Global Warming Hysteria

by metatron 262 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Big Tex

  My own position, one that may surprise the non-thinking element mentioned above is that though Global Warming is the issue of the day that effects us all, it is a natural cycle taking place which we will just have to learn to survive as best as we can and that man's input into the problem is far less than is being touted in some quarters. On a geologic timescale, which takes place over hundreds of thousands of years, what is happening is not unusual, though even the little that mankind is contributing to the problem is not helping the situation. There is little room for complacency, one way or the other, as the problem will effect all of us.

  I thought as much. I've read what you've posted many times over the years and I get where you're coming from. You have a very subtle wit and a reasoned approach that is often not appreciated in a louder and louder 'yes but' argument.

  Irregardless of the cause it is happening now there is little we can do (now) to change it.

  Be well,

  Chris
• 

  hillary_step

  Brother Apostate,

  Dumb until the very last!

  Exhibit A: Witness the latest tripe by both of them.

  If you had actually read what I have wriiten above, you would have noted that my position on the matter is in agreement with your own!!! This is clear evidence that you do not even bother to read posts before you hit your keyboard and run off at the mouth, a typical reaction of a person who posts in a flurry of injured emotion. That is why your posts are totally devoid of content and why you are incapable of understanding even the basics of the process of debate.

  No wonder that Abbadon has your number well taped.

  Perhaps you should rely on the other attack-gnats to help you out. Try 'elderwho', his posts are always filled with interesting research, pertinent statistics and laced with iconoclastic vision. Here is an example :

  Poor Hilarious.

  HS
• 

  hillary_step

  Frank,

  Likewise the USA will need to take the biggest lead as we North Americans must reduce CO2 (according to Kyoto) by 25% by 2012. That means the US would need to find a replacement to fossil fuels energy for a 1/4 of a nations consumption while the nation is growing in population simultaneously. You Americans will need to build hydro, solar, wind, tidal and/or nuclear capacity to take 30-5% of the domestic power utility while taking coal, oil and other CO2 positive utilities off line....and you have 5 years to do it!

  You are taking a Luddite approach to the issue. Eventually fossil fuels will need to be replaced as an energy source. It is through such pressures that some of the greatest inventions and discoveries have been made in the past. If the alarm surrounding the Global Warming issue leads to a healthier environment, renewable energy, and a forward looking focus, then the 'trillions' involved would be small money well spent.

  I own a healthy sceptisicm toward human involvment in the issue of climate change, not as with some other posters on this thread driven by a political agenda, but due entirely to the fact that the scientific evidence for human involvment as the major culprit seems at best coincidental.

  Chris,

  I thought as much. I've read what you've posted many times over the years and I get where you're coming from. You have a very subtle wit and a reasoned approach that is often not appreciated in a louder and louder 'yes but' argument.

  Thank you Chris. What is astonishing, and I have found this a common issue when debating with XJW's, is that many take a strong, determined and agressive stance on an issue that they are incapable of backing with facts, or even a logical argument. I am convinced it is a hang-over from JW days, when our automatic assumption when people disagreed with us as we went from door to door was that they were wrong by default.

  Just as an experiment, try thinking of 'Brother Apostate' taking the door, and 'elderwho' his quieter partner giggling evry so often ( not his turn to take the call! ) running through the days sermon and HS disagreeing with them. I think it makes an ironic picture. I suspect they are both quite newly released from the clutches of the WTS.

  HS
• 

  Brother Apostate

  hillary_step,

  Exhibit A: Witness the latest tripe by both of them.

  If you had actually read what I have wriiten above, you would have noted that my position on the matter is in agreement with your own!!! This is clear evidence that you do not even bother to read posts before you hit your keyboard and run off at the mouth, a typical reaction of a person who posts in a flurry of injured emotion. That is why your posts are totally devoid of content and why you are incapable of understanding even the basics of the process of debate.

  I did note your schizophrenic reversal on the issue. The fact remains, you jumped on this thread, exactly why? To suggest that you are part of the sky-is-falling crowd, only to later show what you now say you believed all along.

  What kind of a twisted game is that?

  If you side with the sky-is falling crowd, say so.

  If you side with the rational crowd that knows there is (as of yet at least) insufficient research to adopt a view that humans are responsible for global warming, then say so from the beginning.

  I have straightforwardly stated my beliefs, you have been schizophrenic in stating yours.

  Are we to believe your previous posts or your latest ones?

  Or will you jump back and forth between those alternate views?

  Sheesh, what a child-like game you play.

  BA- Calls 'em as he sees 'em

  PS- heres a rose,which by any other name smells as sweet.
• 

  OUTLAW

  hillary_step..Once again your razer wit has me laughing..I just don`t see you as a cheerleader,much too manly.It is a funny thought though..LOL!!..I remember watching the learning channel,there was a program on this subject..Aparrently the 14th centurey was much warmer than it is now..They did`nt have cars back then but they did have cows that fart..Farting cows contribute 20% to globel warming..A glacier in Canada broke off a few weeks ago and now Canada is just a little bit smaller..Why?.. Because of farting cows!..Next time you go to a Mcdonald`s or a Wendys,you can keep another piece of Canada from breaking off..Order a fillet of fish on a bun..Fish don`t fart!..LOL!!...OUTLAW
• 

  Brother Apostate

  Dear hillary_step,

  What is astonishing, and I have found this a common issue when debating with XJW's, is that many take a strong, determined and agressive stance on an issue that they are incapable of backing with facts, or even a logical argument.

  
  What a whopper! Here it is you who has taken a stance that you now say you didn’t, asking me and others to post facts that you now say you were in agreement with all along. How is that not schizophrenic, disingenuous or just game-playing? Just as I stated above, you are a time waster and a game player.

  I am convinced it is a hang-over from JW days, when our automatic assumption when people disagreed with us as we went from door to door was that they were wrong by default.

  Congratulations, you have diagnosed your own problem rather well.

  Just as an experiment, try thinking of 'Brother Apostate' taking the door, and 'elderwho' his quieter partner giggling evry so often ( not his turn to take the call! ) running through the days sermon and HS disagreeing with them. I think it makes an ironic picture.

  The only thing ironic about the picture you paint is that you are speaking about all of us xJWs, including yourself, if you were capable of intellectual honesty. Simply substitute “Abaddon” and “hillary_step”, ironic, huh? Go look it up in a dictionary.

  I suspect they are both quite newly released from the clutches of the WTS.

  Once again, if you believe it, it must be true. Make up a false hypothesis, then buy it. Tsk, tsk, some people would rather just read their own press releases, how sad.

  BA- Saw a bug and squashed it.

  PS- See a therapist.
• 

  zack

  So, why, again is global warming bad? Think of all the areas in northern latitudes that are presently uninhabitable because they are so cold? Ocean rise?

  I guess that's bad if you have coastal property. Hurricances? I guess that's bad if you insure coastal property.

  What I find fascinating is the ABSOLUTE certainty of man's direct causation of the warming when the evidence, as I see it, is simply that global temps. have increased

  over the last century. Man's responsibility seems to me to be a CONCLUSION based on that evidence and then stated with ABSOTULE certainty. Sounds a liitle bit

  like faith in an invisible kingdom.
• 

  hillary_step

  Brother Apostate,

  I did note your schizophrenic reversal on the issue. The fact remains, you jumped on this thread, exactly why? To suggest that you are part of the sky-is-falling crowd, only to later show what you now say you believed all along.

  LOL....You really are an idiot.

  Read my posts. I made it clear in three posts that I was not divulging my viewpoint, you even alluded to this yourself insisting that I was clearly of the 'pro-warming' side of the issue and that I had given myself away. If you cannot read other posts accurately, at least read your own!

  I asked that you leave behind your previous issues with Abbadon and not bring your hurt feelings ( no doubt he diced you like a withered carrot in other debates ) into this thread and stick to standard debating techniques. It became clear you are incapable of doing this, but the very least you could do is to actually read posts on a thread before you reply to them. It is quite clear that you just do not have the attention span to read anything longer than a Readers Digest article.

  You have made yourself look like the Village Idiot by trying to focus your eyes on the tip of your nose, and now you are screaming like a wrinkled Harpy bathing in Holy water. Attend to yourself before you try to debate any issues of importance BA - we all have your number now, not just Abbadon.

  So, let me ask, do you actually have anything to add to this thread? The actual content of your posts that relate to the thread, apart from trying to throw a few blunt arrows at Abbadon and myself, has in actuality been NIL....lol

  HS
• 

  Big Tex

  What is astonishing, and I have found this a common issue when debating with XJW's, is that many take a strong, determined and agressive stance on an issue that they are incapable of backing with facts, or even a logical argument. I am convinced it is a hang-over from JW days, when our automatic assumption when people disagreed with us as we went from door to door was that they were wrong by default.

  Now there you may be on to something. I've mentioned this to Nina several times.

  I disagree strongly with the idea that potential problems = End Of The World (a/k/a Armageddon). For example, global warming, or al-Qaeda, or MSG or [fill in the blank]. I believe in life and life finds a way to survive. Even if, God forbid, we are stupid enough to nuke each other, life will survive.

  I do, however, see a dynamic in place that in a discussion of ideas (which ideally this sort of discussion should be), that very often one or several people (often on both sides) invest so much of themselves into "proving" the other side wrong. It's as if, somehow, proving the another wrong, validates that person.

  And I don't think this behavior is especially about Jehovah's Witnesses. I see often in politics, where it's called polarization.

  HS, I've disagreed with you and I know you've disagreed with me back in the day (most likely a couple of years ago in admin!) but one thing I have always appreciated about you is that you do not make it a personal issue. I see this on this board as well as in other parts of life. As I say, I don't think this is an especially ex-JW behavior, perhaps it's more of where our society has evolved. I don't know. Perhaps it's the reverse that is true, that ex-Witnesses are more inclined (whether through experience or their own personal issues) to engage in a winner-take-all fight that somehow, magically, "proves" they are right and somehow a better person, et al.

  Interesting thought, as always.

  Chris
• 

  Frank75

  So, why, again is global warming bad? Think of all the areas in northern latitudes that are presently uninhabitable because they are so cold? Ocean rise?

  I guess that's bad if you have coastal property. Hurricances? I guess that's bad if you insure coastal property.

  What I find fascinating is the ABSOLUTE certainty of man's direct causation of the warming when the evidence, as I see it, is simply that global temps. have increased

  over the last century. Man's responsibility seems to me to be a CONCLUSION based on that evidence and then stated with ABSOTULE certainty. Sounds a liitle bit

  like faith in an invisible kingdom.

  Hallelujah!

  Frank75