IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Bush in denial on global warming
[link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23541-2004Nov3.html|http://www.washingto...541-2004Nov3.html]

The Bush administration has been working for months to keep an upcoming eight-nation report from endorsing broad policies aimed at curbing global warming, according to domestic and foreign participants, despite the group's conclusion that Arctic latitudes are facing historic increases in temperature, glacial melting and abrupt weather changes.

State Department representatives have argued that the group, which has spent four years examining Arctic climate fluctuations, lacks the evidence to prepare detailed policy proposals. But several participants in the negotiations, all of whom requested anonymity for fear of derailing the Nov. 24 report, said officials from the eight nations and six indigenous tribes involved in the effort had ample science on which to draft policy.



"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."     --Albert Einstein

"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses."     --George W. Bush
New warming in the arctic is a good thing
birds get here earlier so eggs are fresh sooner, longer summer means more berries,
more whitefish and caribou are fatter
regards
daemon
that way too many Iraqis conceived of free society as little more than a mosh pit with grenades. ANDISHEH NOURAEE
New As are thousands of scientists...
The following [link|http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p37.htm|petition]
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

was signed [link|http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p357.htm|by]
more than 17,100 basic and applied American scientists, two-thirds with advanced degrees, have signed the Global Warming Petition.

Signers of this petition so far include 2,660 physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists, oceanographers, and environmental scientists (select this link for a listing of these individuals) who are especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide on the Earth's atmosphere and climate.

Signers of this petition also include 5,017 scientists whose fields of specialization in chemistry, biochemistry, biology, and other life sciences (select this link for a listing of these individuals) make them especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide upon the Earth's plant and animal life.
New ^^ This, friends, is what we're up against
The endless legions of Repo-redstate ostrich-men, assiduously poking holes in the sand with their pointy heads.

They are the enemies of everything rational and real - twisted-soul nutcase radicals, hell-dwelling, hell-suffering, hell-bent on the ruination of all reason and all the accoutrements of reason.

-drl
New ^^ This, friends, is why democrats keep losing
A good sign you're winning is when all the other side can do is call you names...
New ^^ and this, friends, is why republicans keep winning
—because the country is chock-full of credulous ninnies like my pal johnu whose sense of smell is so impaired that a ripe, steaming operation like the OISM doesn't even cause his dainty nostrils to flare.

cordially,
Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.
New yeah, that "petition"...
In addition to the bulk mailing, OISM's website enables people to add their names to the petition over the Internet, and by June 2000 it claimed to have recruited more than 19,000 scientists. The institute is so lax about screening names, however, that virtually anyone can sign, including for example Al Caruba, a pesticide-industry PR man and conservative ideologue who runs his own website called the "National Anxiety Center." Caruba has no scientific credentials whatsoever, but in addition to signing the Oregon Petition he has editorialized on his own website against the science of global warming, calling it the "biggest hoax of the decade," a "genocidal" campaign by environmentalists who believe that "humanity must be destroyed to 'Save the Earth.' . . . There is no global warming, but there is a global political agenda, comparable to the failed Soviet Union experiment with Communism, being orchestrated by the United Nations, supported by its many Green NGOs, to impose international treaties of every description that would turn the institution into a global government, superceding the sovereignty of every nation in the world."

When questioned in 1998, OISM's Arthur Robinson admitted that only 2,100 signers of the Oregon Petition had identified themselves as physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, or meteorologists, "and of those the greatest number are physicists." The names of the signers are available on the OISM's website, but without listing any institutional affiliations or even city of residence, making it very difficult to determine their credentials or even whether they exist at all. When the Oregon Petition first circulated, in fact, environmental activists successfully added the names of several fictional characters and celebrities to the list, including John Grisham, Michael J. Fox, Drs. Frank Burns, B. J. Honeycutt, and Benjamin Pierce (from the TV show M*A*S*H), an individual by the name of "Dr. Red Wine," and Geraldine Halliwell, formerly known as pop singer Ginger Spice of the Spice Girls. Halliwell's field of scientific specialization was listed as "biology."
[link|http://www.prwatch.org/improp/oism.html|more here].

Ayup. Lots of rigorous hypothesis-experiment-verification-and-review going on at the "Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine." Really, johnu, you ought to have gone to one of the slicker sites directly maintained by the coal industry: they're not as readily shown up as objects of ridicule after six seconds of googling.

cordially,
Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.
New Re: yeah, that "petition"...
Thanks for that [link|http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/|unbasied] article. I'm sure you verified those names were actually on the petition.

Of course the disenting opinions on global warming are not limited to that one web site. Here's a few more I got after a couple minutes on Google:

[link|http://www.co2science.org/|http://www.co2science.org/]
[link|http://www.junkscience.com/|http://www.junkscience.com/]
[link|http://www.globalwarming.org/|http://www.globalwarming.org/]
[link|http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/|http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/]
[link|http://www.sepp.org/books/gwunfbus.html|http://www.sepp.org/books/gwunfbus.html]
[link|http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=9442|http://www.heartland...le.cfm?artId=9442]
[link|http://www.marshall.org/article.php?id=67|http://www.marshall....article.php?id=67]
[link|http://weathereye.kgan.com/expert/warming/skeptic.html|http://weathereye.kg...ming/skeptic.html]
[link|http://www.cato.org/dailys/04-20-04.html|http://www.cato.org/dailys/04-20-04.html]
[link|http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/09/20/do2002.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/09/20/ixop.html|http://portal.telegr...4/09/20/ixop.html]
[link|http://www.skepticism.net/faq/environment/global_warming/|http://www.skepticis...t/global_warming/]
[link|http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/04/10/wo_muller101504.asp|http://www.technolog..._muller101504.asp]


New Scientists are all bought and paid for . . .
. . so you can always find plenty to support any crank (or legitimate) theory you want. Every one of them knows where his/her paycheck / grant money came from, to whom s/he is beholden, and how to slant the "research".

That's the great wonder of the "free enterprise" system - the truth can never be known because all the "experts" are working to someone else's agenda.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New BFD
sorry, but what we have happening up here to our glacial cover etc simply brooks no argument, no matter how many shills the oil companies can afford to pay for.

The differences in the Ross Ice Shelf in the last ten years alone are huge. Someone up here did a series where they took an explorer ancestor's shots of glaciers in the Rockies and took pictures from the same place today. In most cases, an ice covered landscape from 100 years ago is bare rock today with no ice in sight, and in all cases the ice cover is very much diminished. The polar ice cap has shrunk precipitously in the last ten years as well.

Your guys' ideological posturing on behalf of their paymasters doesn't cut it any more, when anyone can see the changes that the last ten years have brought to the seasons.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton                            jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca]                   [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada               [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
New Really
You'd think that if they are too stupid to see that vast quantities of ice are vanishing, something that only requires opening the eyeballs and gazing, well, at least they'd be ashamed to be so many hirelings for a lowlife crowd of money-grubbing goons.

Those people have no pride.


-drl
New Oh, you fool, you . . .
Don't you know that's "hearsay evidence"? Observing that all the ice that was there is gone now is simply not scientific.

Of course, if you can pull out a doctorate from a prestigious university, 3 reams of meaningless statistics you've deliberately misinterpreted, and prove you've never worked a day of your life at a "real world" job, perhaps we could reconsider.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New Counterpoint...
I don't think they're arguing that the ice isn't disappearing. I think they're arguing that we don't know that humans have caused it in its entirety.
Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
New 'In it's entirety'
It has been scientifically measured that a bird took a dump on the ice in 1997, causing "significant melt" so there's no way humans can be responsible "in its entirety".

What will be "in its entirety" is a sudden dramatic climatic shift causing extreme dislocation of agriculture and national economies. Evidence is these things happen very quickly and may be accompanied by tremendous storms, so Florida, hold on to your hat.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New Lower third of Florida
will need more than their hat, unless it's to bail out the boat.

It'll be interesting to see what the masses do to the Titans of Industry once they figure out just how badly we're all screwed.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton                            jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca]                   [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada               [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
New Clinton caused it.
He had SEX in the WHITE HOUSE and now GOD is PUNISHING US.

Four more years!

Imric's Tips for Living
  • Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
  • Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
  • Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.


Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
 
 
New I'll make popcorn
--
Chris Altmann
New I'm not saying I agree.
Just that I don't think they're denying that the ice is actually melting.
Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
New Yup.
There are 2, er 3 issues.

1) Is the ice melting? Y/N

Most people would say Y.

2) Is the melting unusual? Y/N

It is on the last 100-200 year or so timescale, but it's not clear if it is on other time scales. Scientists have to answer this.

3) Is the melting caused by what humans have done and are doing to the environment? Y/N

This is where it gets hairy. Some say yes; some say no; some say we don't know and won't know until we do more studies and shouldn't change economic policy until we do; some say we don't know but the risk is so large that we have to act as if we do know. Scientists and politicians have to answer this.

I'm in the "we don't know, we need more studies, and we should take the risk seriously but not exaggerate it" camp. I remember in grade school that we were taught that the next ice age was just around the corner. And I'm also given pause by the recent controversy about the [link|http://www.techcentralstation.com/102704F.html|"hockey stick"] temperature measurements/extrapolations. We need to know more, there's no doubt, but we shouldn't take the problem lightly.

Cheers,
Scott.
(Who realizes that there are some scenarios where ice ages can result from too much CO2 in the atmosphere.)
New Don't forget...
4) If so, we should quickly sign an agreement hamstringing the economies of the west while giving a completely free ride to China and Southeast Asia where the issues of pollution are getting worse instead of better.

[link|http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/08/12/asia.haze/|Brown is a good color!] But we have to make sure Kansas is safe!
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New Although...
... if one group says "We're making the planet warmer!" and the other group says "No we're not!" and it's the latter group (ostensibly) in power, then why couldn't the second group then say "Here: we'll show you. We'll scotch as much CO2 et al as we can and see if it makes a difference. If you're right, then the planet will stop getting warmer. If we're right, the planet will either keep getting hotter or will get a lot colder."

Wade.

Is it enough to love
Is it enough to breathe
Somebody rip my heart out
And leave me here to bleed
 
Is it enough to die
Somebody save my life
I'd rather be Anything but Ordinary
Please

-- "Anything but Ordinary" by Avril Lavigne.

     Bush in denial on global warming - (tuberculosis) - (20)
         warming in the arctic is a good thing - (daemon)
         As are thousands of scientists... - (johnu) - (18)
             ^^ This, friends, is what we're up against - (deSitter) - (2)
                 ^^ This, friends, is why democrats keep losing - (johnu) - (1)
                     ^^ and this, friends, is why republicans keep winning - (rcareaga)
             yeah, that "petition"... - (rcareaga) - (13)
                 Re: yeah, that "petition"... - (johnu) - (12)
                     Scientists are all bought and paid for . . . - (Andrew Grygus)
                     BFD - (jake123) - (10)
                         Really - (deSitter)
                         Oh, you fool, you . . . - (Andrew Grygus)
                         Counterpoint... - (admin) - (7)
                             'In it's entirety' - (Andrew Grygus) - (6)
                                 Lower third of Florida - (jake123) - (2)
                                     Clinton caused it. - (imric)
                                     I'll make popcorn -NT - (altmann)
                                 I'm not saying I agree. - (admin) - (2)
                                     Yup. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                         Don't forget... - (bepatient)
             Although... - (static)

No, m'lord.
77 ms