• 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!

Republicans, fearing congressional end-run, warn Obama ahead of climate talks

Absentglare said:
There are two main sources of water in Abu Dhabi Emirate: Desalinated seawater and groundwater. While groundwater is used for agriculture in Al Ain and Liwa, drinking water is provided almost entirely from desalinated seawater across the Emirate. In 2008, groundwater contributed 71% to total water demand for all purposes, desalinated water 24% and treated wastewater 5%.

90% of groundwater in Abu Dhabi Emirate is saline, in some cases up to eight times as much as seawater. There are only two freshwater aquifers. Natural groundwater recharge is estimated at about 300 million cubic meters per year. Brackish groundwater is mostly used for the irrigation of date palms which are relatively salt-tolerant. Recharge dams have been built on wadis in order to prevent flood water to flow into the sea, recharging it instead to aquifers. Unplanned and uncontrolled groundwater withdrawals, especially for agriculture and forestry, total over 2,000 million cubic meters per year and have resulted in declining groundwater levels and quality.
Click to expand...

If you shot at the sky you would miss. This has nothing to do with global warming. You did prove that they have pretty crappy city planning when it comes to water. Maybe that is why they hired environmental engineering companies to come in and help them with the water problem. Still nothing to do with global warming and everything to do with growth.
 
Absentglare said:
Resource scarcity has always existed therefore they've always been constant on every place on earth at all times is supremely poor reasoning.

That's so ridiculous.

Population grows. Suddenly, there's a research shortage, then people get desperate.

For you to call me delusional is ****ing ridiculous. I'm honestly baffled that you would do such a thing.
Click to expand...
I don’t even know what the part you bolded means. Can you please clarify this point?

I agree that populations grow, and they also shrink. I also agree that when resource shortages occur, people get desperate and take actions they wouldn’t normally take. If you’re trying to tell me that the real reason these people are committing mass murder/suicides is because of climate change, despite the fact that they claim it is Islamic Jihad, yes, I’ll consider you delusional at best and a political hack at worst.

You can’t just change the facts of the world to fit your political narrative and then act all offended and butt hurt when someone calls you on the BS propaganda you are propagating. Either put up some hard evidence to support your claims or sit down and shut the hell up!
 
Absentglare said:
Right, you don't like the idea of spending money, therefore the science is false.

Sound reasoning there.
Click to expand...

Is this strawman really the best argument you can make? I don’t have a problem with the US Government spending money on things that protect the American people from foreign threats or on national social issues that can’t be handled by the individual states. Feel free to argue the science any time you get a spur under your saddle. You’ll find that I don’t fit your prejudiced profile once again if we go down that road.

This is the problem with leftists like you; you like to lump people into categories based upon skin color and the like, and make broad assumptions about how they’re supposed to think and act, and when they don’t fit the profile you have for them, you call them an Uncle Tom or get so confused by their thinking you feel you must tell them what to think and feel, just as you are doing with me.

I assume you have abandoned attempting to argue the delusional idea that climate change causes terrorism?
 
Last edited:
NonoBadDog said:
If you shot at the sky you would miss. This has nothing to do with global warming. You did prove that they have pretty crappy city planning when it comes to water. Maybe that is why they hired environmental engineering companies to come in and help them with the water problem. Still nothing to do with global warming and everything to do with growth.
Click to expand...

Oh, you think it's impossible that global warming could possibly make water scarcity any worse?

It sounds like i can't solve your problem there.
 
GPS_Flex said:
I don’t even know what the part you bolded means. Can you please clarify this point?

I agree that populations grow, and they also shrink. I also agree that when resource shortages occur, people get desperate and take actions they wouldn’t normally take. If you’re trying to tell me that the real reason these people are committing mass murder/suicides is because of climate change, despite the fact that they claim it is Islamic Jihad, yes, I’ll consider you delusional at best and a political hack at worst.

You can’t just change the facts of the world to fit your political narrative and then act all offended and butt hurt when someone calls you on the BS propaganda you are propagating. Either put up some hard evidence to support your claims or sit down and shut the hell up!
Click to expand...

If resources shift from more available to more scarce, social instability increases.
 
GPS_Flex said:
Is this strawman really the best argument you can make? I don’t have a problem with the US Government spending money on things that protect the American people from foreign threats or on national social issues that can’t be handled by the individual states. Feel free to argue the science any time you get a spur under your saddle. You’ll find that I don’t fit your prejudiced profile once again if we go down that road.

