[pp.int.general] Don't roast our planet

[Charly Pache]

Man made global warming is an hypothesis as well, even the IPCC report says
it, that there is no final proof, no 100% certainty but just that it is
very likely the reason. I already posted all the links and information that
cast doubts about this man made global warming hypothesis and I just tell
that we should not stop researching the other possible causes, like sun
fluctuation, and we have to be open minded towards these other scientists
and researchers, who often have more to loose as to win in not accepting
the main stream vision of global warming.

On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Justus Römeth <squig at dfpx.de> wrote:

> I do not need to do anything, I just do not see you engaging in this
> conversation with anything but hypthetical talking points.
>
> Yes, IF we find out that CO2 has nothing to do with global warming (or we
> cannot stop it anyways), IF global warming is more of a concern than
> running out of fossil fuels and the growing ozone layer and IF our
> resources regarding those issues are severly limited we are betting on the
> wrong horse trying to reduce CO2 emission. Those are three pretty big IFs,
> I don't think arguing with these hypotheses as the main starting point
> makes a lot of sense, and frankly I do not understand why you think it
> does, other for the sake of arguing and going against the majority, or for
> not having to change a convenient lifestyle.
>
>
> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Charly Pache <charly.pache at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Why do you need to tell i'm childish and that my argument are weird? Be
>> factual, don't make any subjective statement please.
>>
>> As for the resources, there are not so many brains really working on
>> these issues worldwide on an everyday basis (450 lead authors and ~800
>> contributing authors worked on the last IPCC report).
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Justus Römeth <squig at dfpx.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Now you just sound childish while making up hypothetical scenarios that
>>> suit your weird arguments, tbh. If our resources were that strained we'd be
>>> f'cked either way. This is not a Roland Emmerich movie!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Charly Pache <charly.pache at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> The argument is that human kind has a limited amount of energy,
>>>> resource and time and it's better to put focus on the most efficient ways
>>>> of reaching our goal. In a limited world, we have to prioritize and yes,
>>>> these two things could be mutually exclusive if we realize we have to put
>>>> all your resources in one solution or the other. So my argument is an
>>>> argument, definitely.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Justus Römeth <squig at dfpx.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> As others have stated, reducing CO2 emissions is a worthy goal even if
>>>>> they are not responsible for global warming. At the same time we have to
>>>>> plan for the scenario that we will not be able to stop global warming
>>>>> whatever we do, and act accordingly. Those two things are not mutually
>>>>> exclusive, so your argument is not really an argument at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Charly Pache <charly.pache at gmail.com
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> No, it was just insinuating that i'm ignorant that i didn't like, and
>>>>>> transforming my words to let think i said something i never said.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One last thought about this topic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Imagine one day, in let say 20 years, we realize the main cause of
>>>>>> the global warming was not C02, but sun fluctuation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And that we suddenly realize that during the last 20 years we took
>>>>>> measures to cut-off C02 emissions and that these heavy measures didn't stop
>>>>>> global warming at all cos in fact, we didn't analyse toroughouly the topic
>>>>>> at the beginning and we blindly accepted for granted the C02 theory, even
>>>>>> if we didn't have all the necessary data.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's dangerous. Because then will realize we lost 20 years into
>>>>>> looking for other solutions, like this one [1] or these ones [2][3], in the
>>>>>> case the sun would be the cause.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Take care, warm thoughts ;) Charly
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] Obama climate adviser open to geo-engineering to tackle global
>>>>>> warming:
>>>>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/apr/08/geo-engineering-john-holdren
>>>>>> [2] Geoengineering experiment cancelled amid patent row (15th May
>>>>>> 2012!, please note that climate engineering is not yet allowed under
>>>>>> international law):
>>>>>> http://www.nature.com/news/geoengineering-experiment-cancelled-amid-patent-row-1.10645
>>>>>> [3] A (not so up-to-date) list of geoengineering patents filed by
>>>>>> many private corporations (and i didn't say it's bad, if situation on Earth
>>>>>> will be unbearable, we will have to raise the issue):
>>>>>> http://www.lightwatcher.com/chemtrails/patents.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 4:43 AM, Richard Stallman <rms at gnu.org>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Re-read my messages please, I never said there is no global
>>>>>>> warming going
>>>>>>>    on, on the contrary, we argued here on whether it was really man
>>>>>>> made or
>>>>>>>    natural, like it could be assumed as the other planets in our
>>>>>>> solar system
>>>>>>>    get warmer as well. And I never said 4°C in Switzerland is the
>>>>>>> proof that
>>>>>>>    there is no global warming
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> By mentioning it in this discussion, you presented it as relevant to
>>>>>>> the issue.  If you misspoke, you can say so and people will disregard
>>>>>>> that apparent meaning.  But don't criticize people for responding for
>>>>>>> what you appear to say.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Dr Richard Stallman
>>>>>>> President, Free Software Foundation
>>>>>>> 51 Franklin St
>>>>>>> Boston MA 02110
>>>>>>> USA
>>>>>>> www.fsf.org  www.gnu.org
>>>>>>> Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
>>>>>>>  Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________
>>>>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>>>>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>>>>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ____________________________________________________
>>>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>>>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>>>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________
>>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________
>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20120518/1de94a67/attachment-0001.html>