Women’s Reactions to Eco Initiatives

Does anyone remember seeing this thread, earlier??????

Anyway—the Washington Post/WMW made mention of Ontario looking to ban the sale of incandescent light bulbs by 2012, but what they didn’t mention was…

...A week later, on April 25 2007, the Canadian federal government announced plans to ban the sale of incandescents throughout Canada.

As for the rest of the article, is WMW trying to appeal to the ones who “nest and stay at home” as not to buy these things?

JB

I love the contradictions now surrounding the replacement of incandescent to the CFL’s.  I especially love the fact that global warming groups and environmentalists completely missed the boat on the mecury poisening that will soon follow… but hey, they’re great for the environment right? 

What hypocrytes, right down to the 30k/year that Al Gore spends to supply electric to her personal property in Tennessee.  Are people that dumb and gullible that they don’t see it?

Mary

Give credit where credit is due. Al Gore, who received poor grades in college and was thrown out of grad school for poor academic performance (and who couldn’t carry his own state in the 2000 election), has convinced liberals and Hollywood wackos that the environment is in danger. Like the truly clueless idiots they are, they are coughing up the dough to fund the High Priest Of The Environment and buy indulgences. “Yeah, I purchased carbon offsets. I’m saving the environment”. Meanwhile, the money is sent to a financial services company in London co-founded and partially owned by Al Gore himself. He is laughing at these idiots behind their backs. “The fools!” he says “I have convinced them that they will go to hell unless they buy carbon credits and line my pockets! Even academic failures can put one over on true liberals! HA HA HA”. Then, Al Gore is in denial about his house in Tenn. (one of three) that uses 20 times the electricity of the average American. I’m guessing that’s about $2,000 per month, give or take. Does Al Gore spend $1,900 per month on carbon offsets? How about the $20,000 per year in royalties he receives from a polluting mine on his property? What about the constant travel in private jets and buses?

When will people realize that this whole global warming thing is a scam and that they are being used to give money to those who have a financial stake in this debate?

Nick, it’s funny that you mock Gore for his academic failures, because you obviously did not pass physical science. 

How about this: why don’t you walk out to your SUV on a hot bentonville afternoon, roll up the windows, and sit there for 4 hours without the AC on.  If you walk away without heat stroke, i’ll stop believing in the greenhouse effect.

poor guy :`(

Sickspin,

“How about this: why don’t you walk out to your SUV on a hot bentonville afternoon, roll up the windows, and sit there for 4 hours without the AC on.  If you walk away without heat stroke, i’ll stop believing in the greenhouse effect.”

So, you are saying that because the sun is ‘hot’ and a person being confined in an enclosed area, will suffer from heat stroke, this is evidence of the greenhouse effect!!

Just remember, Al Gore must know what he’s talking about, after all, he invented the internet, DIDN’T HE?

SickSpin

You make no sense. You compare an enclosed, heated area to the Earth! First, an enclosed area would run out of oxygen. The Earth is not enclosed nor will we run out of oxygen. How do I know? Because trees produce oxygen, which we breathe. We produce Carbon Dioxide, which is actually beneficial because it.......are you ready for this?..........provides “oxygen” for trees! So, humans and trees give each other life! Isn’t that great?! Keep on polluting, I say, because the trees need to breathe!

Second point, you use the ridiculous comparisons to try and make your point. What if I said that the existence of a microwave oven is proof that we will be cooked by the sun? You cannot compare the two because the Earth is not covered by a sealed container lid.

My final point, one which is NEVER asked to fans of environmentalism, is this: Can you prove, as far as scientifically possible, that the Earth is warming and that human beings are the cause? Where is your data? Now, before you go off on a rant, explain one more thing. If humans are absolutely the cause of global warming, how is it that the Earth has gone through at least two ice ages and thaws and multiple climate changes, all BEFORE the advent of mass scale fossil fuels? Medieval England was much warmer than it is today. It cooled then warmed then cooled then warmed then cooled again and, in between, has experienced periods of higher or lower average temperatures. Was Ohio Edison running coal fired power plants in England, circa 1220? How about Greenland? Greenland was, at one time, so warm that the Vikings started colonies there and grew crops on huge, productive farms. Then, they abandoned the farms and the colonies as Greenland grew cooler. How did Greenland get COOLER? I thought the Earth was warming?

