• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama administration to announce controversial emissions cap on power plants

apdst said:
They have it pegged? Why do they have to rig the research if they have it pegged?
Click to expand...

jmotivator said:
The climate record doesn't have the resolution to compare current trends to any prior trends.
Click to expand...

If you listen to right-wing sources this is "true". If you listen to mainstream science this is false. I'm not going to argue about who is telling the truth.
 
Verax said:
We can likely do it with minimal impact. The latest estimates show it is surprisingly cheap, especially compared to the consequences.
Click to expand...

Eveyone's light bill is going up 80%. That ain't cheap!

I can't see damn near doubling peoples's light bills based on faked research as being a great idea.
 
Verax said:
Thinking minds huh? Do thinking minds also question the idea that all the scientists in the world are part of a global hoax to steal money in a socialist plot? Sounds kind of silly doesn't it? Seems kind of unlikely doesn't it? Seems like the logistics of such a thing would be almost impossible wouldn't it?

Throughout history there have been hundreds if not thousands of examples of the public rejecting the findings of scientists because it is convenient. Scientists have been persecuted for this for centuries. It took twenty years for society to start to take action and stop putting lead in gasoline from the time it was discovered it was a terrible pollutant. Look into how the fossil fuel industry behaved in that instance, then ask yourself if they might do something like that again, with global warming.

How many times have scientists been caught falsifying research on a grand scale to try and manipulate the public into a financial trap? I can't think of a single time.

Now tell me, what would thinking minds find to be the more likely scenario?
Click to expand...

Oh please, More than once those scientists "allied" with the IPCC have been caught falsifying data. They have been caught citing fake data to make the case that global warming is accelerating, they in their own emails proved they have engaged in covering up/ hiding their own data flaws. But what these yahoos claim to be the truth even with all its flaws and falsifying data, ends up to be the standard for folks like those working at our EPA who are responsible for all these massive regulations about to be shoved on us. Now if this standard is sufficient for you, then why have standards at all?
 
apdst said:
Eveyone's light bill is going up 80%. That ain't cheap!

I can't see damn near doubling peoples's light bills based on faked research as being a great idea.
Click to expand...

apdst said:
There's no doubt about who's lying...lol!

Fakegate: The Obnoxious Fabrication of Global Warming - Forbes
Click to expand...

vesper said:
Oh please, More than once those scientists "allied" with the IPCC have been caught falsifying data. They have been caught citing fake data to make the case that global warming is accelerating, they in their own emails proved they have engaged in covering up/ hiding their own data flaws. But what these yahoos claim to be the truth even with all its flaws and falsifying data, ends up to be the standard for folks like those working at our EPA who are responsible for all these massive regulations about to be shoved on us. Now if this standard is sufficient for you, then why have standards at all?
Click to expand...

This is all right-wing conspiracy propaganda.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Did I?

Is water vapor also a pollutant then?
Click to expand...

You've always seemed like a reasonable person, don't fall into this silliness.

Yes there are many greenhouse gases and factors that contribute to global warming. A natural level of Co2 in the air certainly isn't pollution. When man releases gigatons of carbon over centuries it is no longer natural and it becomes a pollutant if you want to call it that. Playing semantics doesn't change the science of what is going on.
 
Verax said:
This is all right-wing conspiracy propaganda.
Click to expand...
Yeah right. I have some real estate on the F-ring of Saturn you might be interested in.
 
Deuce said:
Water isn't carbon dioxide. Don't try to deflect. This thread is about carbon dioxide, not your silly conspiracy theories about liberals trying to control your drinking water.
Click to expand...

"Not all chemicals are bad. Without chemicals such as hydrogen and oxygen, for example, there would be no way to make water, a vital ingredient in beer." Dave Barry :mrgreen:

CO2 is absolutely necessary for plant growth, as everyone knows. Have their been studies made that show otherwise? Also, at what levels does it cause plant life to die?

Greetings, Deuce. "2wave:
 
apdst said:
That's all Left Wing denial.
Click to expand...

polgara said:
"Not all chemicals are bad. Without chemicals such as hydrogen and oxygen, for example, there would be no way to make water, a vital ingredient in beer." Dave Barry :mrgreen:

CO2 is absolutely necessary for plant growth, as everyone knows. Have their been studies made that show otherwise? Also, at what levels does it cause plant life to die?

Greetings, Deuce. "2wave:
Click to expand...

Co2 is great in some ways. Plants evolved during a period in which Co2 levels on Earth were much higher than today so they contain the potential to absorb more. Increased Co2 causes plants to grow faster as it amplifies photosynthesis. This is all well and great but carbon's greenhouse effects in the atmosphere produce a warming which is far more bad than good. The biggest problem is that the warming is occurring much too rapidly for many species to evolve. This leads to mass extinction and a chaotic upset to ecosystems around the world. Life is largely interconnected so if you take away a species that another species relies on it creates a chain reaction of failure.

Evolution to the current environment works great over millions of years, not so well over centuries.
 
Verax said:
Co2 is great in some ways. Plants evolved during a period in which Co2 levels on Earth were much higher than today so they contain the potential to absorb more. Increased Co2 causes plants to grow faster as it amplifies photosynthesis. This is all well and great but carbon's greenhouse effects in the atmosphere produce a warming which is far more bad than good. The biggest problem is that the warming is occurring much too rapidly for many species to evolve. This leads to mass extinction and a chaotic upset to ecosystems around the world. Life is largely interconnected so if you take away a species that another species relies on it creates a chain reaction of failure.

Evolution to the current environment works great over millions of years, not so well over centuries.
Click to expand...

