Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt...

Full story: Newsday 46,744
When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore. Full Story

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#35914 May 17, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
HAD, man HAD. The current dominance of large corporations (to compete globally is the excuse) had eliminated the 'competition' between those trying to take second spot. There IS only one spot now. And the government is not spending enough to encourage innovation. In fact, when they do, they get a backlash from the 'free marketers'.
Four things have made the US an economic engine. One is position (on trade routes between EU and the Far East). Second is easy access to the interior from the Great Lakes and Mississippi water ways. Third was access to untouched high grade resources. Fourth is competitive spirit with many small businesses.
..........
I can't argue with a lot of what you say, in the current climate it would be next to impossible for someone to invent a ground breaking product in their garage and have it brought to market.
There are other factors thou and that is a global recession kicked in. So there is a tendency for everyone to play it safe.
However Capitalism in its purest form means the end goal that one corporation owns and controls everything. At this point there is no competition and government is totally in-effective. What Americans have to decide is at what point does the reset button need to be pushed so they can start over with healthy competition again. Do you leave it until there is only ONE Bank, One Grocery chain, One Media outlet etc. In my view one of the quickest ways to hit the reset button is to slowly make fossil fuels worthless.
Easy to do and that is tax them out of existence in a slow and deliberate way or another fuel product is invented that is clean.
Then Innovation kicks back in and its a whole new ball game. A government worth its salt would have to do this on a world scale, for those countries not willing to comply then their products get hit with a import duty. It's pure fantasy and never likely to happen but in your scenario for the US then its fall of the Roman Empire all over again if no course change takes place.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#35915 May 17, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Whine a lot?
http://www.altenergystocks.com/archives/2013/...
If we fear for the future, it is paradoxical to attempt to mitigate risks by remaining invested in fossil fuels. What we do now will bring about the future for better or worse. If we’re to emerge from our 19th century energy system, it must be us, now, today, who set that emergence in motion. Leave fossil fuels for those who prefer to look backwards.
whine a lot??? lol i tried it once to see what it felt like. it felt....well...sort of like a greeny.

i'm fine with change, btw. in fact i embrace change. i just prefer that free markets make the change instead of government mandates.

i don't disagree with your models as much as i disagree with your unfounded conclusions, son.

it's pretty basic.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#35916 May 17, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Each one believes their way to success is the only way and there is a lack of harmony Now 97% of Scientists now accept that man is the main contributor to climate change. Yet conservative politics won't accept that assumption so in the US decisions that need to be made do not get made. That is the difference. Why because the Industrialist sees this as taking away his or her piece of the pie to give to the innovator.
these are the points i 100% disagree with.

i am not, nor know of, a businessman who thinks their way is the only way.

97% of scientist may agree that man is responsible for added co2, methane, etc., but are we humans the main contributor?? where can you clarify that observation. if we embraced a 'ludite' mindset tomorrow and 'went on the wagon' with fossil fuels.....what difference would it make?

you guys seem all too willing to give up your freedoms, choices, and powers to the government. i think that's THE BIGGEST MISTAKE.

the rest of what i disagree with is your genralities and unfounded assumptions. care to give proof?
Retired Farmer

Kuttawa, KY

#35917 May 17, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't argue with a lot of what you say, in the current climate it would be next to impossible for someone to invent a ground breaking product in their garage and have it brought to market.
There are other factors thou and that is a global recession kicked in. So there is a tendency for everyone to play it safe.
However Capitalism in its purest form means the end goal that one corporation owns and controls everything. At this point there is no competition and government is totally in-effective. What Americans have to decide is at what point does the reset button need to be pushed so they can start over with healthy competition again. Do you leave it until there is only ONE Bank, One Grocery chain, One Media outlet etc. In my view one of the quickest ways to hit the reset button is to slowly make fossil fuels worthless.
Easy to do and that is tax them out of existence in a slow and deliberate way or another fuel product is invented that is clean.
Then Innovation kicks back in and its a whole new ball game. A government worth its salt would have to do this on a world scale, for those countries not willing to comply then their products get hit with a import duty. It's pure fantasy and never likely to happen but in your scenario for the US then its fall of the Roman Empire all over again if no course change takes place.
True, it would be like the latter days of the Roman Empire. But it would be something else, too, and much worse. Ever hear of something called the "Easter Island Hypothesis"?
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#35918 May 17, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't argue with a lot of what you say, in the current climate it would be next to impossible for someone to invent a ground breaking product in their garage and have it brought to market.
In my view, the things that need doing to restore the US are

1: control or limitation of lobbyists.

2: More than two political parties, so that the voter has a choice less restricted to 'dumb vs dumber'. Maybe any party can be defined that has X percent of the public support and can run candidates is every district. Once certified, they would then have a right to be on the ballots.

It works somewhat for Canada (as long as the left and right are fragmented) as they are today. The requirement for a solid percentage limits the number of parties to avoid endless minority governments.

