Another one for the "man made" global warming suckers

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Huh? Did you smoke a bowl before you answered this?
I'll say it again and maybe you can stop speaking DEMOCRAT!!!
By WHAT standard? Name the precept by which we should judge our interaction with the environment. Define the environment and please tell us who owns it?
At whose expense: What do you mean "Shouldn't be and expense"??? What the fock planet are you from? Why the hell do you think gas costs $4? Why do you think your POS Chevy that used to cost $2400 is now $45k? Is it really that much better than a '74?
There is no end to conservation? Then why do it? If there is no end, then I suppose there is no value? Did you just say that?
I'm not calling you out Ultra. Lot's of people buy this shit. Y'know.. their women tell them they should be sensitive and all. They always have this kind of... busted look about them. But, you need to take it down to base principles. You need to decide for yourself that there is more to the answer than what you read in the newspaper and see on the TV. You need to realize that there is always a motivation for whatever people do, and it is always selfish...AND THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY a bad thing!!!!
You should have your boat; use it in health and enjoy it. You should have whatever you want to drive and do the same. And in the meantime, realize that the politicians have a specific agenda to control each of us by using our own virtue against us. They will succeed if they have guys like you helping them. Just jump off for a minute and look around. Real science doesn't seek to blame, only to understand. From the very beginning, the agenda of AGW has been to blame and control. To leverage our own guilt and capability against us to enact a level of control by the government heretofore only reserved for religion.
Today, they are telling us we can't have two stroke outboards; tomorrow they will be telling us where we are allowed to reincarnate.
.....not that i have an opinion.... :P
Full of ourselves aren't we?
Name the percept? One's own eduucated judgement. Does it sound like I'm speaking Democrat when I mention NOT CONTROLED by the govt?
Define the environment? The circumstances, objects, or conditions by which one is surrounded. Noone or everyone.
Expense? I remember when my Father bought a his one and only brand Cadillac CdV in 1964. $6,400. Same car today, nearly 8 times that. Last I heard it was called inflation. Maybe if the Feds would stop devaluing the dollar by printing more, every time they feel the urge, the process would slow. Obviously there is more to it than this.
There is no end to conservation? Then why do it? If there is no end, then I suppose there is no value? Did you just say that?
No I didn't just say that.
Then why do it IMO, most intelligent believe that it is proper to conserve at some level. I'm sure that there some intelligent folks who believe that conservation is a left wing political hoax, but probably not to many.
Please don't get the impression, because of what others suggesst, that I have no understanding of what drives politics. When you state "guys like me" it suggests that you know me and are aware of my views. An assumption at best.
What ever I choose or don't choose to conserve is my business, It is not result of some some left wing imposed guilt, or right wing imposed denial. By choice, I now drive, what some have described as, a "little pussy Civic. I have been conscious of my fuel consumption since 1974 when you had wait
in line to buy gas on odd or even days. My choice.
If trying to live a balanced life make me a hypocrite to some, so be it. I'm not campaigning for some leadership position here.
I have listened to both sides of the climate change issue. Call me ignorant if you'd like, but I'm not convinced that it is all about a political hoax. I'm not conceived that it isn't.
There is life beyond the Political Rhetoric Forum on ***boat.com. It is my plan to enjoy the time I left on this planet, and die not feeling like I was a POS pig while I was here.
Not sure who you believe "they" are. Seems to me that the majority makes the rules and there will always be those who oppose. We have now had almost 7 years from the "less government, less government spending" party, and where are we today? A giant disappointment in this regard. Seems to me there is very little to be proud of from either party.
Gotta go
Take care
John M
Smokin,
Thanks

[jh4rt]

