Bill Clinton Takes Campaign Against Climate Change To Thailand

[MightyMouse]

SomTumTiger - Great Video The idiocy of polarization has never been more apparent then on this thread. If pollution does not effect the environment perhaps all the taxis in Bangkok should go back to using leaded gas? Look at pollution on an item by item basis and make a judgment call. It does not make sense to say Climate Change is not real so we should forget about pollution. Come on people and open your eyes!

[jazzbo]

Post #4: One volcanic eruption of 2 seconds blows out what man kind can do in 1,000 years on current thought process about greening the planet in spewing out gas, ash and pollutants. Sorry to rain on the greenies parade!

INT. DOCTOR'S OFFICE-DAY

Alvy as young boy sits on a sofa with his mother in an old-fashioned,

cluttered doctor's office. The doctor stands near the sofa, holding a

cigarette and listening.

MOTHER

(To the doctor)

He's been depressed. All off a sudden,

he can't do anything.

DOCTOR

(Nodding)

Why are you depressed, Alvy?

MOTHER

(Nudging Alvy)

Tell Dr. Flicker.

(Young Alvy sits, his head down. His

mother answers for him)

It's something he read.

DOCTOR

(Puffing on his cigarette and

nodding)

Something he read, huh?

ALVY

(His head still down)

The universe is expanding.

DOCTOR

The universe is expanding?

ALVY

(Looking up at the doctor)

Well, the universe is everything, and if

it's expanding, someday it will break apart

and that would be the end of everything!

Disgusted, his mother looks at him.

MOTHER

(shouting)

What is that your business?

(she turns back to the doctor)

He stopped doing his homework.

ALVY

What's the point?

MOTHER

(Excited, gesturing with her hands)

What has the universe got to do with it?

You're here in Brooklyn! Brooklyn is not

expanding!

... Once again Woody Allen (1977 in "Annie Hall") is way ahead of every one

[jayjay0]

SomTumTiger - Great Video The idiocy of polarization has never been more apparent then on this thread. If pollution does not effect the environment perhaps all the taxis in Bangkok should go back to using leaded gas? Look at pollution on an item by item basis and make a judgment call. It does not make sense to say Climate Change is not real so we should forget about pollution. Come on people and open your eyes!

Great post.

A person would have to be brain dead to think we are not polluting the atmosphere. Just stand by a busy street. To deny it because a volcano is doing it makes no sense.

It is a fallacy that mother nature needs mans help, fact is mother nature would do just fine with out man.

I do not believe that a volcano puts out that much pollution. Show me the facts. If that were true and man was not adding to it then we would still have to ware face masks in down town Bangkok and in the middle of a jungle all would be the same.

[Mitker]

Can anyone explain the unusual weather paterns in the world today? Extreme cold in some areas, extreme heat in others, islands in Thailand & other countries slowly going under water, rivers overflowing there banks, I don't believe you can outright dismiss climate change. We, as in the world, are abusing nature and as the old sayng goes, NEVER FOOL WITH MOTHER NATURE, you'll lose every time.

It's just that it is so easy to deny any responsibility for it: no need to worry, no need to change... so comfortable. Just blame the plot.

[mataron]

Which 'scientists' to listen to?

For the past 30 years the Antarctic ice has been increasing by 100,000 sq km per decade.

This scientist says it because of the depleting ozone layer.

http://www.scienceda...90421101629.htm

This one says it's not???!!!

http://www.scienceda...01005141516.htm

depletion of ozone layer 'they' say!!! got that one pinned down.???

<deleted> these 'scientists' say the ozone layer has been increasing

http://www.scienceda...90921134831.htm

YOU listen to the \scientists/

Global warming is as real as the Millenium Bug,,, chicken little

(First, an overuse of punctuation does not support your argument.)

Imagine the earth is your car. You notice your car isn't running normally, so you ask two mechanics (specialists) what the problem is. One says that your car is in dire need of fixing, while the other says that your car is okay and you shouldn't worry about it. What do you do? Take your car in with the worry of being ripped off, or do you go on about your business hoping/praying what the first guy said is not true? Instead, have thousands of mechanics give you their advice. Because the mechanics know they're not getting the work, there is no incentive for them to try to rip you off, so they'll give you their honest expertise. Therefore, you'd probably take the collective opinions of all those mechanics to decide whether or not your car needs fixing, right?

The consensus among scientists regarding global warming can be found here:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090119210532.htm

"The debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes," the researchers conclude.

There is basically no debate among scientists about climate change! It's kind of ridiculous that you and I have to debate about whether your car needs to be fixed or not, when the vast majority of mechanics say it needs fixing.

[Spee]

Just watch this - argue the point if you can, i dare you...

Just another "sky is falling" Chicken Little goofball, trying to apply the concept of Pascal's Wager to a nonsensical argument.

Here's another way of looking at the whole global warming nonsense.

A while ago, the US Supreme Court ruled that EPA scientists could determine whether or not CO2 is a pollutant. Interestingly, during the Reagan and Bush-1 years, the EPA ruled that CO2 was not a pollutant. During the Clinton years, it ruled that it was. During the Bush-2 years, it ruled that it wasn't. And lo and behold, during the Obama years, the EPA once again rules that it is. Obviously, CO2 is treated as a political football, and given the enviro-wacko leftists vote entirely Democrat down the line, is this any real surprise?

How can something that humans and animals exhale by their very existence, and plants fundamentally require for their very existence, be classified as a pollutant to be regulated? Obviously, it can't, as least in the sense of normal rational behaviour. Yet this very issue is a core facet of the enviro-wacko leftist movement with the global warming nonsense.

Let's call it for what it is, a quest for greater and greater control over peoples' lives, and ultimately, that power must be held and enforced by governments. We have hundreds of years of history to demonstrate where that leads, including this one from the present day:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/dprk-dark.htm

North Korea must really be an environmentally friendly and pro-global warming advocate. See how they turn off all their lights at night to conserve energy and help to do their fair share to fight global warming. I'm surprised all the world's enviro-wackos don't move there so they can be with more of their own kind. Surely it can't be because the central government controls every facet of the lives of its citizenry, and has done nothing but create misery and despair because of that control.

[powderpuff]

Yep people like Leonardo DiCaprio tell you to get out & walk or ride a bike while they fly around in their private jets.

Global Massive Hypocrisy

[powderpuff]

Can anyone explain the unusual weather paterns in the world today?

Weather is unpredictable. it changes at random & all the time.

Just because you have only been on Earth 16 years most things to you are surprising.

It is amazing to me the amount of guilt some people want to carry around over being white, having money, having food, of being Catholic.

Get over it.

One day soon we'll all be dead.

I personally am gonna enjoy the ride.

As for why BKK taxis run on LPG? Simple. Because there is a krap load of gas in the gulf of Thailand & little to no oil.

The gov't can set the cost of a kilogram of LPG & the gov't can set the price of a taxi ride.

They learned from the old Soviet Union. Wage & price controls. Central Planning.

[mataron]

Just another "sky is falling" Chicken Little goofball, trying to apply the concept of Pascal's Wager to a nonsensical argument]

In trying to argue against the video, that's the best you can come up with. I'm sorry but calling an argument "nonsensical" without giving any concrete evidence of your own is nonsensical. If the EPA switches its stance based on what administration is in office, then maybe one should look elsewhere for facts! Like the video suggested, the National Academy of Sciences might be a good place to start.

How can something that humans and animals exhale by their very existence, and plants fundamentally require for their very existence, be classified as a pollutant to be regulated? Obviously, it can't, as least in the sense of normal rational behaviour.

Yes, by exhaling, we're contributing carbon dioxide to the air as a part of the carbon cycle. Carbon-emitting power plants or whatever things we've built that emit enormous amounts of carbon dioxide are not apart of the carbon cycle. Taking a look at http://www.skepticalscience.com/breathing-co2-carbon-dioxide.htm might make it more clear to you.

North Korea must really be an environmentally friendly and pro-global warming advocate.

