking about.

Personally, I think the flaw in global warming is that it is based on an Evolutionary timetable. We've only been measuring the melting of the ice caps for maybe a century, so saying that it's become rapidly accelerated is just speculation. If you go by the young earth theory (which is what the Bible would support), then the glaciers have probably only existed for a few thousand years (probably from the Great Flood in Genesis) and they've probably been melting since then. So if you take the amount that the glaciers have receded over the course of a few thousand years and stretch it out over billions of years, then of course any melting we observe today is going to appear frighteningly accelerated.

What global warming amounts to is just a bunch of alarmists and opportunists trying to cash in on artificially-produced mass hysteria.

I think I'm going to have to agree with you. The theories are definitely contradictory, especially in the sense that the scientists are claiming that the vehicles we drive are releasing harmful C02.. Again, I'm not a genius, but I always understood that when crazy suicidal people are running garden hoses to the exhaust pipes in their car to off themselves that they are in actuality yearning for the CO (carbon monoxide). If carbon dioxide is such a threat, what do the scientists suggest we do? Do we stop breathing? The polar ice cap theory really makes absolutely no sense to me, if the sunlight is hitting the equator and the poles are for the most part dark, I don't see where the reflection is coming from. I think you're right... definitely a product of mass hysteria. Probably lining somebody's pockets pretty good, too. Kinda like the Nibiru 2012 crap, it makes for a cool sci-fi story but other than that...bunk. People are ridiculous nowadays

Tyburn
04-10-2009, 12:26 PM
1)we drive are releasing harmful C02..

2)The polar ice cap theory really makes absolutely no sense to me, if the sunlight is hitting the equator and the poles are for the most part dark, I don't see where the reflection is coming from.
1) Carbon Dioxide just keeps the heat in. Its not exactly "harmful" It builds up naturally anyway, we just increase its build up by adding to it

2) Its not about Light...its about Heat. When the Ice reflects most of the heat, the Ice will be down to the Tropics. Dont just avoid my posts because you dont aggree with them, start researching for yourself. At the moment there isnt enough Ice to reflect the heat and light...but during the Ice Age, there will be much more of it :)

timmyja
04-10-2009, 12:32 PM
Well I guess I'll buy a snowmobile!!

NateR
04-10-2009, 04:43 PM
Well I guess I'll buy a snowmobile!!

I wouldn't worry about any other Ice Ages (I don't believe we ever had to begin with), according to the Bible, the next destruction of the Earth is going to be by fire, not ice.

VCURamFan
04-10-2009, 04:45 PM
I wouldn't worry about any other Ice Ages (I don't believe we ever had to begin with), according to the Bible, the next destruction of the Earth is going to be by fire, not ice.Soooo...an asbestos surfboard?

NateR
04-10-2009, 05:04 PM
Soooo...an asbestos surfboard?

The Armor of GOD will suffice for many of us.:)

VCURamFan
04-10-2009, 05:11 PM
The Armor of GOD will suffice for many of us.:)When did the armor of God include a surfboard?? Man, I need to go back & re-read Ephesians!!

Tyburn
04-10-2009, 05:44 PM
I wouldn't worry about any other Ice Ages (I don't believe we ever had to begin with), according to the Bible, the next destruction of the Earth is going to be by fire, not ice.
who mentioned "destruction of the Earth" through Ice.

Nathan READ what I put :angry:

NateR
04-10-2009, 05:52 PM
who mentioned "destruction of the Earth" through Ice.

Nathan READ what I put :angry:

Why? It's just the meaningless prattle of a bunch of scientists who think GOD is a fairy tale. I don't trust their conclusions because I don't believe in their preconceptions.

Unlike you, I'd rather put my faith in GOD, not men.

Jonlion
04-10-2009, 05:56 PM
Global Warming is a lload of bunkum.

I am all for conservation and not polluting but when people through out all these rising temps and strange weather conditions on Global Warming i want to laugh!

I mean, the earth has always got hotter and colder, we had an ice age, we had a mini ice age, in the tenth and eleventh century we reached a climatic optimum in Europe, Southern England was producing WINE, Wine, i tells you , it was that hot. :frantics:

Its just something for the govt to frighten us with and celebrities who travel the world in planes to tell me to cut down on my carbon emisisons by not flying!