In short, the Earth goes through cycles. These cycles have very little to do with man. You might be able to convince me that massive pollution has caused approximately 1/100 of 1% of the global temperature increase but the remainder has to do with Earth’s cycles. Some people even say sunspots are the cause. Mars is going through a warming period and, last I checked, there were no factories or SUVs there.

Did you know that a mid 1970’s “Time” cover featured the new danger: Global Cooling?

I have always said this and I will say it until the end of time:
Global “climate change” is a giant scam run by people looking to line their pockets at the expense of a bunch of dumb Hollywood types, greenpeacers, hippies, liberals, stupid college students and emotional soccer moms. Do you people realize that you have been outwitted and fleeced by AL GORE? That’s like saying Forrest Gump beat you in a game of poker!

What do YOU think?

...completely missed the boat on the mecury poisening that will soon follow…

There’s mercury in flourescent bulbs?  Who’da thunk?

you refer to the carbon cycle.  unfortunately, we produce more carbon that ecological processes can neutralize.  that is why C02 levels drastically risen.  that is just fact.  find the studies, theyre everywhere.

the MWP was not a global phenomenon, and its existence as historical fact has no bearing on current climate change. 

Nature published an article explaining the warming of mars. it has nothing to do with the earth.  interesting point, but.. no.

it is scientific fact that the changing composition of the atmosphere has reduced its ability to disperse solar energy.  see the ipcc, or any other reputable study (ie, peer reviewed, not from the cato institute)

You sound like an older guy with a lot of time on his hands.  You should really check out some local community college courses on physical science, you would probably enjoy them.  Don’t worry if you don’t have a high school diploma, you can often attend without earning credit. You’re obviously passionate about this subject, so why not educate yourself?

Here is some info for you, Sick. And, yes, i iz colage edgeamecated.

The global warming scam
By Derek Kelly, PhD

Scam, noun: a swindle, a fraudulent arrangement.

A chronology of climate change
During most of the last billion years the Earth did not have permanent ice sheets. Nevertheless, at times large areas of the globe were covered with vast sheets of ice. Such times are known as glaciations. In the past 2 million to 3 million years, the temperature of the Earth has changed (warmed or cooled) at least 17 times, some say 33, with glaciations that last about 100,000 years interrupted by warm periods that last about 10,000 years.

The last glaciation began 70,000 years ago and ended about 10,000 years ago. The Earth was a lot colder than it is now; snow and ice had accumulated on a lot of the land, glaciers existed on large areas and the sea levels were lower.

15,000 years ago: The last glaciation reaches a peak, with continental glaciers that cover a lot of the sub-polar and polar areas of the land areas of Earth. In North America, all of New England and all of the Great Lakes area, most of Ohio, Indiana, Minnesota and the North Dakotas, lie under ice sheets hundreds of meters thick. More than 37 million cubic kilometers of ice was tied up in these global sheets of ice. The average temperature on the surface of the Earth is estimated to have been cooler by approximately 6 degrees Celsius than currently. The sea level was more than 90 meters lower than currently.

15,000 years ago to 6,000 years ago: Global warming begins. The sheets of ice melt, and sea levels rise. Some heat source causes approximately 37 million cubic kilometers of ice to melt in approximately 9,000 years. Around 9,500 years ago, the last of the Northern European sheets of ice leave Scandinavia. Around 7,500 years ago, the last of the American sheets of ice leave Canada. This warming is neither stable nor the same everywhere. There are periods when mountain glaciers advance, and periods when they withdraw. These climatic changes vary extensively from place to place, with some areas affected while others are not. The tendency of warming is global and obvious, but very uneven. The causes of this period of warming are unknown.

