View Full Version : WTF they are sueing the automakers for global warming!!! WTF
RedXtcy
09-20-2006, 05:13 PM
:bs: they cant even prove global warming is happening or peoples fault!!! WTF is this LIBRAL SHIT...
uluz2a6
09-20-2006, 07:18 PM
:bs: they cant even prove global warming is happening or peoples fault!!! WTF is this LIBRAL SHIT...
Run an exhaust hose into your house... let me know if the room heats up.
Crazzy_Al
09-20-2006, 07:27 PM
Run an exhaust hose into your house... let me know if the room heats up.
PLEASE tell me that you're not supporting this bullshit suit?!?!?!?!?!?!
uluz2a6
09-20-2006, 07:34 PM
PLEASE tell me that you're not supporting this bullshit suit?!?!?!?!?!?!
HELL NO!!!
Next thing ya know they'll want cars to have catalytic converters!
Line Noise
09-20-2006, 07:40 PM
:bs: they cant even prove global warming is happening or peoples fault!!! WTF is this LIBRAL SHIT...
I just saw this and cam eher eto post Bullshit..........
Maybe we can sue Ca for ruining TV?
97blksvt
09-20-2006, 07:49 PM
I just saw this and cam eher eto post Bullshit..........
Maybe we can sue Ca for ruining TV?
Iam in for sure if this happens, and those Jennifer Granholm or how ever its spelled, has fake commercials so I might try and sue her.
91Notch
09-20-2006, 08:38 PM
Run an exhaust hose into your house... let me know if the room heats up.
:mmm: so that's what happened to you :icon_mrgr
mdhmi
09-20-2006, 09:37 PM
Will everyone who owns a car be named as codefendants?
91Notch
09-20-2006, 09:58 PM
Global warming took place during George Washingtons time also. Must have been that Hummer H2 he rode around in :dontknow:
mikeg
09-20-2006, 10:08 PM
Typical god damn liberal thinking, lets just sue someone, that will fix the problem.
strtracer
09-21-2006, 03:26 PM
Typical god damn liberal thinking, lets just sue someone, that will fix the problem.
Yep, the government and the car makers will spend millions fighting this in court, nothing will get decided, but a bunch of lawyers will be richer. I know the cant afford to, but If I ran the auto companies, Id say fuck you California, we have decided to not sell cars there any more. Close the plants, the dealer networks, the parts supply shops. Watch California turn into a third world country, I mean what the hell, the already have the population of one.
91Notch
09-21-2006, 09:53 PM
Yep, the government and the car makers will spend millions fighting this in court
and more auto jobs will be lost :(
Al Gore :pow:
wide winger
09-22-2006, 08:52 PM
Its the sun's fault , but it has no money so they wont sue the real global warmer!
mikeg
09-22-2006, 09:41 PM
I feel global warming is a natural process which is being multiplied by green house gasses.
Now the part I don't get is that the automobile is a small contributor compared to industrial pollution. Now, before you start bashing President Bush and big bussiness, it is not the United States that is the biggest polluters.
There is also a theory about global warming causing the ice caps to melt. Since the ice caps are fresh water as they melt they cause the oceans to become more dense. This will cause the ocean currents to slow and sink faster cooling down the oceans, which is 70% of the earths surface.
uluz2a6
09-23-2006, 08:46 AM
I feel global warming is a natural process which is being multiplied by green house gasses.
!!!!!!!!!! GULP!!! We agree!
Now the part I don't get is that the automobile is a small contributor compared to industrial pollution. Now, before you start bashing President Bush and big bussiness, it is not the United States that is the biggest polluters.
I agree, the U.S. is not THEE major polluter, but we have the means and know-how to reduce emissions. SO why don't we? BECAUSE BUSH FAVORS BIG BUSINESS OVER PEOPLE.
W. House Guts Global Warming Study
CBS/AP) Angry environmentalists are denouncing the Bush administration for censoring the scientific evidence on global warming, reports CBS News Chief White House Correspondent John Roberts.
At issue is next week's huge government report on the state of the environment. Under heavy editing pressure from the White House, a lengthy chapter on climate change has been gutted.
In a draft of the report – obtained by CBS News – strong language that "climate change has global consequences for human health and the environment" was stricken by the White House; as was government research that suggests recent climate change is "likely mostly due to human activities."
An edited version said that climate change "may have potentially profound consequences" but, "The complexity of the earth system and the interconnections among its components make it a scientific challenge to document change, document its cause and develop useful projections on how natural variability and human actions may affect the global environment in the future."
The revised draft removed a reference to a 1999 study showing global temperatures had risen sharply in the past decade compared to the previous 1,000 years. But it did cite another study, partly paid for by the oil industry, challenging the uniqueness of recent temperature increases.
And it deleted a National Research Council finding that various studies have suggested that recent warming was unusual and likely due to human activities. The 2001 NRC report had been commissioned by the White House and cited in the past by President Bush.
"When presented with real science that talks about what climate change means to you and me, the Bush administration instead wants to essentially take that out, censor it," says Jeremy Symons of the National Wildlife Federation.
The changes were protested by EPA staffers, who wrote in a confidential memo that the report "no longer accurately represents scientific consensus on climate change."
But outgoing EPA administrator Christie Todd Whitman, who was comfortable with the original language, gave in, fearing the White House might kill the entire report.
"I didn't want to lose this report over language on climate change. It wasn't worth it," Whitman said.
A so-called EPA "options" memo gives a rare glimpse into her decision. Fighting the changes, it states, "may antagonize the White House," while accepting them would "end a negotiating process that has regressed substantially."
In the end, the EPA just threw out most of the chapter, reasoning that it "can explain the omission by pointing to the scientific disagreements" over global warming.
White House officials say the language in the original report was too declarative for a science that is still poorly understood. But the action seems to have only further tarnished what environmental groups say is an already dismal record on environmental issues.
It's the second time in six months the administration has cut some discussion of global warming out of a report. In September, discussion of climate change was kept out of a report that had for six years contained a section on global warming.
wide winger
09-23-2006, 06:36 PM
In the early '80's they talked about global cooling and the return of another iceage.
They wanted to cover the ice caps with ash to warm up the earth.
Since it got hot every summer no one bought into it so they changed there voice to global warming and now everone is buying into it.
Its all due to the solar flare activity of the sun, the more activity the more heat that reaches the earth.
We could not change it if we wanted.
patman
09-23-2006, 07:25 PM
ALL globel warming is Bush's fault....everyone knows that.:pow:
MAHAHAHAHAHAHA
patman
wide winger
09-23-2006, 09:50 PM
ALL globel warming is Bush's fault....everyone knows that.:pow:
MAHAHAHAHAHAHA
patman
:gr_rainbo
2low4u
09-23-2006, 10:17 PM
can we sue cali for putting ppl like paris hilton and lindsey lohan on tv
jpsartre12
09-23-2006, 10:55 PM
I feel global warming is a natural process which is being multiplied by green house gasses.
Multiplied? by what factor? 0.000000000001? :icon_mrgr
Now the part I don't get is that the automobile is a small contributor compared to industrial pollution. Now, before you start bashing President Bush and big bussiness, it is not the United States that is the biggest polluters.
Actually, the US is the #1 producer of greenhouse gases.
There is also a theory about global warming causing the ice caps to melt. Since the ice caps are fresh water as they melt they cause the oceans to become more dense. This will cause the ocean currents to slow and sink faster cooling down the oceans, which is 70% of the earths surface.
Some theory. That's the first time in my 30 year career as a chemist that someone said that diluting salt water with fresh water made it MORE dense.:bs: :bs: :bs: :bs:
mikeg
09-24-2006, 01:52 AM
Multiplied? by what factor? 0.000000000001? :icon_mrgr
Actually, the US is the #1 producer of greenhouse gases.
Some theory. That's the first time in my 30 year career as a chemist that someone said that diluting salt water with fresh water made it MORE dense.:bs: :bs: :bs: :bs:
The first part was my OPINION, I am intitled to it, I am no scientist, I just go off of what makes sense.
The second part, China has a HUGE pollution problem, not just greenhouse gas, but industrial pollution.
And the third, I may have been mistaken, but it was in a presentation that a geologist gave, it was a while ago, but it did have to do with the ocean currents slowing. I do not remember all of the specific details, and I am probably wrong about the water being more dense, but the gist of the presentation was about what causes ice ages and ice cap melt.
wide winger
09-24-2006, 09:02 AM
Nature is the number one producer of greenhouse gases.
Quick86
09-24-2006, 09:59 AM
I'm going to sue Canada the next time one of their cold fronts comes down in to michigan and makes me turn on my homes heat costing me money.....
jpsartre12
09-24-2006, 10:01 AM
The first part was my OPINION, I am intitled to it, I am no scientist, I just go off of what makes sense.
Don't apologize for your opinion, just be able to defend it. That's what debate is all about.
The second part, China has a HUGE pollution problem, not just greenhouse gas, but industrial pollution.
China does have an industrial pollution problem, for sure, but we are the #1 producer of greenhouse gases. Personally I say "who cares?"
And the third, I may have been mistaken, but it was in a presentation that a geologist gave, it was a while ago, but it did have to do with the ocean currents slowing. I do not remember all of the specific details, and I am probably wrong about the water being more dense, but the gist of the presentation was about what causes ice ages and ice cap melt.
Gotcha. I was just messing with you. :wink:
jpsartre12
09-24-2006, 10:03 AM
Nature is the number one producer of greenhouse gases.
By far! :thumbsups
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.