Screw them, i need a holiday!


By the way, this is a ridicalous idea, it is common sense not to mess around with the Sun! All humans do is advance our own destruction with such things.

Tyburn
04-10-2009, 06:14 PM
Why? It's just the meaningless prattle of a bunch of scientists who think GOD is a fairy tale. I don't trust their conclusions because I don't believe in their preconceptions.

Unlike you, I'd rather put my faith in GOD, not men.
Really. Thats the same attitude the Roman Catholic Church took when presented with the Evidence that the Earth WASNT the Centre of the Universe.

FAR from putting my Faith in men...I can handle something which YOU cant. We both know what GOD will do...but YOU Have preconceived Ideas about HOW he will do it. Just like you ASSUME that Israel reformed, means the End Times are near.

I also think its extremely unbecoming to put words into other peoples mouths. I NEVER talked about distruction by Ice, I never said Global Warming would lead to the end of Humanity, or the distruction of the Earth. Infact I said the opposite...but your to busy mocking, to even bother reading.

How can you counter my arguement if you dont even READ it. Argument and Counter Argument. Answer my argument...you'll find we dont dissagree about the End Times at all. I just trust GOD no matter what the Physical Scientific Evidence says...NOT by making up HOW GOD will do it...but saying "Ice Age? How does that Change the Revelation Prophecy???"

You need to realize that Science is NOT at War with GOD. Science is about Glorifying GOD in creation. The Roman Catholics distroyed the faith a vast majority of the world HAD in Christianity, almost singlehandedly, by doing EXACTLY the same thing YOU just did.

Now...RE-READ my Argument...and point out which bits say anything about Distruction by Ice. Tell me why you care so much that an ice age could never possibly happen...does the thought REALLY threaten your faith?? Couldnt you cope with The Northern Hemesphere under Ice, and no polar Caps???

NateR
04-10-2009, 06:14 PM
Really. Thats the same attitude the Roman Catholic Church took when presented with the Evidence that the Earth WASNT the Centre of the Universe.

Your knowledge of history is severely flawed. :laugh:

Tyburn
04-10-2009, 06:15 PM
Global Warming is a lload of bunkum.

I mean, the earth has always got hotter and colder, we had an ice age, we had a mini ice age, in the tenth and eleventh century we reached a climatic optimum in Europe, Southern England was producing WINE, Wine, i tells you , it was that hot. :frantics:

.

So first Global warming is not true...then you say global cooling and heating happen all the time.

Make your bloody mind up :angry:

Tyburn
04-10-2009, 06:16 PM
Your knowledge of history is severely flawed. :laugh:
:ninja: No its not. :)

Jonlion
04-10-2009, 06:21 PM
So first Global warming is not true...then you say global cooling and heating happen all the time.

Make your bloody mind up :angry:


Well its a fact that the earth, warms up and gets colder.

To me it is a natural cycle that happens.

For me, it isnt Global Warming in the context that it is put in now. That we have to tinker with it, adjust it or worry about overly.

So in the context that Global Warming is thrust on me politically, i think its all bullsh@t. But the earth gets warm and cold, it just happens naturally, it always has.

There is a distinction, nothing to get angry about and my mind is made up!


:tongue0011:

NateR
04-10-2009, 06:27 PM
Really. Thats the same attitude the Roman Catholic Church took when presented with the Evidence that the Earth WASNT the Centre of the Universe.

FAR from putting my Faith in men...I can handle something which YOU cant. We both know what GOD will do...but YOU Have preconceived Ideas about HOW he will do it. Just like you ASSUME that Israel reformed, means the End Times are near.

I also think its extremely unbecoming to put words into other peoples mouths. I NEVER talked about distruction by Ice, I never said Global Warming would lead to the end of Humanity, or the distruction of the Earth. Infact I said the opposite...but your to busy mocking, to even bother reading.

How can you counter my arguement if you dont even READ it. Argument and Counter Argument. Answer my argument...you'll find we dont dissagree about the End Times at all. I just trust GOD no matter what the Physical Scientific Evidence says...NOT by making up HOW GOD will do it...but saying "Ice Age? How does that Change the Revelation Prophecy???"

