Quote :

" International aid groups warned Tuesday of an impending health crisis if help does not reach millions of people in South Asia stranded by heavy flooding amid forecasts of more rain in the devastated region."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,292361,00.html


These poor people will continue to pay for our lifestyle. Who cares about them anyway?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/08/07/weather.extremes/index.html
only gets worse from here

8/8/2007 12:47:05 AM

not me, that's for sure

8/8/2007 1:09:17 AM

what the hell do you mean for our lifestyle? what kind of stupid ass statement is that?

8/8/2007 1:23:38 AM

Quote :

"And in the United States, temperatures climbed into the triple digits this week in Midwestern states. "

ahah cause thats never happened there before...

8/8/2007 1:53:56 AM

DUSTBOWL!!!!!!!!!

8/8/2007 2:00:38 AM

should i just lock this fucking stupid thread, or do some of you actually want to tear it apart?

8/8/2007 2:52:32 AM

^^^ yeah, it really hurts the global warming argument when stupid journalists confuse Climate with Weather

8/8/2007 7:12:12 AM

^^If you lock this bullshit, then you had better damn well lock the hooksaw/salisburyboy threads too.

8/8/2007 9:29:55 AM

Look at the bright side, everyone gets free beer...




Disclaimer: Photo has been edited to clearly represent my statement above

[Edited on August 8, 2007 at 9:57 AM. Reason : done.]

8/8/2007 9:44:37 AM

Quote :

"what the hell do you mean for our lifestyle? what kind of stupid ass statement is that?"

fine i'll just be clear. our lifestyle changes their land into ocean.

8/9/2007 1:54:17 AM

you may or may not be right

but your argument is full of holes and logical missteps.

8/9/2007 2:00:32 AM

who cares. The reason they are even in that situation is due to overpopulation. If they weren't drowned away half of them would end up dying due to disease or hunger anyway. People always bitch about people dying in the 3rd world but as Darwin says it is survival of the fittest. Unfortunately planet earth can not support every indian/(insert racial group) having 10 kids and expect them to live hunger free and have 10 of their own kids.

8/9/2007 2:22:26 AM

The swastika amused me.

8/9/2007 8:36:02 AM

^^ Excellent statement.

Poetrickster, seriously, common. If you really want to point the finger, look at one of their closer relatives that is polluting exponentially more than us: China.

or at least have something to back up your statements other than ridiculous judgments.

8/9/2007 9:08:29 AM

ATTN: Users with less than 1000 posts

8/9/2007 9:54:27 AM

China is a developing nation and are polluting by necessity. We could ratify kyoto and still survive but we're greedy.

8/9/2007 11:32:27 AM

i hope you are one of the guys that ties himself to a tree the next time some developers try to build a shopping mall. hopefully, the supervisor will say "fuck it" put the bulldozer on full steam and run you over anyway.

As consolation I volunteer to take a urn of your ashes to THE WORLD'S BESTTTT BEACH- MYRTLE BEACH and sprinkle your remains all over the sand. If you are lucky maybe some 300 lb trailor trash bitch will plop down on the beach and get some of your urn ashes stuck in her smelly crusty pussy if they manage to make it past her FUPA. I will then proceed to the strip to rail some 16 yr old jersey chick that will end up getting the train run on her the very next night.

8/9/2007 12:20:05 PM

Quote :

"trailor trash"

oh, the irony.

8/9/2007 12:30:44 PM

Quote :

"China is a developing nation and are polluting by necessity. We could ratify kyoto and still survive but we're greedy."

isnt the idea of curbing GLOBAL warming to reduce emissions around the globe and not just everywhere but China? Seems if you are so adamant about the US ratifying you'd certainy want an even bigger polluter like China to sign it...or maybe we can allow China to pollute but just charge them money for "credits"...that why polluting is ok...and then when they continue to have their automobile boom (which obviously emit a lot more CO2 than bicycles) and further increase their emissions, what do we do then? When do we tell them they're not developing anymore and that they're developed? It only seemed to take the US a couple hundred years to be "developed"

Also we could ratify Kyoto and still survive...our lives would be completely different but we'd probably still survive...most of our cars would be illegal to drive in a few years but hey, who cares, lets ratify that protocol...it just sounds like a good thing

8/9/2007 12:35:38 PM

ATTN: SOUTH ASIA

Send some of your rain to my yard. Thx.

8/9/2007 9:33:37 PM

Quote :

"China is a developing nation and are polluting by necessity. We could ratify kyoto and still survive but we're greedy."

Wow, this is most fucking retarded, bass-ackwards statement yet from Poetrickster.

On the one hand, the communist up and coming power should be allowed to dump 100's of times more pollution into the air, land and water because they are "developing", but WE should be more communist/socialist and do for the good of the world because we are too "greedy".

If ANYONE should be nipping polution in the bud, its China. It's INSANELY cheaper to build energy efficient factories, power plants and buildings FROM THE START, versus the ridiculous amount of infrastructure redevelopment that would be needed in the US. Seriously dude you are a fucking idiot.

8/9/2007 10:29:37 PM

^

8/11/2007 11:51:54 PM

If everyone were to ratify under the same conditions it would just put us at a huge advantage and retard the developing world

If we were to ratify everyone would eventually ratify

If we don't ratify and even if everyone else does nobody will further ratify in the future and the whole thing is pointless everybody loses.

We selfishly choose the latter. Either we're going to have some kind of advantage or fuck the whole thing.

8/12/2007 2:55:06 AM

Bull-fucking-shit.

