• 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!

AGW Believers Turn on Each Other

Tim the plumber said:
Building stupid wind farms or starving the world's poor will not change the amount of fossil fuels we use at all. If anything it maight just add a little due to the resources used to build the things.
Click to expand...

Wind power isn't as useful as nuclear, but it's far, far better than nothing. Lifecycle analysis of the CO2 output of wind, including the energy cost to build it, shows that wind emits about 12 gCO2e (grams of CO2 equivalent) per kWh, compared to about 980 for coal and about 460 for natural gas. So that's an enormous improvement.

Tim the plumber said:
Helping research would and could not be opposed by any group. Especially industrial groups which you dream are out to get you. They are not. The communists are. They will do anything for power. They have a track record of lying.
Click to expand...

China is currently spending more on nuclear power research that the US is. Russia might be too -- it's hard to get numbers from there, but judging by their output of FBRs it's clear they're doing a lot that we're not.
 
Tim the plumber said:
So you think that my estimation of 20 million a year rather than the offical figure of 10 million a year makes it all bullshit do you?

You place your faith far above simple human suffering. You are very evil.
Click to expand...

It is impossible for ethanol to cause 20 million starvation deaths per year because there aren't 20 million starvation deaths per year. That's not faith, that's math.
 
flogger said:
Their actions speak louder than words.

You've already been given dozens of quotes from high profile activists
Click to expand...

Ahhh yes, their actions. Look how many billions have been murdered to reduce the world's population already!
 
Deuce said:
Ahhh yes, their actions. Look how many billions have been murdered to reduce the world's population already!
Click to expand...

Only if we let them. I don't think we should. Their policies have killed enough already :cool:
 
flogger said:
Only if we let them. I don't think we should. Their policies have killed enough already :cool:
Click to expand...

You're so happy about all these dead people you use smiley faces when discussing death. Are you sure it's environmentalists who want to kill people? Because you seem pretty happy about dead people.

My god. Right-wingers want to kill people in the name of profit. I've blown the lid off the whole thing.
 
Deuce said:
You're so happy about all these dead people you use smiley faces when discussing death. Are you sure it's environmentalists who want to kill people? Because you seem pretty happy about dead people.
Click to expand...

I'm not they are. You've got the quotes

My god. Right-wingers want to kill people in the name of profit. I've blown the lid off the whole thing.
Click to expand...

Smear all you like but I've never voted for a right wing political party in all my life

For me this is a humanitarian issue transcending petty partisan bickering or points scoring

I think adopting policies that will kill people in order to save them from the environmental sin of existing is a bad idea and I make no apologies for that
 
Last edited:
flogger said:
I'm not they are. You've got the quotes



Smear all you like but I've never voted for a right wing political party in all my life

For me this is a humanitarian issue transcending petty partisan bickering or points scoring

I think adopting policies that will kill people in order to save them from the environmental sin of existing is a bad idea and I make no apologies for that
Click to expand...

Yes yes anything that does anything to reign in unchecked pollution is evil and wrong because it kills..... profit.
 
Deuce said:
Yes yes anything that does anything to reign in unchecked pollution is evil and wrong because it kills..... profit.
Click to expand...

What has the demonization of CO2 (a benign beneficial and naturally occurring gas thats a product of your own respiration cycle) have to do with pollution ?
 
Last edited:
flogger said:
What has the demonization of CO2 (a benign beneficial and naturally occurring gas thats a product of your own respiration cycle) have to do with pollution ?
Click to expand...

"Demonization of CO2" :roll:

Right. CO2 is plant food. Therefore it can never cause any kind of problems. Physics works that way!
 

[h=1]Naomi Oreskes: James Hansen is a Denier[/h] Guest essay by Eric Worrall Naomi Oreskes has accused climate scientists like James Hansen, who support the expansion of nuclear power, of practicing a “strange new form of denial”. According to The Guardian; After the signing of a historic climate pact in Paris, we might now hope that the merchants of doubt – who for…
 
Deuce said:
Yes yes handwave decades of research. Makes the comic book plot easier to accept, right?
Click to expand...

And you wave away what is so far the only measurable evidence of what CO2 is doing because you don't want to see it
 
Poor Debater said:
Wind power isn't as useful as nuclear, but it's far, far better than nothing. Lifecycle analysis of the CO2 output of wind, including the energy cost to build it, shows that wind emits about 12 gCO2e (grams of CO2 equivalent) per kWh, compared to about 980 for coal and about 460 for natural gas. So that's an enormous improvement.
Click to expand...

Given that the stupid things need an equal amout back up power plant and need to have their internal dynamos driven when the wind is low, or high, to keep them in time with the grid just measuring the amount of energy they generate is silly.

CO2 is not dangerous!!!! Stop being so scared over nothing!

China is currently spending more on nuclear power research that the US is. Russia might be too -- it's hard to get numbers from there, but judging by their output of FBRs it's clear they're doing a lot that we're not.
Click to expand...

Yes, once you have got a system to the point where it's as good as it can get you don't need to do more research. Fast breeders are for making bombs more than any other plant.
 
Deuce said:
It is impossible for ethanol to cause 20 million starvation deaths per year because there aren't 20 million starvation deaths per year. That's not faith, that's math.
Click to expand...

Deaths due to slow hunger and related disease. Deaths due to not having $1 to go to the doctors.

Adding 70% to the cost of food is nothing to us rich people but for the poor on $1 a day it is hell.
 
Deuce said:
Ahhh yes, their actions. Look how many billions have been murdered to reduce the world's population already!
Click to expand...

My estimation is around 400 million.

Obviously this will increase if any more silly missapplication of resources happens.
 
