Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Why is Global Warming a . . .
Topic Started: Mar 4 2008, 04:20 PM (1,299 Views)
lb1
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
kenny
Mar 5 2008, 11:40 AM
Why not go buy a hybrid car or do other things besides throw your hands up into the air?

Now you sound like one of those people who say, "It is written."

Do you think that if everyone in the world would switch to electric cars today it would make even a dent of a difference?

Do you know that there are over 8,000 semi loads of garbage hauled INTO Indiana every week and dumped into landfills. This is overflow coming from metropolitan areas outside Indiana that cannot handle all their waste, and Indiana isn't alone with this problem. From my perspective I would welcome global warming if it would stop the destruction of my house.

When someone in Los Angeles takes a drink or flushes the toilet where that water came from?

lb
My position is simple: you jumped to an unwarranted conclusion and slung mud on an issue where none was deserved. Quirt 03/08/09
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kenny
HOLY CARP!!!
I'm not talking about everyone.

I'm talking about you, or me.

Think globally, act locally and all that.

Give a crap; make a difference.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lb1
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
kenny
Mar 5 2008, 11:40 AM

Now you sound like one of those people who say, "It is written."

No, I don't see it as written, I just want to attack a problem when it is a problem and not attack a windmill. Especially if that windmill is attached to the water pump that supplies my water.

lb
My position is simple: you jumped to an unwarranted conclusion and slung mud on an issue where none was deserved. Quirt 03/08/09
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Quote:
 
The problem I see is that there are too many people on this planet to support in the lifestyles that they are demanding. From the packaging material for their products all the way to the chemicals that are being flushed down the sewers into the water system are pollutants many times worse IMO than the CO2 emissions.


That part I can agree with totally.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Copper
Member Avatar
Shortstop
QuirtEvans
Mar 5 2008, 03:00 PM
Quote:
 
The problem I see is that there are too many people on this planet to support in the lifestyles that they are demanding. From the packaging material for their products all the way to the chemicals that are being flushed down the sewers into the water system are pollutants many times worse IMO than the CO2 emissions.


That part I can agree with totally.


Sure, that part doesn't take any thought at all.

The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Copper
Mar 5 2008, 03:09 PM
QuirtEvans
Mar 5 2008, 03:00 PM
Quote:
 
The problem I see is that there are too many people on this planet to support in the lifestyles that they are demanding. From the packaging material for their products all the way to the chemicals that are being flushed down the sewers into the water system are pollutants many times worse IMO than the CO2 emissions.


That part I can agree with totally.


Sure, that part doesn't take any thought at all.

You may say that, but many people disagree.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lb1
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
kenny
Mar 5 2008, 11:57 AM
I'm not talking about everyone.

I'm talking about you, or me.

Think globally, act locally and all that.

Give a crap; make a difference.

Kenny,

I average driving about 800+ miles per week. I average around 29 mpg. I could increase my mpg but it would effect several other things in my life and inconvience me to the point that I do not wish to do so. We conserve water at our home not because of the cost but because it is prudent. We do a lot of our shopping based on the refuse that will be created by the packaging. We recycle and we conserve. I have served on local environmental boards for close to 25 years trying to get whole communities to do better.

Am I doing as much as I could be? Nope, but I don't believe that global warming is man made either.

lb
My position is simple: you jumped to an unwarranted conclusion and slung mud on an issue where none was deserved. Quirt 03/08/09
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
Wanna know who the original greens were?

We used to call them conservationists. A segment of society mostly made up of hunters, fishermen and outdoorsmen, who will still be doing what they can to preserve the integrity of the woods, lakes and mountains they love, long after the hippie-wannabes move on to the next ecological cause du jour.

I find these guys to be more practical than the Al Gore types. They take a different look at sustainability than others...for instance, isn't it better to build a vehicle that can run on biodiesel, get decent but not outstanding mileage, yet last for 300,000 or 400,000 miles? Something with enough torque to pull a guy's boat up a boat landing, or enough room to carry a family of six?

Or isn't it better to discourage development in places where there is not enough water to sustain that development? Or to discourage agricultural practices which result in soil erosion and rapid nutrient depletion from our farmland?

To me, global warming is not even a proven problem. It could just as easily be the precursor to a new ice age, something which humans have no control over, whatsoever. So before I get tied into knots over CO2 emissions, etc., I'm more worried about the water quality in the river or the impact of clear-cutting practices on forest flora and fauna.
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frank_W
Member Avatar
Resident Misanthrope
Right on, Jolly. I've never called myself an Environmentalist. I've always been a Conservationist. :thumb:
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin."
Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CHAS
Member Avatar
Middle Aged Carp
Read in Rolling Stone a few months ago and interview with a well known scientist whose name I can not recall who stated that global warming is already too far gone for any simple solutions to remedy the situation.

In my opinion, such solutions depend upon politics, and therefore, any "solution" will be too little and too late.

