OT: US Pres election

[Omnirizon]

Originally Posted by Trumanator

considering that the arctic ice cap GAINED mass over the last year I think that the US position on GW might end up the most prudent.

what? we don't really know what's going on? so let's just keep plugging away? maybe we can think of some sham stuff to keep people distracted long enough for us to rape the earth a little more? who cares about the future, we're rich and getting richer, so our grandkids don't have to worry about the place getting trashed. family values... for our family, not yours.

I think even those who held out the 'ice caps' growing stuff realized it was a complete fallacy to the actual situation; a simple distraction. ice caps growing because the warmer seas create increased moisture and increased snowfall on the icecaps.

[Trumanator]

Originally Posted by Omnirizon

what? we don't really know what's going on? so let's just keep plugging away? maybe we can think of some sham stuff to keep people distracted long enough for us to rape the earth a little more? who cares about the future, we're rich and getting richer, so our grandkids don't have to worry about the place getting trashed. family values... for our family, not yours.

I think even those who held out the 'ice caps' growing stuff realized it was a complete fallacy to the actual situation; a simple distraction. ice caps growing because the warmer seas create increased moisture and increased snowfall on the icecaps.

We can't predict the weather a week in advance accurately. Yet we're expected to believe the "projections" that are months or years in the future. I'm all for alternative energy and such, but more because of foreign oil dependence than the global warming hysteria. Besides, if you look at history, warming trends show up all the time, and have often lead to great prosperity. It really doesn't help that those who are always telling people how to treat their land DON'T ACTUALLY LIVE ON IT!! Some Berkely professor (no offense intended) thinks he's a better steward of the land than the farmer who actually lives on it.

Aside: Sorry Pasha for making assumptions about you.

[lch]

Originally Posted by Trumanator

We can't predict the weather a week in advance accurately. Yet we're expected to believe the "projections" that are months or years in the future.

Actually we're a lot better about predicting the weather than we were 20 years ago. Back then, whatever they told you in the news about tomorrow's weather, in 70% of cases they were wrong. Now the forecast for tomorrow usually is true, and the three-day forecast is going to be true most of the time, too. I expect that this is because of the increased computing power over the years, and because more measurements have been done to better predict what might or might not happen next. Weather is a chaotic process, you can't just calculate the outcome with all the imperfect inputs from measures. Still, you can make predictions based on what you have seen before.

Your statement that nothing can be forseen without failure, therefore no predictions about the future hold any meaning are too religious that I'm going to argue much more about it. Seems like you really are more interested in keeping the status quo and getting distracted while waiting for Godot.