Public money in support of political candidates funded by the public purse (proportional to votes in the last election) to defuse the power of the corporate donations and ensure that politics isn't so much a matter of how much money your supporters have..

3: Anti-monopoly breakup of Corporations above a set limit or percentage of the market. And I also include holding companies that may unify several corporations under different brand names with a dominance of the market.

4: Limits on campaign spending (return to grass roots).

The one thing I like about the US is that they have a strong 'community spirit' that can solve some things locally.

But this has led to a rejection of federal solutions even when the problem is too big for community based action.

And they have a strong core of competitive spirit (I get better service for defects from the US) that is currently stifled by the dominance of large corporations (that don't need to care). Well, not always but I am talking in general.

All this is to reduce the dominance of money in politics. THE key problem.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#35919 May 17, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>these are the points i 100% disagree with.
i am not, nor know of, a businessman who thinks their way is the only way.
97% of scientist may agree that man is responsible for added co2, methane, etc., but are we humans the main contributor?? where can you clarify that observation. if we embraced a 'ludite' mindset tomorrow and 'went on the wagon' with fossil fuels.....what difference would it make?
you guys seem all too willing to give up your freedoms, choices, and powers to the government. i think that's THE BIGGEST MISTAKE.
the rest of what i disagree with is your genralities and unfounded assumptions. care to give proof?
What we have here is something that has been the driving force to the World's economy for the last 100+ years is found to have more than a negative impact on the planet's environment. It can also place our food supply & living habitats under threat.

This is just one link, google any other posts in past week to find the same result.
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/11128500...

Now changing that might change the whole way we do business and be a monumental lifestyle change. But it doesn't have to be, we can use technology to come up with solutions that right now have not had much incentive to do so when they are up against some oil company finding a new oil field somewhere else to tap. The big factors like shipping and air transport and energy production are key players in this. For instance it might take another 50 yrs to find a fuel for aviation that is clean but in the meantime every one of us could cut back on our own personal use to have a huge impact. It wont happen on "feel good" basis Governments have to enforce it.
So this is where your philosophy of so called "freedom" kicks in and it would be a decision that the government makes for the good of all. No different than science finding asbestos products are dangerous and therefore banned or lead in gas or paint.
Science told us that chlorinating water supplies makes drinking water safe for millions of ppl living in a city. It is also science telling you that we found a threat to our environment and we need to do this to fix it. Only because that threat was the key driver to the economy it was seen as something totally unacceptable
It's nothing to do with personal freedoms it's man progressing with science and knowledge just in the same way as we found out how to live longer through advances in medicines or find our way to other planets.
joey

El Monte, CA

#35920 May 17, 2013
F*ck the gov. Quit try'n to scare people.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#35921 May 17, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
<quoted text>
True, it would be like the latter days of the Roman Empire. But it would be something else, too, and much worse. Ever hear of something called the "Easter Island Hypothesis"?
Yeah but you would want to hope that any Aliens visiting our planet way into the future find something more than a barren desert and remains of decaying gas stations.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#35922 May 17, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
What we have here is something that has been the driving force to the World's economy for the last 100+ years is found to have more than a negative impact on the planet's environment. It can also place our food supply & living habitats under threat.
This is just one link, google any other posts in past week to find the same result.
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/11128500...
Now changing that might change the whole way we do business and be a monumental lifestyle change. But it doesn't have to be, we can use technology to come up with solutions that right now have not had much incentive to do so when they are up against some oil company finding a new oil field somewhere else to tap. The big factors like shipping and air transport and energy production are key players in this. For instance it might take another 50 yrs to find a fuel for aviation that is clean but in the meantime every one of us could cut back on our own personal use to have a huge impact. It wont happen on "feel good" basis Governments have to enforce it.
So this is where your philosophy of so called "freedom" kicks in and it would be a decision that the government makes for the good of all. No different than science finding asbestos products are dangerous and therefore banned or lead in gas or paint.
Science told us that chlorinating water supplies makes drinking water safe for millions of ppl living in a city. It is also science telling you that we found a threat to our environment and we need to do this to fix it. Only because that threat was the key driver to the economy it was seen as something totally unacceptable
It's nothing to do with personal freedoms it's man progressing with science and knowledge just in the same way as we found out how to live longer through advances in medicines or find our way to other planets.
At last!! Someone who seems to want a civil conversation. We have our differences I'm sure, but I can accept where you're coming from. I'm headed out the door for dinner right now. Maybe we can kick it around later on or sometime this weekend? I really want the same things you seem to ascribe to....but how we get there.:-/ ttfn