What now?
"You want to be Nice, or you want to be Effective? Make the law or be subject to it?"-Roy Cohn
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Copper
Member Avatar
Shortstop
CHAS
Mar 5 2008, 07:07 PM
Read in Rolling Stone a few months ago and interview with a well known scientist whose name I can not recall who stated that global warming is already too far gone for any simple solutions to remedy the situation.

In my opinion, such solutions depend upon politics, and therefore, any "solution" will be too little and too late.

What now?


What does "simple" mean?

A "well known" TNCR member said earlier that all we have to do is wait a few years.

That sounds like a perfect solution for most politicians.
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frank_W
Member Avatar
Resident Misanthrope
When all is said and done, there's going to be one hell of a lot more said, than done. :shrug:
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin."
Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
CHAS
Mar 5 2008, 05:07 PM
Read in Rolling Stone a few months ago and interview with a well known scientist whose name I can not recall who stated that global warming is already too far gone for any simple solutions to remedy the situation.

In my opinion, such solutions depend upon politics, and therefore, any "solution" will be too little and too late.

What now?

Chas:

I think you have returned us to Kenny's original question. I think Quirt is quite wrong about the reasons he gives for thinking conservatives are opposed to the theory of anthropogenic global warming (=bad for business). It is always dodgy when someone on one side of the political spectrum attempts to speak for the other side (as if a conservative said "liberals like global warming theory because they like the nanny state, or they love nature but hate humanity, etc").

I think the general liberal sensibility is to look at issues and concerns collectivistically, where as conservatives looks at the individual's action. Depending on how you look at the problem will determine what is your answer: should we solve the problem through shifting individual behaviors from within (say a more "virtue ethics" approach) or extrinsically (authoritarian regulation from above).

The conservatives bristle at what are perceived to be the intrinsically elitist attitudes of the left They hold a high view of humanity and believe that the bad things in society are the result of bad things in the souls of the members of the society. The way to fix it is to fix the individual from within, not without. They oppose the generally behavioralist approach to the human being that the left seems to have embedded in their view of humanity in relation to the State.

It is as deep as a whole different anthropology, and has nothing to do with "what is bad for business".
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
ivorythumper
Mar 6 2008, 05:55 AM
CHAS
Mar 5 2008, 05:07 PM
Read in Rolling Stone a few months ago and interview with a well known scientist whose name I can not recall who stated that global warming is already too far gone for any simple solutions to remedy the situation.

In my opinion, such solutions depend upon politics, and therefore, any "solution" will be too little and too late.

What now?

Chas:

I think you have returned us to Kenny's original question. I think Quirt is quite wrong about the reasons he gives for thinking conservatives are opposed to the theory of anthropogenic global warming (=bad for business). It is always dodgy when someone on one side of the political spectrum attempts to speak for the other side (as if a conservative said "liberals like global warming theory because they like the nanny state, or they love nature but hate humanity, etc").

I think the general liberal sensibility is to look at issues and concerns collectivistically, where as conservatives looks at the individual's action. Depending on how you look at the problem will determine what is your answer: should we solve the problem through shifting individual behaviors from within (say a more "virtue ethics" approach) or extrinsically (authoritarian regulation from above).

The conservatives bristle at what are perceived to be the intrinsically elitist attitudes of the left They hold a high view of humanity and believe that the bad things in society are the result of bad things in the souls of the members of the society. The way to fix it is to fix the individual from within, not without. They oppose the generally behavioralist approach to the human being that the left seems to have embedded in their view of humanity in relation to the State.

It is as deep as a whole different anthropology, and has nothing to do with "what is bad for business".

Compare and contrast:

Quote:
 
It is always dodgy when someone on one side of the political spectrum attempts to speak for the other side


with:

Quote:
 
I think the general liberal sensibility is to look at issues and concerns collectivistically,


In the very next sentence!

Physician, heal thyself.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Klaus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
QuirtEvans
Mar 6 2008, 01:49 PM
Compare and contrast:

Quote:
 
It is always dodgy when someone on one side of the political spectrum attempts to speak for the other side


with:

Quote:
 
I think the general liberal sensibility is to look at issues and concerns collectivistically,


In the very next sentence!

Pwned! :spit:
Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Klaus
Mar 6 2008, 07:46 AM
QuirtEvans
Mar 6 2008, 01:49 PM
Compare and contrast:

Quote:
 
It is always dodgy when someone on one side of the political spectrum attempts to speak for the other side


with:

Quote:
 
I think the general liberal sensibility is to look at issues and concerns collectivistically,


In the very next sentence!

Pwned! :spit:

Sorry Klaus, you get failings marks for that. "Pwned! :spit:" is not a valid comparison/ contrast.

You probably fell for Quirt's trick of eliding the last part of the sentence as well as the rest of the post that gives context and shows a valid contrast as a point of discussion.

It is hardly an original idea that I wrote, and the notion of the individual vs the collective is perhaps the single most defining characteristic of the difference between modern liberalism and traditional conservatism.

For instance, Hertzberger's writings on the politics of public space and architecture argues against "collective interpretations of individual living patterns" in favor of "individual interpretations of collective patterns".

These are always held in tension in any political discussion, and it seems evident that the Left generally does side toward the collectivistic and the Right toward the individualistic. That does not seem to be a statement that any liberal or conservative ought to disagree with-- and it does not take a conservative to formulate that statement (Mao would have held the same thing) -- but argue against that if you want.

Of course, neither you nor Quirt seemed capable of actually arguing against the points that the left is generally collectivistic, or imbued with a vestigial behavioralistic social engineering mentality, or that the left and the right hold decidedly opposite views of anthropology, the human condition, or man in society.

Rather, all you two could muster was a hit and run "compare and contrast" without actually do so!!!!, and a silly little "Pwned! :spit:" statement of agreement with a throw away comment.

I really expect better of both of you. :wink:
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Klaus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Come on, IT - even you've got to admit that this was funny. Why do you take everything so deadly serious? Is it not possible for you to laugh at yourself?
Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Quote:
 
neither you nor Quirt seemed capable of actually arguing against the points ...


This is the trigger point where threads involving IT and me generally devolve into pissing contests. IT, you may claim that you never start the name-calling, but right there, that's where you did.

Before this turns into the usual ugly-fest, I'm out.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
I don't see anything in that that could be construed as name calling. He said you were apparently unable to argue against his points. When you read that, what name did you hear yourself being called?
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
Let me ask one question - how many of you use fertilizers and weed killers on your yard? Grub control? How many times a year? All this junk goes directly into the water system.

I'm with Quirt and whoever else said it - it makes no sense to rail on about CO2 if the water is not going to be fit to drink, which is increasingly the case. Cincinnati water has so much chlorine it is like drinking a swimming pool. I won't touch the stuff.
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Larry
Mar 7 2008, 07:52 AM
I don't see anything in that that could be construed as name calling. He said you were apparently unable to argue against his points. When you read that, what name did you hear yourself being called?

I heard him saying I was incapable of arguing something. That's an insult. What's more, it was intended to be insulting.

It's how these threads between IT and me head downhill, and I'm not playing any more. For a long time, I simply ignored IT, to avoid these sorts of bashing contests. If that's what I need to go back to doing, I will, but I'd rather we both simply remain civil. That post, imho, was not civil.

Others are free to have different opinions, but I intend to base my conduct on my own opinion.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Telling you that you're incapable of arguing something is hardly calling you a name. Also, there are other reasons besides lack of intellect or ignorance that can cause someone to say you are incapable of arguing something. You're obviously intelligent, and while we're all ignorant about something, your "ignorance factor" is quite low - but sometimes you are in fact incapable of arguing something, because you are more interested in "winning" than you are in furthering the discussion.

Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
Gee, Quirt, if that is your threshold for "name calling" or being insulting you owe me and others an apology a thousand times over. However, I don't really think you need to apologize to me as I have always found your rather brusque manner to be kind of endearing. It is like anti-charm that is somehow charming. You certainly should not have a thin skin if you are going to be that way, though.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Mikhailoh
Mar 7 2008, 04:58 AM
Let me ask one question - how many of you use fertilizers and weed killers on your yard?  Grub control?  How many times a year?  All this junk goes directly into the water system. 

I'm with Quirt and whoever else said it - it makes no sense to rail on about CO2 if the water is not going to be fit to drink, which is increasingly the case.  Cincinnati water has so much chlorine it is like drinking a swimming pool.  I won't touch the stuff.

:rolleyes:

First of all, I can assure you that fertilizers, weed killers, grub control or other chemicals do not make it into your drinking water.

It is a federal requirement that drinking water undergoes at least primary and secondary treatment before it can even be made available for consumption. Flocculation chambers, air floatation devices, carbon filters, ozone tanks, and yes, chlorine treatment are just some of the methods water treatment facilities use to get your water clean. That chlorine taste doesn't come from your fertilizer. It comes from the plant; most likely your water district uses chlorination as a secondary disinfectant.

Besides, it's not just the fertilizer that impacts the environment. All the yard clippings, leaves, mulch and other organic material generates more waste than you realize. Yard waste accounts for about 1/6 of the total municipal solid waste dumped onto landfills each year. Many states have banned yard waste from landfills for exactly this reason.

And it makes perfect sense to grill on about CO2 and the crappy water if you understand the system. What you're saying is the equivalent of "who cares about all these school shootings, we have all these drug busts to worry about!" Air and water pollution are so totally different from one another they have to be given equal consideration.

CO2 emissions are important because it's a greenhouse gas. (I don't think we have to get into that right now, so for now I'll just leave it at that.) Chemical fertilizers and other lawn care products mess with the biochemical oxygen demand of waterways. Both are different issues but equally important.
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lb1
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Aqua Letifer
Mar 7 2008, 05:25 AM
All the yard clippings, leaves, mulch and other organic material generates more waste than you realize. Yard waste accounts for about 1/6 of the total municipal solid waste dumped onto landfills each year. Many states have banned yard waste from landfills for exactly this reason.

.

That is why I burn mine.

lb
My position is simple: you jumped to an unwarranted conclusion and slung mud on an issue where none was deserved. Quirt 03/08/09
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply