Scientists say they have proved climate change is real, now mus...

[Rahm Jizzbucket Emanuel]

We have to save the polar bears! Doesn't anyone care about the POLAR BEARS!

[Brian_G]

ChromiuMan wrote:

Actually, the only part of your statements I disagree with is the use of the word 'hoax'. If man-made emissions contribute to global warming, it follows that a cessation of those emissions would not contribute to global warming.

That's a big if; what if man made greenhouse gas emissions are insignificant? What about if climate measurements are more influenced by other factors like the urban heat island effect?

Why not test the theory with experiments before we go all in?

.

ChromiuMan wrote:

Stopping the use of fossil fuels while simultaneously reducing atmospheric CO2 and finding a means of making the Earth more reflective would mitigate climate change.

Or, it could cause disaster. If man made greenhouse gases cause warming, then we are already mitigating climate change against global cooling; the well known catastrophic ice age climate scenario. If an animal stops emitting carbon dioxide it dies.

.

ChromiuMan wrote:

That in itself refutes the term 'hoax', even if those activities are purely speculative fantasy.

So, hair growth tonic, the fountain of youth, turning lead into gold and psychic ability might be speculative but are they hoaxes? If somebody's making money off them the answer is yes.

.

ChromiuMan wrote:

However, is it practical or feasible for man to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere? Is it even possible?

Plants do a reasonable job; I'm satisfied.

.

ChromiuMan wrote:

I'm unaware of any quick and easy means of carbon capture and storage that could possibly make a dent in offsetting the amounts we produce, much less significantly reduce the amount of CO2 already present in the atmosphere, so I understand your point - I just disagree with your phrasing.

Now we're getting somewhere.

First, do the experiments and refine the theory; then advocate for world wide climate change mitigation. I'm just saying, let's be reasonable.

[tina anne]

ChromiuMan wrote:

<quoted text>
Since you have no idea what points of Brian_G's post I might take exception to or why, would you please take your prissy little presumptions and bugger off? Thank you, very much. Have a nice day, now! ;-)

It would not be hard to figure out what points in BrianG's posts you would take exception to. Any point where he told you that you were wrong. What makes you think you would be such a hard man to figure out.

As for the rest, I always say that the sign of someone has lost an agument is when they have to resort to insults.

[Jeb Wilson]

hell yeah the climate changed man. what you think bro.80

[PHD]

tina anne wrote:

<quoted text>
It would not be hard to figure out what points in BrianG's posts you would take exception to. Any point where he told you that you were wrong. What makes you think you would be such a hard man to figure out.
As for the rest, I always say that the sign of someone has lost an agument is when they have to resort to insults.

Again the spanking goes on good job.

[Wallop10]

tina anne wrote:

<quoted text>

As for the rest, I always say that the sign of someone has lost an agument is when they have to resort to insults.

You realize you just described basically 99% of PHD's posts.

[PHD]

Wallop10 wrote:

<quoted text>
You realize you just described basically 99% of PHD's posts.

And 100% of yours. See you are a cut above the rest when it comes to useless babble tainted with hate.

[Wallop10]

PHD wrote:

<quoted text>And 100% of yours. See you are a cut above the rest when it comes to useless babble tainted with hate.

HA HA What a moron.

[PHD]

Wallop10 wrote:

<quoted text>
HA HA What a moron.

HA HA what a LESS-ON

[Edward Kelly]

PHD wrote:

<quoted text>Well peanut brain this is the GREAT COUNTRY OF THE USA. It’s a free Country. Sorry you live in that third world country under dictatorship. If you were quoting yourself you show your publications of your own work and to date it's only cut and paste useless babble. Get help maybe you can move to this GREAT COUNTRY CALLED USA and continue to post on Topix.

And you believe a country that still calculates in Farenheit and feet and inches great?

Hmmm...

[Edward Kelly]

PHD wrote:

<quoted text>Firstly: It is quite acceptable to use copy and paste when you can't show your own work. This simply shows as you don’t really really know. The reference generally not likely indicates the truth.
Secondly: NOBODY has to do what you ask also. I have encountered demanding LESS-ONS such as your--self who generally can't show their own work to answer the question. Not more likely but positively you are a nut who dreams of wishing they could answer the question by their own work but like the rest you simply can't.

Sure I can.