This is the problem with leftists like you; you like to lump people into categories based upon skin color and the like, and make broad assumptions about how they’re supposed to think and act, and when they don’t fit the profile you have for them, you call them an Uncle Tom or get so confused by their thinking you feel you must tell them what to think and feel, just as you are doing with me.

I assume you have abandoned attempting to argue the delusional idea that climate change causes terrorism?
Click to expand...

The only delusion here is the unquestioned assertion that global warming cannot possibly impact terrorism.
 
GPS_Flex said:
Is this strawman really the best argument you can make? I don’t have a problem with the US Government spending money on things that protect the American people from foreign threats or on national social issues that can’t be handled by the individual states. Feel free to argue the science any time you get a spur under your saddle. You’ll find that I don’t fit your prejudiced profile once again if we go down that road.

This is the problem with leftists like you; you like to lump people into categories based upon skin color and the like, and make broad assumptions about how they’re supposed to think and act, and when they don’t fit the profile you have for them, you call them an Uncle Tom or get so confused by their thinking you feel you must tell them what to think and feel, just as you are doing with me.

I assume you have abandoned attempting to argue the delusional idea that climate change causes terrorism?
Click to expand...

The irony in that is hilarious.
 
Absentglare said:
GPS_Flex said:
Really? Are you really going to argue that there has been a sudden water shortage in the middle east that has caused the recent uptick in terrorism? How long has the Middle East been mostly desert?
Click to expand...
absentglare said:
Tell that to the Aral Sea:

Do you have any idea how much fresh water a city like Dubai consumes ?
Click to expand...
EdwinWillers said:
The Aral Sea is on the border of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.

The city of Dubai creates its potable water from giant desalinization plants.

It's unclear what the two have to do with one another - let alone (save perhaps Dubai) the middle east. Perhaps you could clarify.
Click to expand...
That calling the science false simply because the notion that humans consume lots of freshwater is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
:confused: How, pray tell, is asking you to clarify the above somehow "calling the science false."


Absentglare said:
Maybe you should pay attention.
Click to expand...
:doh Pay attention to what? :doh

Maybe you should clarify what a sea in Kazakhstan and potable water in Dubai have to do with 1) one another, 2) water shortages in the middle east, 3) science, 4) terrorism, or 5) ....anything.
 
EdwinWillers said:
:confused: How, pray tell, is asking you to clarify the above somehow "calling the science false."


:doh Pay attention to what? :doh

Maybe you should clarify what a sea in Kazakhstan and potable water in Dubai have to do with 1) one another, 2) water shortages in the middle east, 3) science, 4) terrorism, or 5) ....anything.
Click to expand...

Your initial post denied that the Middle East has endured any relative water shortage in recent history for no discernible reason.

I showed you how people can consume a surprisingly large quantity of freshwater in short order. It is a simple matter of (water consumed) > (water replenished).

Since global warming may actually impact both of those, maybe people drink more water when its hot, maybe less water is replenished due to climate changes, then it stands to reason that you discard a reasonable theory for no actual reason, at all, at least not one that i could find.

Further, a city like Dubai pumps water from far sources to irrigate soil to produce crops for the rich folks. That increases the price of water, since the demand for water increased (assuming supply is constant or in decline). This could result in some folks losing water altogether, as their local reserve dries up, Dubai doesn't care, just pump from some other poor slob's aquifer.
 
Absentglare said:
Your initial post denied that the Middle East has endured any relative water shortage in recent history for no discernible reason.
Click to expand...
Well now, that's a lie isn't it?

Here is my initial post. Please point out where I denied anything, let alone the nonsense you're falsely alleging:
EdwinWillers said:
The Aral Sea is on the border of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.

The city of Dubai creates its potable water from giant desalinization plants.

It's unclear what the two have to do with one another - let alone (save perhaps Dubai) the middle east. Perhaps you could clarify.
Click to expand...
Next?
Absentglare said:
I showed you how people can consume a surprisingly large quantity of freshwater in short order. It is a simple matter of (water consumed) > (water replenished).
Click to expand...
Actually, that's not true either is it. Here's what you wrote:
Absentglare said:
Tell that to the Aral Sea:

View attachment 67193398

Do you have any idea how much fresh water a city like Dubai consumes ?
Click to expand...
You snarked something about talking to an inanimate object (the Aral Sea) then rhetorically asked if we knew how much water the city of Dubai consumed.

...so naturally I asked for clarification, given the Aral Sea is in Kazakhstan and the city of Dubai creates its own potable water.

Absentglare said:
Since global warming may actually impact both of those, maybe people drink more water when its hot, maybe less water is replenished due to climate changes,
Click to expand...
"may?" "maybe?" You don't sound too sure.

