Software

General discussion

Locked

What About Global Warming?

By FluxIt ·
I read through several Global Warming threads and saw many things that were curious. Then I came across this article:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

While I have not made a decision on the human contribution to Global Warming, I have a tendency towards a neglible impact. I believe that Global Warming is a natural process and that the natural has a greater impact on the climate than human influence. Certianly, humans cause an impact but it is usually a whisp in the spanse of time and space.

What do you think about the article?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Freedom and swinging fists or wielding political coercive power

by sn53 In reply to a warmer climate is both ...

deep wrote, "The truth comes out - it's about your freedom to f*ck up the world.
Your freedom to swing your fist ends at my nose."

And vice versa. I am only asking to be left alone. You and your green/socialist allies are asking for my enslavement. No thank you.

Collapse -

Your right "be left alone" is not without limitations.

by deepsand In reply to a warmer climate is both ...

Such exists only to the extent that it does not affect others.

You have no right to adversely affect the quality of my life or that of others simply because you desire to so act.

Collapse -

No, deepsand, but with few limitations, and prohibitive standards of proof.

by Absolutely In reply to a warmer climate is both ...

Your right "be left alone" is not without limitations.
Such exists only to the extent that it does not affect others.

You have no right to adversely affect the quality of my life or that of others simply because you desire to so act.


I refer you to Amendment 4 of the Constitution of the United States.

Collapse -

Re. "prohibitive standards of proof"

by deepsand In reply to a warmer climate is both ...

The right of any person to swing his fist ends where my nose begins.

It is this that sn53 refuses to accept.

Collapse -

Right of a person to swing fist ends at any other person's nose.

by Absolutely In reply to a warmer climate is both ...

I cannot imagine sn53 arguing against that principle. With that common ground accepted, let's argue about which side is the swinging fist in the 'global warming' debate and which is the nose.

Collapse -

re: fist vs. nose

by apotheon In reply to a warmer climate is both ...

It's not quite that straightforward, on the "global warming alarmist" side of the debate -- though it is basically that straightforward on the "global warming denier" side, at the moment.

1. alarmist:
The fist (pollution) is swinging at a punching bag (the environment). There may or may not be a person standing on the other side (global warming) -- because it's a heavy-bag, the puncher can't tell without walking around to the other side. Some people claim there's a person on the other side, some claim it's just a reflection of a person in the mirrors on the wall. None of them have yet made it all the way around the bag to check.

2. denier
The fist (governmental economic regulation) has already bloodied the nose (market freedom). It may swing again. It's likely, given time, that the nose will break. The only question is whether that swinging of the fist is some form of self-defense -- and that relies on point 1. If it's not self defense, it's assault.

Collapse -

Pejorative terms, such as "alarmist," serve only to interject subjectivity.

by deepsand In reply to a warmer climate is both ...

To characterize all who believe that there is scientific evidence suggestive of a serious problem worthy of consideration as being "alarmists" is naught but argumentum ad hominem.

Collapse -

Pejorative terms, such as "denier," serve only to interject subjectivity.

by Absolutely In reply to a warmer climate is both ...

To characterize all who believe that there is not scientific evidence suggestive of a serious problem worthy of consideration as being "deniers" is naught but argumentum ad hominem.

Apotheon has applied the commonly used pejoratives to both sides, leading me to suspect that he is quite aware of his own biases, and alert to ours. He is still my favorite for "impartial moderator", but I suspect he is less than enthusiastic about undertaking the task.

http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=213262&messageID=2195803

Who could blame him? Who on Earth, and for what reason, would wish to interject himself into such a feud?

Collapse -

Selective use of "naysayers" was not subjective.

by deepsand In reply to a warmer climate is both ...

I reserve that term for those who, out of hand, dismiss that it is possible that global warming and/or man's ability to affect climate is extant.

Those who simply question whether or not such is the case are deemed to be skeptics.

Collapse -

Are different types of 'deniers' being lumped together?

by TonytheTiger In reply to a warmer climate is both ...

There are threee types:

People who deny that global warming is happenning.

People who deny that humans are responsible.

People who deny that there is enough evidence to make a definitive conclusion.

Related Discussions

Related Forums