And these climate models are as accurate as .. oh say... weather models? Essentially climate models can be rigged to output anything the rigger wants them to so basically, they can't be taken as factual. Even if the programmer is trying to be scientifically accurate and honest the probability that he is taking everything that needs to be taken into account and all his assumptions are correct is near zero. When we landed on the moon the first time the moon dust modelers consensus was that there should be several feet of dust. There was a couple inches of dust. That is typical for scientific conjecture.
i call it cynic inability to bear any responsibility. it is the easiest way to get away with ... everything. what you call "guilt" is a self-reflecting process that enables one to become a better person (no sorry, i won't discuss what that means in length). shutting out this process freezes one at one's current stage. bad thing? well, not necessarily bad, but inevitably very static.
Funny thing man I told you elsewhere the exact same what TM_Direct is telling you. You are somebody seriously kidding yourself. You aren't better then rest of us, maybe it's hard for you to accept it but truly you aren't.
I have the same argument with this guy I mean exactly the same. http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1356336#post1356336
On the contrary...I think it shows more responsibility to admit your flaws and to admit that you will not be changing, rather then to be a fake and a fraud and wag a finger at others from a supposed moral high ground, while at the same time committing the same sin...this is one of the big problems that the Catholic church faced in light of their scandals...they wag a finger at homo's, while at the same time conspiring to cover up child abuse of their own priests.....Al Gore and Joseph Kennedy are prime examples of this...both strut around town in Limos and are flown around in private jets, yet they will come out against a mom and her SUV.....do as i say not as i do is the mantra.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/5/27/93622.shtml?s=ic Former Vice President Al Gore's new global warming movie, "An Inconvenient Truth," warns in emphatic terms that the world is facing a "planetary emergency" unless America curbs its penchant for fossil fuel pollution. ...the ex-veep's own environmental record... One of the most glaring tidbits, for instance, is the pollution Gore and his family caused by maintaining their own toxic waste dump on their farm in Carthage, Tennessee. CBS networkaffiliate WTVF broadcast video of the Gore dump after the then-vice presidential candidate denied the story was true. The film featured aerial shots of the debris, and included close-ups of dripping oil filters, toxic aerosol spray cans, unrecycled aluminum pesticide containers, used tires and all manner of environmentally unfriendly refuse. Al Gore, polluter? VP repeatedly chose politics, gain over environment in personal life http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=17685 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/06/al_gore_and_the_limits_of_recy.html Al Gore is an energy hog, one who has contributed disproportionately to the injection of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Whether jetting off to yet another global warming conference, or taking a gas-hungry limousine to a Hollywood fundraiser, few Americans have individually pumped more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than Albert Gore Jr. YOU should conserve energy. YOU should walk or bicycle instead of driving. YOU should take mass transit. YOU should telecommute. YOU should spend $25,000+ on a hybrid car (if you must drive), and YOU should live in a small, energy efficient home in a "sustainable" neighborhood. But not the patrician Gore, who, when not traveling in that lumbering limousine, or jet-setting around in that pollutant-spewing airplane, lives in a spacious, energy-gobbling home.
and i would guess it would not take me much time to find someone responding similar to you as i do. what kind of argument is that supposed to be? someone says the same as i to you, so it must be true?
you make mistakes willingly and you call that responsibility? well, that is not my definition of it. but go ahead with it. you are right, it ain't my business.
but, to both of you, we are talking about serious things here, right? stability of this planet and early stage racism/fascism. and i dare to respond to posts like yours since this is a public board and those views of yours need to be exposed as what they truly are IMHO. i cannot find one of you honest or responsible, not even original. but maybe you find a third person whom i am having a controversy with ... feels better to utter your concepts in groups or even better with a sixpack of budweiser, right?
utterly stupid line of argument. sorry, i would like him to reach as many people as possible. by influencing others he reduces the amount of pollution by a much higher amount than if he used other means of transport and influence no one. this story is just a plain attempt to discredit him.