[Edward Kelly]

PHD wrote:

<quoted text>Firstly: It is quite acceptable to use copy and paste when you can't show your own work. This simply shows as you don’t really really know. The reference generally not likely indicates the truth.
Secondly: NOBODY has to do what you ask also. I have encountered demanding LESS-ONS such as your--self who generally can't show their own work to answer the question. Not more likely but positively you are a nut who dreams of wishing they could answer the question by their own work but like the rest you simply can't.

Classic case of dodging.

Sorry mate, but you clearly do not have a clue - you are just unintelligent dribble that resorts to bending the argument to suit themselves, or to attack the debator personally.

A person such as yourself is known as a Troll.

I suggest that due to your lack of ability to argue the point and to use proven research to support your claim, you are not interested in a real debate with real science.

Prove me wrong - if you have the gumption.

[Edward Kelly]

Rahm Jizzbucket Emanuel wrote:

We have to save the polar bears! Doesn't anyone care about the POLAR BEARS!

I suggest that we need to look at what we are doing to ensure a quality of life for our great, great grandchildren. One that includes a diverse natural environment.

Our natural environment is being depleted at a rate we have never experienced before. Last time there was an extinction crisis of this magnitude was the mega mammals and before that -the dinosaurs. If the decline in diversity is not arrested, the end result is an environment which does not remotely resemble what we have today - is that what we really want for our great great grandchildren?

[titonton divaunte pants]

World war z. Kill the zombies that have ruined the atmosphere with bovine farts. Forget about what they put in chem trails...

[titonton divaunte pants]

Of coarse dems think that having to prove who you are is fraud. Look at florida.

[PHD]

Edward Kelly wrote:

<quoted text>
Sure I can.

Well than pony up and show all your published work.

[PHD]

Edward Kelly wrote:

<quoted text>
Classic case of dodging.
Sorry mate, but you clearly do not have a clue - you are just unintelligent dribble that resorts to bending the argument to suit themselves, or to attack the debator personally.
A person such as yourself is known as a Troll.
I suggest that due to your lack of ability to argue the point and to use proven research to support your claim, you are not interested in a real debate with real science.
Prove me wrong - if you have the gumption.

Step one: I'm not your mate. Step two: I correct the argument to reflect the truth.Step three: I respond in kind.Step four: Your the trolette.Step five: You offer nothing of substance just cut and paste. Ther you have it proved wrong several times.

[ChromiuMan]

Rahm Jizzbucket Emanuel wrote:

For the love of God, we need to save the polar bears people!

For the love of God? For most of man's history, that has meant "kill anything and anyone that is "not like us".

[litesong]

ChromiuMan wrote:

For the love of God? For most of man's history, that has meant "kill anything and anyone that is "not like us".

Correction: Should be:
For most of man's history, for any reason: "kill anything and anyone that is "not like us".
The largest democidal genocides on planet Earth were carried out by atheists. The largest democidal genocide- chinese communists(always small letters) murdered, tortured & starved to death, 100 MILLION OF THEIR OWN BROTHERS, SISTERS, CHILDREN, & BABIES.
I get little opposition when I make this statement. chinese communists(always small letters) probably know that the quote of 100 million dead is conservative & could easily be a much higher number. chinese communists( always small letters) don't want any more discussion than there already is about their killings of 100 million people.
Shhhhh....... keep it under your hat. chinese communists did THIER best, by keeping the bodies underneath the ground.

[ChromiuMan]

Brian_G wrote:

<quoted text>Exactly! Our government's fuel policy makes us more reliant on foreign oil by discouraging the production and use of energy and fuel. It takes a basic commodity and adds an extra-market constraint to increase its price, making it more expensive for the consumer and more profitable for the producer. There's more profit margin in diamonds than in coal.
.
<quoted text>Importing foreign goods keeps prices lower by letting the market find the most efficient workers and consumers. Factories were closed by unions increasing wages, government adding regulation and foreign workers able to produce quality goods at low prices.
I'm in favor of free trade; that's one of the few good ideas liberal have given us.

We disagree on your supply and demand economics. Just to briefly touch on a couple points, oil which is produced in the US is sold on the world market. "Drill baby, drill" as a solution to foreign oil consumption is a myth. The increased amounts of imported goods over the last decades have increased our trade deficit and reduced exports have contributed to loss of jobs. Blaming the unions and government regulations on the trend of outsourcing and off-shoring is contrary to actual figures.
Unlike coal, the diamond market is artificially set by the industry. In any case, you have a weak comparison between a luxury impulse market and a necessity consumable market.
I could go on, but this is tangential to the thread topic and resolves little, since I suspect the cornerstone of your stance is more ideological than demonstrable.