You need to realize that Science is NOT at War with GOD. Science is about Glorifying GOD in creation. The Roman Catholics distroyed the faith a vast majority of the world HAD in Christianity, almost singlehandedly, by doing EXACTLY the same thing YOU just did.

Now...RE-READ my Argument...and point out which bits say anything about Distruction by Ice. Tell me why you care so much that an ice age could never possibly happen...does the thought REALLY threaten your faith?? Couldnt you cope with The Northern Hemesphere under Ice, and no polar Caps???

Your also working under flawed assumptions. None of these predictions threaten me, because I truly don't believe these scientists have any clue what they are talking about.

Just because I disagree with the evidence, along with hundreds of qualified scientists, doesn't mean that I am motivated by fear of my preconceived notions being shattered. I don't believe in Global Warming any more than I believe that we evolved from monkeys.

What threatens me about Global Warming is the extremist politicians who only want power and are using this flawed theory to scare the stupid people into relinquishing their freedoms. That's the real danger, not another Ice Age when there was never even a first Ice Age to begin with.

NateR
04-10-2009, 06:34 PM
:ninja: No its not. :)

You've simply fallen for revisionist history.

The Catholic Church didn't believe that the earth was the center of the universe. It believed that the earth was the garbage dump of the universe. Galileo's discovery actually elevated the earth to the status of a "heavenly body" and the Pope was very interested in the man's theory. He got put under house arrest for questioning the authority of the Pope, not for his scientific findings.

Regardless, the comparison doesn't even match up anyway. Galileo was reporting something that he and other scientists could readily observe. Global Warming is based on speculation of what happened billions of years ago, long before any climatologist was even alive. It's based on theories that can never be proven, because no one can observe first hand what the weather was like billions of years ago. They can only study soil and ice samples and try to speculate what MIGHT have happened.

You're confusing empirical science with pseudo-science.

Tyburn
04-10-2009, 07:30 PM
Well its a fact that the earth, warms up and gets colder.

To me it is a natural cycle that happens.

For me, it isnt Global Warming in the context that it is put in now. That we have to tinker with it, adjust it or worry about overly.

So in the context that Global Warming is thrust on me politically, i think its all bullsh@t. But the earth gets warm and cold, it just happens naturally, it always has.

Thats what IVE been saying :laugh:

Tyburn
04-10-2009, 07:33 PM
You've simply fallen for revisionist history.

The Catholic Church didn't believe that the earth was the center of the universe. It believed that the earth was the garbage dump of the universe. Galileo's discovery actually elevated the earth to the status of a "heavenly body" and the Pope was very interested in the man's theory. He got put under house arrest for questioning the authority of the Pope, not for his scientific findings.

Regardless, the comparison doesn't even match up anyway. Galileo was reporting something that he and other scientists could readily observe. Global Warming is based on speculation of what happened billions of years ago, long before any climatologist was even alive. It's based on theories that can never be proven, because no one can observe first hand what the weather was like billions of years ago. They can only study soil and ice samples and try to speculate what MIGHT have happened.

You're confusing empirical science with pseudo-science.
No its not its based on cycles the Earth goes through naturally. Sure its a speculation...but at least its not denial.

Might there not be another Ice Age? I suppose we could be wrong...but are the polar Ice Caps melting and sea level rising...YES they are. It measurable.

Does it equate to the devistation they make out...well that depends on how you look at it. Personally, I dont see climate change as anything we cant simply adapt to.

But I wont have the complete shunning of Science. If used properly it is a tool which brings Glory to GOD :)

...and as for the Catholic View of the Earth...Actually they adopted the Aristotilian View of the Earth...which has the Earth at the centre, and various heights of things above it. That isnt particularly Christian, but its a view they wouldnt let go of

...you know How Catholics get with Tradition LOL

Buzzard
04-10-2009, 07:46 PM
I also think its extremely unbecoming to put words into other peoples mouths.


A priceless quote from Dave. That will make a great sig!


We just all need to make a lot of ice to keep our world cooler. :frantics:

atomdanger
04-17-2009, 12:21 AM
Eh, killing half the worlds population would probably do us all some good.
But it seems like a silly idea.

atomdanger
04-17-2009, 12:24 AM
For me, and I feel like for any intelligent person,
it should be less about "global warming" and more about the FACT that we're hurting the planet.

