An Inconvenient Truth. The end of the world in our lifetime?

[Propertarian]

[ QUOTE ]
Buy an economics textbook.

Record profits cannot come at the public's expense, they can only come with it's benefit, by definition.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's funny, all my economics textbooks mention something called externalities and imperfect information, making this false, as the 'benefits' might be offset by costs to parties external to the contract, and the 'benefits' might be illusory (e.g. fake medicine).

Even funnier, they all list environmental problems as externalities that cannot be solved by market based solutions (like your preposterous proposal of endless litigation) because it is impossible for anyone to own the whole planet or air, and the negative costs imposed on others by these externalities are diffuse and hard to impossible to quantify monetarily.

[Morrek]

Any way for europeans to watch this movie? I've looked around and found nothing

[wacki]

To vanveen,

[ QUOTE ]

If you'd like to read articles and papers penned by someone with credentials that trump Wacki's by an order of magnitude, check out this site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, I didn't catch this earlier. Well I won't resort to personal attacks against you but you might want to read this....

[ QUOTE ]
Lindzen is .... an esteemed member of the National Academy of Sciences.

[/ QUOTE ]

Esteemed National Academy of Sciences? Wow! Well lets see what they have to say!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here is a press release released in 2005 which opens with the words “Climate Change is real”. It’s conclusion begins with “We urge all nations, in the line with the UNFCCC principles, to take prompt action to reduce the causes of climate change, adapt to its impacts and ensure that the issue is included in all relevant national and international strategies.” It is signed by:

1. Academia Brasiliera de Ciências, Brazil
2. Royal Society of Canada, Canada
3. Chinese Academy of Sciences, China
4. Academié des Sciences, France
5. Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher, Germany
6. Indian National Science Academy, India
7. Accademia dei Lincei, Italy
8. Science Council of Japan, Japan
9. Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia
10. Royal Society, United Kingdom
11. National Academy of Sciences, United States of America

http://nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf

plenty more on my site. Just for you vanveen!!!!!!

Do you want one from 6 years ago? Ok, here it is!

http://darwin.nap.edu/openbook.php?r...139&page=1


Btw considering that's the whole planet's supply of scientists basically, how many magnitudes of order is that compared to Lindzen?

[ QUOTE ]
Wacki, I generally appreciate your thoughts and eleemosynary acts of didacticism, but you are out of line in this thread and flatly mistaken.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya, the several hundred thousand scientists I link to are probably wrong too. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

do yourself a favor and read this

http://www.logicalscience.com/skeptics/Lindzen.htm

Everything is sourced. Since he's the oil companies "best" I'll make sure I source everything 5 ways from Sunday. But for now you will have to put up with only two sources for every fact.

There is so much other crap in this thread to respond to but I don't have the time.

[Soulman]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok let's say we assume global warming is a big, real problem and that we can do something about it. We hustle and hustle and then one hundred years later it turns out we were wrong. Dire consequences of our mistakes include a healthier and more energy-efficient society.

Ok now let's assume we blow off global warming cos when we were little kids we always thought it'd be cool to be an ostrich or a president. So we go along on our merry way and a hundred years later it turns out we were wrong. Dire consequences of our mistake now likely include worldwide chaos and misery.

Hmm.

[/ QUOTE ]
Quoted yet again because this is an extremely good argument, no matter if you believe in global warming and its effects or not.

Would you accept a 0.1% percent chance your plane would crash? No? Why risk something so hugely important like this? What are the giant downsides to being cautious? I have yet to see a good argument for this...

(And yes, I know the effects of warming aren't necessarily 'omgwtf tha Earf be doomed, we all gonna die!')

[AceHigh]

The earth is most likely either getting hotter or getting colder, it's less likely it's staying a constant temperature.

It's also more likely that the earth is getting warmer than it is getting cooler.

Isn't warmer preferable to colder? Wouldn't an Ice Age be the worst thing that could happen to humans? The earth getting warmer is probably good, unless you live at sea level, so relax and work on your tan.

[ivaluebet]

The penguin movie made me sad.

[meccaNES]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you are probably overreacting, and the people who are going to come in and disagree with you are probably douchebags.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope I'm overreacting because the evidence presented in the film was terrifying to say the least. Every day the ice on greenland and Antarctic are wasting away. The film showed that if 50% of the ice in Greenland melted and 50% of the ice in the Antarctic melted it would raise the sea level world-wide by 20 feet. That means most of the US east cost, almost all of Florida, most of Ontario, all of Manhatten would be underwater. The results however are world-wide and effects almost every country. When is this projected? Anytime between next year and 50 years if our world doesn't start taking steps to lower our CO2 levels and slowing down global warming.

Again, this is information presented very thoroughly in the film, and is whatsoever not my own opinion. I was not an environmentalist by any means before seeing this film. Heck I own a new Cadillac Escalade for christ sakes.. I'm part of the problem. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

-Caddy

[/ QUOTE ]

Fly the water into space via Futurama trashball. With better results though.

[phil_ivey_fan]

its def not gonna be global warming that ends our world.

ok, that's not right...let me re-phrase. It is way more probable that religious beliefs in the Middle East are going to be the root cause followed closely by corrupt US politicians.

[John Feeney]

I had a longer post prepared, but it got into some speculation about the psychology of political partisanship in the GW debate. I fear it may be too "political" right now, so I won't bother.

I'll just say I think it's cool, wacki, that you put those videos on youtube.

And Borodog, I still wish you'd make clear your view on the science of climate change when you disagree with some economic assertion wacki or others make in these threads. Otherwise, some will get the impression you side with the "skeptics," which you've previously made clear you don't.