"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong - Page 9

02-03-2007, 06:41 AM

On Feb 2, 1:30 pm, "nash" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> I always thought it was the Lions against the Christians anyway.
> Moneyed vs the poor.

The Christians (as did the Jews) learned that instead of facing the
lion is better to become one. They still playing the victim though.

02-03-2007, 06:47 AM

On Feb 2, 4:37 pm, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Brent P) wrote:

> The belief in human caused global warming is being used to gain more control
> over the population, to consolidate wealth, to end any sort of freedom of the
> masses, and put the whole world in the control of a small group of
> elites.

I thought that was the job of Globalization.

>
> I will believe that human caused global warming is a serious issue when
> and only when, nations like China are forced to do something about it.
> Right now, things like the Kyoto treaty are designed simply to relocate
> manufacturing from places where there _ARE_ environmental protections to
> places where there are practically _NONE_. They expect us to believe that
> CO2 released in Ohio is bad, but CO2 released in Tianjin is of no
> concern. Not to mention all the pollution controls that are required in
> Ohio, the limits, the regulations, all to keep the environment cleaner
> but simply don't exist in other places in the world like China.

It's not Kyoto, but America that is feeding China. Go to Walmart or
the Dollar Store if you don't believe me.

02-03-2007, 06:56 AM

On Feb 2, 5:12 pm, Bill Baka <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> BTW, I don't drink or use drugs, except for chocolate.

Chocolate is a fancy drug used by liberals given to European socialist
ideas of biking and small cars. Real Americans eat something like
Freedom Fries --and drive SUVs.

02-03-2007, 07:04 AM

Wayne Pein wrote:
> Further, bus public transit is heavy and destroys the pavement,
> something that is very important to bicyclists. And when the bus pulls
> over to the curb, there is conflict with bicyclists.
>
> Frankly, public transportation and bicycling have nothing in common.
> Bicycling has much more in common with automobile travel.
>
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> html/table_04_20.html
>
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

No way. Buses with racks go a long way for bicyclists who just use the
bikes for shorter distances. They are complementary...

Why Add Bike Racks to Public Transit Buses?

Encourages Multimodal Trips:
The federal government, originally through ISTEA, (Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991), "encourages states and
metropolitan areas to develop innovative transportation plans and
programs which better integrate public transit, bicycle facilities,
and other modes of travel into the existing transportation system. The
goal of this multimodal planning is to provide travelers with a real
choice of travel options." (Federal Transit Administration, Bicycles
and Transit, A Partnership that Works, 1999). Adding bike racks on
buses does exactly that: provides people with real transportation
options by allowing a bicycle trip to be incorporated with a public
transit one. Through this incorporation, the bicycle and the public
transit vehicle create endless opportunities for a person with a bike
and bus fare!

Contributes to Cleaner Air and More Livable Communities:
"In many areas, increased investment in transit and bicycle facilities
can help meet goals for cleaner, healthier air; less congested
roadways and more livable communities. Used individually, bicycling
and transit provide low-cost mobility and place fewer demands on local
roads and highways to carry everyday trips. Used in combination,
bicycles and public transportation provide millions of Americans with
enhanced access to work, shopping, services and family and
friends." (Federal Transit Administration, Bicycles and Transit, A
Partnership that Works, 1999). The bike - bus combination not only
provides more mobility options to everyone, but also fewer automobiles
on the street mean quieter and safer neighborhoods.

Expands Ridership:
"Studies show that people are most likely to use public transit when
it's within a quarter mile walking distance or when it's within a
three mile biking distance. Making it easier for bike riders to take
their vehicles along on public transit opens up a 12 times larger
drawing zone for riders." (Passenger Transport, November 16, 1992.)
Not to mention, bicyclists often fill a gap in the weekend or off-peak
market, when transit ridership is typically lower.

Improves Bicycle Access:
Many commuters and recreational bicycle riders are constrained by
bridges, tunnels, dramatic hills and unsafe city streets. Adding a bus
bicycle rack into the public transit equation creates more options to
overcome geographical barriers, thus creating more opportunities for a
cyclist to ride and use the bus. Rail stations, businesses and
communities overall are continuing to get more bicycle friendly, and
it makes good proactive sense to extrapolate this out into the public
transit realm.

Promotes Good Public Relations:
Adding bicycle racks onto buses is one of the only value-added
services a public transit authority can provide to its riders. These
high profile programs market themselves. The community views bikes
being carried on the front of buses, and not only gets a direct
message about new transit options, but also gets a positive
environmental image of the public service. Statistics show that
cyclists have both outspoken advocate voices and are consistent
voters! Not bad, considering that the product is less expensive than a
bus tire!

Working Partnership:
As federal transportation spending now incorporates bicycles, a new
trend is growing and ultimately embracing a new partnership - one
between bicycles and public transportation. The importance of
strengthening the connections between bicycling and public transit is,
as Federal Transit Administrator, Gordon J. Linton, says, "a win-win
proposition". This partnership addresses our concern about traffic
congestion, air quality, and limited resources. The federal
transportation bill requires that this partnership be addressed at the
planning level, where multimodal concerns must be taken into
consideration. This is resulting in a viable partnership between the
bicycling community and public transit authority. Further, grant
monies under the federal transportation bill are widely available for
bike-on-bus projects, including up to a 95% match under the Transit
Enhancements Program.

02-03-2007, 07:22 AM

On Feb 2, 6:15 pm, "Rod Speed" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> > Those are just a pre-cursor to what CAN happen.
>
> Nothing will be taking out most of humanity, you watch.

Nothing will happens, so is the prediction of the "Church of the
Flying Spaghetti Monster." I quote them here, where the clearly state
there's nothing to fear...

"I have attached a picture of pirate weatherman reporting a rather low
temperature, which is even more evidence that pirates reduce global
warming."

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

See, it seems this Spaghetti Monster (report back to me if you figure
it out) will help us clean all the filth and puke put out by our shiny
SUVs. What a neat solution, ain't it?

> > BTW, I don't drink or use drugs, except for chocolate.
>
> Thats the drug you're crazed by, stupid.

I told you it would make you suspicious before the Freedom Fries
crowd.

02-03-2007, 08:55 AM

On Feb 2, 7:57 pm, Mark Hickey <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> >>You said it best. There's one hope though: THE REVOLUTION (coming
> >>soon)...
>
> > Stick it.
>
> I'm thinking all we gotta do is to convince everyone who's sure that
> we're all doomed anyway to "check out early" - get it over with, why
> wait for us all to be drowned in 10 years when the sea level jumps up
> 10,000 feet. That'll cut down on the needs for a lot of resources,
> and will reduce the release of hot air considerably. ;-)

That's not all that hard to do. All you got to do is connect Global
Warming with Armageddon, and that so is the will of God. Actually, I
think they are already working hard to make Global Warming happen with
all those SUVs with God's bumper stickers.

So the connection is that the same Christian fundamentalists are
causing Armageddon!

Can Humanity Survive? Want to Bet on It?
Sixty ago years, a group of physicists concerned about nuclear weapons
created the Doomsday Clock and set its hands at seven minutes to
midnight. Now, the clock's keepers, alarmed by new dangers like
climate change, have moved the hands up to 11:55 p.m.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

SEE POLL TAKING PLACE AT PRAVDA...

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-03-2007, 09:42 AM

donquijote1954 wrote:

> Wayne Pein wrote:
>
>>Further, bus public transit is heavy and destroys the pavement,
>>something that is very important to bicyclists. And when the bus pulls
>>over to the curb, there is conflict with bicyclists.
>>
>>Frankly, public transportation and bicycling have nothing in common.
>>Bicycling has much more in common with automobile travel.
>>
>>[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>html/table_04_20.html
>>
>>[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>
> No way. Buses with racks go a long way for bicyclists who just use the
> bikes for shorter distances. They are complementary...

So, the 2 bicyclists that use the bus are still chauffered energy
users/polluters for their bus leg.

Wayne

02-03-2007, 09:52 AM

Some gutless ****wit desperately cowering behind
donquijote1954 <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
desperately attempted to bull**** its way out of its
predicament and fooled absolutely no one, as always.

02-03-2007, 10:10 AM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Don Klipstein) wrote:

>In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>, Mark Hickey wrote:
>>[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Brent P) wrote:
>>
>>>But it isn't about the environment, it's about power, control, and
>>>wealth.
>>
>>Couldn't agree more. And that applies at the individual level as well
>>- look at the funding spent on pro-global warming, and then contrast
>>the money spent on contrarian studies. No contest - you simply can't
>>get rich telling people that there's no lurking invisible monster
>>about to eat the earth, it seems.
>
> Oh, those that make money in ways threatened by addressing of global
>warming sure have a lot to lose and are putting money into generation of
>data or "data" that we don't have a problem! For one example, I remember
>something maybe about a decade ago by a major oil company saying how the
>temperature has not significantly warmed at some level a few miles aloft,
>which I expect to not warm up as much as the surface and lowest couple
>miles of the atmosphere would as a result of adding "greenhouse gases".

I believe what you're talking about was the NOAA data that was used to
exclude the urban heat centers (relying on mid-level atmospheric
temperatures, which would obviously also have to go up in the event
there was a true global warming scenario underway). The fact that the
alarmists have to use selective and incomplete data to support their
claims tells you all you really need to know. The fact they've
singled out CO2 as the culprit just shows that they count on the
masses not having done any reading on the subject (which is probably a
safe assumption).

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Home of the $795 ti frame

02-03-2007, 10:12 AM

.... arent' scared to use their real name when they put forth an
opinion.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Home of the $795 ti frame