Something to think about

[phljess]

Lets put this into perspective. The earth is a closed system, just like your house an aquarium, etc. If I were to start my car in my garage and sit there for a few hours without opening the garage door, who would like to hop in the passenger seat? That's what I thought, no-one.
I don't know if CO2 is causing global warming but I do know adding too much of anything to a closed system puts it out of balance. If CO2 is not causing global warming, I guarantee it is causing somekind of problem.

But what is the point, it really does not matter because no one is going to do anything about it. We the consumer will continue buying gas gusseling trucks,SUVs etc. And buying the Middle East out of its crude oil instead of stepping back and looking at feasible substitutes.

Why?

First think of who is getting rich from you buying crude oil? Yes some Middle Eastern countries but thats not all. How about all the refineries here in the U.S.? One more thing, on this subject, would there even be a reason to fight in the Mid East if we developed new technologies and used different fuels. No. Within ten years all oil producing countries would be begging the U.S. for a glass of water and an ear of corn. So why are we not building them? There must be something going on behind the scenes. People in power do not want us to stop buying oil or producing vehicles that run on fossil fuels, because they receive economic gains from selling fuel ie; Rockefeller, Bush, Cheney, etc...

 

[carb850]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9687088#post9687088 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by phljess
I don't know if CO2 is causing global warming but I do know adding too much of anything to a closed system puts it out of balance. If CO2 is not causing global warming, I guarantee it is causing somekind of problem.

Good point.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9687088#post9687088 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by phljess
But what is the point, it really does not matter because no one is going to do anything about it. We the consumer will continue buying gas gusseling trucks,SUVs etc. And buying the Middle East out of its crude oil instead of stepping back and looking at feasible substitutes.

We are doing things about it. Some would argue not enough but the government does have fleet gas mileage regulations for automakers. The government also gives tax incentives for people that buy alternative fuel cars (I think..) So in my eyes we are doing something politically.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9687088#post9687088 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by phljess

Why?

First think of who is getting rich from you buying crude oil? Yes some Middle Eastern countries but thats not all. How about all the refineries here in the U.S.? One more thing, on this subject, would there even be a reason to fight in the Mid East if we developed new technologies and used different fuels. No. Within ten years all oil producing countries would be begging the U.S. for a glass of water and an ear of corn. So why are we not building them? There must be something going on behind the scenes. People in power do not want us to stop buying oil or producing vehicles that run on fossil fuels, because they receive economic gains from selling fuel ie; Rockefeller, Bush, Cheney, etc... [/B]

Anyone would be a fool not to believe that money was not an issue. Of course someone is getting rich off of it. Someone is getting rich no matter what. If we found some new miracle fuel or even something known such as ethanol, someone would be getting rich.

The reason we are not using alternative fuels on a wider scale is simply due to economics. It cost more to create these other fuels than it does to pump crude out of the ground. Gasoline at some point we get expensive enough that it will be cheaper to produce some source of alternative fuel. Not until then will we see a serious change.

 

[carb850]

Bill ties Climate to National Security

 

[firefish2020]

The reason we are not using alternative fuels on a wider scale is simply due to economics. It cost more to create these other fuels than it does to pump crude out of the ground.

Everything is expensive at first, the computer you are using would have cost over $20,000 20 years ago if it could have been made. DVD players were over $500 three years ago when they came out. Today they are under $30 and computer technology and chip tech has increased to the point to where just about anyone who wants one can afford a computer now. Technology costs at first but only at first. It cant get cheaper until it's made widely available. Computers were made widely available because the PTB want all of us "plugged" in so they can tell all of us what to think and how to act. It's all part of a huge game and we are all being used as pawns on both sides of the issue. "Green technology" should have no political affiliation at all, it should be a human matter and nothing more but it's being used as a weapon of opinion by a group of individual for matters purely political IMO. The bottom line is no one cares enough to do anything about it really except quote link, debate and argue endlessly till the last drop of ice melts from the poles.

"The traditional triggers of conflict which exist out there are likely to be exacerbated by the effect of climate change," said Emyr Jones Parry, Britain's UN ambassador.