Absentglare said:
...then it stands to reason that you discard a reasonable theory for no actual reason, at all, at least not one that i could find.
Click to expand...
Well I've already proven I denied nothing, discarded nothing so I haven't a clue where you came up with that.

As to your "reasonable theory," talking to an inanimate object (the Aral Sea) doesn't exactly sound reasonable to me.

And equivocally speculating how global warming "may" impact people's drinking habits who "maybe" might drink more water when it's hot - I can clear that up for you right now - people do tend to drink more water when it's hot. That's pretty much been true throughout history.

Absentglare said:
Further, a city like Dubai pumps water from far sources to irrigate soil to produce crops for the rich folks.
Click to expand...
Are you trying to tell us the city of Dubai pumps water from the Aral Sea -- across Uzbekistan, across Turkmenistan, across Iran, and over/under the Strait of Hormuz to produce crops?

...for the "rich folks?"

Absentglare said:
That increases the price of water, since the demand for water increased (assuming supply is constant or in decline). This could result in some folks losing water altogether, as their local reserve dries up, Dubai doesn't care, just pump from some other poor slob's aquifer.
Click to expand...
Whatever... I'm chuckling too hard right now to respond to any more of this
 
EdwinWillers said:
Well now, that's a lie isn't it?

Here is my initial post. Please point out where I denied anything, let alone the nonsense you're falsely alleging:
Next?
Actually, that's not true either is it. Here's what you wrote:
You snarked something about talking to an inanimate object (the Aral Sea) then rhetorically asked if we knew how much water the city of Dubai consumed.

...so naturally I asked for clarification, given the Aral Sea is in Kazakhstan and the city of Dubai creates its own potable water.

"may?" "maybe?" You don't sound too sure.

Well I've already proven I denied nothing, discarded nothing so I haven't a clue where you came up with that.

As to your "reasonable theory," talking to an inanimate object (the Aral Sea) doesn't exactly sound reasonable to me.

And equivocally speculating how global warming "may" impact people's drinking habits who "maybe" might drink more water when it's hot - I can clear that up for you right now - people do tend to drink more water when it's hot. That's pretty much been true throughout history.

Are you trying to tell us the city of Dubai pumps water from the Aral Sea -- across Uzbekistan, across Turkmenistan, across Iran, and over/under the Strait of Hormuz to produce crops?

...for the "rich folks?"

Whatever... I'm chuckling too hard right now to respond to any more of this
Click to expand...

It's comical isn't it?
 
EdwinWillers said:
Well now, that's a lie isn't it?

Here is my initial post. Please point out where I denied anything, let alone the nonsense you're falsely alleging:
Next?
Actually, that's not true either is it. Here's what you wrote:
You snarked something about talking to an inanimate object (the Aral Sea) then rhetorically asked if we knew how much water the city of Dubai consumed.

...so naturally I asked for clarification, given the Aral Sea is in Kazakhstan and the city of Dubai creates its own potable water.

"may?" "maybe?" You don't sound too sure.

Well I've already proven I denied nothing, discarded nothing so I haven't a clue where you came up with that.

As to your "reasonable theory," talking to an inanimate object (the Aral Sea) doesn't exactly sound reasonable to me.

And equivocally speculating how global warming "may" impact people's drinking habits who "maybe" might drink more water when it's hot - I can clear that up for you right now - people do tend to drink more water when it's hot. That's pretty much been true throughout history.

Are you trying to tell us the city of Dubai pumps water from the Aral Sea -- across Uzbekistan, across Turkmenistan, across Iran, and over/under the Strait of Hormuz to produce crops?

...for the "rich folks?"

Whatever... I'm chuckling too hard right now to respond to any more of this
Click to expand...

Actually it is. Apparently you have trouble with the meaning of the word "initial"-

GPS_Flex said:
Really? Are you really going to argue that there has been a sudden water shortage in the middle east that has caused the recent uptick in terrorism? How long has the Middle East been mostly desert?
Click to expand...

See how you dismiss the claim on the basis of the content of the conclusion? There is only one valid means to do so and you did not invoke it, namely, citing a conclusion that disproves itself through contradiction.

I showed you the Aral Sea so that maybe you're aware that human beings consume a lot of water. Needs are often inherently bursty, as are supplies, so this dismissal is inappropriate. It was merely an example of a huge quantity of water being consumed in a short period of time.

I'm trying to help you.
 
GPS_Flex said:
It's comical isn't it?
Click to expand...

EdwinWillers said:
Actually, it's a little scary.
Click to expand...