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#35923 May 17, 2013
joey wrote:
F*ck the gov. Quit try'n to scare people.
No one is trying to scare anyone. To borrow a phrase from a famous innovator's advertising. It's about getting you to "Think Different" or start to think outside the square. That's how Einstein discovered Relativity and the concept of Time in a whole new way. If you think in a pre-programmed way to deny all that doesn't fit into your concept of how things are then you are denying yourself a opportunity to advance. Conservatism seems to have gone that way and now its trying to hold on to what has long since past. There is no future in that concept, only going backwards.
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#35924 May 18, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
No one is trying to scare anyone..
"...a barren desert and remains of decaying gas stations."
Not sure I'd like that... Sounds scary!
Sorta like it was meant "to scare someone".
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#35925 May 18, 2013
"The big threat to Florida's future that elected leaders aren't talking about: the average amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere."
"..in less than 25 years the planet could suffer irreversible damage."
"A hotter planet will be susceptible to long droughts, reduced polar ice, higher sea levels and more acidic oceans. The changes will wreak havoc on food and water supplies, infrastructure, human habitation and economic stability, especially for the billions of humans who live on or near coastlines like Florida's."
"The CO2 milestone indicates that dire scientific predictions are coming true. Doing nothing will be seen in hindsight as one of the worst examples of human greed and ignorance."
This from just ONE review of a scientific study.
Horrible human suffering caused by AGW.
Of course no one is trying to scare anyone ;-)
.
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#35926 May 18, 2013
CO2 WILL DESTROY THE PLANET!!!
If you do not except my words as FACT then you have doomed the Human Race to a horrible burning death because of your denial.
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#35927 May 18, 2013
http://nujournal.net/core.pdf

The Earth is Going to EXPLODE!!!

Pesky CO2
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#35928 May 18, 2013
“We have an obligation to save [all of] humanity and not just half of humanity,” said Morales. He warned that if we don’t do more to curb global warming,“many islands will disappear and Africa will suffer a holocaust.”

http://progressive.org/mpballve041510.html
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#35929 May 18, 2013
Coffee and Chocolate and Beer Oh My.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/11/28/3...

"Like coffee and chocolate, beer is one of the common pleasures of life being damaged now by global warming""

Now wait one darn minute.

Some one IS trying to scare people here!
litesong

Everett, WA

#35930 May 18, 2013
drink the kkk-aid wrote:
"...a barren desert and remains of decaying gas stations."
Not sure I'd like that... Sounds scary!
Sorta like it was meant "to scare someone".
However,'drink the kkk-aid' never condemned bob burns & his words & was mute on the subject of bob burns threats:
//////////

litesout wrote:
Here are evidences & words of bob burns who is an alleged criminal & reasons he is an alleged criminal.
bob burns' HELLGATE...
bob burns' quote from hard copy, first post:
You are one despicable piece of shit. I hope you & your lawyer get gunned down. I'll do it myself if I get a chance.
=====
Second post:
I'm coming after your 'wife' too. I'll rape and torture 'her' in front of you. Same with your lawyer. What I do with you will be right out of a Saw movie. I'll film it & put it on the 'net'.
=====
bob burns' replying post:
Burn baby, burn
//////////
'drink the kkk-aid' says toxic topix AGW deniers are not scary......... even the worst, bob burns.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#35931 May 18, 2013
Find me one IPCC warning that says a climate crisis from Human CO2 will be eventual or inevitable,not just possible and likely etc.

If it's real it's inevitable if it's not it's not a real crisis. Deny that!
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#35932 May 18, 2013
“Climate change has moved into a new and highly dangerous phase and is now the most urgent issue confronting the world,” said Ian Dunlop, member of the Club of Rome and Deputy Convener for the Australian Association for the Study of Peak Oil.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#35933 May 18, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
Coffee and Chocolate and Beer Oh My.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/11/28/3...
"Like coffee and chocolate, beer is one of the common pleasures of life being damaged now by global warming""
Now wait one darn minute.
Some one IS trying to scare people here!
What you imply about scaring ppl is that it is being alarmist because its based on a phantom threat. A few weeks ago when some mad bombers were running around in Boston and police instructed ppl to lock your doors and not go outside, most ppl would consider that sound advice. There is a huge difference between someone getting into a car, strapping themselves in only to drive safely without taking risks. Than someone jumping in a car with no belts and driving straight into a brick wall. Which category do you fall into ?

As I said in previous posts you deniers put in your head this is a problem I don't have to deal with nor my children or my children's children. It's always 100's of yrs away for your lot and that's how you deal with it. It's a BS concept because its no different than seeing the big a$$ truck coming straight for you on the highway but tell yourself I'll still be to turn at the last split second to avoid disaster. Not only that expect others to take the same risks you are.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 11 min Scrutiny 178,107
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 24 min Incognito4Ever 1,110,246
Word (Dec '08) 1 hr andet1987 4,726
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr Mister Tonka 98,239
Adult Nursing Relationships (May '11) 1 hr Handcuff ottoman 137
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 1 hr KiMerde 49,882
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 2 hr JOEL 69,402
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••