BF2S Forums Despite your opinion on global warming...

People should take care of the environment as much as they can. Since the systems for dealing with Global Warming mean less polloution etc. then yeah, they should be implemented. Whether or not it's real shouldn't be an issue. Humans are dirty polluting fuckers and we should attempt to be as clean as possible.

Basicly if we shit in our own bed, we're the ones who are going to have to sleep in it.

I'm interested to hear the 'no' arguements. All the ones I've heard so far is

- who cares
- too lazy
- fuck the children

Yes, inact all measures. So even IF global warming isn't happening, we can prevent it. Or fight it off.

That'll keep all those so called 'experts' who can't tell whats going on calm.

vedds wrote:

explain why environmental change is neccesarily bad?

Say bye bye to everything you know, everything you loved.

theelviscerator wrote:

This is a small upswing.

Yes, a small upswing that is a record high in Co2 emissions caused by human activity.

There is no way in hell that this "small upswing" of yours is a small upswing at all.

What`s funny about this issue is to read the comments from people who dont have a clue to what it is all about and thinking its just a small upswing and other ignorant remarks !

Yes we must decrerase green house gases because it traps to much heat inside the atmosphere !

US and Norwegian politicians and currently working on reducing Chinas use of CFC`s that is actually a bigger threat to the enviroment than green house gases.

Ask your local politicians what they are thinking of mixing in 5 - 10 % ethanol into regular gasolin, almost all petrol fuelled cars can run on this mix and just such a small contribution will help in the reduction !

Countries where deforestation is a problem especially the burning of the rain forest should be an international issue to resolve !

My next car will be a hybrid Toyota Prius

Varegg wrote:

What`s funny about this issue is to read the comments from people who dont have a clue to what it is all about and thinking its just a small upswing and other ignorant remarks !

Yes we must decrerase green house gases because it traps to much heat inside the atmosphere !

US and Norwegian politicians and currently working on reducing Chinas use of CFC`s that is actually a bigger threat to the enviroment than green house gases.

Ask your local politicians what they are thinking of mixing in 5 - 10 % ethanol into regular gasolin, almost all petrol fuelled cars can run on this mix and just such a small contribution will help in the reduction !

Countries where deforestation is a problem especially the burning of the rain forest should be an international issue to resolve !

My next car will be a hybrid Toyota Prius

The Prius has a larger eco footprint over its lifetime then a HUMMER.

Good job moron.

I vaguely remember a story about a coastal liberal housing complex that got all bent out of shape because plans were in motion to set up power generators offshore. They complained that it "obstructed their view". So, easier said than done.

theelviscerator wrote:

The Prius has a larger eco footprint over its lifetime then a HUMMER.

Good job moron.

If you make statements like that with nothing to back it up, you come off sounding like a moron. Appropriate for someone who likes to call others morons, especially after totally disregarding the topic of the poll. The poll is called Despite your opinion on global warming..., yet you do nothing but complain about global warming. Nice one. You must have brushed over it in your attempt to be a forum troll. Just stay on topic and post whether you think we should be cleaner than we are.

I agree with aceofspade, I like all of the options presented above except the clean coal. No one likes living in a cesspool, and we're going to be eventually if we don't start cleaning up after ourselves.

No...  Because I like the idea of the human population being thinned out dramatically.

surgeon_bond wrote:

theelviscerator wrote:

THe earth has cooled since 1000 AD.


This is a small upswing.  You wanna pay for a very large and silly science experiment, go ahead.

Leave US of out it.

Nobody who has signed Kyoto has come close to meeting its standards.

Nuff said.

all hot air.

so you think that we should carry on polluting the world, making many species extinct covering alphas homeland in water, getting "tropical storms" nearly every month etc. etc.

I don't know what "covering alphas homeland in water" means, but species have been going extinct for millions of years before we arrived on the scene. They will continue to go extinct after we have.

And I don't know where you get your data about getting tropical storms every month, but as there is no precedent for it, and no proof that it is going to happen (other than media scaremongeting), it's not something that keeps me up at night.

Blehm98 wrote:

the batteries in electric/hybrid vehicles cause a tremendous amount of pollution when disposed of and during their making, resulting in more pollution being made...

same thing with solar panels...  expensive to make, and making them makes a very large amount of pollution

IMO the most important step in stoping global warming is to go nuclear, and to fund research into fusion power, which will allow us to be completely independant of oil, except as a lubricant for machinery and such

QFT. He's right on all points.

As to the original post, I agree with the postulated ideas, in principle. However, there are areas that you mentioned that we don't yet have acceptable replacements, and when faced with banning something that works before you have a viable replacement for it, well, I stand on the side of logic, not the environment. For example, there is no technology on the horizon to replace the diesel semi-truck cab. These suckers got a LOT cleaner in 2007, but they still put off a pretty good amount of CO₂. Not to mention, hydrogen/fuel cell cars ONLY put off CO₂.

So, we can't afford to legislate the banning of the truck industry. The US depends on it too much.

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I vaguely remember a story about a coastal liberal housing complex that got all bent out of shape because plans were in motion to set up power generators offshore. They complained that it "obstructed their view". So, easier said than done.

Ted Kennedy was involved in that, specifically. It'd be a lot more accurate to say that some rich bastards complained because it would obstruct their view but all someone has to do is say "Ted Kennedy" and suddenly it's "liberals" stopping the development. I realize it gets beaten into peoples' heads constantly, but Ted Kennedy and the rest of his contemporaries that stopped the construction of that wind farm are about as liberal as I am Catholic.

acsman50 wrote:

Nice reference to lemmings. It's recently come to light that scientists were in fact wrong about the idea of lemmings commiting mass suicide if their migration path has been interrupted. A majority of scientists wrong, hmm....

No, actually you would be wrong. Scientists haven't ever really believed that in any kind of majority.

AR-News: Scientists Find Lemmings Die as Dinners, Not Suicides

Do Lemmings Commit Suicide?

Apparently most of the supposition that lemmings commit mass suicide is due to a Disney nature film called "White Wilderness", during the filming of which lemmings were physically thrown off cliffs or into the water, to make them look like they were killing themselves.

Urban Legends Reference Pages: White Wilderness

So, the majority of scientists were actually right that they didn't commit suicide. However the predominant meme held by most regular people that lemmings commit suicide was wrong. A belief held by a majority of people reinforced by repetition and through "entertainment" wrong, hmm...