Absentglare said:
Actually it is. Apparently you have trouble with the meaning of the word "initial"-

See how you dismiss the claim on the basis of the content of the conclusion? There is only one valid means to do so and you did not invoke it, namely, citing a conclusion that disproves itself through contradiction.

I showed you the Aral Sea so that maybe you're aware that human beings consume a lot of water. Needs are often inherently bursty, as are supplies, so this dismissal is inappropriate. It was merely an example of a huge quantity of water being consumed in a short period of time.

I'm trying to help you.
Click to expand...
See what I mean?
 
Does any one else believe that the vast majority of nation leaders want these climate change summits in order to force global domination of policy by statists? I mean to extend past the power and control that they already have over citizens and private industry?
They either want people to just go along with it and kiss their ass, or they want you to get lost in the debate and deny your gut feeling about them and their intentions.
 
Saucey said:
Does any one else believe that the vast majority of nation leaders want these climate change summits in order to force global domination of policy by statists? I mean to extend past the power and control that they already have over citizens and private industry?
They either want people to just go along with it and kiss their ass, or they want you to get lost in the debate and deny your gut feeling about them and their intentions.
Click to expand...

A lot of people believe that, but not me.
 
Saucey said:
Does any one else believe that the vast majority of nation leaders want these climate change summits in order to force global domination of policy by statists? I mean to extend past the power and control that they already have over citizens and private industry?
They either want people to just go along with it and kiss their ass, or they want you to get lost in the debate and deny your gut feeling about them and their intentions.
Click to expand...

Well, I think they see an opportunity to constrain the United States with rules and regulations. They know that we will follow an agreement, and that they can get away with cutting corners. You think China will do the same thing we do? Of course not.

But the big thing for them is Obama. They know he is delusional about this subject and is willing to do damage to his own country in order to be looked at as a hero on the left. They know he can be manipulated, and they can get him to work for their best interests (mostly financial) and against our best interests.
 
Absentglare said:
Actually it is. Apparently you have trouble with the meaning of the word "initial"-
Click to expand...
I checked it and can verify that EdwinWillers use of the word “initial” was contextually proper and grammatically correct. FAIL!!!


Absentglare said:
See how you dismiss the claim on the basis of the content of the conclusion?
Click to expand...
No, I don’t. I do see how you are failing to support your absurd argument that global warming is the cause of terrorism however.

Absentglare said:
There is only one valid means to do so and you did not invoke it, namely, citing a conclusion that disproves itself through contradiction.
Click to expand...
I consider this mental masturbation.

Absentglare said:
I showed you the Aral Sea so that maybe you're aware that human beings consume a lot of water.
Click to expand...
You didn’t need to show me the Areal Sea to make such a simple point. I’m already aware of this fact.

Absentglare said:
Needs are often inherently bursty, as are supplies, so this dismissal is inappropriate.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what you’re talking about now but you humor me so I’ll allow you to continue for a while.
Absentglare said:
It was merely an example of a huge quantity of water being consumed in a short period of time.
Click to expand...
I see. Obviously you needed to provide pictures of a dry lake to make sure I understand such concepts?
Absentglare said:
I'm trying to help you.
Click to expand...
And if I were to tell you I don’t need your help would you continue to try to force it on me?

Look, when you can post a link to a video of terrorist pointing his knife at the camera while claiming he is about to saw the head off of a climate polluter, your argument that climate change is causing terrorism will have a leg to stand on. Until then, I’ll take those terrorists at their word and trust that they’re doing it for the reasons they quote in the videos.
 
GPS_Flex said:
I checked it and can verify that EdwinWillers use of the word “initial” was contextually proper and grammatically correct. FAIL!!!


No, I don’t. I do see how you are failing to support your absurd argument that global warming is the cause of terrorism however.

I consider this mental masturbation.

You didn’t need to show me the Areal Sea to make such a simple point. I’m already aware of this fact.

I have no idea what you’re talking about now but you humor me so I’ll allow you to continue for a while.
I see. Obviously you needed to provide pictures of a dry lake to make sure I understand such concepts?
And if I were to tell you I don’t need your help would you continue to try to force it on me?

Look, when you can post a link to a video of terrorist pointing his knife at the camera while claiming he is about to saw the head off of a climate polluter, your argument that climate change is causing terrorism will have a leg to stand on. Until then, I’ll take those terrorists at their word and trust that they’re doing it for the reasons they quote in the videos.
Click to expand...

1) If you can't explain how i'm wrong, then there's no point in declaring that i'm wrong. I was referring to the post i quoted, your misinterpretation is not my problem.

