for page 2

Quote :

"i'm pretty sure this is what i read back in April http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=37487 the country is set to overtake the United States as the world's biggest source of greenhouse gases (GHGs) this year"

in response to:

Quote :

"China is...now the single biggest source of carbon dioxide (8% more than the US)"

6/24/2007 10:53:12 PM

yes, what you read was a prediction, not the actual event....

6/24/2007 11:11:15 PM

there is no way you are going to get me to concede on this

all you did was give me an exact date to something i knew back in april

6/24/2007 11:12:36 PM

yes, i did. but this idea was even older than then, so dont roll up and troll with the *OLD* when it's a further elaboration of it. it's akin to me saying that I heard that it will be hot sometime in 2 weeks.... then claiming that when someone inevitably makes a thread about the heat....

6/24/2007 11:18:02 PM

i guess i see your point

i'll just quietly congratulate myself and pat myself on the back

6/24/2007 11:22:16 PM

Quote :

"Only because they have yellow coal which is rich in sulfur. Its not their fault they were dealt that hand and unless we want to dig up yellowstone and give them the good coal. We don't really have room to criticize because we use ALOT of coal ourselves and we don't even have to, they have to so don't even go there."

it would help if they used scrubbers everywhere like the rest of the civilized world.

6/25/2007 10:01:09 AM

I think they can already afford scrubbers; it's just a matter of setting the policy.

Instead of command and control regulation, I would recommend they slap a tax on emissions. It raises government revenue, hopefully used to offset an income-tax cut, and it provides strong incentives to reduce emissions.

6/25/2007 11:51:30 AM

Quote :

"Quote : "if only CO2 emissions did anything dangerous to the environment." Either an idiot or a troll. Either way, a waste of time"

I'm afraid you're the only troll in this thread.

[Edited on June 25, 2007 at 1:39 PM. Reason : i'm not getting into it again]

6/25/2007 1:34:04 PM

You must be mistaken there are no troll's on this website.

6/25/2007 2:23:26 PM

^^^Pigovian taxes have been proven to reduce pollution without harming economies in Europe, especially when they are accompanied by a revenue-balancing tax cut somewhere else.

Unfortunately, China's coal-mining interests are just as politically powerful as those in the US, and politicians are even more corrupt because of the 1-party system. Don't expect change any time soon.

[Edited on June 25, 2007 at 4:04 PM. Reason : 2]

6/25/2007 4:03:36 PM

Quote :

"IF??? it is bad? say what?"

why am I not surprised that you are incapable of comprehending this argument?

6/25/2007 9:51:45 PM

Maybe because there is NO argument

6/26/2007 12:22:50 PM

CO2 is bad...stop breathing

6/26/2007 12:26:12 PM

NO argument supporting CO2 as being dangerous maybe - just a bunch of bogus claims of global warming and the polar ice caps melting when neither is occurring.

6/26/2007 12:54:44 PM

so all animals on this planet are inherently dangerous, b/c they (we) expel C02?

6/26/2007 1:06:18 PM

Quote :

"just a bunch of bogus claims of global warming and the polar ice caps melting when neither is occurring."

How stubborn do you have to be to ignore the obvious fact that the Earth has been warming up over the last 20 years?

It's one thing to try to downplay CO2's impact on global warming, but to deny global warming entirely? How the fuck did you get into NC State?

6/26/2007 1:12:27 PM

"global warming" != "increase in earth's temperature"

it refers to the theory that manmade co2 emissions are causing this

you're arguing semantics cause nobody is denying temp/time graphs, just the causes

6/26/2007 1:15:33 PM

Quote :

"How stubborn do you have to be to ignore the obvious fact that the Earth has been warming up over the last 20 years? It's one thing to try to downplay CO2's impact on global warming, but to deny global warming entirely? How the fuck did you get into NC State?"

6/26/2007 1:30:08 PM

reading comprehension is lacking for Trolly McTroll, as usual

6/26/2007 1:32:00 PM

Quote :

"Terminology The term "global warming" is a specific example of the broader term climate change, which can also refer to global cooling. In common usage the term refers to recent warming and implies a human influence.[8] The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) uses the term "climate change" for human-caused change, and "climate variability" for other changes.[9] The term "anthropogenic climate change" is sometimes used when focusing on human-induced changes."

You get partial credit at best. Now shut the fuck up.

6/26/2007 1:46:36 PM

^STFU man, you knew exactly what he was talking about, and you know its true.

6/26/2007 1:52:20 PM

Maybe eleusis needs to make his statements a bit clearer (the part Prawn quoted). Then you two dipshits won't feel compelled to argue over some bullshit point.

6/26/2007 1:56:15 PM

Quote :

"In common usage the term refers to recent warming and implies a human influence"

wow that sound familiar

Quote :

""global warming" != "increase in earth's temperature" it refers to the theory that manmade co2 emissions are causing this"

you get zero credit...die

6/26/2007 2:03:26 PM

Quote :

"it refers to the theory that manmade co2 emissions are causing this""

!=

Quote :

""In common usage the term refers to recent warming and implies a human influence""

Which is why I said you get partial credit. Christ you cunt bag. This stupid ghey spat that is no doubt going to piss people off, could have ended by you saying, "yea, I guess you are right". But you're so hell bent on being a fuck bag and winning every micro debate (were you not loved as a child?), that even when the answer is right in front of your face, you'll ignore or deny it, so you can troll troll troll again.

The hate should have been directed at Prawn Star for taking part of eleusis quote out of context. Furthermore, my quote came from Wikipedia, and as it stands, I don't think there is any official standard stating "global warming" MUST mean warming caused by man. At the moment, many different people use the term in many different ways (as Prawn quoted it) thanks to the confusion about what actually is causing the earth to heat up.

6/26/2007 2:09:07 PM

words

6/26/2007 2:20:32 PM

The statement "[global warming] refers to the theory that mandmade co2 emissions are causing this" is wrong, and you know it. Moving right along.

6/26/2007 2:29:12 PM

But you're so hell bent on being a fuck bag and winning every micro debate

why dont you stick to jacking off while you scream hate speech at bush cause aside from not knowing shit, you dont know shit about climate change

"according to wikipedia..."

wikipedia deez nuts motherfucker...i could have edited wikipedia with that entry, with your shit ass non-credible sources

6/26/2007 2:41:32 PM

Man, when you lose, you really go ballistic.

6/26/2007 2:55:20 PM

man when you troll, you really are a pussy alias

6/26/2007 2:58:33 PM

Keep calling it trolling if it helps you sleep at night. Don't you have some cases to work through, maybe some tech support to handle, or some patch cable to run?

6/26/2007 3:04:49 PM

i just call it trolling because thats what it is

6/26/2007 3:05:46 PM

I just wanted everyone to be clear on what the term global warming means. Your statement was wrong, I was pointing it out. How is that trolling?

6/26/2007 3:26:37 PM

my statement wasnt wrong

your wikipedia quote essentially confirmed my statement was right

i think Prawn Star immediately caught my drift

then you came along...

6/26/2007 3:29:05 PM

Quote :

"you're arguing semantics cause nobody is denying temp/time graphs, just the causes"

Look man, you're the one that is crying about semantics. You do that any time you aren't winning an argument because you make lazy statements that people misunderstand.

You then stated, like you were some sort of authority about the matter, that global warming refers to the earth warming caused by manmade CO2.

This is a partially true statement, which would ordinarily be fine, but since you tried to make it an absolute in the context of the argument, it is logically wrong, and I called you out as such.

You realize this, so you then play your "you're a troll game" to try to deflect the attention away from you being an idiot. You know I'm bored and respond to it, then you keep piling onto it like you haven't done shit wrong, and you know it pisses everyone off, and you somehow think you are above it because I called you out on your incorrect statements.

Just give it a rest man. You say stupid shit a lot of the time here, a lot of people call you out, a lot of people don't waste their time on you, we can't all be trolls. You're the one with the problem.

6/26/2007 3:49:21 PM

words

6/26/2007 11:24:33 PM

Quote :

"How stubborn do you have to be to ignore the obvious fact that the Earth has been warming up over the last 20 years? It's one thing to try to downplay CO2's impact on global warming, but to deny global warming entirely? How the fuck did you get into NC State?"

my statement directly implied that CO2 is claimed to be the direct cause of global warming - when in fact there is no solid evidence to prove this to be the case. maybe you need to catch up on your reading comprehension skills.

Also, just for future reference, you being accepted to NC State doesn't mean shit. they let everyone into the university, and they'll let you stay there until you either fuck up every opportunity they give you or you go broke. The only thing that matters is what you get out with and how much you have to spend to get there. If you haven't figured that out by now, then you have a lot to learn about the world around you.

6/26/2007 11:31:22 PM

Quote :

"Maybe because there is NO argument"

in that, you are partially correct. In the quote to which you referred, I was NOT arguing that CO2 wasn't bad. that you are so fundamentally blinded by your own stupidity should, thus, come as no surprise to me.

6/28/2007 9:29:53 PM