8,000 years ago to 4,000 years ago: About 6,000 years ago, temperatures on the surface of Earth are about 3 degrees warmer than currently. The Arctic Ocean is ice-free, and mountain glaciers have disappeared from the mountains of Norway and the Alps in Europe, and from the Rocky Mountains of the United States and Canada. The ocean of the world is some three meters higher than currently. A lot of the present desert of the Sahara has a more humid, savannah-like climate, with giraffes and savannah fauna species.

4,000 years ago to AD 900: Global cooling begins. The Arctic Ocean freezes over, mountain glaciers form once more in the Rocky Mountains, in Norway and in the Alps. The Black Sea freezes over several times, and ice forms on the Nile in Egypt. Northern Europe gets a lot wetter, and the marshes develop again in previously dry areas. The sea level drops to approximately its present level. The temperatures on the surface of the Earth are about 0.5-1 degree cooler than at present. The causes of this period of cooling are unknown.

AD 1000 to 1500: This period has quick, but uneven, warming of the climate of the Northern Hemisphere. The North Atlantic becomes ice-free and Norse exploration as far as North America takes place. The Norse colonies in Greenland even export crop surpluses to Scandinavia. Wine grapes grow in southern Britain. The temperatures are from 3-8 degrees warmer than currently. The period lasts only a brief 500 years. By the year 1500, it has vanished. The Earth experiences as much warming between the 11th and the 13th century as is now predicted by global-warming scientists for the next century. The causes of this period of warming are unknown.

1430 to 1880: This is a period of the fast but uneven cooling of Northern Hemisphere climates. Norwegian glaciers advance to their most distant extension in post-glacial times. The northern forests disappear, to be replaced with tundra. Severe winters characterize a lot of Europe and North America. The channels and rivers get colder, the snows get heavy, and the summers cool and short. The temperatures on the surface of the world are about 0.5-1.5 degrees cooler than present. In the United States, 1816 is known as the “year with no summer”. Snow falls in New England in June. The widespread failure of crops and deaths due to hypothermia are common. The causes of this period of cooling are unknown.

MORE...............

1880 to 1940: A period of warming. The mountain glaciers recede and the ice in the Arctic Ocean begins to melt again. The causes of this period of warming are unknown.

1940 to 1977: Cooling period. The temperatures are cooler than currently. Mountain glaciers recede, and some begin to advance. The tabloids inform us of widespread catastrophes due to the “New Glaciation”. The causes of this period of cooling are unknown.

1977 to present: Warming period. The summer of 2003 is said to be the warmest one since the Middle Ages. The tabloids notify us of widespread catastrophes due to “global warming”. The causes of warming are discovered - humanity and its carbon-dioxide-generating fossil-fuel use and deforestation.

Anyone else find something fishy about the final sentence?

Comments
The above chronology of recent (geologically speaking) climate changes should place global-warming catastrophists (such as those who developed the Kyoto treaty) in an awkward position. Their fundamental assumption is that Earth’s climate was stable and was doing just fine before the Industrial Revolution started interfering with climate’s “natural” state. It is the Industrial Revolution, and in particular the use of fossil-fuel-burning machines, that has led us to the brink of environmental catastrophe due to global warming caused by increasing amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere.

But it is plain to see that both warming and cooling occurred numerous times before the Industrial Revolution. Similarly, all the dire predictions of global-warming consequences - sea-level rise, for example - have happened in the past. In fact, the greatest warming period was when dinosaurs walked the land (about 70 million to 130 million years ago). There was then five to 10 times as much CO2 in the atmosphere as there is today, and the average temperature was 4-11 degrees Celsius warmer. Those conditions should have been very helpful to life, since they permitted those immense creatures to find an abundance of food and they survived.