The only people who ratify it are the countries who ALREADY meet the standards. The US ratification won't do shit but put the non-member countries at a tremendous industrial advantage. That's like arguing that the illegal immigrants will start paying taxes if we grant amnesty, you know, because it's the right thing to do.

8/12/2007 3:16:39 AM

i agree with your overall point, but i do think that many illegal immigrants would pay taxes if it meant not having to fear deportation at every turn. i think a combination of one-time amnesty and drastically increased enforcement at the borders and our work sites would probably do a lot of good. sure there would still be people floating under the radar, but it would be minor compared to the problem now.

8/13/2007 10:31:45 AM

Quote :

"Wow, this is most fucking retarded, bass-ackwards statement yet from Poetrickster"

i dont know...did you see what he was posting in the Myrtle Beach #1 thread in the lounge

8/13/2007 12:53:39 PM

I'd just like to say that here in the north east summer temperatures have averaged 6 degrees below normal.

GLOBAL WARMING, OMG OMG!

Kyoto Protocol would do dickle even if every country in the world followed it.

8/14/2007 1:04:05 PM

Actually, models are demonstrating that if world-wide CO2 emissions were reduced it actually would make a significant difference way down the road (the model I saw was for 100 years).

BUT WHAT DO 99% OF SCIENTISTS KNOW?

(Edit: this should in now way be interpreted as an endorsement of the original poster's stupidity)

[Edited on August 14, 2007 at 3:15 PM. Reason : .]

8/14/2007 3:14:37 PM

"the model I saw"

thanks! we'll take your word for it!

8/14/2007 3:15:51 PM

It's in that Scientific American I've referenced. It's not my fault they haven't put it online yet. Go to the news stand if you really care.

8/14/2007 3:18:17 PM

Quote :

"It's in that Scientific American I've referenced"

How did you reference it before? You didn't have a link then?

I figured pretty much all journals were available online although some aren't free

8/14/2007 3:26:06 PM

Here you go:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=B1182F51-E7F2-99DF-30CB2EAAC975FE93

8/14/2007 3:30:01 PM

we just need to stop giving out humanitarian aid until they all starve

the problem is that when we give out aid to those that are starving we help them through and they have more and more kids since they can feed them

then when the next drought or whatever happens it is 2x as bad

8/14/2007 3:33:30 PM

^^well thanks I guess even though I can't read the article without subscribing

8/14/2007 3:36:06 PM

haha... this is the LOLz:






******************


i am not sticking up for china, but how is this statement true:

Quote :

"polluting exponentially more than us: China"

1) if we look at total CO2 emissions, US releases 33% more than China (or China 25% less than US).
2) if we look at per capita CO2 emissions, US releases 600% of China.
3) did you mean the growth in emissions (gross and per capita) over the years?

ok i just read that China surpassed US for the first time in 2006, and emitted 8% more than US.

still, i don't see "exponentially more" part.


[Edited on August 14, 2007 at 6:15 PM. Reason : ]

8/14/2007 6:13:54 PM

China is a far worse polluter than the US, there are much worse things to put into the atmosphere.

They are is the largest contributer of chlorofluorocarbons, sulfur oxide, and almost all the other ozone-depleting substances.

That is just air pollution. They are also the worst soil/water polluters as well.

8/14/2007 6:44:19 PM

They have to make sure all of that pesky wildlife is adequitely extinct before the Olymipics. Ask the dolphins.

8/14/2007 7:21:00 PM

the poor dolphins

fucking chinese

8/14/2007 7:28:58 PM

Quote :

"should i just lock this fucking stupid thread, or do some of you actually want to tear it apart?"

wait, what?

You're saying you'll lock it because you don't agree with it?

8/14/2007 7:38:28 PM

I thought that the ozone layer was a primary contributor to the greenhouse effect. Maybe those holes weren't so bad. Sure, we'll all get a megadose of solar radiation and die of cancer, but at least we'll be cooler.

8/14/2007 10:11:12 PM

Quote :

"I thought that the ozone layer was a primary contributor to the greenhouse effect. Maybe those holes weren't so bad. Sure, we'll all get a megadose of solar radiation and die of cancer, but at least we'll be cooler."

Oddly, the stratosphere does get cooler, but the troposphere gets warmer below "ozone holes".



Sulfur Oxides = acid rain, and contributes to the "yellow cloud" that forms over China and has spread as far as the west coast of the US.

Increase in UV radiation is harmful and can kill plankton and bacteria in the ocean (among other things). Guess what is the largest consumer of C02 in the world? Plankton and bacteria in the ocean.

China is also the largest contributor of Methane, which is also a major greenhouse gas.

C02, especially from cars, is a relatively minor in the grand scheme of things.

8/14/2007 10:47:51 PM

Fascinating. I think the solution is clear. We have to nuke China.

8/14/2007 10:57:55 PM

^^Methane is 4 times as strong a GHG as CO2. I don't think thats mentioned enough

8/15/2007 1:14:08 PM

Quote :

"Guess what is the largest consumer of C02 in the world? Plankton and bacteria in the ocean."

yep...lots of people are like omg save the rainforests, which is a worthy thing to do, but they dont realize about 90% of co2 absorbed is by photosynthetic phytoplankton and algae

8/15/2007 2:55:58 PM

Quote :

"i think a combination of one-time amnesty and drastically increased enforcement at the borders and our work sites would probably do a lot of good. "

the only problem w/ "one-time amnesties" is that they are never "one-time." the always lead to more "one-time" amnesties

8/15/2007 8:13:52 PM