Global warming has been ongoing since the last ice age.
It is a cycle. Man contributes some, but the damage has already been done (by man). May bring it (next ice age) about a little sooner is all.
If you want to worry about something, why not worry about the bee population depletion. Much bigger threat and more we can do to help stem the progress.
seems you are a religious zealot on subject of global warming. closed mind to anything in the news, and scientific evidence to the contrary, no matter what you are going to "stick with your story"
Do you have many piercings, or tattoos? Just curious.
It has nothing to do with sticking to the story or zealotry, it is scientific fact that every legit scientist in the world see's as the truth. The only people who disagree are proven shill's for the oil companies or "faux news" folk.
Same people as before attending these activities. Before, it was anti-nuclear. (Thanks fopr that). Now it is free coffee and donuts in the morning at the pro-rally. And free finger sandwiches and coffee at the afternoon anti-rally. Maybe a chance for random sex, and sell some meth too.
Even if you don't believe global warming is real, and that all the credible scientists are liars.. and Bush knows more about the environment than say... an actual scientist... there is NO WAY you can be pro-pollution. I'll be at this event. [=
Currently, the United States is the world's largest emitter of carbon emissions from energy. However, China is expected to overtake the United States as the number one emitter in the world by 2015.
Chen Tianqiao, the co-founder, chairman, and CEO of Shanghai's Shanda Interactive Entertainment Ltd is the richest man in China and has nothing to do with solar power or solar panels. Fact, not fiction.
China's emissions are just an extension of America's consumption. Manufacturing things there displaces the source of the emissions. For that matter, anyone who buys manufactured goods in China in complicit with the increase in emissions there.
I agree. My only disagreement in this post is that the U.S. cannot be the sole country to cut carbon emissions. If we were to dicontinue all manufacturing here in the U.S. it would just be done somewhere else and the amount of carbon emissions would remain the same worldwide. The problem is complex and simply taking to the streets and making demands without offering alternative solutions is pointless. I'm not very optimistic about the future of planet Earth.
Of course the US cannot be the sole country to cut carbon emissions. many European countires are already doing it and have been for years. Unfortunately, they are small contributors to overall global pollution to begin with. CHINA is a major polluter and must be encouraged to participate in the actions required to cut carbon and pollution. They are burning coal like there is no tomorrow. On the other hand, their cars have better emissions standards than ours. Go figure.
And your righteous attmept at a historical parallel between your position as a skeptic and that of slavery abolitionists is really quite perverse. You, had you lived back then, i'm sure would have been arguing that the institution of slavery could not be dismantled because it would destroy American society and economy, or that black people would be incapable of living free.
How can you be sure of what arguments I would have made regarding slavery. You don't know me. You don't even know if I am black or white. Your ignorance is showing and your credibility is zero.
Say something NOW before your entire movement is coopted by the nuclear industry which is using global warming to re-market nukes as clean and green. Have you forgotten the 1980 NoNukes concert in Battery Park?
Cutting carbon emissions 80% by the year 2050 would ruin the world's economy and millions of people would starve to death or die of disease. These people are blissfully ignorant of the consequences. I also can't think of a place that is more deserving of being underwater than NYC.
Hyperbole and junk science do not scare me. People who advocate causes without knowing the facts do scare me. Also, global cooperation will be needed to affect any change in carbon emissions, not just U.S. cooperation. If you really believe that the world will unite behind this cause you are being naive. Where is the world unity to stop something as obviously wrong as the carnage in Darfur. Global cooperation? Not going to happen.
Being in the minority does not make one wrong. Anti-slavery advocates were once in the minority. As far as where I am drawing my facts from, this is not a good forum for such a lengthy discussion.
Let the record show that in the past 10 years there have been 934 peer-reviewed (read: legit) studies showing that climate change is real and cause in great part by humans, and exactly 0 (zero) casting any doubt on that. So don't talk to us about junk science.
Let the record show that in the past 10 years there have been 934 peer-reviewed (read: legit) studies showing that climate change is real and cause in great part by humans, and exactly 0 (zero) casting any doubt on that. So don't talk to us about junk science.
I have done my research and I find I agree more with Richard Lindzen (The Alfred P. Sloane professor of meteorology at MIT)who contradicts your view.
And, yes, of course global cooperation is necessary. But we certainly can't start preaching to other countries what we don't practice at home. And much of the world is uniting on climate change already. In the developed world, only the U.S. and Austrailia are the last to react. And once we get our house in order, we can start helping others.
Complete and total backwards thinking on every count.
You have no basis for claiming that the 80%/2050 target would ruin the world economy and lead to millinos of deaths. Please provide a source - and not one from AEI or CEI or any other free market think tank that. You won't find one. There are, of course, many resources indicating how bad the economic and human toll will be if we do not respond to the problem.
If the only sources you will accept are ones that you agree with (a typical liberal tactic) then there isn't much room for debate. By the way, it was your Ann Coulter remark that betrayed your liberalism. We are trying to have an honest, open debate and there is no room for close-minded people like you in this kind of forum.
consider this: China's solar industry is growing far faster than the U.S.'s. Don't think the solar industry is a big deal? China's richest man is a solar entrepreneur. Renewables will be the biggest energy businesses of the 21st Century. If there's one way to cripple America's economy and lose our stake as world economic superpower, it's to keep relying on fossil fuels and start buying our solar panels from China.
China's industrial sector alone emitted 485 million metric tons of carbon in 1990, or about 75 percent of the country's total carbon emissions in that year. For perspective, China's industrial carbon emissions are greater than total emissions from any country in the world, except for the United States and Russia.
China's carbon emissions increased about 5 percent per year in all economic sectors between 1980 and 1990. In absolute terms, industrial carbon emissions grew the most (about 180 million metric tons), while transportation sector emissions grew the least (about 15 million metric tons) during the 1980s.
China's carbon emissions are expected to increase about 4 percent annually through 2015, driven by rapid economic growth and a rapid increase in coal use. The country's total carbon emissions should exceed 1.8 billion metric tons in 2015, over three times the 1986 emissions of 543 million metric tons and more than double the 1995 emissions of 808 million metric tons.
China's carbon emissions are expected to increase about 4 percent annually through 2015, driven by rapid economic growth and a rapid increase in coal use. The country's total carbon emissions should exceed 1.8 billion metric tons in 2015, over three times the 1986 emissions of 543 million metric tons and more than double the 1995 emissions of 808 million metric tons. So much for China's solar power.
You can cut and paste plenty of info on China--I'll take it you've accepted my other fact-based arguments. Re: China--Listen--I'm not saying it's a model. One thing we can agree on is that China poses an enormous risk. But they're growing fast-in all energy sectors. And yesterday (!) China announced that they will reduce coal use 3% in 3 years. Not much, but it's a start. More than the US can say. Thus we need action here!
I don't only cut and paste, I read and absorb and I investigate the source of the info for bias. I have not yet accepted your other arguments but I promise to look into them. I myself keep an open mind but I do not tolerate a closed one (I don't mean you. I don't know you so I cannot make that judgement).
Change happens. Imagine an Ice Age. There are to many humans on Earth. It was bound to mess with the climate. Humanity will survive, but not all of us.
Google the "Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act" and the "Safe Climate Act of 2007," or do a little bit of research on California's State law to find an answer to your question. . . of course you will have to take your own head out of your ass first, in order to do that.
That's the same Richard Lindzen that recieves $2,500/day from coal and oil companies. And who was paid by OPEC to write "scientific" reports which no other scientist has confirmed upon review. Great scientific resource. And let's settle down the gutter-talk. Is this a debate or are you guys writing on bathroom walls? I guess it can't be much of a debate since everyone who knows the truth (like, the real factual truth) is in agreement.
