This Was Brought To My Attention By John K
Want to see something very disturbing? Check this site out. The first page you see shows you the terror threats for just the past 10 days alone. Some were false alarms and hoaxes, but many were real attacks around the world. To see something even worse, check out the past 12 months. Being a dial-up dinosaur, I had to stop the page because it was taking too long to load. And to think, some people still think global warming is a bigger threat.
Categories:
Global Warming,
In Case You Missed It,
War On Terror
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Well, terrorism is less likely to turn entire nations of people into refugees, and it's existed for decades... so you know...
... as for the 'terrorism alerts', anything that involves: guns, explosives, chemicals, white powder, foreigners, etc. is responded to as a 'terrorist threat' (things that are obviously pranks/false alarms have to be taken seriosly now).
Where there are actual incidents, the temptation to assume that anything involving 'foreigners with weapons' is 'terrorism' is far greater than it was ten years ago. That is a trend repeated all over the world. For decades, one man's terrorist was anothers 'freedom fighter', now they are all too easily terrorists (it's the new, fashionable way of killing dissidents, just ask China about 'Office 610' vs Falun Gong)(or David Hicks' Pentagon-appointed lawyer why he'll be unemployed soon).
(even half of what is commonly know as 'culture jacking' could construed as 'terrorism' by some definitions of new anti-terrorism laws)
...and the idea of 'terrorism' versus 'global warming', when planet Earth gets pissed-off it has/can/will kill a lot more people than a bunch of religious extremists ever have!
Dont look now; but several scientists whos name was FORGED onto the UN report on global warming are sueing to get the names removed. Because in scientific terms the global warming report commisioned by the UN is "Junk Science". Go figure.
Don't look now; but the US senate is inquiring into why the Bush administration stifled their own researchers, edited their own reports and quashed all evidence of global warming. Because in scientific terms that's called "lying". Go figure.
Stifled the researchers? Really? Been proven already huh? Then whats all the Senate investigating for then? The Why? LMAO.
Evidence of Global warming? Heh...
In scientific terms thats lying? That would be the first scientific thing the global warming crowd has every presented.
You're ass backwards with your moral equivelency again and reaching for straws. But thats what libs do when confronted with facts about the the lying UN report and the junk science of global warming being Manmade.
Global Warming theory isn't based on one single UN report. There are hundreds of scientists/organisations looking into it.
Then again, even you John should be able to understand that we as a species are creating astronomical amounts of certain gases that trap solar radiation in the atmosphere, and that solar radiation is largley in the form of heat.
I won't bore you with the rest, as I'm not sure you'd 'get it'.
It's not something that you can 'write-off' as something washington liberals cooked-up.
Infact, other than contribute to the problem more than any other nation, America has had little do with the topic.
Global Warming isn't an American political invention which is just divided down party-lines, and then consigned to an endless cycle of reports and committees designed to avoid doing anything (otherwise known as 'political process'), it's the name of the environmental problem that will screw your kids over (if American 'fast food'/gun-crime/own stupidity doesn't get them first)
Look; I know "global Warming" is a known fact. It has happened many times throughout earths history as far as human science can determine. What I find not credible is the Fauxscience that deems it as caused by mankind.
One volcanic errupton belches more carbon emmisions into the atmosphere than all the carbon greenhouse gasses emitted by mankind since he has been on the earth. And; there are several erruptions each and everyday on the planet. Its a normal cycle for the earth. If there was not global warming then we would STILL be in an ICE AGE for crists sake.
What this current global warming crises is all about is nothing more than an attack on capitalism by socialists and communists for political gain. Plus its turning out to be one of the greatest financial swindles of all time thanks to the "Progressives"(ie Liberals) worldwide.
Why is it all the worst pollutors like China are never mentioned? Because they are not a "Capitalistic" system. Its all a worldwide attack on successful global capitalistic economies by those who are against capitalism.
Why are nine out of every ten of these so called Global alarmist scientists getting their money and publicity from socialist/communist organizations like the World Workers Communist Party and many of thier underlings?
You cannot deny the connections; nor the conclusions.
"It has happened many times throughout earths history as far as human science can determine"
That is true, but those cycles take tens/hundreds of thousands of years (unless you are a creationist who packs the whole span of earth history into 6 thousand years)
"Its a normal cycle for the earth."
Yes, the Earth has it's normal cycles, but we contributing additional material, while taking away the means to balance the system (ie. deforestation, the trees use the CO2. We are adding massive amounts of CO2, while reducing the worlds rainforest, China alone has approx. 5-15% of forests that it did before 'civilisation' struck, similar figures apply to Europe).
"One volcanic errupton belches more carbon emmisions into the atmosphere than all the carbon greenhouse gasses emitted by mankind since he has been on the earth"
Where did you get an idea like that from?
"Why are nine out of every ten of these so called Global alarmist scientists getting their money and publicity from socialist/communist organizations"
Where do you get that figure from?
Besides, it's solid scientists (like CSIRO, Australian Government funded body) that have the some of the most damning research (to the annoyance of those who sign the cheques).
John, you've got to calm-down about the communists/socialists, they aren't 'coming to get you'.
Yes, China is mentioned as a contributor (although I thought you were saying that none of the pollution matters), it's just as a 'developing economy' China is following patterns that were 'layed-down' by the developed economies, and are struggling to get industrialised before they consider how to do it 'clean'.
This isn't an struggle between competing economic theories, it's not like the communists can move to planet capitalism (or visa versa). It's all occurring on the same planet, regardless of what political/social/economic doctrine is in effect in a particular localised area.
One volcanic errupton belches more carbon emmisions into the atmosphere than all the carbon greenhouse gasses emitted by mankind since he has been on the earth.
Allow me to correct that opinion.
Volcanic activity now releases about 130 to 230 teragrams (145 million to 255 million short tons) of carbon dioxide each year. Around 24 billion tonnes of CO2 are released from fossil fuel usage per year worldwide.
Furthermore, in methane, we actually outproduce nature. The natural total is about 270 teragrams a year, while we produce 330 teragrams a year (and note that methane has about 23 times the effect of CO2 as a greenhouse gas).
Nobody's stated that it's mankind's fault - what HAS been suggested by the scientific community is that our addition to the natural production of greenhouse gases is tipping the normal balance over significantly enough to make this one worse than any before.
Furthermore, even under a standard global warming scenario, we'd be seeing many nations wiped out entirely anyway.
Why is it all the worst pollutors like China are never mentioned?
Well primarily because the US has the worst pollution per annum, and Australia has the worst pollution per capita. China falls behind both of us.
Post a Comment