Tim the plumber said:
My estimation is around 400 million.

Obviously this will increase if any more silly missapplication of resources happens.
Click to expand...

Environmentalists have gone from being a useful prick for our collective consciences to being the enemy within many of whom seem bent on the decimation of our species.

Many within the movement have decided the earth is far too fragile and precious for us to be allowed to share it sadly. You don't just need to take my word for it though

Quote by Maurice Strong, , primary power behind UN throne, : “Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?”

Quote by Club of Rome: "The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man."

Quote by John Davis, editor of Earth First! journal: "Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs."

Quote by Christopher Manes, a writer for Earth First! journal: "The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing."

Quote by Ted Turner, major UN donor, and large CO2 producer: “A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”

Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: “My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”

Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing."

Quote by Club of Rome: "...the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million people but less than one billion."

Quote by UN Commission on Global Biodiversity Assessment: "A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society at the present North American material standard of living would be 1 billion. At the more frugal European standard of living, 2 to 3 billion would be possible."

Quote by Ingrid Newkirk, a former PETA President: “The extinction of Homo Sapiens would mean survival for millions, if not billions, of Earth-dwelling species. Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on Earth - social and environmental.”

And there are many more sadly :(

C3: Global Warming Quotes & Climate Change Quotes: Human-Caused Global Warming Advocates/Supporters

It is clear to me that when people with power and influence hold extreme views like these then climate change is the very least of our worries
 
Last edited:
Tim the plumber said:
Deaths due to slow hunger and related disease. Deaths due to not having $1 to go to the doctors.

Adding 70% to the cost of food is nothing to us rich people but for the poor on $1 a day it is hell.
Click to expand...

They count those already, chief.
 
Tim the plumber said:
My estimation is around 400 million.

Obviously this will increase if any more silly missapplication of resources happens.
Click to expand...

You pulled your estimation out of your ass and I love that flogger "likes" your estimation. Just accepts it without question. You guys are great.
 
flogger said:
Environmentalists have gone from being a useful prick for our collective consciences to being the enemy within many of whom seem bent on the decimation of our species.

Many within the movement have decided the earth is far too fragile and precious for us to be allowed to share it sadly. You don't just need to take my word for it though

Quote by Maurice Strong, , primary power behind UN throne, : “Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?”

Quote by Club of Rome: "The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man."

Quote by John Davis, editor of Earth First! journal: "Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs."

Quote by Christopher Manes, a writer for Earth First! journal: "The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing."

Quote by Ted Turner, major UN donor, and large CO2 producer: “A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”

Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: “My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”

Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing."

Quote by Club of Rome: "...the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million people but less than one billion."

Quote by UN Commission on Global Biodiversity Assessment: "A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society at the present North American material standard of living would be 1 billion. At the more frugal European standard of living, 2 to 3 billion would be possible."

Quote by Ingrid Newkirk, a former PETA President: “The extinction of Homo Sapiens would mean survival for millions, if not billions, of Earth-dwelling species. Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on Earth - social and environmental.”

And there are many more sadly :(

C3: Global Warming Quotes & Climate Change Quotes: Human-Caused Global Warming Advocates/Supporters

It is clear to me that when people with power and influence hold extreme views like these then climate change is the very least of our worries
Click to expand...

Yes, yes. We've all seen the quotes from idiots. Al Gore gets death threats from people like you, but you know how many ****s I give? Zero. Zero ****s.

It's funny that you pick out statements that are totally innocuous and toss them in with the crazies as evidence of EEEEVIILLLL PLOOOOOOTS
 
ocean515 said:
So what estimate would you give?
Click to expand...

Me, personally? I wouldn't. Because I've never researched starvation deaths and neither has he. He's just ****ing making numbers up and you people never call him out on it because he's on your team. Reagan's commandment, right?
 
Deuce said:
Me, personally? I wouldn't. Because I've never researched starvation deaths and neither has he. He's just ****ing making numbers up and you people never call him out on it because he's on your team. Reagan's commandment, right?
Click to expand...

So you chose to continue to demonstrate an aversion to the scientific method? This is a problem with warmists, the elimination of the scientific method.

If you haven't researched the topic, and therefor have no idea what is true or not, how do you dismiss the claim out of hand?

To expect superiority on the subject, it's probably not a good idea to make the emotion based approach to the issue so transparent.
 
ocean515 said:
So you chose to continue to demonstrate an aversion to the scientific method? This is a problem with warmists, the elimination of the scientific method.

If you haven't researched the topic, and therefor have no idea what is true or not, how do you dismiss the claim out of hand?

To expect superiority on the subject, it's probably not a good idea to make the emotion based approach to the issue so transparent.
Click to expand...

Oh please. Show me his scientific calculation of starvation and malnutrition-related deaths per year that is double what anyone else estimates. Please! I'd like to see his ****ing math.

I'm particularly interested in seeing how he explains the multi-decade decrease in world hunger coinciding with a massive increase in biofuel usage.
 
Last edited:
Deuce said:
Oh please. Show me his scientific calculation of starvation and malnutrition-related deaths per year that is double what anyone else estimates. Please! I'd like to see his ****ing math.

I'm particularly interested in seeing how he explains the multi-decade decrease in world hunger coinciding with a massive increase in biofuel usage.
Click to expand...

Many articles and scientific studies have been presented showing the increased use of biofuels has had a negative impact on food supply.

Perhaps you could offer evidence that demonstrates a connection between the increased use of biofuels and a corresponding decrease in world hunger specifically related to it's increased use.

The global population has increased during this period, so following the same connective logic you appear to be using, it would seem the answer to addressing world hunger is to grow the population.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom