Sunday, November 05, 2006

Global Warming, Liberal BS

Scientists are always talking about how we're all going to die and for the past two decades global warming has been first and foremost amongst the prophecies of the scientific community. Of course this hasn't been the only prophecy hailed by the liberal elite. In the 70's they said we were heading for the ice age and hunger would be the norm for the powers of the world, obviously that was wrong, here we are, the fattest nation in the world. Another doomsday theory involved locust-like swarms of killer bees flooding major cities yet it is clear as day when I look out the window. (OK, I lied, it is, in fact, night, but quite clear and killer bee free) Every other year the medical community goes up in arms about an imaginary flu pandemic that will kill a higher percent of our population than the black plague, yet just a few weeks ago the US has hit yet another population milestone. Close to the hearts of geeks everywhere is the Y2K bug, within five years of Y2K there were stories of grocery stores being empty, every computer in ever home and office would shut down, nuclear plants would succumb to meltdown, and a malfunction of weapons systems around the world would shower the planet with ballistic missiles. In reality, 5% of the world's computers were effected by the bug, and those computers remained quite operational though their system clocks were rolled back to 1900. We may never find absolute proof that global warming does not exist, but common sense, the same sense that tells you the sky is blue, and plants die when they're not watered, can give us the answer: It is incredibly arrogant to think that the pissant all of humanity can effect the climate of an entire planet.


At 1:25 AM, Blogger Lance Duval said...

You freeper fool. Are you seriously denying global warming? are you seriously suggesting that the ICe Age theory was some liberal conspiracy? Did that ever gain as much attention as the very real and present threat of an overheating planet. Are you fucking nuts? Do you really believe what you are writing?
Damn. You're too stupid to live. What a drain on valuable resources you damn republicans are. You're a bigger threat to world peace than terrorists and that's for sure.

At 2:37 AM, Blogger sevenvoices said...

Considering the fact that it 17 F outside right now, just like it was a year, a decade, a century ago, yes I deny global warmning. The ice age theory is indeed a bunch of FUD. I am incapable of fucking nuts and I do believe what I write. I am not too stupid to live and it is you who are wasting valuable oxygen and contributing to greenhouse gases.

At 4:20 PM, Blogger Lance Duval said...

You conservatives must imagine an awful lot of conspiracy theories. For example, the notion that the whole environmental movement is a liberal conspiracy designed to hurt working people and American industry is the sort of whacky thing we might expect from "Shelley The Republican" - please tell me you do not write for that blog? I can hardly tell you apart!

As I see it, conservatives are in denial about so many issues.

Saying that global warming does not exist makes about as much sense as trying to solve the global AIDS epidemic by selling an abstinance-only message to the local prostiutes and rapists. Like most conservative dogma, it is little more than wishful thinking based on a bronze-age mythology.

Average global temperature has been rising continuously since the world became industrialized. My home has not yet been flooded or turned into a desert, but I live in a temperate zone (just like you). Pity those of us who live in the tropics.

Combined with the fact that we have destroyed many of the planet's natural defences against extremes of weather we can expect to see more katrina-like events (and not just in the USA). I know Pat Robertson likes to put all natural disasters down to God's anger - but at some stage we all have to grow up and realize that environmental effects happen and we may be affecting them.

And that I am afraid is the crux of the issue. There seems to be more than significant correlation between mankind's actions and changes to the environment. One hypothesis is that our actions are irrelivant and can never alter our environment - these issues are solely the domain of God and therefore we are powerless to alter our world. Roll on the Rapture!

The other hypothesis is that the natural world is a bizarrely complex system of entirely natural forces, and that the effects of man might just be altering the equilibrium in this complex and baffling system. Many climatoligists (who might be part of your conspiracy) wish to err on the side of caution: If we do not know for certain that it is safe to continue our fossil-fuel dependant ways.

And that's another interesting flip-side of a coin: We've passed the Global peak-oil. That means we have found most of the oil in the world that is easy to exploit and cheap to extract. Now we are starting to explore for oil in the Antarctic, and Canadian oil-shale deposits.

The stuff is going to run out. The best supplies of oil increasingly lie in controversial areas. America imports oil from Venezuela and Saudi-Arabia. You are bankrolling these governments every time you buy gas.

Even if you cannot accept the consensus of climate change you should definitely accept that we have to kick the oil habit.


At 12:10 PM, Blogger sevenvoices said...

Understand this: I am not against researching, developing, and eventually using renewable energy sources. I have taken personal interest in non-combustion vehicles such as fuel cells or battery powered (from what I understand there have been significant improvements with the range of these vehicles with NiMH, Li-Ion, and Li-Polymer). I am also attempting to find more economically feasible ways to utilize solar power. I also support the building of windmills here in my windy town. I also believe that we need to reduce our use of oil as a fuel because there are other things we need it for (like plastics).

I do not, however, think we should screw over our economy to keep something we can even confirm happens from happening. There is coal to be burned, which is, economy-wise the best choice. The coal we burn now has far fewer emissions problems than the other sources of coal has in the past. Most industrial centers that burn the stuff are required to extract at least some of the carbon dioxide out of the exhaust.


Post a Comment

<< Home