Full of ourselves aren't we?
Way too full!!!!
Name the percept? One's own eduucated judgement. Does it sound like I'm speaking Democrat when I mention NOT CONTROLED by the govt?
Well, Precept (hope I didn't spell it wrong) and that isn't quite it. But, OK.
Expense? I remember when my Father bought a his one and only brand Cadillac CdV in 1964. $6,400. Same car today, nearly 8 times that. Last I heard it was called inflation. Maybe if the Feds would stop devaluing the dollar by printing more, every time they feel the urge, the process would slow. Obviously there is more to it than this.
Oh .. hey there... don't get me started on the fed and fiat money.... I'm with ya there. However, inflation isn't the cause of the extra cost in your car. If it was inflation, all things would inflate equally and a loaf of bread would now cost $20. It is the regulation that has driven the cost disproportionate to other objects while delivering less value to the consumer. It is the f$%king with the free market that does that. I'm glad you realize there is more to it than that.
Then why do it IMO, most intelligent believe that it is proper to conserve at some level. I'm sure that there some intelligent folks who believe that conservation is a left wing political hoax, but probably not to many.
Conservation as a practice is great. I appreciate your driving a Honda because you enjoy that it is economical and lasts a long time. I myself bought a lexus this year and one of the driving factors was that it gets 25 MPG no matter how much of an asshole I am while driving it. I appreciate that you would consider your perception of the positive effect on the environment as a value you hold dear; and would never call you a pussy for driving a civic. I expressed earlier that I pick up after others, and am disgusted by the mess left after "Earth Day" in Isla Vista. But that doesn't have anything to do with preaching Anthropogenic Global Warming.
The acknowledgment of AGW, as it stands in the books today is ignorant. To say that man, although we have learned a lot, has the capability to fully comprehend his own affect on the environment, or that the limitation of "greenhouse" gasses in the next 30 to 40 years will in-fact make a difference in a cycle we don't fully understand, well... It's not just that I don't agree with it, it's that I vehemently disagree. When I look at its public proponents, and their agenda, well... I disagree even further.
When you state "guys like me" it suggests that you know me and are aware of my views. An assumption at best.
I apologize for my presumption. Perhaps the G&T was getting the better of me and I ran off at the mouth.
There is life beyond the Political Rhetoric Forum on ***boat.com. It is my plan to enjoy the time I left on this planet, and die not feeling like I was a POS pig while I was here.
......
Seems to me there is very little to be proud of from either party.
......
John M. Glad to know you. You have given me more to write about and think about in the last couple of days than I have had in weeks. I'm glad we had an opportunity for this interchange and would love to sit over a beer or three and discuss with you in person at some point (as long as neither of us is the designated driver). :devil: :sqeyes:
Best regards,
Jim.
P.S. Both "parties" are the same and have been since Abe Lincoln was president. The contest is just a media show for those who still vote (with something other than their dollar). :devil:

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Couldn't decide whether to put this "information": here, or under the "stupidity" thread, so here it is.
AGW SOLUTIONS, from the AGW pushers.
Planktos, a small California-based "ecorestoration" company, will use a 115-foot (35-meter) research ship to dump a hundred tons of iron dust into international waters some 200 miles (322 kilometers) west of the Galapagos Islands.
Now, this is supposed to stimulate plankton growth, who absorb CO2 while growing.
What's the effect of all that iron powder on the ocean?
The local fish/other sea life populations?
Whats' the effect on the islands of all that plankton suddenly growing?
Planktos ultimately wants to fertilize plankton blooms, measure the carbon they capture, and sell the corresponding credits
Ahah!!!!!!
More .................................................. ...............
A Nobel Prize-winning scientist has proposed a controversial method for protecting Earth from global warming: seeding the atmosphere with sulfur to reflect the sun's rays.
The sulfur particles would be dropped from high-altitude balloons or fired into the atmosphere with heavy artillery shells, he says.
Once airborne the particles would act like tiny mirrors, bouncing the sun's light and heat back into space.
Just how much sulfur is "polution" then? :jawdrop: :idea:
Ok................................................ ..
The initiatives are being fostered by "geo-engineers" - scientists who say headway to reduce the fossil-fuel pollution which drives global warming is so ludicrously slow that bold new ideas are needed to avert climate catastrophe.
Among solutions they sketch is a giant network of tilted mirrors, deployed in orbit, that would deflect some of the sunlight Earth receives.
A huge, orbiting solar shade.
Just, um,,,,, how do we get it there? I sure hope we don't burn rocket fuel.
The SRB's of the shuttle are a lot less cleanly opperating than the main engines are. Lotsa atomized ALUMINUM burned up in them.
More .................................................. ...............
This one should concern you. China is already doing it tho, so perhaps we need to get aboard.
Ahead of Earth Day on Sunday, an advocacy group warned that the United States is ignoring "the most crucial factor in reducing global warming" -- population control.
"Human population growth is the paramount environmental issue," Ric Oberlink, a spokesman for Californians for Population Stabilization, told Cybercast News Service.
"Global warming is a very serious problem, but it is a subset of the overpopulation problem," he said.
Oberlink argued that an increase in the emission of "greenhouse gases" -- carbon dioxide and other gases blamed for climate change -- is a result of human activity, "like most environmental problems."
Although one part of the equation is what people do, he said, the other part is how many there are.
"If we had half as many people, we wouldn't have much of a climatic warming problem," argued Oberlink.
I will be willing to bet that I know which half of the population HE IS IN.
The 1/2 that gets to stay, not the half that needs to be killed off.
They've been planning THIS since 1968.
Back in 1968, Professor Paul Ehrlich published his famous -- and entirely erroneous -- anti-reproduction manifesto, "The Population Bomb." "The battle to feed all of humanity is over," Ehrlich claimed. "In the 1970s the world will undergo famines -- hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death." His solution: "The birth rate must be brought into balance with the death rate. We can no longer afford merely to treat the symptoms of the cancer of population growth; the cancer itself must be cut out."
In 1990, Al Gore trumpeted the sequel to "The Population Bomb," writing a glowing blurb for its dust jacket: "The time for action is due, and past due. The Ehrlichs have written the prescription." Gore neglected to mention that Ehrlich's prescription is mass distribution of RU-486.
That's from Al Gore!!!!!!!!!!!!
Professor John Guillebaud, co-chairman of the Optimum Population Trust (OPT). "The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet would be to have one less child."