The Cretaceous was an intense “greenhouse world” with high surface temperatures. These high temperatures were due to the much higher level of CO2 in the atmosphere at the time - four to 10 times as much as is in our air today. The biota was a mixture of the exotic and familiar - luxuriant green forests of now-extinct trees flourished within the Arctic Circle and dinosaurs roamed. The global sea level was at its highest ever during this period, peaking during the Late Cretaceous around 86 million years ago. It is certain that the global sea level was well over 200 meters higher during this time than it is today. The Earth was immensely hotter, the CO2 vastly more plentiful, and the sea levels much higher than they are today.

The Earth has also been immensely colder, the CO2 much less plentiful, and the sea levels much lower than today. Fifteen thousand years ago, the sea level was at least 90 meters lower than it is today. The land looked bare because it was too cold for beech and oak trees to grow. There were a few fir trees here and there. No grass grew, however, just shrubs, bushes and moss grass. In the northern parts of North America, Europe and Asia there was still tundra. The animals were different from today too. Back then there were woolly mammoth, woolly rhinos, cave bears (the former three now extinct), bison, wolves, horses, and herds of reindeer like modern-day reindeer.

The major “sin” for the global warmists is CO2. The Kyoto treaty is meant to reduce the amount of this gas so as, they say, to reduce the degree of warming and eventually return us to some stable climate system. If we look at the historical situation, however, this is cause for alarm. For one thing, there has never been a stable climate system. For another, the level of CO2 in our atmosphere is near its historic low. In the long run, the greatest danger is too little rather than too much CO2. There has been a long-term reduction of CO2 throughout the 4.5-billion-year history of the Earth. If this tendency continues, eventually our planet may become as lifeless as Mars.

MORE........................

Glaciation has prevailed for 90% of the last several million years. Extreme cold. Biting cold. Cold too intense for bikinis and swimming trunks. No matter what scary scenarios global-warming enthusiasts dream up, they pale in comparison with the conditions another ice age would deliver. Look to our past climate. Fifteen thousand years ago, an ice sheet a kilometer and a half thick covered all of North America north of a line stretching from somewhere around Seattle to Cleveland and New York City.

Instead of reducing CO2, we should, perhaps, be increasing it. We should pay the smokestack industries hard dollars for every kilogram of soot they pump into the atmosphere. Instead of urging Chinese to stop using coal and turn instead to nuclear-generated electricity, we should beg them to continue using coal. Rather than bringing us to the edge of global-warming catastrophe, anthropogenic climate change may have spared us descent into what would be the most serious and far-reaching challenge facing humankind in the 21st century - dealing with a rapidly deteriorating climate that wants to plunge us into an ice age. Let’s hope Antarctica and Greenland melt. Let’s hope the sea levels rise. All life glorifies warmth. Only death prefers the icy fingers of endless winter.

What do you think?”

Please actually read and respond. Thanks.

Nick,

I heard recently, that they found out that every 60,000 years or so, the Earth’s polarity reverses and this happens over a number of years and causes areas of the Earth to change at different levels and times.  Now I’m not saying that this might be the answer to why these warming and cooling periods occur, but, it could be associated!!

this is all bs all peeple know the earth is only 6000 yrs old as it says in the bible and man cant destroy it only God can do that.

I’m sorry, I had hoped that instead of grasping for random bits of “evidence,” i could get you to think twice about the issue. 

Derek Kelly has no business writing about climate change… he has a doctorate in religion. 

this is an editorial, not a scientific paper.  it should be obvious enough, considering the first few vitriolic lines… but, for this guy to publish his “paper” without a disclaimer about his qualifications borders on fraud.

“I’m sorry, I had hoped that instead of grasping for random bits of “evidence,” i could get you to think twice about the issue”

Talk about denial!!!!!  SickSpin you don’t get it!!!!  For every article you can cite stating the existing of Global Warming by humans you can find an article that exploits the lies in those Global Warming claims.  It’s the hypocracy of people like Al Gore and his 30k/year electric bills and “carbon offset"s that make a complete mockery of any case for global warming.