By the way-I love America, that's why I want it to be economically prosperous and have American carmakers sell more cars and keep more jobs than Toyota (who employs more Americans than any of the Big Three in Detroit) by making more hybrids and I want America to generate power on our roofs and on our ranches and farms and not dependent on fossil-fuels from unstable Middle Eastern countries. Tamarlane-Oil is death to America. I guess you're conflicted.
NOVA has shown several scientific documentaries on Global Warming and it really isn't a joke. Watch PBS for truthful information.
Jibbie49 4 years ago
Maybe a green mohawk?
TAMARLANE 4 years ago
There is no debate about global warming except on fox "news" folks, time to wake up and join the rest of the scientific world.
cliemac 4 years ago
cliemac
Global warming has been ongoing since the last ice age.
It is a cycle. Man contributes some, but the damage has already been done (by man). May bring it (next ice age) about a little sooner is all.
If you want to worry about something, why not worry about the bee population depletion. Much bigger threat and more we can do to help stem the progress.
TAMARLANE 4 years ago
Wake up and join the rest of the scientific world, leave the "faux news" retoric out of logical thought.
cliemac 4 years ago
cliemac
seems you are a religious zealot on subject of global warming. closed mind to anything in the news, and scientific evidence to the contrary, no matter what you are going to "stick with your story"
Do you have many piercings, or tattoos? Just curious.
TAMARLANE 4 years ago
It has nothing to do with sticking to the story or zealotry, it is scientific fact that every legit scientist in the world see's as the truth. The only people who disagree are proven shill's for the oil companies or "faux news" folk.
cliemac 4 years ago
gullible idiots.
SirFinklebottom 4 years ago
Same people as before attending these activities. Before, it was anti-nuclear. (Thanks fopr that). Now it is free coffee and donuts in the morning at the pro-rally. And free finger sandwiches and coffee at the afternoon anti-rally. Maybe a chance for random sex, and sell some meth too.
TAMARLANE 4 years ago
your ignorance is amazing... congrats!
badmalone 4 years ago
badmalone (3 hours ago)
your ignorance is amazing... congrats!
If I'm so stupid, how can I tell you are a liberal, after only one short sentence? OH, I know.
It was a juvenile insult.
TAMARLANE 4 years ago
Even if you don't believe global warming is real, and that all the credible scientists are liars.. and Bush knows more about the environment than say... an actual scientist... there is NO WAY you can be pro-pollution. I'll be at this event. [=
RainaBeeford 4 years ago
Give it up Hippie, there's no such thing as Global Warming, but there is such a thing as band practice.
RellikBoon 4 years ago
Currently, the United States is the world's largest emitter of carbon emissions from energy. However, China is expected to overtake the United States as the number one emitter in the world by 2015.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
Chen Tianqiao, the co-founder, chairman, and CEO of Shanghai's Shanda Interactive Entertainment Ltd is the richest man in China and has nothing to do with solar power or solar panels. Fact, not fiction.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
China's emissions are just an extension of America's consumption. Manufacturing things there displaces the source of the emissions. For that matter, anyone who buys manufactured goods in China in complicit with the increase in emissions there.
TAMARLANE 4 years ago
I agree. My only disagreement in this post is that the U.S. cannot be the sole country to cut carbon emissions. If we were to dicontinue all manufacturing here in the U.S. it would just be done somewhere else and the amount of carbon emissions would remain the same worldwide. The problem is complex and simply taking to the streets and making demands without offering alternative solutions is pointless. I'm not very optimistic about the future of planet Earth.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
Of course the US cannot be the sole country to cut carbon emissions. many European countires are already doing it and have been for years. Unfortunately, they are small contributors to overall global pollution to begin with. CHINA is a major polluter and must be encouraged to participate in the actions required to cut carbon and pollution. They are burning coal like there is no tomorrow. On the other hand, their cars have better emissions standards than ours. Go figure.