LOL It is a global security issue IMO

BTW the oceans are getting more acidic and have been doing so since the industrial revolution, theory is the oceans are absorbing Co2. What happens when sea water absorbs to much Co2 Phil?

 

[phljess]

The CO2 is changed into carbonic acid and pH drops.

 

[carb850]

IMO, the global warming debate comes down to faith. Their are arguments for both side. People just tend to believe the arguments that back up the way they feel.

As firefish stated, technology does get cheaper with time but I still stand by the fact that we will not see widespread alternative fuels until it becomes cheaper than processed crude oil. I for one would not buy stock in an alternative fuel production company unless I thought they could undercut the price of cude oil consistantly.

The only thing that would change that is government intervention and I guess that is what this argument boils down to. Do we have enough data for the government to step in and do more than it already is? I for one have my doubts.

 

[phljess]

"The only thing that would change that is government intervention and I guess that is what this argument boils down to. Do we have enough data for the government to step in and do more than it already is? I for one have my doubts."

I guess you would take a ride with me in the garage then.

 

[carb850]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9688276#post9688276 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by phljess
I guess you would take a ride with me in the garage then.

I think I will pass

Nor would I be interested in being in a small chamber feed only the air from the exhaust of a coal fired power plant or the smoke generated from a wood fire.

 

[phljess]

"Nor would I be interested in being in a small chamber feed only the air from the exhaust of a coal fired power plant or the smoke generated from a wood fire."

Thats funny

 

[LtPiper]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9686787#post9686787 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by firefish2020
LOL that just proves no one really reads these posts before responding. That's the same site I commented on above LOL


:thumbsup:

I though I had read that before.

 

[firefish2020]

LOL cool debate guys, it is important that everyone at least feel free to state his/her opinions that's what makes us American. Who knows who is right or who is wrong in reality, evidence can be twisted but I believe everyone needs to see all the available evidence and hear expert opinions on this matter then make up there own minds for them selves. Most of the debunking of global warming so far is IMO pretty bad and very desperate and at times like the Newsweek article just funny.

I remember growing up and reading books about mass extinction especially the dinosaurs. When I was smart enough to understand the physic involved it made perfect since to me that the event was caused by a massive asteroid impact which is what the "fringe" scientists in those days were saying. They found debris layer, they found iridium residue, they found tektites, everything to support there theory but they had no crater. Then in the early 1990s they found the smoking gun. The crater was under the sea near Puerto Chicxulub. The final evidence was gleaned from oil Co. maps taken in the 1960s but never fully understood. When Alan Hildebrand matched new satellite images to the old maps the crater stood out. The blast estimate would have been 200,000 times more powerful than the biggest manmade Hydrogen bomb ever detonated. Still not all scientists got on board, they needed more proof as no one in history had ever actually seen a massive impact that could cause such an event. Then as if almost on cue in 1994 the proof arrived. Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 bombarded Jupiter and scientists watched in awe. After this event there was little doubt as the the cause of the crater or the extinction level event(s) in our pre-history. The small group of scientist were right.

However unlike this theory the scientists now backing global warming and climate change are not a small number of fringe scientists and the rank are growing daily. In this case unlike the above case, scientists have to shout to be heard over the ramblings of politicians and oil hungry CEOs who have threatened that if they have to "Go Green" then it will "cost the consumer". This makes it personal and they want that, they need you to think that there is no danger, there is no truth to the claims because they really don't care about tomorrows environment, only todays sale. Some of these Execs make over 22 million dollars a month! Do you think they will ever give in as long as there are those in the public eye willing to sell out the human race to old technology. The change is not up to them, it's up to us. It's Ok to spend 40 million dollars on a new stealth bomber with the latest technology but it's costly to develop technology to scrub the air of Co2 or research new energy alternatives? That is just not logical IMO. I personally welcome Govt intervention in this matter and that's saying a lot from me. I'll choose the lesser of two evils any day.

I only hope we don't need such a wakeup call as was needed for the dinosaur extinction theory in this instance to weld all scientists and public opinion to the reality of the latest potential threat.

 

[firefish2020]

Happy Earth Day

Happy Earth Day

http://news.aol.com/topnews/article...t/20070421184009990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001