2) See 1), you have still failed to explain how the argument is wrong that global warming may exacerbate terrorist violence in the Middle East due to resource scarcity.

3) Okay, i consider your declarations that i addressed in 1) and 2) to be far better examples of "mental masturbation."

4) Apparently i thought i did because you had no content to your argument except to state the conclusion, as though the conclusion is false without requiring any argument at all.

5) Okay.

6) You gave me the impression that i had to show you a picture to demonstrate the basic concept. Some people deny that global warming is even possible. These people deny obvious facts about reality.

7) Yes, honesty is a form of respect, and as long as you invite my opinion by participating with me in this shared venue, i am more than happy to provide my view as clearly as i can.

8) Obviously, the conditions in the Middle East are complicated and the situation has been escalating since long before the industrial revolution. The point is that, with other things held constant, resource scarcity would likely be simply throwing more fuel on the fire.
 
Absentglare said:
1) If you can't explain how i'm wrong, then there's no point in declaring that i'm wrong. I was referring to the post i quoted, your misinterpretation is not my problem.

2) See 1), you have still failed to explain how the argument is wrong that global warming may exacerbate terrorist violence in the Middle East due to resource scarcity.

3) Okay, i consider your declarations that i addressed in 1) and 2) to be far better examples of "mental masturbation."

4) Apparently i thought i did because you had no content to your argument except to state the conclusion, as though the conclusion is false without requiring any argument at all.

5) Okay.

6) You gave me the impression that i had to show you a picture to demonstrate the basic concept. Some people deny that global warming is even possible. These people deny obvious facts about reality.

7) Yes, honesty is a form of respect, and as long as you invite my opinion by participating with me in this shared venue, i am more than happy to provide my view as clearly as i can.

8) Obviously, the conditions in the Middle East are complicated and the situation has been escalating since long before the industrial revolution. The point is that, with other things held constant, resource scarcity would likely be simply throwing more fuel on the fire.
Click to expand...

So using your logic, I must ask: do you support the banishment of abortions, the outlawing of homosexuality, the repeal of women's rights to vote or drive or walk around in public without being completely covered by a burka so the terrorists will stop attacking us?
 
Saucey said:
Does any one else believe that the vast majority of nation leaders want these climate change summits in order to force global domination of policy by statists? I mean to extend past the power and control that they already have over citizens and private industry?
They either want people to just go along with it and kiss their ass, or they want you to get lost in the debate and deny your gut feeling about them and their intentions.
Click to expand...
I’d say that’s a fairly accurate assessment of the situation. There are a few exceptions to the rule, like China, However, that really don’t need to consolidate power. For them, the draw is in the weakening of the USA and the opportunities for corruption and wealth that come from the global flood of money from taxed western nations to less developed countries and the power that gives them over those less developed countries.
 
Saucey said:
Does any one else believe that the vast majority of nation leaders want these climate change summits in order to force global domination of policy by statists? I mean to extend past the power and control that they already have over citizens and private industry?
They either want people to just go along with it and kiss their ass, or they want you to get lost in the debate and deny your gut feeling about them and their intentions.
Click to expand...

Promotion of energy independence through alternative energy certainly would not serve such an interest if it exists. I don't see how freeing the world from the chains fastened by oil and coal barons is a form of "global domination."
 
Napoleon said:
Promotion of energy independence through alternative energy certainly would not serve such an interest if it exists. I don't see how freeing the world from the chains fastened by oil and coal barons is a form of "global domination."
Click to expand...
The answer might be in your own words - "freeing the world" and "global domination." How can the world be freed of anything but by an entity with power over it?

And given a world currently comprised of numerous nations abjectly opposed to "being freed" from their use of cheap and readily available oil and coal, how does one propose to "free" unwilling, sovereign entities except by some sort of force - be it economic force, military force, or some other force?

And if such force over the world be required to "free" the world, what sort of entity, if not one with global dominion (of at least some form), do you imagine capable of such "liberating" power?

Couple of side notes:
There is no such thing as "energy independence" - unless perhaps one is dead
"Alternative energy" is not "energy independence" - pretty much by definition
Oil and coal barons are a thing of the past and don't really exist, and isn't a proper title to give to the corporations that produce oil and coal.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Pretty simple, the Constitution says in Article II, Section 2, Clause 2: "The President ... shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur..."

However that didn't stop him from signing other international agreements (the Iran Nuclear Deal being the most braze example) without Senate approval or many other actions he's taken which were against the US Constitution.
Click to expand...

the iran deal is a nonbinding agreement. the next president just like with all of Obama's unconstitutional EO's can be undone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom