Global Warming - Let's do this, fuckers
- Thread starter mikeshinobi
- Start date
I want to fucking vomit every time I read a post by pewep. I mean I get it, really I do. A black guy that tries to sound like an intellectual so he can break the stereotypes surrounding black people. In the end what we end up with is a pseudo-intellectual posting his useless opinion on various topics people discuss here on wickedfire.
It's like he just doesn't fucking get it, playing right back into the stereotype. You'll never be one of us pewep, give it up and go back to your 9-5 (2:30-11 LOL) job, peasant.
It's like he just doesn't fucking get it, playing right back into the stereotype. You'll never be one of us pewep, give it up and go back to your 9-5 (2:30-11 LOL) job, peasant.
It does not matter if its real or not, you think governments can now regulate the temperature of the entire globe?
Really think how much power they would need to even attempt such a thing.
Would it help if the fed printed say 10 Trillion? This is nonsense, we are not going to pick a temperature we think the world should be and then make it so.... lol
Really think how much power they would need to even attempt such a thing.
Would it help if the fed printed say 10 Trillion? This is nonsense, we are not going to pick a temperature we think the world should be and then make it so.... lol
Now THIS I can talk about.
As an anarchist I take offense to the assumption that global warming would require a GOVERNMENT response. In fact I think we're ALREADY getting the government response; and we don't want it!
Assuming the problem is bad enough to need solving through human action, why couldn't a CHARITY be made to solve the problem?
Lazy ass socialists the world over who think like you just did require more government involvement when in fact the solution lies in LESS.
If a large charity, independent of the world governments were to make it their mission statement to bring AGW back under control, then concerned citizens the world over would start pouring in their cash to solve that problem that they're all buying Priuses and sorting trash right now to fight instead.
With enough donations, the worlds' brightest and best can be paid to implement the best solution they find between themselves to stop AGW from going too far.
I beleve that problems like these would have solved themselves decades ago if not for the existence of governments... Idiotic statists think that it necessarily requires a big, armed governments to strongarm corporations into outgassing less carbon in order to solve this problem, yet it's the corporations that run the government so they're clearly practicing insanity.
Mankind can solve this one, WITHOUT making corporations expel less CO2. There are thousands of possible solutions and we just need to be testing them all, not making up cap & trade schemes.
We chop them down faster in the Amazon to make room for the cattle that make up our McDonald's burgers
I suppose the question is what is easier, have a constant increase in the number of these FREE magical devices that convert carbon dioxide into oxygen and wood using unlimited FREE energy from the sun (trees) or spend incredible amounts of money on decreasing the amount of carbon dioxide we release into the atmosphere?
Seems like a no-brainer, but I'm sure it's not that simple.
Because humans in general are lazy, greedy, self-serving cunts (yes, that includes me). Just look at this thread as an example as to why global warming couldn't be solved privately.
Or for example, take another worldwide challenge such as WWII. Do you think a privatized force from donations and volunteers would have made it all the way to Berlin? Probably not.
No, they'd bitch that global warming isn't real, or it's not their problem, or the administration of the charity are thieves who steal the money, or any number of reasons not to donate.
You still seem to be under the notion that if we moved to an anarchy based system, all of a sudden human nature will change. Not going to happen.
And I believe global warming could have been solved long ago if corporations like ExxonMobil weren't spending $10s of millions to debunk global warming.
BTW, if you guys are concerned about CO2, look into cannabis.
Weed can solve our de-forestation issues, can be used as source of the best paper and clothes that kills bacteria.
1 acre of weed can replace 4 to 10 acres of forest used for paper. Weed has a lot more cellulose that is used for production of paper than trees do.
It grows back in a season. Win win no?
One can also make bio fuels out of it that are carbon neutral: plant produces oxygen and then CO2 when burnt and is carbon neutral.
Furthermore, cannabis can used to build houses that can stand for 1000 years.
Hemp protein is one of the best proteins out there.
Hemp is the oldest medicine.
Yes, weed is the solution to all of our problems, including greenhouse gases.
Weed can solve our de-forestation issues, can be used as source of the best paper and clothes that kills bacteria.
1 acre of weed can replace 4 to 10 acres of forest used for paper. Weed has a lot more cellulose that is used for production of paper than trees do.
It grows back in a season. Win win no?
One can also make bio fuels out of it that are carbon neutral: plant produces oxygen and then CO2 when burnt and is carbon neutral.
Furthermore, cannabis can used to build houses that can stand for 1000 years.
Hemp protein is one of the best proteins out there.
Hemp is the oldest medicine.
Yes, weed is the solution to all of our problems, including greenhouse gases.
Global warming lol.
Here's the thing, I used to believe in the global warming theory and watched Al Gores nice little promo video, but the people involved in pushing the global warming agenda are such crooks that it's impossible to take their word at value, when they're lying profiteering douchebags.
1) Denying access to data and pilfering results, making a mockery of free, peer reviewed science.
2) Getting rich like mad, while jetting around in personal airplane
3) Trying to sell carbon credits as some sort of solution, where poor nations sell of 'credits' to industrialized nations
4) Making global warming into a global wealth redistribution scheme, where the topics being discussed at luxury conventions are how much money the poorer countries should receive
5) Activism being led by lunatic 'earth first' people who commit acts of eco-terrorism
6) Scaring young children in school with one sided propaganda
7) Demonizing private consumption and gasoline cars, when the leading emitters are long distance freighters (boats) and farting animals
In this case, the people involved in pushing this agenda have been shown to have such vested interest in it, that it instantly becomes uncredible.
Here's the thing, I used to believe in the global warming theory and watched Al Gores nice little promo video, but the people involved in pushing the global warming agenda are such crooks that it's impossible to take their word at value, when they're lying profiteering douchebags.
1) Denying access to data and pilfering results, making a mockery of free, peer reviewed science.
2) Getting rich like mad, while jetting around in personal airplane
3) Trying to sell carbon credits as some sort of solution, where poor nations sell of 'credits' to industrialized nations
4) Making global warming into a global wealth redistribution scheme, where the topics being discussed at luxury conventions are how much money the poorer countries should receive
5) Activism being led by lunatic 'earth first' people who commit acts of eco-terrorism
6) Scaring young children in school with one sided propaganda
7) Demonizing private consumption and gasoline cars, when the leading emitters are long distance freighters (boats) and farting animals
In this case, the people involved in pushing this agenda have been shown to have such vested interest in it, that it instantly becomes uncredible.
OH HAI HERE WE GOEZ AGAIN...
YOU are claiming that human nature would change under anarchy, not me.
Without taxes, all the charitable people could afford to give much more to the charities of their own choosing. That's the way it should be... Anything else is forced wealth redistribution.
Either way, take the state out of the equation and you'll finally have a chance to solve these problems.
I disagree. I see tons of charity in the world today, and I notice how you conveniently left off my points about Priuses being bought now and people sorting their recyclables... Those people aren't lazy, but you're argument is they will suddenly become so because there is no gun to their head anymore? Lulz...
There obviously wouldn't be any worldwide challenge like Hitler if there were no governments. Your argument is invalid.
I've never been under that assumption. However YOU seem to be under the assumption that all the charity in the world today would somehow magically cease to exist without the guns pointed at them all.
YOU are claiming that human nature would change under anarchy, not me.
Without taxes, all the charitable people could afford to give much more to the charities of their own choosing. That's the way it should be... Anything else is forced wealth redistribution.
We're agreed on this point, but what you seem to fail to recognize is the fact that they wouldn't have the POWER to do that so effectively without using the government to do this dirty deed. Sure they could buy a few commercials but if they couldn't buy or influence the congressmen then their efforts advertising would be wasted. Those ads go to influence policy at the state and federal levels of the government.
Either way, take the state out of the equation and you'll finally have a chance to solve these problems.
"Climategate" debunked | Examiner.com
The Fake Scandal of Climategate
People pushing solutions came after the problem was identified by other people, many who died long ago.
Where did "cap and trade" come from? In the later half of Reagan's presidency he had a committee looking into it, a committee that had VP Bush on it.
The Clean Air Act was passed in 1963 (by 15 year old Al Gore?). In 1990, George "I am the environmental president" H.W. Bush amended it to include cap and trade. There wasn't a big uproar, possibly because Bush didn't have a D after his name and there was no Fox News.
Man teenagers really have it hard these days right? It's bad enough the older generations started taking their jobs, and now cattle are squeezing them out of their minimum wage gigs.
I don't believe in global warming. But I get the point, that throwing chemicals in your river is soon or later leading to bad consequences. In my opinion they are just using the wrong spin on that whole damn subject.
For example energy: All that save-the-whales bullshit is not going to cut it for me. But if you promote it as a way of gaining independence and liberate your home from big energy corporations by installing a self-supply energy system, you have my interest. But by the level of de-individualisation going on, my suggestions sounds unfortunately like a bad Prisonplanet banner ad.
For example energy: All that save-the-whales bullshit is not going to cut it for me. But if you promote it as a way of gaining independence and liberate your home from big energy corporations by installing a self-supply energy system, you have my interest. But by the level of de-individualisation going on, my suggestions sounds unfortunately like a bad Prisonplanet banner ad.