Mary,

“It’s the hypocracy of people like Al Gore and his 30k/year electric bills and “carbon offset"s that make a complete mockery of any case for global warming.”

Whether Global Warming is real or not, you have to look at the actions of the ideas proponents and ask yourself, “A they ready to put their money where their mouth is?”.  It is kind of like the T.V. evangelists, they tell you to live a life free of material things, yet, go home to their mansions, with your donations.  There is no reason that Al Gore should not be practiceing what he preaches, if he really believes it, after all, he has more financial resources to do it, than the average person he is asking to do it!!  Does he ride in a limo or a hybred?  Remember, it cost money to make the changes necessary to combat CO2 emissions!!

One good example:  For the Democrat debate, 4 of the candidates all left Washington D.C., on 4 different charter planes, why didn’t they combine to take only 1 plane and reduce the CO2 produced?

You have to admit, SickSpin, Nick, Mary, and Bob may not have an intellectual leg to stand on but that won’t limit their blather.

Don’t feel too badly. They go off on almost everything with the same baseless enthusiasm.

You sound like an older guy...

Interesting take on Nick, SickSpin. I saw it a little differently. I picture Nick as young and wanting peer acceptence.  Like the child at the adult cocktail party jumping up and down yelling: “Look what I know!  Look what I know!”

And I guess Al Gore is the “intellectual leg” that the global warming extremists turn to.  What a joke!!!!!

“Don’t feel too badly. They go off on almost everything with the same baseless enthusiasm.”

I know Ken.  It just kills you when facts hit you straight in the eye.  Instead of dealing with reality of facts you would rather change the subject then address the issue.  You are so narrow minded that it makes no difference what facts people post.  What matters to you and your ilk is that it has to meet your political agenda, and if it doesn’t then it must be false.  My friend.... you need to stop smoking that crack you are on because it is COMLETELY impairing any sane judgement.

Mary,

Ken has already admitted that he thinks ‘Perception’ is more important than ‘Reality’!!  Therefore, his perception of things, is more important to him than the reality of the issue!!

Ken has already admitted....

What I don’t understand is why the Right won’t admit to global warming since it may be the biggest business opportunity in the history of the planet.

We foul our water.  Viola! We create an multibillion dollar bottled water industry.

We foul our air. I have no figures for the air filtration industry but I’ll bet it’s growing.

Think of the business possibilities if the earth’s climate veers out of the livable range of the human race.

Ken V,

“What I don’t understand is why the Right won’t admit to global warming since it may be the biggest business opportunity in the history of the planet.”

What you have a hard time understanding, is we don’t deny that Global Warming is happening, we just don’t think it is ALL man’s fault!!  Even Nick admits it is part of the Earth’s normal cycles!!

And, as for taking advantage of the business opportunities, that is exactly what IS happening, ie: Hybred cars, solar, windmills, etc.!!  Our problem, is with the ‘doom sayers’ who don’t practice, what they ask others to do, especially when they can better afford to do so!!

...the ‘doom sayers’ who don’t practice, what they ask others to do, especially when they can better afford to do so!!

I have to hand it to you, Bob, you are the last person I would have guessed would support an eco-tax!

I guess I should take my own advice and not pigeon hole people.

Ken V,

“I have to hand it to you, Bob, you are the last person I would have guessed would support an eco-tax!”

Who said anything about an Eco-tax?  All I said, is practicing what you preach!!  That means driving fuel efficent cars, installing solar panels, putting in windmills, etc., not just asking others to do it, and saying “Don’t do what I do, do what I tell you to do”.

So you’re saying I should go ahead and pigeon hole you?

The problem is the word ‘eco’, huh, Bob? Too liberal… How about we call it a “consumption” tax? The bigger your “carbon footprint” the more you PAY!