Right. If we pollute less and take this issue seriously, then we're just like North Korea. That makes a lot of sense. And then you post a link for a map that shows North Korea is darker than South Korea. It's not clear what you're trying to prove with that.

It's best to formulate a clear argument that is supported with evidence. An "argument" without evidence is not an argument; it's a claim. Making claims is easy, but they don't mean anything.

[jayjay0]

Which 'scientists' to listen to?

For the past 30 years the Antarctic ice has been increasing by 100,000 sq km per decade.

This scientist says it because of the depleting ozone layer.

http://www.scienceda...90421101629.htm

This one says it's not???!!!

http://www.scienceda...01005141516.htm

depletion of ozone layer 'they' say!!! got that one pinned down.???

<deleted> these 'scientists' say the ozone layer has been increasing

http://www.scienceda...90921134831.htm

YOU listen to the \scientists/

Global warming is as real as the Millenium Bug,,, chicken little

(First, an overuse of punctuation does not support your argument.)

Imagine the earth is your car. You notice your car isn't running normally, so you ask two mechanics (specialists) what the problem is. One says that your car is in dire need of fixing, while the other says that your car is okay and you shouldn't worry about it. What do you do? Take your car in with the worry of being ripped off, or do you go on about your business hoping/praying what the first guy said is not true? Instead, have thousands of mechanics give you their advice. Because the mechanics know they're not getting the work, there is no incentive for them to try to rip you off, so they'll give you their honest expertise. Therefore, you'd probably take the collective opinions of all those mechanics to decide whether or not your car needs fixing, right?

The consensus among scientists regarding global warming can be found here:

http://www.scienceda...90119210532.htm

"The debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes," the researchers conclude.

There is basically no debate among scientists about climate change! It's kind of ridiculous that you and I have to debate about whether your car needs to be fixed or not, when the vast majority of mechanics say it needs fixing.

A great article. There will always be non conformists. They absolutely want to be different no mater how stupid it makes them look. Scientists tell us we are contributing to the pollution they tell us the earth is warming and these poor misfits deny it. They even deny common sense. One even went so far as to prove it by showing that North Korea uses less lights at night. He even had satellite photos of it. Some how to him this proved that man was innocent. Then there is the ones that say the government will control us if we try to stop it. Like the government needs help? Give me a break.:jap:

Any one thinks we are not adding to the pollution answer me this why do the natives in the middle of the Jungle not wear masks to protect them from the pollution in the air.

Question?

Is there direct descendants of the people who believed the earth was flat with us?

Edited November 14, 2010 by jayjay0

[bbradsby]

Skeptics are good, as they challenge premises & assumptions. I am a skeptic by nature. Deniers, however, are detrimental to getting to the truth because when presented with any contrary information, they resort to conspiracy theories. TO think that universities across the world are colluding together to push any theory is actually hilarious if you know academe at all. And an independent inquiry found that the so-called climate-gate Anglia hacked emails did not undermine the larger conclusions of the scientists' climate research. But even it you think they did, the balance of the world's respected scientific community backs the theory that man's activities are having detrimental effects on the climate.

Some independent, non-partisan data: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/indicators/

Also: this University of Pennsylvania website is pretty good for cutting through the BS of any issue where people with agendas are grinding their axes: http://www.factcheck.org/tag/global-warming/

One thing is for sure, seas are rising and Bangkok is obviously at great risk. On the brighter side, my house could be beachfront property in fifty years

[MightyMouse]

Tried to post image but did not work.

Edited November 14, 2010 by MightyMouse

[Jingthing]

What do you do when you're a socialist politician who has passed their sell-by date and misses the feeling of being important and in the spotlight?

Bill Clinton is very, very far from being a socialist. His presidency was very supportive of big corporations and his loosening up of financial regulations especially regarding derivatives (a gift to wall street) contributed greatly to the financial meltdown years later.

Of course, weather is not the same as climate.

Someone mentioned that major volcanic eruptions timed well will take care of global climate change concerns. This is true, but last time I checked, we have no control over the timing of such eruptions.

Personally, I think if we need to rely on selfless human actions to save the planet, the planet is doomed. The main hope is a man made scientific solution (that doesn't involve personal sacrifice by the masses). In other words, a man made fix for a man made problem.

Edited November 14, 2010 by Jingthing

[TAWP]

Let our friend George Carlin sum it up for us:

You got people like this around you? Country is full of them now! People walking around all day long, every minute of the day — worried about EVERYTHING! Worried about the air, worried about the water, worried about the soil. Worried about insecticides, pesticides, food additives, carcinogens; worried about radon gas; worried about asbestos. Worried about saving endangered species.

Let me tell you about endangered species, all right? Saving endangered species is just one more arrogant attempt by humans to control Nature! It's arrogant meddling! It's what got us into trouble in the first place! Doesn't anybody understand that? Interfering with Nature! Over 90 percent.. over... way over 90 percent of all the species that have ever lived — EVER LIVED — on this planet are gone. Whissshht! They are extinct!

We didn't kill them all.

They just... disappeared! That's what Nature does! They disappear these days at the rate of 25 a day, and I mean regardless of our behavior. Irrespective of how we act on this planet, 25 species that were here today, will be gone tomorrow! Let them go... gracefully! Leave Nature alone! Haven't we done enough?

We're so self-important. So self-important! Everybody's going to save something now. "Save the trees; save the bees; save the whales; save those snails." And the greatest arrogance of all, "Save the planet." WHAT? Are these fuc_king people kidding me? Save the planet? We don't even know how to take care of ourselves yet. We haven't learned how to care for one another, we're gonna save the fuc_king planet?

I'm getting tired of that shit. Tired of that shit. Tired! I'm tired of fuc_king Earth Day! I'm tired of these self-righteous environmentalists; these white, bourgeois liberals who think the only thing wrong with this country is there aren't enough bicycle paths. People trying to make the world safe for their Volvos. Besides, environmentalists don't give a shit about the planet. They don't care about the planet. Not in the abstract they don't. Not in the abstract they don't. You know what they're interested in? A clean place to live. Their own habitat. They're worried that some day in the future, they might be personally inconvenienced. Narrow, unenlightened self-interest doesn't impress me.

Besides, there is nothing wrong with the planet. Nothing wrong with the planet. The planet is fine. The PEOPLE are fuc_ked. Difference. Difference! The planet is fine. Compared to the people, the planet is doing great. Been here four and a half billion years. Did you ever think about the arithmetic? The planet has been here four and a half billion years. We've been here, what? A hundred thousand? Maybe two hundred thousand? And we've only been engaged in heavy industry for a little over two hundred years. Two hundred years versus four and a half billion. And we have the CONCEIT to think that somehow we're a threat? That somehow we're gonna put in jeopardy this beautiful little blue-green ball that's just a-floatin' around the sun?

The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through all kinds of things worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles; hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors; worlwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages... And we think some plastic bags, and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference? The planet... the planet... the planet isn't going anywhere. WE ARE!

We're going away. Pack your shit, folks. We're going away. And we won't leave much of a trace, either. Thank God for that. Maybe a little styrofoam. Maybe. A little styrofoam. The planet will be here and we'll be long gone. Just another failed mutation. Just another closed-end biological mistake. An evolutionary cul-de-sac. The planet will shake us off like a bad case of fleas. A surface nuisance.

You wanna know how the planet is doing? Ask those people at Pompeii, who are frozen into position from volcanic ash, "How the planet's doing?" You wanna know if the planet's all right, ask those people in Mexico City or Armenia or a hundred other places buried under thousands of tons of earthquake rubble, if they feel like a threat to the planet this week. Or how about those people in Kilowaia, Hawaii, who built their homes right next to an active volcano, and then wonder why they have lava in the living room.

The planet will be here for a long, long — LONG — time after we're gone, and it will heal itself; it will cleanse itself, because that's what it does. It's a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover; the earth will be renewed; and, if it's true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new pardigm: the Earth plus plastic! The Earth doesn't share our prejudice towards plastic. Plastic came out of the Earth. The Earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the Earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It wanted plastic for itself. Didn't know how to make it. Needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old philosophical question, "Why are we here?" "Plastic! <deleted>."

So! So, the plastic is here, our job is done, we can be phased out now. And I think that it has already started already, don't you? I think, to be fair, the planet probably sees us as a mild threat. Something to be dealt with. And I am sure the planet will defend itself in the manner of a large organism, like a beehive or an ant colony, and muster a defense. I am sure the planet will think of something. What would you do if you were the planet trying to defend against this pesky, troublesome species? "Let's see... What might... Hmm.. Viruses! Viruses might be good. They seem vulnerable to viruses. And, uh...viruses are tricky, always mutating and forming new strains whenever a vaccine is developed. Perhaps, this first virus could be one that compromises the immune system of these creatures. Perhaps a human immunodeficiency virus, making them vulnerable to all sorts of other diseases and infections that might come along. And maybe it could be spread sexually, making them a little reluctant to engage in the act of reproduction."

Well, that's a poetic note. And it's a start. And I can dream, can't I? See I don't worry about the little things: bees, trees, whales, snails. I think we're part of a greater wisdom than we will ever understand. A higher order. Call it what you want. Know what I call it? The Big Electron." The Big Electron...whoooa. Whoooa. Whoooa. It doesn't punish; it doesn't reward; it doesn't judge at all. It just is. And so are we. For a little while.

Thanks for being here with me for a little while tonight!

Thank you!

[mataron]

I like George Carlin, and he's a funny comedian, but I wouldn't take anything he says that seriously. (I probably didn't have to say that, but based on what I've seen some people post, I wouldn't be surprised if they misinterpret Carlin's words for fact or serious debate.) Having said that, I agree with him that we're all going to be a small part of earth's history if we don't do something.

[Jingthing]

I like George Carlin, and he's a funny comedian, but I wouldn't take anything he says that seriously. (I probably didn't have to say that, but based on what I've seen some people post, I wouldn't be surprised if they misinterpret Carlin's words for fact or serious debate.) Having said that, I agree with him that we're all going to be a small part of earth's history if we don't do something.

Was, not is. He died in 2008.

[RickBradford]

The venerable (founded in 1845) magazine Scientific American has been something of a torch-bearer for the alarmist man-made global warming scare, and recently decided to poll its readers to see how aligned their thinking was.

This turned out to be a bad idea. Not every reader of Scientific American magazine is a scientist. But the responses of the 7,000 readers who took the magazine's online poll were telling, as Investors Business Daily reported:

More than three-fourths (77.7%) say natural processes are causing climate change and almost a third (31.9%) blame solar variation. Only 26.6% believe man is the cause. (The percentages exceed 100 because respondents were allowed to choose more than one cause on this question.)

Whether climate change is man-caused or natural, most respondents don't believe there's anything that can be done about it anyway. Nearly seven in 10 (69.2%) agree "we are powerless to stop it." A mere one in four (25.7%) recommend switching "to carbon-free energy sources as much as possible and adapt to changes already under way."

It seems even some of those who would endorse changing energy sources don't believe the benefits are worth the costs (which indicates they aren't taking the alarmists' claims seriously). Almost eight in 10 (79.4%) answer "nothing" to the question: "How much would you be willing to pay to forestall the risk of catastrophic climate change?"

A small but apparently hard-core 12.3% say they'd be OK with spending "whatever it takes." Only 4.9% choose "a doubling of gasoline prices" while 3.4% don't mind paying "a 50% increase in electricity bills."

That small, but hard, core likely makes up most of the 15.7% who think "the IPCC, or Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is an effective group of government representatives, scientists and other experts." These holdouts are overwhelmed, though, by the 83.6% who agree the IPCC "is a corrupt organization, prone to groupthink, with a political agenda."

I hope that the world has found its sense in time to prevent the Green/Left getting its own way and forcing everyone to live in a yurt, powered by tallow candles.....