stringrrl 4 years ago
And your righteous attmept at a historical parallel between your position as a skeptic and that of slavery abolitionists is really quite perverse. You, had you lived back then, i'm sure would have been arguing that the institution of slavery could not be dismantled because it would destroy American society and economy, or that black people would be incapable of living free.
cneidl 4 years ago
How can you be sure of what arguments I would have made regarding slavery. You don't know me. You don't even know if I am black or white. Your ignorance is showing and your credibility is zero.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
damn tree hugging sandal wearing hippies take a shower and get a job
jmts25 4 years ago
Say something NOW before your entire movement is coopted by the nuclear industry which is using global warming to re-market nukes as clean and green. Have you forgotten the 1980 NoNukes concert in Battery Park?
LuMagazine 4 years ago
Cutting carbon emissions 80% by the year 2050 would ruin the world's economy and millions of people would starve to death or die of disease. These people are blissfully ignorant of the consequences. I also can't think of a place that is more deserving of being underwater than NYC.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
there is no business to be done on a dead planet.
badmalone 4 years ago
Hyperbole and junk science do not scare me. People who advocate causes without knowing the facts do scare me. Also, global cooperation will be needed to affect any change in carbon emissions, not just U.S. cooperation. If you really believe that the world will unite behind this cause you are being naive. Where is the world unity to stop something as obviously wrong as the carnage in Darfur. Global cooperation? Not going to happen.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
i would love to know what facts you're drawing from... seeing as though you're in the minority here.
badmalone 4 years ago
Being in the minority does not make one wrong. Anti-slavery advocates were once in the minority. As far as where I am drawing my facts from, this is not a good forum for such a lengthy discussion.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
I would love such a discussion. My supporting facts and empirical data are vast, and certainly can't fit in hte confines of these 500 characters.
bervey 4 years ago
Let the record show that in the past 10 years there have been 934 peer-reviewed (read: legit) studies showing that climate change is real and cause in great part by humans, and exactly 0 (zero) casting any doubt on that. So don't talk to us about junk science.
bervey 4 years ago
bervey (3 hours ago)
Let the record show that in the past 10 years there have been 934 peer-reviewed (read: legit) studies showing that climate change is real and cause in great part by humans, and exactly 0 (zero) casting any doubt on that. So don't talk to us about junk science.
I have done my research and I find I agree more with Richard Lindzen (The Alfred P. Sloane professor of meteorology at MIT)who contradicts your view.
TAMARLANE 4 years ago
And, yes, of course global cooperation is necessary. But we certainly can't start preaching to other countries what we don't practice at home. And much of the world is uniting on climate change already. In the developed world, only the U.S. and Austrailia are the last to react. And once we get our house in order, we can start helping others.
bervey 4 years ago
Complete and total backwards thinking on every count.
You have no basis for claiming that the 80%/2050 target would ruin the world economy and lead to millinos of deaths. Please provide a source - and not one from AEI or CEI or any other free market think tank that. You won't find one. There are, of course, many resources indicating how bad the economic and human toll will be if we do not respond to the problem.
cneidl 4 years ago
If the only sources you will accept are ones that you agree with (a typical liberal tactic) then there isn't much room for debate. By the way, it was your Ann Coulter remark that betrayed your liberalism. We are trying to have an honest, open debate and there is no room for close-minded people like you in this kind of forum.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
consider this: China's solar industry is growing far faster than the U.S.'s. Don't think the solar industry is a big deal? China's richest man is a solar entrepreneur. Renewables will be the biggest energy businesses of the 21st Century. If there's one way to cripple America's economy and lose our stake as world economic superpower, it's to keep relying on fossil fuels and start buying our solar panels from China.
