Earth Hour - March 29th (this Saturday)

[timouse]

i turned everything off but the fire and the cbc, me and the dog fell asleep. viva earth hour!

[Kanada Kev]

[bouche]

I think this is a cool movement...I also think that most people aren't considering the fact that the sun is getting hotter which is causing the ice caps to melt...carbon emissions causes humans to be unhealthy and develop cancer etc. The sun causes extra heat melting ice caps

how high are you? the sun doesn't get hotter that fast dude. we are on a very miniscule timescale compared to the suns increasing temp.

My theory is better. The more solar power that is used, the more energy is demanded from the sun and thus drawn. This means that we are pulling more energy from the sun to energize solar panels. With that, our planet will heat up.

eat that theory and come back to me in 20 years when they can prove it.

[bouche]

Wait just a second. It just occurred to me that Cops is on from 8-9 tonight.

wait. Cops is still a show? Are they new ones or are you watching old reruns?

[bouche]

Blackle's whole dealio is that a black pixel needs less energy than a white pixel.

that's a really good point (pixel)

[FOWL]

I strongly implore anyone who hasn't considered why it is the media and politicians have all suddenly jumped on the global warming bandwagon, caiming an illusionary and completely false "scientific consensus" based on flawed climate models and disregarding any study that conflicts with the predetpermined agenda, to watch this documentary in the interest of having a balanced view of the facts. If you haven't looked at both sides of the argument, then you have no knowledge of the subject at hand.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=3069943905833454241&q=global+warming+or+global+governance&total=283&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

[boiler]

Blackle's whole dealio is that a black pixel needs less energy than a white pixel.

that's a really good point (pixel)

lol, you're pretty bright.

Reading a book by candlelight with my honey was good fun. Hey wait, I work in a Nuke plant, everybody get all your lights on NOW!!! I don't want to be unemployed.

[boiler]

I strongly implore anyone who hasn't considered why it is the media and politicians have all suddenly jumped on the global warming bandwagon, caiming an illusionary and completely false "scientific consensus" based on flawed climate models and disregarding any study that conflicts with the predetpermined agenda, to watch this documentary in the interest of having a balanced view of the facts. If you haven't looked at both sides of the argument, then you have no knowledge of the subject at hand.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=3069943905833454241&q=global+warming+or+global+governance&total=283&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Only did it for the romance,

can't argue with that.

[bouche]

I went to our backyard with hopes to see what Ottawa looked like in the dark. I forgot that we don't live in a highrise, but I did manage to see the tip of the peacetower. The flag that sits on top was glowing in the night. Like really glowing. It was so weird. That light on there was the only one on, but it is fucking bright You can see what I mean in the posted photo.

[dancingbear]

I strongly implore anyone who hasn't considered why it is the media and politicians have all suddenly jumped on the global warming bandwagon, caiming an illusionary and completely false "scientific consensus" based on flawed climate models and disregarding any study that conflicts with the predetpermined agenda, to watch this documentary in the interest of having a balanced view of the facts. If you haven't looked at both sides of the argument, then you have no knowledge of the subject at hand.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=3069943905833454241&q=global+warming+or+global+governance&total=283&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

are you joking? yeah harper is really jumping on the bandwagon, with emissions down by 2050, that will really settle things. there will always be two sides (at least) to any arguement. however MOST of the worlds "scientist" would say global warming is FACT. the debate my friend,( which has been raging for a while) is over. its now time to do something about it.

i was about to testify in a trial (caregivers plead guilty right before I had to testify), for a horrible case of child abuse. the defendents however had a 'prominent' physician who was going to testify that this was not necessary abuse. my point being, here is a crime against, a completely innocent child. the victim has a 'face', and it is personalized. yet someone for $$$ was going to be on their side. So when there is a 'faceless'generalized victim ie. humans, plants, animals, with a lot of money involved in CHANGE, it does not surpirse me in the least there are naysayers.

the movie is drivel.

annoyingly as well they use 'man', instead of human. their vocabulary stuck with their mindset, somehwere in the distant past.

oh yeah, let's reach the farthest points of our imagination and say 'they' are right, and there is no global warming. should we then NOT 'implement policy' to clean up pollution? ie. what about human health, that is affected by these same emmisions?

Edited March 30, 2008 by Guest

[Thorgnor]

I dare anybody who questions the validity of science concerning the dangers of emmisions to go suck a tailpipe and tell me they feel great.

Smoke kills things, more smoke kills more things... sounds illogical, eh?

If you think it's too late and I don't why do you get to make the decision to do nothing and I don't get the opportunity to try?

[Tricky]

I think this is a cool movement...I also think that most people aren't considering the fact that the sun is getting hotter which is causing the ice caps to melt...carbon emissions causes humans to be unhealthy and develop cancer etc. The sun causes extra heat melting ice caps

how high are you? the sun doesn't get hotter that fast dude. we are on a very miniscule timescale compared to the suns increasing temp.

My theory is better. The more solar power that is used' date=' the more energy is demanded from the sun and thus drawn. This means that we are pulling more energy from the sun to energize solar panels. With that, our planet will heat up.

eat that theory and come back to me in 20 years when they can prove it.

[/quote']

Read up a little and learn...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

Edited March 30, 2008 by Guest

[bouche]

that is so february 28th.

[Tricky]

stop being so funny...

[FOWL]

How long did you watch? 1 minute??? Noone is saying global warming doesn't exist. It just isn't caused by human emissions, period. Sure Harper could care less about emissions, he knows it's a fraud, but that doesn't mean he isn't handing out billions of tax dollars in Global Warming initiatives. And guess where those go? THE OIL COMPANIES! hahahah it's a complete sham. Remember Al Gore's movie, how he shows the graphs for carbon dioxide concentrations on top of (not together so as to obscure the relationship) global temperature and says "there is a complicated relationship..." The relationship is that carbon levels lag behind temperature shifts by hundreds of years!!! Don't believe me, go find the ice core records and look at the data. Noone is saying pollution isn't bad. We know smog kills, it just doesn't affect global climate. Even if the less than 3% of carbon dioxide humans are responsible for (compared to all the decaying plankton in the ocean, decaying vegetative matter) the Earth has had 11 times more CO2 concentration in our atmosphere in the past AND LIFE FLOURISHED. The fossil records show it drives plant life, which then supports more animal life. We have also lived through temperatures ten degrees warmer on average than what we see now, and guess what, humanity prospered. I suggest you actually watch that movie, and actually check up on it's sources. You've been conned. Let's talk about pesticides, let's talk about GMO food. Let's talk about pollution, but global warming is a farce being used to push more taxes and further globalisation. And if you listen to what the environmental think tanks suggest, we are talking about a complete return to serfdom, with all the little people taken from the land and moved to compact cities, or the Earth will die. There many people who actually think like this, and some of these groups actually get massive funding from oil tycoons. Watch the acadamy award winning "film" An Inconvenient Truth, full of emotional pandering and severe ego tripping, then watch Global Warming or Global Governance, full of SCIENCE. Cheap production values, high on information. Which one do you think had support from major corporations?

Edited March 30, 2008 by Guest

[dancingbear]

FOWL,

i really am lost where to begin. i have tried typing several responses, yet just seem lost. after reading your post, i guess then the climate is changing but oil companies have conspired to blame humans. i looked up 'serfdom' on wickipedia

to see what those nasty environmental think tanks are doing but gave up trying to understand when the first line said

"Serfdom is the socio-economic status of peasants under feudalism, and specifically relates to Manorialism."

myths about climate change.

to counter your arguements i refer you to myths 1,3,5,7, and 10.

oh yeah, an inconvenient truth was designed to educate the masses on climate change. i realize now you find many faults with it. so just ignore it and concentrate on the other thousands of SCIENTIFIC papers out there.

Edited March 30, 2008 by Guest

[Tricky]

if it's on the internet, it must be true.

[FOWL]

Okay, thanks for replying and bringing up some attempts at facts instead of just attacking the fact he used the word man in the doc (WHAT A DEMON! hahha)

1. First off, there have been countless scientists who contributed signatures to the IPCC who's data and comments were completely ignored due to them not supporting the predetermined goal of the report (which is inherently anti-scientific) yet their signatures were included in a report that was the exact opposite of their finding. A consensus indeed. Then that Sierra club page you posted goes on to say an opposing petition with 19000 signatures is a "hoax" because they feel it was sold to scientists as being involved with an institution it wasn't. Well that doesn't change the actual statements those scientists signed off on, and I can't find anyone claiming that petition had essentially stolen their signature like the IPCC.

Here's an article talking a bit about this. http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=c47c1209-233b-412c-b6d1-5c755457a8af

3. There have been some interesting scietific reports (published by the University of Guelph, and detailed in that film) showing how thermometer readings are taken in major city centres globally, which have micro climates often ten degrees warmer than rural readings. Note the ice and tree ring samples show a completely reasonable temperature, while the red thermometer line rises out of control. The fact is in the past century we have only gained one degree of average temperature, and in the past year we dropped .7 a degree, (yes that's right, the globe had an excessively cold winter, in keeping with the sun's recent drop in activity.) Besides all that, that graph doesn't go back far enough to show some of the hotter periods of Earth's history. Only a thousand years old? Anyone who knows ANYTHING about Earth's climate knows there are minor cycles and major cycles, and the major cycles play out over hundreds of thousands of years.

5. Okay, this is a big load of conjecture. Much of this is based on climate models, which are flawed entirely as there are always factors unknown to us that affect how a system works. We don't fully understand the Earth's climate yet, that is a fact. So how could we trust anyone's climate model? We can't predict the weather more than a week in advance, but we can predict what will happen in the coming decades? this is absurd, especially when taking into account that when the temperature and CO2 levels of Earth were drastically higher, fossil records show life on Earth was much bigger and more plentiful. Remember dragonflies with 7 foot wing spans? Dinosaurs??? To me that is EVIDENCE that higher Co2 and temperatures lead to more life on earth, regardless of what a computer model says.

7. Now this is the kicker. Look at those graphs. Why do they have them on top of each other, and not seperate cloloured lines on the same graph?? look closely. look really closely. Actually, what you need to do is find the actual numbers, and you will see, that temperature peaks BEFORE CO2 peaks. The relationship is actually the OPPOSITE of what they want you to believe. The hotter it gets, the more organic matter decays, releasing more co2. If all the climate models of feedback cycles of endless warming are true, why is it the peaks fall so quickly?

That graph is purposely misleading, as the lag between CO2 and temperature tends to be a few centuries, which is too short a time span for this graph to show. Look at the actual numbers though. I quickly did a search on ice core data, and this was the first link that came up. Note that same graph is put together, now how does it look? http://www.daviesand.com/Choices/Precautionary_Planning/New_Data/

10. Once again, they are misleading. I don't know the history of the IPCC chairman losing his position, but it is a fact that if you are a scientist, the journals will publish your report if you support the global warming myth. Here is a quick article written by a scientist admitting such. http://www.mises.org/story/2571

I have read what the environmental think tanks suggest, and yes, serfdom is exactly where we are headed. A return to the dark ages if they had their way. No more land rights, one child policies, no more meat, no more travelling. I'm not saying humanity will accept this, but these are sincere suggestions, and when worded as "it's either this or the death of all life on Earth" it seems like a clear cut choice, right?

I'm all for many environmental changes, but Global Warming is a hoax. I'm sorry, I know it's hard to accept, I was once a believer. I know it is hard to accept that you have been conned. It was hard for me to realise what a fool I was, but when the Earth didn't scorch, and the coasts didn't flood (which back in the the early nineties, all predictions pointed to chaos by the mid 2000's, think back, I'm sure you'll remember) I started to get doubtful, then when politicians around the world suddenly jumped on board all at once a few years back, I had to search deeper and really vet this information. You owe it to yourselves to approach this issue in scientific manner weighing all evidence. The film I posted is thoroughly scientific and is a great place to start. If you don't take the time to assess that information, you are simply running off faith. Not science, religion.

Edited March 30, 2008 by Guest

[SmoothedShredder]

::pops popcorn... eats celery::

[FOWL]

Let's not forget that we have seen a warming of planetary bodies across the solar system in step with the warming on Earth. To me this is the ultimate slam dunk in the man made global warming theories. It is the Sun, period.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2006/161106suvjupiter.htm

[DevO]

I was driving in my car during Earth Hour, on the highway, but I turned off my headlights anyway to get into the Earth Hour spirit of things.

BUT I did organize an Earth Hour event at my work (linuxcaffe). We participated in Earth Hour and so lit up about 50 or so candles, and had Ben Whiteley & Suzy Wilde play a live set by candlelight.

[AD]

It is the Sun, period.

Al Gore is sooo pissed at you right now

[FOWL]

I know, he's been super serial pissed ever since I stopped helping him search for Manbearpig. Oh well, you can't please everyone!

[dancingbear]

hey FOWL, at least your obviously passionate!

anyhow i pretty much disagree with you.

as for the your link to the graph, it looks to me CO2 is linked to temperature, and would agree with the text

" ... because of the difficulty in precisely dating the air and water (ice) samples, it is still unknown whether GTG concentration increases precede and cause temperature increases, or vice versa--or whether they increase synchronously....Nevertheless, the scientific consensus is that GTGs account for at least half of temperature increases, and that they strongly amplify the effects of small increases in solar radiation due to orbital forcing"

[d_rawk]

if it's on the internet, it must be true

My theory is better. The more solar power that is used, the more energy is demanded from the sun and thus drawn. This means that we are pulling more energy from the sun to energize solar panels. With that, our planet will heat up.

This is meant to be the funny, yes?