You can deny global warming all you want,
but are you going to sit there and say pollution isn't a problem?
That the ice caps aren't melting at some ungodly rate?
That we're wayyy over populated and are destroying the earth?

Come one now, you don't need to believe we are the direct cause of the earth warming or cooling,
but to say we aren't doing damage is just ignorant.

NateR
04-17-2009, 12:32 AM
Eh, killing half the worlds population would probably do us all some good.
But it seems like a silly idea.

So, if you were to criticize Adolf Hitler, you'd say that he simply wasn't ambitious enough? Why settle for only killing 13,000,000 people, when we really need to be killing off 3,500,000,000 people?

NateR
04-17-2009, 12:37 AM
For me, and I feel like for any intelligent person,
it should be less about "global warming" and more about the FACT that we're hurting the planet.

You can deny global warming all you want,
but are you going to sit there and say pollution isn't a problem?
That the ice caps aren't melting at some ungodly rate?
That we're wayyy over populated and are destroying the earth?

Come one now, you don't need to believe we are the direct cause of the earth warming or cooling,
but to say we aren't doing damage is just ignorant.

Polution is a problem, but the factories set up in third world countries are what is doing all the damage. Even if you were to knock the United States back to the Stone Age, it would barely make a dent in the world's pollution levels.

Overpopulation is a myth. You could take the entire 7 billion person population of the planet and put them in the state of Texas and it would still be less congested than New York City. The problem is that large populations are crowded into too small of places.

Also, I don't believe that the polar ice caps are melting at an increased rate, because the climatologists are going off of an Evolutionary timetable. If you take the melting of glaciers that has taken place over the last 5,000-6,000 years and stretch it out over billions of years, then of course, what we measure today is going to appear frighteningly accelerated.

Basically, there is just not enough real science behind Global Warming to justify the measure that they are trying to take to stop it.

rockdawg21
04-17-2009, 12:39 AM
Reducing pollution is just something that people should do, it's what I would consider a natural transition. Things such as battery-powered cars, renewable energy, etc. is simply progression.

But the ridiculous liberal ideas, California's ban on black vehicles because they are warmer on the inside and therefore require the use of more A/C to keep cool, blot out the sun - one of the essentials of life on this planet, etc. is so FAR beyond absurd, it's completely indescribable.

rockdawg21
04-17-2009, 12:47 AM
Polution is a problem, but the factories set up in third world countries are what is doing all the damage. Even if you were to knock the United States back to the Stone Age, it would barely make a dent in the world's pollution levels.

Overpopulation is a myth. You could take the entire 7 billion person population of the planet and put them in the state of Texas and it would still be less congested than New York City. The problem is that large populations are crowded into too small of places.

Also, I don't believe that the polar ice caps are melting at an increased rate, because the climatologists are going off of an Evolutionary timetable. If you take the melting of glaciers that has taken place over the last 5,000-6,000 years and stretch it out over billions of years, then of course, what we measure today is going to appear frighteningly accelerated.

Basically, there is just not enough real science behind Global Warming to justify the measure that they are trying to take to stop it.
Go look at Metro Manila, Philippines (using it as an example because I've been there - including the outlying cities). The physical size of it is 238.2 square miles - about the size of Chicago. In August 2007, there were 11.5 million people there vs. 3 million in Chicago. If you were to take the land size of San Antonio and use the same densities, you could fit nearly 20 million in this city alone. Overpopulation is just more liberal propaganda.

atomdanger
04-17-2009, 01:01 AM
Polution is a problem, but the factories set up in third world countries are what is doing all the damage. Even if you were to knock the United States back to the Stone Age, it would barely make a dent in the world's pollution levels.


I know a lot of the problem is from third world countries,
but that doesn't wash away our responsibilities.