bervey 4 years ago
China's industrial sector alone emitted 485 million metric tons of carbon in 1990, or about 75 percent of the country's total carbon emissions in that year. For perspective, China's industrial carbon emissions are greater than total emissions from any country in the world, except for the United States and Russia.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
China's carbon emissions increased about 5 percent per year in all economic sectors between 1980 and 1990. In absolute terms, industrial carbon emissions grew the most (about 180 million metric tons), while transportation sector emissions grew the least (about 15 million metric tons) during the 1980s.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
China's carbon emissions are expected to increase about 4 percent annually through 2015, driven by rapid economic growth and a rapid increase in coal use. The country's total carbon emissions should exceed 1.8 billion metric tons in 2015, over three times the 1986 emissions of 543 million metric tons and more than double the 1995 emissions of 808 million metric tons.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
China's carbon emissions are expected to increase about 4 percent annually through 2015, driven by rapid economic growth and a rapid increase in coal use. The country's total carbon emissions should exceed 1.8 billion metric tons in 2015, over three times the 1986 emissions of 543 million metric tons and more than double the 1995 emissions of 808 million metric tons. So much for China's solar power.
RockyBluz 4 years ago
You can cut and paste plenty of info on China--I'll take it you've accepted my other fact-based arguments. Re: China--Listen--I'm not saying it's a model. One thing we can agree on is that China poses an enormous risk. But they're growing fast-in all energy sectors. And yesterday (!) China announced that they will reduce coal use 3% in 3 years. Not much, but it's a start. More than the US can say. Thus we need action here!
bervey 4 years ago
I don't only cut and paste, I read and absorb and I investigate the source of the info for bias. I have not yet accepted your other arguments but I promise to look into them. I myself keep an open mind but I do not tolerate a closed one (I don't mean you. I don't know you so I cannot make that judgement).
RockyBluz 4 years ago
Change happens. Imagine an Ice Age. There are to many humans on Earth. It was bound to mess with the climate. Humanity will survive, but not all of us.
Drakewood 4 years ago
We need you to get rid of your SUVs!
14gonzo 4 years ago
80$ by 2050? How was this figure arrived at? Or was it just surgically removed from someone's butt?
TAMARLANE 4 years ago
Tamarlane,
Google the "Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act" and the "Safe Climate Act of 2007," or do a little bit of research on California's State law to find an answer to your question. . . of course you will have to take your own head out of your ass first, in order to do that.
cneidl 4 years ago
but that would be too easy chris...
badmalone 4 years ago
cneidl
I have done my research and I find I agree more with Richard Lindzen (The Alfred P. Sloane professor of meteorology at MIT)who contradicts your view.
I am a meat eater and I talk dirty when I have sex (with women). Death to those who chant death to America.
TAMARLANE 4 years ago
That's the same Richard Lindzen that recieves $2,500/day from coal and oil companies. And who was paid by OPEC to write "scientific" reports which no other scientist has confirmed upon review. Great scientific resource. And let's settle down the gutter-talk. Is this a debate or are you guys writing on bathroom walls? I guess it can't be much of a debate since everyone who knows the truth (like, the real factual truth) is in agreement.
bervey 4 years ago
By the way-I love America, that's why I want it to be economically prosperous and have American carmakers sell more cars and keep more jobs than Toyota (who employs more Americans than any of the Big Three in Detroit) by making more hybrids and I want America to generate power on our roofs and on our ranches and farms and not dependent on fossil-fuels from unstable Middle Eastern countries. Tamarlane-Oil is death to America. I guess you're conflicted.
bervey 4 years ago
. . . You agree with Lindzen because your Anne Coulter view of the universe requires you too, not because you are interested in evidence.
cneidl 4 years ago
New world order ploy....
evrmohr 4 years ago
this should be a great event. hope we get a ton of people and really send a strong message!
badmalone 4 years ago
Solidarity from the UK...good work.
calvinjones 4 years ago
Great idea. Too bad I'll be on the WC, where people always turn off the lights but never walk anywhere.
mfs500 4 years ago