Sea Kayak Trips Bulletin Board

Not paranoid, just tired of GW's misuse.

Posted By: Dale Frolander
Date: Tuesday, 21 August 2001, at 1:01 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Not global warming again. OT (Rob Forsell)

: Dale, you sound a little paranoid.

Paranoid? That doesn't even make sense, I'm not the one running around like chicken little yelling "The sky is falling, the sky is falling".

: The earth is most assuredly warming. There
: are natural cycles of cooling and warming. That's why there are such
: things as ice ages. There are also ice-free periods in history as well.
: The argument is not whether or not it exists; the argument is how much
: does the impact humans have on the globe affect this natural cycle.

I agree, the earth warms and cools over the centuries, and it does this for many reasons, but not entirely human intervention. The fact of Global warming exists or does not exist is not my point, my point is that some people have decided that they are going to use the warming and cooling of the earth to start hysteria that it will be the end of the earth if we don't stop the warming. They are using it to push their own environmental agenda. My point is that once again it is being used to say that it is killing off all of the species including the coral reefs. So how much would you say we have caused the earth to warm up in the last century or so since we started burning fossil fuels, a degree or two? The temperature of the water that the coral live in varies by more than that?

My other point is that we have only been measuring the temperature of the earth on a global scale for only 20 years or so, that is much too short of a time span to extrapolate all the disasters that have been dreamt up. For example, If you look at one day on a graph of the stock market and it goes up can you then extrapolate that you will be rich in X years? No, the stock market goes up and down. We use more and more resources (goes up), then we come up with alternative resources (goes down), then we have more population (goes up again)... For example, the cars we use today are much more environmentally friendly than the one's of 20 years ago even with more people driving them, but has that got the radicals off our backs? Before that my grandmas house was heated by shoveling coal into the furnace, but I bet she could have told you of some days in North Dakota that were just as hot as any I've ever experienced. My point is that we have been studying global warming for way too short of a time to be able to accurately say what will happen.

Also, if we produce all of this CO2 emissions that is causing global warming, won't that make the environment more friendly to plants? More plants will then use up more CO2. You see the earth tries to balance itself if we just stop trying to fix it.

And why do we spin out of control if a species dies out (gotta protect those 3 blue and white polka-dotted tree climbing zebras)? Many species have went extinct and new ones have been born long before people were ever here. And if there are so few left, what are the animals that depend on them eating? Could they possibly be eating something else? Are we not protecting the weak? That might mess up darwin's theory.

Why do we feel the need to keep tweeking the environmental engine that this earth runs on? We couldn't even make the biosphere work for even close to the 2 years that it was supposed to run. And we think we can master the earth's environment?

It reminds me of when the Exxon valdez dumped it's oil all over the beachs. It was great that there were people out there mopping it up, but then some radicals decided that they were going to fix it by spraying HOT pressurized water on the rocks to wash off the residual oil. Turns out that where they washed the rocks, they also sterilized the beach of all life forms that were under the rocks. The life in the other areas came back relatively soon. They should have just mopped up the worst of it like the others did, and then left it alone to allow nature to finish fixing it.

The outdoors are important, and we should protect it, but we need to be able to be part of it and USE it with some common sense. Many environmental radicals would like to lock everyone out of nature. What they can't get locked up, they are buying or trying to have donated to them so that it will then be the organizations and can never be used. Weren't we a species like all the rest just 100 years ago and could go anywhere in the woods that we wanted. When did we get factored out of nature?

Another point I'm trying to make is that we should not just blindly take the media's word for it? Where have YOU directly felt the impact of global warming, or do you just know what you know by what others have told you? In other words where have YOU seen evidence of global warming? If you listen to others (including the media), combine that with your own personal experiences and still come up to the same conclusions, then great. But if you rely entirely on what you've been told, and don't temper it with your own personal experiences, then you will easily be lied to.

Messages In This Thread

Sea Kayaking in the Florida Keys
Peggy Goddard -- Monday, 13 August 2001, at 1:45 p.m.

Why would it get ruined? *NM*
Dale Frolander -- Monday, 13 August 2001, at 2:08 p.m.

Maybe the anchors from a 30 ft. raft? *NM*
Ed K. -- Monday, 13 August 2001, at 2:22 p.m.

Re: Why would it get ruined?
Peggy Goddard -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001, at 12:14 p.m.

We have met the enemy and it is us.
Shawn Baker -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001, at 12:40 p.m.

Not global warming again.
Dale Frolander -- Thursday, 16 August 2001, at 5:47 p.m.

Re: Not global warming? THANKS "W"
Peggy Goddard -- Thursday, 16 August 2001, at 6:36 p.m.

Re: Not global warming? THANKS "W"
Dale Frolander -- Friday, 17 August 2001, at 1:34 a.m.

NO MORE POLITICS *NM*
Mike Scarborough -- Friday, 17 August 2001, at 9:14 a.m.

Re: Not global warming? THANKS "W"
Shawn Baker -- Monday, 20 August 2001, at 1:56 p.m.

Re: Not global warming again. OT
Rob Forsell -- Friday, 17 August 2001, at 8:08 a.m.

Re: Not global warming again. OT
LeeG -- Friday, 17 August 2001, at 9:27 a.m.

Re: Not global warming again. OT
Charles Cooper -- Friday, 17 August 2001, at 4:04 p.m.

Not paranoid, just tired of GW's misuse.
Dale Frolander -- Tuesday, 21 August 2001, at 1:01 a.m.

Re: Not paranoid, just tired of GW's misuse.
LeeG -- Tuesday, 21 August 2001, at 9:00 a.m.

Re: Not paranoid, just tired of GW's misuse.
Tim Mattson -- Wednesday, 22 August 2001, at 2:19 a.m.

Re: Not paranoid, just tired of GW's misuse.
Ian Johnston -- Sunday, 2 September 2001, at 3:00 a.m.

Re: Not paranoid, just tired of GW's misuse.
Dale Frolander -- Tuesday, 4 September 2001, at 4:17 p.m.

Re: Not paranoid, just tired of GW's misuse.
Ian Johnston -- Tuesday, 4 September 2001, at 9:43 p.m.

Re: Not paranoid, just tired of GW's misuse.
Dale Frolander -- Wednesday, 5 September 2001, at 3:46 a.m.

Re: Government doesn't work for the people anymore
Shawn Baker -- Wednesday, 5 September 2001, at 10:59 a.m.

C'mon, tell what you really think
Ted Henry -- Wednesday, 5 September 2001, at 3:55 p.m.

Re: There's no conceivable way it will work
Shawn Baker -- Wednesday, 5 September 2001, at 6:17 p.m.

Re: snip-snip, end of discussion
Don Beale -- Wednesday, 5 September 2001, at 7:46 p.m.

Re: snip everyone, I say!
Shawn Baker -- Thursday, 6 September 2001, at 11:00 a.m.

Re: snip everyone, I say!
Don Beale -- Thursday, 6 September 2001, at 11:24 a.m.

Re: snip-snip, end of discussion
Ken Sutherland -- Thursday, 6 September 2001, at 2:04 p.m.

Re: How Bad it hurts
Shawn Baker -- Thursday, 6 September 2001, at 4:48 p.m.

Sorry OT
Ken Sutherland -- Thursday, 6 September 2001, at 7:09 p.m.

Re: C'mon, tell what you really think
Ian Johnston -- Saturday, 15 September 2001, at 9:26 p.m.

Great stuff! Shawn Baker in 2004!!! *NM*
Dale Frolander -- Wednesday, 5 September 2001, at 9:55 p.m.

I agree with your thinking Shawn.
John Monfoe -- Thursday, 6 September 2001, at 8:25 a.m.

Re: I heard it put eloquently once...
Don Beale -- Thursday, 6 September 2001, at 11:28 a.m.

Re: Not paranoid, just tired of GW's misuse.
Ian Johnston -- Sunday, 2 September 2001, at 3:20 a.m.

Re: Not paranoid, just tired of GW's misuse.
Ian Johnston -- Sunday, 2 September 2001, at 3:34 a.m.

Re: Not global warming again.
Tim Mattson -- Friday, 17 August 2001, at 7:05 p.m.

Re: Human vs. natural warming
Shawn Baker -- Monday, 20 August 2001, at 2:02 p.m.

sniff sniff... Smells like SPAM to me *NM*
tony B -- Monday, 13 August 2001, at 4:37 p.m.

Re: sniff sniff... Smells like SPAM to me
Peggy Goddard -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001, at 12:23 p.m.

Re: whether SPAM?
Shawn Baker -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001, at 12:45 p.m.

Re: whether SPAM?
Peggy Goddard -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001, at 6:25 p.m.

Re: Kayaking the Keys
Shawn Baker -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001, at 7:53 p.m.

Re: whether SPAM?
LeeG -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001, at 7:58 p.m.

Inexpensive paddle
Ed K. -- Wednesday, 15 August 2001, at 12:30 p.m.

Re: But not a cheap paddle
Shawn Baker -- Wednesday, 15 August 2001, at 10:05 p.m.

Re: whether SPAM?
Mike Boren -- Wednesday, 15 August 2001, at 1:54 p.m.

Re: Peggy, tell more
LeeG -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001, at 3:58 p.m.

Re: sniff sniff...
Mike Scarborough -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001, at 6:09 p.m.

Re: sniff sniff...
Peggy Goddard -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001, at 6:36 p.m.

Not SPAM after all
tony B -- Monday, 20 August 2001, at 2:52 p.m.

Re: yeah, it looks like advertising BUT
LeeG -- Monday, 13 August 2001, at 9:53 p.m.

Re: Sea Kayaking in the Florida Keys
Pete -- Saturday, 15 September 2001, at 8:30 a.m.

Sea Kayak Trips Bulletin Board is maintained by Nick Schade - Guillemot Kayaks with WebBBS 5.12.