Are you doing anything for 350 day of international climate action?

I’ve been with bottles and cans to the recycling station today. Yay!

Gotta drink something so I have bottles to recycle.

Nope. I am not gullible enough to ignore scientists who have no agenda in favour of green fruitcakes who are walking agendas. I don’t believe that we are the problem, it has been happening for millions of years, well before mankind started fooling around.

I am keen to find alternative energy sources, to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, to reduce unhealthy pollution, but as for carbon footprints – they have as much bearing on the future as my dog’s footprints do.

@DarkScribe The earth has been cooling down and warming up for millions of years now. This is true. They made a nice statistic for this with a line that goes up and down, up and down. However over the last 100 years it has shot up. Guess how many years we have actually have had a poluting industry? You can’t ignore simple facts like that.

I actually have been through a education afternoon nearby. It was great fun! :)

Well this should have been advertised better.

Hubby works as a recycler and is working today. That’ll have to count for our family since he has the car and I have a nasty cold. But on a daily basis we are committed to environmental restoration

I’ll go hug some trees and plant one in my backyard. Thanks for the heads up!

@Hellfrost . Guess how many years we have actually have had a poluting industry? You can’t ignore simple facts like that.

There was more CO2 pollution before the arrival of mankind – something green bias tends to overlook. When a lightning strike started a fire, (a pretty common occurrence even nowadays) the entire continent could burn. No man made roads, cleared farmland etc., to act as firebreaks, and certainly no man to put it out. Where do you think that all of the oil and coal deposits come from? Foliage that died of “old age”? Man has made a massive reduction in CO2 pollution, not increased it.

@DarkScribe wow… I don’t mean to be insulting, not at all but that is the most insane reply I have ever seen in my entire life. What you just said was complete and utter bullshit. I am more drunk then a redneck at a Nascar race and still I see that this is complete nonsense. You truly thing that a entire continent could burn down from one lightning strike? Even the forests in Norway or Alaska where the water freezes on the trees?

How does that one little lightning strike fire a decade you mentioned way up to the billions of cars on the road, to companies pumping toxic waste (china) into rivers, factories pumping normal waste into rivers (all around the world), billions of cars pumping exhaust fumes into the air, the massive cattle to support the endless appetites of mouth breathing red meat eaters, oil tankards leaking and spilling tens of thousands of gallons of oil into the ocean, massive fishing in oceans, deforestation on a global scale… Mankind has added to the C02 pollution, and gave the earth a tumor to boot!

@Hellfrost wow… I don’t mean to be insulting,

That’s ok, only people who have an intellect that I can respect can insult me. Yes, over the billions of years such thing happen quite often. It isn’t my theory, I didn’t invent it, it is a fact that you can find if you bother with some geological research into coal and oil. A modern forest fire in dry hot weather does incredible damage even with everything that man can throw at it. In the days when vegetation was contiguous, no roads or cleared farming land to make natural breaks it was unstoppable. The extraordinarily high C02 levels are supported in all manner of time-line research, some quite recent (this year). If you are too drunk to grasp that, maybe think about it again tomorrow when you sober up.

@DarkScribe “Man has made a massive reduction in CO2 pollution, not increased it.”

Humans have been around for say somewhere between 100000 and 200000 years. CO2 levels in the atmosphere have varied from between 180ppm (glacials) and 300ppm (inter-glacials) over the last 800000 years, and are unlikely to have exceeded present levels for 20 million years. Presently atmospheric concentrations are at approximately 387ppm with the majority of the increase seen over the past 150 years (over the relatively stable 260–280ppm conditions of the last 10000 years) arising due to the burning of fossil fuels, landuse change, cement and meat production. No natural process can account for more than a minority proportion of the increases in ghg observed last century, nor for the majority of observed temperature increases.

So how you come to the conclusion that we have reduced CO2 is beyond me.

“I don’t believe that we are the problem, it has been happening for millions of years, well before mankind started fooling around.”

Sure, climate change has been happening for billions of years. And? This is akin to arguing that because forest fires can be started by lightning there is no such thing as an arsonist.

“There was more CO2 pollution before the arrival of mankind – something green bias tends to overlook.”

Absolutely. 45 million years ago levels were about 1000–1500ppm. Once again…and?
Climate change can result from multiple processes with GHG concentrations acting as an extremely important positive feedback mechanism (for isntance to Milkankovitch cycles, solar output, etc), or as a catalyst (as in the case of anthropogenic ghg emissions).

Human civilizations developed not over geological time scales, but during the relative climate stability observed during the last 10,000 years. Relatively small changes to GHG have large impacts on the Earths climate system (the Earth would be 33 degrees cooler without GHG in the atmosphere, despite the fact that GHG only make up approximately 1% of the atmosphere). We have increased atmospheric concentrations of CO2 by 35%. We have known the potential impact of such changes since the beginning of the 1900s (see Svante Arrhenius). The world’s National Academies of Science are at the forefront of calling for reduced emissions, the “greenies” are approxiately following their lead. I just don’t understand how you have arrived at your conclusions.

http://royalsociety.org/downloaddoc.asp?id=5450

I also suggest you read the following. It is an evidence based source which addresses many climate change fallacies, some of which you appear to be partial to.

http://www.climateworksaustralia.org/Q_and_A.pdf

@Critter38 I also suggest you read the following. It is an evidence based source which addresses many climate change fallacies, some of which you appear to be partial to.

The only thing that I am partial to has boobs. Nice boobs.

As for the rest, I have read all manner of arguments and decided to ignore those that only seem to have support in a very limited subset of the scientific community. You are welcome to believe in any fairytale that you choose. (Hansel & Gretel has gingerbread!)