[BartSimpson]

andyt wrote:

Good luck with that. The Haida aren't pussies like we Canadians. They'll turn you into a slave so fast it will make you head spin. Or maybe follow their old practice: raid a village, rape and pillage, the select the strongest men and cut their hamstrings (so they can't run away) them make those men paddle them to next village, slit their throats and throw them overboard, and repeat.

If the Haida are this bad then why do you let them run around without a leash?

[Psudo]

CKASlacker wrote:

Psudo wrote:

Teikiatsu wrote:

This 'right-winger' is not skeptical of the effects of global warming

What effects are those, exactly?

How much of this global temperature increase is man-made is unclear at this point (at least to me) - but what's quite clear is that many people will be affected by pack ice melt/sea levels rising. Not least those Pacific islanders whose lands are barely above sea level right now.

My point is that the tangible results of a degree of increase to global mean temperature are not clear. Pack ice melt/rising sea levels makes sense, but even pacific islanders have quite some time if sea levels have only risen 20 cm over 135 years at a peak rate of 1.7 ± 0.3 mm/yr [source]. I have trouble believing that a difference of 1 degree C can be responsible for widespread desertification, more violent hurricane seasons (I hear it's a basic meteorological principle that a warmer world correlates to moderate hurricane seasons), species extinction, exponential increase in disease vectors, or other calamitous effects sometimes claimed. Thus, even ignoring the controversial question of how much of global temperature increase is manmade, what are the specific consequences we should expect and what responses do these effects mandate?

[CanadianJeff]

Psudo wrote:

CanadianJeff wrote:

Harper may be conservative on many fronts but budget is not one of them.

I feel this way about American politicians generally; no one is a fiscal conservative anymore.

Well spending money on people is one of the best ways to win a vote.

[BartSimpson]

CanadianJeff wrote:

Well spending money on people is one of the best ways to win a vote.

Buying votes is the best way to buy a vote.

[Psudo]

I think that's what he said.

[Teikiatsu]

Psudo wrote:

Teikiatsu wrote:

This 'right-winger' is not skeptical of the effects of global warming

What effects are those, exactly?

In general:

A gradual warming to to level of the Medieval Warming Period (MWP) in the 1200-1400's will be a net benefit for the population, though some people may not like losing a little beachfront property. The jury is out on how much land will be lost since the weight of glaciers actually depresses the crust down and the ocean ice floats and is already displacing water. It's not like the current ice hasn't had an effect on the ocean size already.

A gradual cooling to the level of the Little Ice Age in the 1500-1600's could be disastrous with reduced crops and restricted access to northern and southern terrain if it becomes permafrost, and could possibly spark a return to an Ice Age, not an impossiblity since we are in an interglacial period.

An increase in temperatures beyond the MWP could likewise not be beneficial but there is no credible evidence we are heading n that direction any time soon.

Also as others have said, I prefer the term Climate Change but again, I believe human impact is negligible.

[Teikiatsu]

CanadianJeff wrote:

Psudo wrote:

CanadianJeff wrote:

Harper may be conservative on many fronts but budget is not one of them.

I feel this way about American politicians generally; no one is a fiscal conservative anymore.

Well spending money on people is one of the best ways to win a vote.

Normally in America that is true, I think this November we're going to change that to "...spending money on people wisely is one of the best ways..."

[CanadianJeff]

You will forgive me if I point out that most people are no where educated or qualified to really make that kind of decision on a larger scale. Myself included.