Re: Fwd: Global Warming Hoax - Wake up Idiots

I did not get to view the video, my apologies. However, recognizing that
some scientists have exhibited round heels on both sides of the issue, AND
recognizing that the stakes in this matter could be far larger than those in which
we got into the war in Iraq where we learned the hard way that authorities and
authoritative information could no longer be trusted: we DO need to do some
contingency planning. In "A New Basis For Solutions,"
http://www.winwenger.com/newbasis.htm, I've proposed a way to do this without pre-judging which side is
correct and without assigning blame for such climate instability as may be
occurring. I've not heard your reply to what I propose in that article - nor
your argument if there is one. I think I have proposed a rational course of
action upon which all CAN agree, and would like to get some reasoned, rational
response to it. ....win

In a message dated 4/3/2007 8:16:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
ccominos%40yahoo.com">ccominosyahoo.com writes:

> Hi Lachlan,
> I have said more than enough on this subject and to continue just
> infuriates me as I keep on repeating everything. I replied to V comments and voiced my
> opinion about the the video she saw. V came into this discussion very late
> and I had already seen that video and wasn't impressed. As I stated to V, I
> will not be making any further comments on the subject no matter who replies so
> go back into the forum and look at all the claims and counter claims and
> judge for yourself. Its not that I don't want to keep pushing for awareness of
> the problems we all face, its that we will never agree either way. In fact the
> only thing we could agree on is to disagree.
>
> Con
>
> Lachlan Cotter < lach%40lachlanc.id.au">lachlachlanc.id.au> wrote:
&gt; Hi,
>
> I've had some trouble with my email lately, not sure if this got
> through or not.
>;
> Cheers,
> Lach
>;
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> >From: Lachlan Cotter < lach%40lachlanc.id.au">lachlachlanc.id.au>
> >Date: 31 March 2007 11:30:28 PM
> >To: imagestream%40yahoogroups.com">imagestreamyahoogroups.com
> >Subject: Re: [imagestream] Fwd: Global Warming Hoax - Wake up Idiots
&gt; >
>; >Wow. That's actually very compelling. I must say that I was
> >sceptical of this material and expected it to be propaganda. But it
> >turned out to be very strong and rational. Assuming of course that
> >the information is all true and accurate. Does anyone have a
> >rebuttal to this?
&gt; >
>; >Cheers,
> >Lach
> >
>; >
>; >
>; >On 30/03/2007, at 7:05 PM, V wrote:
&gt; >
>; >>Here is a nice video that blows the whole global warming hoax wide
> >>open. No doubts in my mind who didnt do their homework around here.
&gt; >>global warming is only real inside your own mind, and has nothing
> >>to do with reality. Sorry Con you just dont have the facts its too
> >>bad.
> >>V
> >>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170
> >
>;
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

**************************************
See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Messages in this topic (0) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

.

I just discovered this link:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?
docid=4569577556800822039&q=Amory+Lovins

If it doesn't work go to google videos and search Amory Lovins and
Charlie Rose. It inspired me about possible energy solutions like no
other in a long time. Apologies if others already know about this
guy.

Jill

Messages in this topic (0) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

.

Absolutely agreed on Win's points. One could happily remain agnostic
about the whole global warming issue whilst still looking for win-win
solutions. One should be looking for solutions, which have a benefit
regardless of the debate around global warming.

An example of which may include the introduction of in situ char
furnaces for the disposal of waste straw stubble on broad acre grain
farms. The product of which could be returned to the ground as a soil
conditioner as well as acting as a carbon sink. The heat from the
furnace, in all likelihood, would not be enough to drive a
conventional steam driven turbine, since it relies on partial
combustion. However if a vortex chimney were attached it might be
possible to capture the energy from the rising hot air column via
helix or conventional wind turbines located within the chimney. This
energy could either be sold to the grid or used as on farm energy.
Particulates arising from partial combustion could be removed via air
scrubbers before release to the atmosphere.

Funding for such enterprise could be either obtained through the use
of incentives or, if a well enough funded company were to take the
enterprise on board could be constructed and leased to farmers. Or
indeed a combination of both could be feasible.

Regards, Tom

--- In imagestream%40yahoogroups.com">imagestreamyahoogroups.com, wwenger101... wrote:
&gt;
> I did not get to view the video, my apologies. However,
recognizing that
> some scientists have exhibited round heels on both sides of the
issue, AND
> recognizing that the stakes in this matter could be far larger than
those in which
> we got into the war in Iraq where we learned the hard way that
authorities and
> authoritative information could no longer be trusted: we DO need to
do some
> contingency planning. In "A New Basis For Solutions,"
> http://www.winwenger.com/newbasis.htm, I've proposed a way to do
this without pre-judging which side is
> correct and without assigning blame for such climate instability as
may be
> occurring. I've not heard your reply to what I propose in that
article - nor
> your argument if there is one. I think I have proposed a rational
course of
> action upon which all CAN agree, and would like to get some
reasoned, rational
> response to it. ....win

Messages in this topic (0) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

.