[SmokinLowriderSS]

April 2007, the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of the big AGW supporters, has conceded that "The earth has natural temperature and climate cycles. Nobody has disputed that."
Combine that with the following facts:
"the earth has warmed 0.6 degree C in the last century." (quoth Algore)
Subtract the 0.5 degrees of warming that occurred before 1940, before most human CO2 emmissions.
That leaves 0.1 degrees, over 65 years.
Also, mix in the fact of NO WARMING SINCE 1998.
Shake thoroughly (don't stir), and pour in a glass. What do you get? :idea: :idea: :idea:

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Way too full!!!!
Well, Precept (hope I didn't spell it wrong) and that isn't quite it. But, OK.
Oh .. hey there... don't get me started on the fed and fiat money.... I'm with ya there. However, inflation isn't the cause of the extra cost in your car. If it was inflation, all things would inflate equally and a loaf of bread would now cost $20. It is the regulation that has driven the cost disproportionate to other objects while delivering less value to the consumer. It is the f$%king with the free market that does that. I'm glad you realize there is more to it than that.
Conservation as a practice is great. I appreciate your driving a Honda because you enjoy that it is economical and lasts a long time. I myself bought a lexus this year and one of the driving factors was that it gets 25 MPG no matter how much of an asshole I am while driving it. I appreciate that you would consider your perception of the positive effect on the environment as a value you hold dear; and would never call you a pussy for driving a civic. I expressed earlier that I pick up after others, and am disgusted by the mess left after "Earth Day" in Isla Vista. But that doesn't have anything to do with preaching Anthropogenic Global Warming.
The acknowledgment of AGW, as it stands in the books today is ignorant. To say that man, although we have learned a lot, has the capability to fully comprehend his own affect on the environment, or that the limitation of "greenhouse" gasses in the next 30 to 40 years will in-fact make a difference in a cycle we don't fully understand, well... It's not just that I don't agree with it, it's that I vehemently disagree. When I look at its public proponents, and their agenda, well... I disagree even further.
I apologize for my presumption. Perhaps the G&T was getting the better of me and I ran off at the mouth.
John M. Glad to know you. You have given me more to write about and think about in the last couple of days than I have had in weeks. I'm glad we had an opportunity for this interchange and would love to sit over a beer or three and discuss with you in person at some point (as long as neither of us is the designated driver). :devil: :sqeyes:
Best regards,
Jim.
P.S. Both "parties" are the same and have been since Abe Lincoln was president. The contest is just a media show for those who still vote (with something other than their dollar). :devil:
Jim,
It's always a pleasure to communicate with another reasonable and thooughtful adult. I would be happy to be the DD as I really don't drink much any more.
John

[Schiada76]

Since U26 thinks it's common sense to err on the side of caution I guess he'll be scheduling his prostate removal surgery since prostate cancer is a given in any male that lives long enough. Probably should get his appendix out at the same time and start his chemotherapy if he has ever been out in the sun.
Just to err on the side of caution.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Since U26 thinks it's common sense to err on the side of caution I guess he'll be scheduling his prostate removal surgery since prostate cancer is a given in any male that lives long enough. Probably should get his appendix out at the same time and start his chemotherapy if he has ever been out in the sun.
Just to err on the side of caution.
Another masterpiece.
BTW, you can look forward to having your colon checked. As I recall, when they have that tool rammed deeply up your ass, if they see polyps they remove them. Err on the side of caution, is what the Dr told me.

[Schiada76]

Another masterpiece.
BTW, you can look forward to having your colon checked. As I recall, when they have that tool rammed deeply up your ass, if they see polyps they remove them. Err on the side of caution, is what the Dr told me.
So when are you having your prostate removed?
It is common sense to err on the side of caution isn't it?

[ULTRA26 # 1]

So when are you having your prostate removed?
It is common sense to err on the side of caution isn't it?
At the same time you have your frontal lobe removed, goof

[Schiada76]

At the same time you have your frontal lobe removed, goof
So explain to me the difference between erring on the side of caution for a completely unproven hypothesis and erring on the side of caution for an absolute fact?