Congressional Hearings Break 'Hockey Stick'

Originally posted by Redmike
In a thread about the destruction of the planet by greedy corporations, you can claim that capitalism works?

It clearly doesn't. Capitalism is wrecking the planet. Capitalism isn't capable of any sort of restraint - it is the nature of the beast that it will consume whatever resources there are.

And, for the millionth time, neither Cuba nor North Korea are communist countries - indeed, this is a contradiction in terms.

This is not a "thread about greedy corporations destroying the planet," nor one on the merits of capitalism. It's a thread about global warming alarmists misrepresenting data and the news media boycotting the refutation to this intentional oversight.

Also, I disagree wholeheartedly with your circular argument about capitalists despoiling the planet. Please consider:

Poor and developing countries don’t have money to spend on environmental safeguards.
Rich countries have far too many government programs and people that value critters over people.
Therefore, rich countries are better stewards of the environment.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
This is not a "thread about greedy corporations destroying the planet," nor one on the merits of capitalism. It's a thread about global warming alarmists misrepresenting data and the news media boycotting the refutation to this intentional oversight.

Also, I disagree wholeheartedly with your circular argument about capitalists despoiling the p ...[text shortened]... alue critters over people.
Therefore, rich countries are better stewards of the environment.

Well, I wasn't the one who brought the conversation onto the merits or otherwise of capitalism, but I can understand why you wouldn't want to discuss this.

Your last paragraph, I have to say, is an absolute gem. Rich countries are the best stewards of the environment because they have money to spend on environmental programs! Sheer magic.

Where's that thread about the howler of the week?

Originally posted by Ragnorak
Not at all.

Ad Hominem: Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason

Its quite logical to dismiss "The scientific reasons why negroes should be slaves", if the article is written by the KKK. Nothing personal in that at all.

D

Wrong. It is not logical to dismiss that just for its source, it is only logical if you attack their reasons for stating that.

An Ad Hominem:

1. KKK states R.
2. There is something objectionable about KKK.
3. Therefore R is false.

Originally posted by Redmike
And, for the millionth time, neither Cuba nor North Korea are communist countries - indeed, this is a contradiction in terms.

Similarly, there are no 'pure' free market economies.

Both extremes of the economic spectrum love that excuse.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
The 'hockey stick' picture of dramatic temperature rise in the past 100 years following 1,700 years of relatively constant temperature has now been proven false. I just thought all of you global warming alarmists would want to know.

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=19734

Um, it's not 1700 years guy. Try the last 400 million years. The earth has gone through several cycles of global warming and global cooling. Each of these cycles correlates to the amount of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. The higher the greenhouse gas the higher the temps...the lower the greenhouse gas, the lower the temps.

Greenhouse gas levels now are off the historic chart and account for the hockey stick picture

Originally posted by uzless
Um, it's not 1700 years guy. Try the last 400 million years. The earth has gone through several cycles of global warming and global cooling. Each of these cycles correlates to the amount of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. The higher the greenhouse gas the higher the temps...the lower the greenhouse gas, the lower the temps.

Greenhouse gas levels now are off the historic chart and account for the hockey stick picture

Not CO2, at least. Nor the temperature.

http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/graphics/large/2.jpg

Source: UNEP. (United Nations environmental programme)

Originally posted by Palynka
Similarly, there are no 'pure' free market economies.

Both extremes of the economic spectrum love that excuse.

I don't think I claimed there were any 'pure' free market economies.

I'm not sure what your point is.

Originally posted by Redmike
I don't think I claimed there were any 'pure' free market economies.

I'm not sure what your point is.

That your point that there are no pure communist countries is rubbish and inconsistent with the accusation that free markets destroy the environment (since there are no free markets in a strict sense).

Originally posted by Palynka
Not CO2, at least. Nor the temperature.

http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/graphics/large/2.jpg

Source: UNEP. (United Nations environmental programme)

co2 is just ONE greenhouse gas. We are emitting a lot more than just frickin co2 and more than just c02 is accounted for in the hockey stick picture over the last 400 million years.

And YES, temperature correlates almost DIRECTLY with the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere over the last 400 million years.

You can't simpy pick out Co2 and try and correlate that to temperature changes. You have to look at ALL THE GREENHOUSE GASES. Methane, CFC, propane...you want a list?

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
The 'hockey stick' picture of dramatic temperature rise in the past 100 years following 1,700 years of relatively constant temperature has now been proven false. I just thought all of you global warming alarmists would want to know.

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=19734

Ha, how can you possibly use Heartland.org as your reference? Those guys are sooooooo frickin right-wing its a joke. These crackpots actually try and argue that the directors of ENRON, (Lay and Skilling) weren't responsible for that Fiasco. Those two should be strung up a pole and shot (even the dead guy) but oh no, here's what your "source" had to say about ENRON....

"We fervently hope that Ken Lay and Jeffrey Skilling will be remembered for their extraordinary contributions, rather than their politically inspired prosecution."

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=19608


Please don't pass off dubious sources as legitimate counter-arguments....you only look like a retard and further denegrate the already shady forums section. Worse still, some people may actually believe the junk they read from sites like that.

Originally posted by Palynka
That your point that there are no pure communist countries is rubbish and inconsistent with the accusation that free markets destroy the environment (since there are no free markets in a strict sense).

Eh?

There are no countries operating a communist economy. There never have been. There haven't even been any countries which claimed to be running communist economies. Not the USSR, China, Cuba, North Korea or any such country. They might have had a government run by a party calling itself 'communist', but that is a long way from a communist economy.

I didn't say free markets destroy the envoronment. I said capitalism was destroying the environment. Are you arguing that there are no capitalist countries?

Originally posted by uzless
co2 is just ONE greenhouse gas. We are emitting a lot more than just frickin co2 and more than just c02 is accounted for in the hockey stick picture over the last 400 million years.

And YES, temperature correlates almost DIRECTLY with the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere over the last 400 million years.

You can't simpy pick out Co2 and try ...[text shortened]... anges. You have to look at ALL THE GREENHOUSE GASES. Methane, CFC, propane...you want a list?

What hockey stick picture over the last 400 million years? We're not even at a temperature peak in the last 400,000 years, much less a hockey stick type of picture in the last 400 million years.

I never said it didn't correlate, I'm saying that CO2 concentration has already reached similar levels several times before the industrial revolution. I picked CO2 because it's very much directly correlated with the temperature as you can see by the graphic.

By the way, can you post data over the last 400 million years regarding other greenhouse gases? If they're alongside temperature estimations we can also have a glimpse at how they correlate historically.

Originally posted by Redmike
Eh?

There are no countries operating a communist economy. There never have been. There haven't even been any countries which claimed to be running communist economies. Not the USSR, China, Cuba, North Korea or any such country. They might have had a government run by a party calling itself 'communist', but that is a long way from a communist economy.

I ...[text shortened]... lism was destroying the environment. Are you arguing that there are no capitalist countries?

Capitalism is a vague definition. Which countries are not capitalist in your view?

Originally posted by Redmike
Eh?

There are no countries operating a communist economy. There never have been. There haven't even been any countries which claimed to be running communist economies. Not the USSR, China, Cuba, North Korea or any such country. They might have had a government run by a party calling itself 'communist', but that is a long way from a communist economy.

I lism was destroying the environment. Are you arguing that there are no capitalist countries?

Why can't you guys (redmike & palynka) stay on topic

Originally posted by Palynka
Capitalism is a vague definition. Which countries are not capitalist in your view?

I don't see what's vague about it.

I didn't say any countries weren't capitalist.

We're talking about a global economic system, which is having a disastrous impact on the environment (to bring it back to the topic).