Offshore drilling bill passes house - CONTACT YOUR SENATORS!

[DallasNewbie]

The idea that global warming _is_ a consensus is even in the title your given link! Hahahaha...

So, if I give you alink to a webpage that says, "Some scientists refuse to acknowledge the truth that the moon landing was faked" you would draw your conclusions based on the title and not the content? Hillarious indeed.

Depending on your definition of concensus - it appears that

Quote:Science Magazine analyzed 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers on global warming published between 1993 and 2003 (Oreskes, 2004). Not a single one challenged the scientific consensus the earth’s temperature is rising due to human activity.

It still isn't an argument. For a long time, there was scientific consensus that the earth was flat, that the Earth was the center of the universe, and that life could spontaneously spring into being. Had you been alive in 1206, you would have accepted all of these things as absolute fact. I wouldn't have been able to convince you otherwise, and you would have been able to point to a "consensus" of reputable scientists to back your position.

Even if there were a consensus on the cause of global warming, it still wouldn't be a persuasive argument. Don't tell me what a bunch of guys in lab coats believe, tell me why they believe it. But FWIW, there's scientific consensus that there was a "little ice age" 500 years ago that coincided with a periodic low cycle in solar radiation. We're near the peak of that cycle now. Hmmmm.

 

[H2Andy]

look, i applaud you for not taking what a bunch of scientists say at face value

however, when the overwhelming majority of professionals who have dedicated their
lives to studying this very issue tell me "global warming is real and it is at least partly
due to man-made causes," i tend to pay attention

don't be too quick to discount what you don't want to hear

this has, sadly, become an ideological/political debate, and we're going to pay
the price for that rather soon

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/science-of-global-warming.html

http://www.environmentaldefense.org/documents/381_FactSheet_globalwarming_timeline.pdf

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4761804.stm

http://www.latimes.com/news/printed...?coll=la-headlines-frontpage&track=crosspromo

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1978

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060410/10warming.htm


please read with an open mind and see what you think

 

[serambin]

Semiconductor chips are getting smaller, but not like at the rates in 1985. You can only push engineering so far.

You can get 24 MPG out of the same Ford engine in a full size car (Crown Victoria) that you get 15 MPG out of a truck. Why? Because the standards for a 'truck' are lower.

Some say gear ratios in trucks are the problem, BS, in 1958 we had dual ratio rear-ends in racing cars. This gives you the torque you need when you're hauling some thing versus the same vehicle used a a passinger car.
The Government currently gives tax incentives for companies to buy gas guzzling vehicles. The original idea was to give a break to the farmers using tractors, but now the CPA's are using it to get tax breaks for SUV's. What a joke. My Honda gets 32 MPG at 70 MPH, but my work trucks get 11 without a load. Go figure.

Stan

 

[serambin]

Andy, you are assuming that the whole reason for drilling offshore is neccesarily to lower oil prices. I don't think that it is, rather, the idea is to reduce the amount of oil that we import from unstable sections of the world. If an oil company makes money in the process, so what? That is what for-profit business ventures do, and I don't have a problem with that.

Indeed, I would say that high gas prices are what is actually needed. With the prices being as high as they are, there is finally some serious attention brought to this issue, and some actual effort being made to come up with alternative fuels, because (pesky profit motive) someone can make money off of it.

At the time of the 1973 oil embargo, we imported about 43 % of our oil from OPEC producing countries. Currently, we import 60+ % of oil from OPEC. Our demand is inflated by both the choices we make in the vehicles we drive and the lack of alternative (including nuclear) energy sources we employ.

During the 1970's, serious investment in alternative resources were given tax incentives. This stopped when the oil companies 'bought' the party in power and stripped the necessary capital from fledgling start-up companies by removing the tax incentives. We can't produce our way out of the problem, in fact, our best long-term strategy may well be to save our oil until the last, as at some point, it may keep us afloat.

Stan

 

[AXL72]

*rolls Eyes Again*

 

[bruehlt]

*rolls Eyes Again*

Its good to see that you have some useful information to contribute to the thread...

 

[Kim]

Its good to see that you have some useful information to contribute to the thread...

In a thread like this that's expecting a bit much! It should be obvious by now that it doesn't matter what anyone says, or what 'proof' they bring to the table. People simply believe what suits their own agenda. What they choose to believe simply reflects how they are as people.
There's all kinds of people......

 

[jbichsel]

Perhaps that's all part of the problem. Image can go a long way. Focusing on improving one's position at the expense of anyone else... scary...

- ChillyWaters

You appear to have twisted what I said. I did not say that I wished to improve my or anyone elses' position at the expense of any other person or group.

I stated that I consider rights granted by God or the Bill of Rights and what is best for my kids and country above those of anyone else.

I would hope that your core beliefs and the good of your family come first in your life, even if we disagree about what those things may be. I have some friends that I differ with on oil, the environment, politics, religion, however, I still respect them because they are doing what they believe is right for themselves and their families. It seems we all want to get to the same place, but choose different roads to get there.

 

[jbichsel]

or play dumb and refuse to take responsibility for what is clearly their doing

the dodo? what dodo?

oil spills? what oil spills?

destruction of rainforests? what rainforests?

species after species becoming extinct thanks to our activities? what?

surely, none of that is our doing .... it can't be ... we can't have that effect on our environment. we simply can't!

and no amount of evidence is going to convince me otherwise

So, given this train of thought, humans ans SUV's caused the dinosaurs to go extinct?

Everything is NOT our fault. Some things just happen.

What ever happened to Darwin's theory of natural selection for some species becoming extinct? Evidently that is not convenient when it comes to placing blame.

 

[H2Andy]

So, given this train of thought, humans ans SUV's caused the dinosaurs to go extinct?

Everything is NOT our fault. Some things just happen.

What ever happened to Darwin's theory of natural selection for some species becoming extinct? Evidently that is not convenient when it comes to placing blame.

seriously? you are offering this as a serious argument?