Hi Win.
I agree with your proposal. Unfortunately all the debate has shown so far is that there is too much irrational thinking on both sides of the fence. True, I could be accused of being irrational but I tend to call it passionate because I am living in an area that is already suffering climate change. I have lived in the same area for all my life and I can see how the patterns have change from my childhood days to now, in geological terms a short space of 50 years. So unless I can see overwhelming evidence that my senses are lying to me than I will remain convinced that climate change is very real and happening now.
Regards,
Con

wwenger101%40aol.com">wwenger101aol.com wrote:
I did not get to view the video, my apologies. However, recognizing that
some scientists have exhibited round heels on both sides of the issue, AND
recognizing that the stakes in this matter could be far larger than those in which
we got into the war in Iraq where we learned the hard way that authorities and
authoritative information could no longer be trusted: we DO need to do some
contingency planning. In "A New Basis For Solutions,"
http://www.winwenger.com/newbasis.htm, I've proposed a way to do this without pre-judging which side is
correct and without assigning blame for such climate instability as may be
occurring. I've not heard your reply to what I propose in that article - nor
your argument if there is one. I think I have proposed a rational course of
action upon which all CAN agree, and would like to get some reasoned, rational
response to it. ....win

In a message dated 4/3/2007 8:16:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
ccominos%40yahoo.com">ccominosyahoo.com writes:

> Hi Lachlan,
> I have said more than enough on this subject and to continue just
> infuriates me as I keep on repeating everything. I replied to V comments and voiced my
> opinion about the the video she saw. V came into this discussion very late
> and I had already seen that video and wasn't impressed. As I stated to V, I
> will not be making any further comments on the subject no matter who replies so
> go back into the forum and look at all the claims and counter claims and
> judge for yourself. Its not that I don't want to keep pushing for awareness of
> the problems we all face, its that we will never agree either way. In fact the
> only thing we could agree on is to disagree.
>
> Con
>
> Lachlan Cotter < lach%40lachlanc.id.au">lachlachlanc.id.au> wrote:
&gt; Hi,
>
> I've had some trouble with my email lately, not sure if this got
> through or not.
>;
> Cheers,
> Lach
>;
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> >From: Lachlan Cotter < lach%40lachlanc.id.au">lachlachlanc.id.au>
> >Date: 31 March 2007 11:30:28 PM
> >To: imagestream%40yahoogroups.com">imagestreamyahoogroups.com
> >Subject: Re: [imagestream] Fwd: Global Warming Hoax - Wake up Idiots
&gt; >
>; >Wow. That's actually very compelling. I must say that I was
> >sceptical of this material and expected it to be propaganda. But it
> >turned out to be very strong and rational. Assuming of course that
> >the information is all true and accurate. Does anyone have a
> >rebuttal to this?
&gt; >
>; >Cheers,
> >Lach
> >
>; >
>; >
>; >On 30/03/2007, at 7:05 PM, V wrote:
&gt; >
>; >>Here is a nice video that blows the whole global warming hoax wide
> >>open. No doubts in my mind who didnt do their homework around here.
&gt; >>global warming is only real inside your own mind, and has nothing
> >>to do with reality. Sorry Con you just dont have the facts its too
> >>bad.
> >>V
> >>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170
> >
>;
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

**************************************
See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

---------------------------------
Need Mail bonding?
Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Messages in this topic (0) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

.

Hi Con,
Your senses are not lying to you.
Sure no doubt that climate change is happening and it is very real, I can see it too, I watch it all the time. that is not the arguement at all. Your senses are not lying to you at all and there is massive climactic change happening, it always has for centuries and always will.
the point in the global warming agenda is really "what is the cause"; and that is where most people are off track. it is politically correct to blame mans activities. However If it is the sun that causes the climate change then all the solutions we come up with dont amount to a hill of beans, as far as any impact on global warming.

But dont get me wrong I am all for alternate energy, I love that area of research and investigation, but for me it has nothing to do with any belief in global warming. It is just great for us to find new sources of cheap clean and hopefully free energy. I am all for that. I have a lot of ideas for doing that and create new ones all the time.

There is one premise in logic you may not be implementing and that is if you start from a false premise, even if all your thinking is correct than you will end up with a false solution. and that is what is happening.
Yes
The climate is changing, the globe is warming, true sometimes. but if you looked at the movie all the way through that is not always so because it was cooling until in the 70s, and the popular thing then was global cooling. And there was a scare that we are heading into an ice age. now its warming up and the popular thing is global warming.

Next part of equation needs to be addressed then what is the cause. If you get that answer wrong them you are barking up the wrong tree. You can bark till you are blue in the face and it wont change one bit or whatever you do will have no effect because you are not addressing the primary cause. So as an exercise in thinking which is part of what this forum is about, check your head because if you dont get all the steps right then. you only affect your own credibility with what you say. Passion does not replace facts, it only makes fanatics if they are working with false data.

- Your sensory data is correct, you see climate change
- The globe is warming.
- But what is the cause??? That part needs to be a fact to make ones actions have any validity.

So I dont want to look like I am just talking about global warming here, but using that popular belief as a tool to examine ones own thought processes and see where the idea comes from and is it really our idea? Where did it come from? And why do we have a need to defend it? It really says more about our character when it comes down to what we believe and defend.

I uphold your sensory data and your right to take that as reality because it is. As to the cause that has to be deduced through analysis and deduction and measurement of the facts over time. That is how the cause is determined. When those facts are produces and people ignore them and still cling to their beliefs, they are not function on the basis of reality. they are functioning from an illusion. And as is always those that can see past the illusion will look at those that are in a dream world as asleep in that particular area. Those that are asleep dont know they are. those that are awake can see the sleepers sleeping.

V

> Hi Win.
>; I agree with your proposal. Unfortunately all the debate has
> shown so far is that there is too much irrational thinking on both
>; sides of the fence. True, I could be accused of being irrational but
> I tend to call it passionate because I am living in an area that is
> already suffering climate change. I have lived in the same area for
> all my life and I can see how the patterns have change from my
> childhood days to now, in geological terms a short space of 50
> years. So unless I can see overwhelming evidence that my senses are
> lying to me than I will remain convinced that climate change is very real and happening now.
>; Regards,
> Con

Messages in this topic (0) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

.