The problem is that the climate scientists can't figure out why global warming has slowed down dramatically.
 
Verax said:
Co2 is great in some ways. Plants evolved during a period in which Co2 levels on Earth were much higher than today so they contain the potential to absorb more. Increased Co2 causes plants to grow faster as it amplifies photosynthesis. This is all well and great but carbon's greenhouse effects in the atmosphere produce a warming which is far more bad than good. The biggest problem is that the warming is occurring much too rapidly for many species to evolve. This leads to mass extinction and a chaotic upset to ecosystems around the world. Life is largely interconnected so if you take away a species that another species relies on it creates a chain reaction of failure.

Evolution to the current environment works great over millions of years, not so well over centuries.
Click to expand...

Is China on board? I remember the work they had to do to get the air cleaned up in time for the Olympics. Since the major winds travel West to East in our country, it seems logical to assume that we are breathing some of their polluted air. We can regulate at great cost to clean our own air, but what good will it do if everyone doesn't follow the same guidelines?
 
Dittohead not! said:
Did I?

Is water vapor also a pollutant then?
Click to expand...

Is there some large injection of water vapor into the atmosphere that humanity is engaging in that I'm not aware of? Because if human activity has increased water vapor content in the atmosphere by 40%, then I'd say yes, that could be classified as a pollutant.
 
polgara said:
Is China on board? I remember the work they had to do to get the air cleaned up in time for the Olympics. Since the major winds travel West to East in our country, it seems logical to assume that we are breathing some of their polluted air. We can regulate at great cost to clean our own air, but what good will it do if everyone doesn't follow the same guidelines?
Click to expand...

Other people hypothetically polluting or continuing to pollute is not justification for our pollution.

Yes, China continuing to screw up will hinder the goal. But a singular hold out from a global effort is likely to be the recipient of economic sanctions.
 
polgara said:
"Not all chemicals are bad. Without chemicals such as hydrogen and oxygen, for example, there would be no way to make water, a vital ingredient in beer." Dave Barry :mrgreen:

CO2 is absolutely necessary for plant growth, as everyone knows. Have their been studies made that show otherwise? Also, at what levels does it cause plant life to die?

Greetings, Deuce. "2wave:
Click to expand...

It is incorrect to narrow the discussion to direct physiological impacts. You aren't attempting to do that, are you?
 
Deuce said:
It is incorrect to narrow the discussion to direct physiological impacts. You aren't attempting to do that, are you?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not! :mrgreen:
 
Verax said:
If you listen to right-wing sources this is "true". If you listen to mainstream science this is false. I'm not going to argue about who is telling the truth.
Click to expand...

You don't have to listen to any side. You just need to look at the paleoclimate data.

I realize you don't get that involved in your opinions though.
 
Deuce said:
No. The world makes more sense if you don't think of everything in black and white.
Click to expand...

Of course it does. That is why I don't buy into the "coal is bad... co2 is pollution... the end of world coming soon unless we ACT NOW!" idiocy.
 
jmotivator said:
You don't have to listen to any side. You just need to look at the paleoclimate data.

I realize you don't get that involved in your opinions though.
Click to expand...

Do tell.
 
Verax said:
Do tell.
Click to expand...

Go ahead and look. I'll be easy on you: find me a paleo record with a resolution 1 decade. I'll be here when you find one.
 
jmotivator said:
Of course it does. That is why I don't buy into the "coal is bad... co2 is pollution... the end of world coming soon unless we ACT NOW!" idiocy.
Click to expand...

Then why did you ask about eliminating CO2 from the environment? That's clearly black and white thinking, and you are the only one here exhibiting that. The stance of AGW proponents has never been "CO2 is always bad for everything." Instead, it is "let's not alter the climate so much by adding a ton of CO2 to the atmosphere."
 
Hello my name is Barak Obama, I'm here for your Coal, your Wood Stoves, Your Natural Gas Pipelines, your oil rigs & oh your prices will necessarily skyrocket!

You can still use cleean energy of course but the price to manufacture the solar panel will go up because of the emissions it will cause and of course you'll only get "some" energy when the sun shines, enough to maybe run the toaster as these things are almost worthless compared to carbon emitting methods for a typical Wisconsin winter.

IMO the people behind this Global warming scam are some of the most ruthless greedy bastards this country has ever produced. Look at Algore as one example.

So then when the price to heat your home is so high you have to resort to burning wood to keep from freezing do we then see the EPA send a Gestapo team to come & rip the stove out of your wall? Maybe now you can see why these Federal Gestapo teams are arming up. They dont expect people will willfully go along with all this crap.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4

Barack Obama: "Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." (January 2008)

watch the video I posted he even admits it, Hope and change people.
 
Iron Yank said:
Hello my name is Barak Obama, I'm here for your Coal, your Wood Stoves, Your Natural Gas Pipelines, your oil rigs & oh your prices will necessarily skyrocket!

You can still use cleean energy of course but the price to manufacture the solar panel will go up because of the emissions it will cause and of course you'll only get "some" energy when the sun shines, enough to maybe run the toaster as these things are almost worthless compared to carbon emitting methods for a typical Wisconsin winter.

IMO the people behind this Global warming scam are some of the most ruthless greedy bastards this country has ever produced. Look at Algore as one example.

So then when the price to heat your home is so high you have to resort to burning wood to keep from freezing do we then see the EPA send a Gestapo team to come & rip the stove out of your wall? Maybe now you can see why these Federal Gestapo teams are arming up. They dont expect people will willfully go along with all this crap.
Click to expand...


Its all about destroying america period.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom