Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [BBC] - Global warming 'confirmed' by independent study
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[BBC] - Global warming 'confirmed' by independent study - Page 13  

post #121 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunaticgts View Post
Ok well the only thing I wanna know, is why all these rich people tell the middle and poor class to cut down on things like taking hot showers and not using as much energy.

While they're living in these huge house that use more energy then small country's and roll around in private jets.

Shouldn't they practice what the preach?

Al Gore and all his cronies are hypocrites trying to make money off the poor.
He was caught flying his private jet everywhere and was confronted about it.

Remember that global concert he had? Yea well he put more co2 in that atmosphere flying the bands around the world. So he bought carbon credits so its ok for him.

And how the F do carbon credits work anyways isn't the co2 still going in to the atmosphere? "But it's ok I bought carbon credits so I can do that" give me a break.
They can shove that propaganda type ***** up there @ss.

Reminds me of Reefer madness.

F them and until they change there ways I'll continue to drive my SUV and take showers as long as I want.
Al Gore was a self imposed spokesman for it. No one voted on one. Rich people do it because they have an audience, and yes, are hypocrites.

Carbon credits is sort of a market for trading emissions. Nothing is mandatory, at least not to my knowledge, but signators of the Kyoto Protocol have agreed to try and stick to an average output, and can trade credits, or buy credits.
Basically it creates an incentive to either produce less of an output of carbon (CO2, CH4) or to keep the global output from rising. I.E. company A emits 20,000 tons of CO2/year, company B emits 15,000 tons/year. The next year company A emits 5k more, and company B emits the same as last year. Company B may have either bought credits, or accrued credits for investing in some sort of technology. Company A says, "hey company B, we'll buy 5k tons worth of carbon credits off of you since we increased our output."
It creates an incentive to either decrease, or maintain carbon output for people who are in that group. It also applies to developed vs developing countries. Developing countries have little to invest in cleaner manufacturing, whereas developed countries do. So developed countries trade carbon credits to the developing countries to offset that output. Same goes for sulfur and NOx gases.

I fail to see how you classify it as propaganda when it's not mandatory, and is pretty much optional to the people who even signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol. And 192 countries signed it, 191 ratified it. Guess who the only country was that didn't. The website is Canadian, so I assume that's why OCN is buying credits.
Edited by esocid - 10/21/11 at 2:33pm
Deimos
(13 items)
 
Pluto
(18 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 1090T Biostar TA890FXE Nvidia GTX 470 Corsair Vengence 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 MZ-7PC128D/AM Western Digital Black Western Digital Green Western Digital Blue 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Dtek v2 Water Windows 7 Pro Fedora 16 LG4250 42" LCD TV 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Ergo Silverstone ST-1000P Cooler Master Cosmos 1000 Logitech G500 
Mouse PadAudio
X-Trac Ripper Asus D1 
  hide details  
Deimos
(13 items)
 
Pluto
(18 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 1090T Biostar TA890FXE Nvidia GTX 470 Corsair Vengence 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 MZ-7PC128D/AM Western Digital Black Western Digital Green Western Digital Blue 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Dtek v2 Water Windows 7 Pro Fedora 16 LG4250 42" LCD TV 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Ergo Silverstone ST-1000P Cooler Master Cosmos 1000 Logitech G500 
Mouse PadAudio
X-Trac Ripper Asus D1 
  hide details  
post #122 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jess94 View Post
How is my argument a Strawman when I accurately represented his argument? I don't think you understand the concept of fallacies.
You're refuting how science determines causation, not the argument and doing so by a flawed usage of "correlation does not imply causation". Unfortunately for you, the scientific process is what drives logic, and that is what is driven behind the thousands of global warming studies.

Thus, strawman.
post #123 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by mobius9 View Post
But what would Lord Monckton say?
He would say why am I not making hundreds of millions of dollars like Alibi Gore and James the liar Hanson are on this MMGW scam?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-3770k  MSI Z77A-GD65 7970 GSkill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Agility2  LG USB External CD/DVD Burner CoolMaster Hyper 212+  Win7 Pro 64  
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer 19" Microsoft wireless  CoolerMaster 850watt Sentey Burton GS-6500  
MouseOtherOther
Microsoft wireless CyberPower 800w UPS 8-Port USB/PS2 Combo KVM Switch 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-3770k  MSI Z77A-GD65 7970 GSkill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Agility2  LG USB External CD/DVD Burner CoolMaster Hyper 212+  Win7 Pro 64  
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer 19" Microsoft wireless  CoolerMaster 850watt Sentey Burton GS-6500  
MouseOtherOther
Microsoft wireless CyberPower 800w UPS 8-Port USB/PS2 Combo KVM Switch 
  hide details  
post #124 of 175
Quote:
I.E. company A emits 20,000 tons of CO2/year, company B emits 15,000 tons/year. The next year company A emits 5k more, and company B emits the same as last year. Company B may have either bought credits, or accrued credits for investing in some sort of technology. Company A says, "hey company B, we'll buy 5k tons worth of carbon credits off of you since we increased our output."
How is this offsetting co2? So company A outputs more carbon just because it bought credits from company B?

How does that reduce CO2 if your putting more into the atmosphere?

So company A buy 5k more so they put out 25k and company B stays at 15k.

So that just added 5k more CO2 into the atmosphere, how is that helping?
Nope
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 AM3 DIAMOND 6970 2GB 256-bit x2 Patriot G Series ‘Sector 5’ Edition 16GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Corsair 64GB Nova Series/Seagate 1tb LG Black 10X BD-ROM 16X DVD-ROM SATA Internal Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit LG 32" Class 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
BTC 9051H Black 86 Normal Keys 8 Hot keys + 17 Gam Antec TPQ-850 TruePower Quattro 850W Power Supply SILVERSTONE RV02B-EW Matte black Logitech G9 Black 9 Buttons Tilt Wheel USB Wired L 
Mouse Pad
Generic 
  hide details  
Nope
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 AM3 DIAMOND 6970 2GB 256-bit x2 Patriot G Series ‘Sector 5’ Edition 16GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Corsair 64GB Nova Series/Seagate 1tb LG Black 10X BD-ROM 16X DVD-ROM SATA Internal Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit LG 32" Class 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
BTC 9051H Black 86 Normal Keys 8 Hot keys + 17 Gam Antec TPQ-850 TruePower Quattro 850W Power Supply SILVERSTONE RV02B-EW Matte black Logitech G9 Black 9 Buttons Tilt Wheel USB Wired L 
Mouse Pad
Generic 
  hide details  
post #125 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by esocid View Post
Al Gore was a self imposed spokesman for it. No one voted on one. Rich people do it because they have an audience, and yes, are hypocrites.

Carbon credits is sort of a market for trading emissions. Nothing is mandatory, at least not to my knowledge, but signators of the Kyoto Protocol have agreed to try and stick to an average output, and can trade credits, or buy credits.
Basically it creates an incentive to either produce less of an output of carbon (CO2, CH4) or to keep the global output from rising. I.E. company A emits 20,000 tons of CO2/year, company B emits 15,000 tons/year. The next year company A emits 5k more, and company B emits the same as last year. Company B may have either bought credits, or accrued credits for investing in some sort of technology. Company A says, "hey company B, we'll buy 5k tons worth of carbon credits off of you since we increased our output."
It creates an incentive to either decrease, or maintain carbon output for people who are in that group. It also applies to developed vs developing countries. Developing countries have little to invest in cleaner manufacturing, whereas developed countries do. So developed countries trade carbon credits to the developing countries to offset that output. Same goes for sulfur and NOx gases.

I fail to see how you classify it as propaganda when it's not mandatory, and is pretty much optional to the people who even signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol. And 192 countries signed it, 191 ratified it. Guess who the only country was that didn't. The website is Canadian, so I assume that's why OCN is buying credits.
IIRC apparently some company started producing MORE methane after carbon credits were introduced because they figured out they would make more money if they just made more methane and got the carbon credits for burning it to CO2.

:|

But yeah, global warming, real issue, known for what, the past 30 years now? Too bad the system we have in place just promotes squabbling with nothing getting done. Either that or it becomes exploited and gets used for profits.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E8400 GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3L eVGA 9800GT Stock Speeds GSkill 4GB (2x2GB) PC6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung F3 500GB Samsung 22X DVD Drive Windows 7 64-bit 22" Acer x223w 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
IBM Model M Model 1391401 Antec EarthWatts 500W Troglodytic Tech Terminal Razer Deathadder 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries Qck+ 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E8400 GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3L eVGA 9800GT Stock Speeds GSkill 4GB (2x2GB) PC6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung F3 500GB Samsung 22X DVD Drive Windows 7 64-bit 22" Acer x223w 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
IBM Model M Model 1391401 Antec EarthWatts 500W Troglodytic Tech Terminal Razer Deathadder 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries Qck+ 
  hide details  
post #126 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jess94 View Post
How is my argument a Strawman when I accurately represented his argument? I don't think you understand the concept of fallacies.
I'm sorry, if you were simply and only commenting on quentin I'll take it back and apologize.
But I was under the impression you were commenting on the scientific position on climate change in general. In which case my comment stands.
The Al Bundy
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-4440 Asrock H87 Pro4 MSI RX 480 4GB Crucial Ballistix DDR3 PC3-12800 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 SSD Samsung F4EG 2 TB WD 1TB Blue Samsung CDDVDW SH-S223F 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Xigmatek HDT-S1283 Windows 10 x64 Samsung C24FG70 Antec HCP-750 
CaseMouseAudio
Cooler Master Storm Sniper Trust GXT 155 Creative Soundblaster Z 
  hide details  
The Al Bundy
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-4440 Asrock H87 Pro4 MSI RX 480 4GB Crucial Ballistix DDR3 PC3-12800 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 SSD Samsung F4EG 2 TB WD 1TB Blue Samsung CDDVDW SH-S223F 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Xigmatek HDT-S1283 Windows 10 x64 Samsung C24FG70 Antec HCP-750 
CaseMouseAudio
Cooler Master Storm Sniper Trust GXT 155 Creative Soundblaster Z 
  hide details  
post #127 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunaticgts View Post
How is this offsetting co2? So company A outputs more carbon just because it bought credits from company B?

How does that reduce CO2 if your putting more into the atmosphere?

So company A buy 5k more so they put out 25k and company B stays at 15k.

So that just added 5k more CO2 into the atmosphere, how is that helping?
if you're talking about carbon credits it's basic economics. the idea is to make reducing emissions more appealing to increasing profit than leaving pollution levels the same. many, i dare say even most companies will operate in whatever way makes them the most profit regardless of what externalities are associated with it.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q9550 GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3R eVGA GTX 560 Ti 4GB Patriot Viper II DDR2 1066 5-5-5-15 2.1V 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Western Digital Caviar Black 2TB 64MB 7200 RPM Lite-On 22X DVD+/-RW XP Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate, Ubuntu Lucid Lynx Samsung UN46B8000 240Hz LED 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Natural Elite PC Power & Cooling 750W Silencer Antec Nine Hundred Logitech G9 
Mouse Pad
Razer Mantis Speed 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q9550 GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3R eVGA GTX 560 Ti 4GB Patriot Viper II DDR2 1066 5-5-5-15 2.1V 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Western Digital Caviar Black 2TB 64MB 7200 RPM Lite-On 22X DVD+/-RW XP Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate, Ubuntu Lucid Lynx Samsung UN46B8000 240Hz LED 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Natural Elite PC Power & Cooling 750W Silencer Antec Nine Hundred Logitech G9 
Mouse Pad
Razer Mantis Speed 
  hide details  
post #128 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by noak View Post
I've been doing a paper for school.

The more I read and research, the more I learn this...
During the 70's it was we are entering another ice age. Global warming is what it is. A huge thing. Huge things need lots of money and servants. And since it's not a real thing you're going to win be successful.

There's huge money in protecting people from something that they don't need protecting from anyway.

Global warming is about selling carbon credits on an exchange. That's all it is.
But since it can be computer price fixed it's just a stealth tax on whoever runs it to other countries and their populations.

Amazon is not about internet business it's about computer aided price fixing.
http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=358

So if the prices for carbon credits are fixed by computers then it's simply a matter of the computers raising taxes on who it wants to lose and lowering them on who it wants to win.
Goofy
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 4850e 2.4Ghz 22 watts 1.1v 1500HT 300FSB Gigabyte GA-M78SM-S2H What I'm Testing 2 2gb Geil PC6400 960MHZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Hitachi 160gb SATA-II Pioneer DVR 111D Redhat Core 12 x86_64, Windows XP HANNspree 20" 1600x900 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitec Premium Desktop Mini-Box M3-ATX 120 Watt DC-DC Spire Logitec 
Mouse Pad
Xtrac 
  hide details  
Goofy
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 4850e 2.4Ghz 22 watts 1.1v 1500HT 300FSB Gigabyte GA-M78SM-S2H What I'm Testing 2 2gb Geil PC6400 960MHZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Hitachi 160gb SATA-II Pioneer DVR 111D Redhat Core 12 x86_64, Windows XP HANNspree 20" 1600x900 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitec Premium Desktop Mini-Box M3-ATX 120 Watt DC-DC Spire Logitec 
Mouse Pad
Xtrac 
  hide details  
post #129 of 175
Plot that graph all the way back to the last ice age and you are going to see a whole lot of warming that is completely irrelevant. The earth's climate is NOT static so there will always be periods of warming and cooling. It doesn't mean we all have to live in grass Huts and walk everywhere from now on....
post #130 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlGrey View Post
I'm sorry, if you were simply and only commenting on quentin I'll take it back and apologize.
But I was under the impression you were commenting on the scientific position on climate change in general. In which case my comment stands.
The climate is changing, but there can't be evidence Humans caused it, since there is no cloned Earth that is free of Humans to compare to. This is simple logic 101.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Technology and Science News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [BBC] - Global warming 'confirmed' by independent study