We should still do what we can, rather than take a stance of, oh the US does well,
and other countries are doing worse, so I can pollute and waste all I want.

rockdawg21
04-17-2009, 01:05 AM
I know a lot of the problem is from third world countries,
but...I can pollute and waste all I want.
Wow! That sure is arrogant man! :tongue0011:

atomdanger
04-17-2009, 01:05 AM
Go look at Metro Manila, Philippines (using it as an example because I've been there - including the outlying cities). The physical size of it is 238.2 square miles - about the size of Chicago. In August 2007, there were 11.5 million people there vs. 3 million in Chicago. If you were to take the land size of San Antonio and use the same densities, you could fit nearly 20 million in this city alone. Overpopulation is just more liberal propaganda.


How is it just propaganda?
(for the record, the city you listed has a pop under 2 million,
so you're saying the outlying cities have over 9?)

Just because those people "fit" there, doesn't mean they aren't hurting the earth.
Is your argument that a city that size is doing no damage to the planet?

Or what did you think over population meant?
http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/image_full/seasia/en/photosvideos/photos/marilao-river.jpg

Feel free to find a clean city of any decent size.
Large populations cause a lot of pollution, a lot of waste, and a lot of problems.
People, all over the world need to take better care of where we live.

atomdanger
04-17-2009, 01:06 AM
Wow! That sure is arrogant man! :tongue0011:

LMAO

I do what I want! I throw my plastic from 6 packs in duck ponds!

rockdawg21
04-17-2009, 02:30 AM
How is it just propaganda?
(for the record, the city you listed has a pop under 2 million,
so you're saying the outlying cities have over 9?)

Just because those people "fit" there, doesn't mean they aren't hurting the earth.
Is your argument that a city that size is doing no damage to the planet?

Or what did you think over population meant?
http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/image_full/seasia/en/photosvideos/photos/marilao-river.jpg

Feel free to find a clean city of any decent size.
Large populations cause a lot of pollution, a lot of waste, and a lot of problems.
People, all over the world need to take better care of where we live.
Having large groups of people living together isn't harmful, that's just crap.

That's why I typed Metro Manila, and not Manila :wink:

Tell you this, have you ever been to the country? Go look at a farmer's land and tell me it's clean - they usually have old equipment, trash ditches, etc. on their property. Just because a person lives outside of the city doesn't mean they aren't polluting.

Yeah, I've been to Manila though. It's messed up. There's tons of signs there that read "Keep Manila Beautiful", but, there aren't any public trash cans, so of course, everybody throws their trash on the ground.

NateR
04-17-2009, 02:41 AM
How is it just propaganda?
(for the record, the city you listed has a pop under 2 million,
so you're saying the outlying cities have over 9?)

Just because those people "fit" there, doesn't mean they aren't hurting the earth.
Is your argument that a city that size is doing no damage to the planet?

Or what did you think over population meant?
http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/image_full/seasia/en/photosvideos/photos/marilao-river.jpg

Feel free to find a clean city of any decent size.
Large populations cause a lot of pollution, a lot of waste, and a lot of problems.
People, all over the world need to take better care of where we live.

I agree that the problem is with cities. If you notice, not only is the pollution level higher, but the quality of life is generally lower and the crime rate is astronomically high compared to rural areas.

When I took Sociology in college, we learned about how living in modern cities actually makes people less civilized than the tribal cultures from thousands of years ago.

atomdanger
04-17-2009, 07:22 AM
I agree that the problem is with cities. If you notice, not only is the pollution level higher, but the quality of life is generally lower and the crime rate is astronomically high compared to rural areas.

When I took Sociology in college, we learned about how living in modern cities actually makes people less civilized than the tribal cultures from thousands of years ago.

For sure, I love the city, but it sucks really.

Small town life is happy, more simple, safer, and usually small town people seem to care about things a LOT more.

rockdawg21
04-17-2009, 03:22 PM
For sure, I love the city, but it sucks really.

Small town life is happy, more simple, safer, and usually small town people seem to care about things a LOT more.
The tend to be more family oriented as well. Hence, one of the reasons they are typically conservatives.

atomdanger
04-17-2009, 06:07 PM
The tend to be more family oriented as well. Hence, one of the reasons they are typically conservatives.

Good point, I forgot the family orientated part.

J.B.
04-17-2009, 06:19 PM
according to the Bible, the next destruction of the Earth is going to be by fire, not ice.

The irony here is legendary. :laugh: