Epic Anti-Global Warming Monologue
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
Thank the anti logging crowd for protecting mature pine from harvesting and fire causeing the worst beetle infestation in years.
Back then they used disinfo as well. How many times have you heard that the amazon rainforest was the lungs of the earth? In reality the taiga (boreal) is.
Why tax something harmless?
Ya, f!ck it. Tax the hell out of people trying to make ends meet.
Throw them a bone, made of their own money, once a year.
You know what's funny Fuzzy? For a guy that loves the working mans party, you and the working mans party, sure have a funny way of showing your love for the working man.
If they taxed stupidity you would be in arrears."I drop logs. Global warming doesn't exist."
-- Kakato
You're right, taxing the working man, is stupid.
Why do you support such a stupid idea?
What's wrong with you?
I never even said that I supported it. It was an honest question to actually continue the discussion.
Because he recently had a kid and is enjoying the tax credits. 10 years from now when little flossy starts to cost more and starts asking for $20 a day he'll feel the crunch.
Guys, I'm only asking about a solution.
We've already proven that there is a link between C02 emissions and global warming.
That is obvious and not in doubt.
The question is: What do we do about it?
I'm asking in earnest here. Is a tax the right methodology? Is cap and trade the correct measure? What specific legislation should we enact?
These are all the options on the table and I encourage captain and petros to contribute as well. You guys have invaluable insight on what kind of economic policy can help rectify the situation.
We've already proven that there is a link between C02 emissions and global warming.
That is obvious and not in doubt.
The question is: What do we do about it?
I'm asking in earnest here. Is a tax the right methodology? Is cap and trade the correct measure? What specific legislation should we enact?
These are all the options on the table and I encourage captain and petros to contribute as well. You guys have invaluable insight on what kind of economic policy can help rectify the situation.
I'm being serious here.
First you give me 15 unwarranted reddies (with no explanation) and now you just divert from the discussion.
I don't know why we even have these threads anymore if it's just going to be a slugfest.
Sure we can joke here and there, but when do we get back to having a serious discussion?
First you give me 15 unwarranted reddies (with no explanation) and now you just divert from the discussion.
I don't know why we even have these threads anymore if it's just going to be a slugfest.
Sure we can joke here and there, but when do we get back to having a serious discussion?
I'm tired of being the beast of burden for the hair brained schemes of people who do far less for the environment than I. And no offence, but by your own admission, you do far less to protect the environment and lessen your carbon footprint than I do.
Do you support Mulcairs position on oil and the environment?
In his defence, babies ain't cheap either.
But what Fuzzy and Tonington fail to take into account is, their notions of taxing the way to a greener future is hard on those at the edge now.
I'm still paying for the economic downturn. I have to worry about the mortgage rates, gas prices, the prices of consumables, the cost of food, the cost of keeping my house lit, heated, in shape.
I do not support making the working people bear the cost of industries, whose profit margins are grotesque. Funny how get branded a conservative shill, when I'm clearly anything but.
Water vapor is the most important gas according to the IPCC's models. The current increase of CO2 is not enough to cause the driving of temperatures by itself and could not explain the warming alone. Water vapor is added, at increasing levels and with only a positive feedback in order to make this temperature increase a man made possibility. Without the increased water vapor, the issue would need to be from sources other than man induced CO2. Even the IPCC admits that the issues with water vapor are not well understood in their 2007 addition of the climate report but are very important for the overall warming. This increased water vapor also has a negative feedback that is ignored by most models and why the IPCC predictions are far higher than the temperature we are experiencing since 2007.
I don't know how you are even aware of what I do for the environment, but that's not the point.
The point is that we're talking about a policy that would be enforced that would affect everyone.
And this is the third time I'm asking an honest, legitimate question just to get your input.
What kind of policy is there to enact? You suggested new legislation. Well what would that legislation entail?
Sure we know, it wasn't so long ago that you indicated that you do little to nothing 'cause your individual input was so minimal... Remember how that was the excuse you needed to explain why you didn't invest in solar/geothermal for your house?