PDA

View Full Version : Earth Hour



midgetonadonkey
03-29-2008, 03:11 PM
Who else is turning their lights off for an hour?

I probably won't.


www.earthhour.org

NASpurs
03-29-2008, 03:11 PM
I'll probably waste more energy to combat the people who are trying to save energy.

Rip-Hamilton32
03-29-2008, 05:51 PM
what if everyone turns all their power back on at the same time wouldn't it blow fuses and shit

peewee's lovechild
03-29-2008, 06:40 PM
We used to do that all the time when I was a kid.

It was called "Dad didn't have enough money to pay the bill."

Some say eating by candle light is romantic, but it's annoying as hell.

RuffnReadyOzStyle
03-29-2008, 07:40 PM
Here's something people around here will be surprised to see me say - Earth Hour is a bad joke.

For one, lighting uses minimal power - for most people it's under 5% of their total power consumption (and power is only about 40% of their total energy consumption). Secondly, there are 8760 hours in a year, so what's the point of acting for 1 hour whilst ignoring the other 8759???

Earth Hour gives people a false sense of achievement in thinking that they have actually done something to help the environment when they've done nothing of the sort. It's Greenwash of the worst kind.


I'll probably waste more energy to combat the people who are trying to save energy.

As for this attitude, WTF is wrong with you? Energy wastage COSTS YOU MONEY! It also uses non-renewable resources and creates pollution, but first and foremost you hurt YOURSELF. You may as well burn some money.

I will never understand that attitude.

Don Quixote
03-29-2008, 08:07 PM
Hey ... if Earth Hour makes some enviro's feel better about themselves, then good for them.

BTW ... I have some Carbon Credits they might be interested in. Only $1 each!

dallaskd
03-29-2008, 08:11 PM
google is.

Dex
03-29-2008, 08:23 PM
Well, my lights are off.

They didn't say anything about my laptop or 32-inch LCD.

Way to compromise, Earth.

Johnny_Blaze_47
03-29-2008, 08:31 PM
I don't think anybody is saying this one hour will make everything all better.



Google users in the United States will notice today that we "turned the lights out" on the Google.com homepage as a gesture to raise awareness of a worldwide energy conservation effort called Earth Hour. As to why we don't do this permanently - it saves no energy; modern displays use the same amount of power regardless of what they display. However, you can do something to reduce the energy consumption of your home PC by joining the Climate Savers Computing Initiative.

On Saturday, March 29, 2008, Earth Hour invites people around the world to turn off their lights for one hour – from 8:00pm to 9:00pm in their local time zone. On this day, cities around the world, including Copenhagen, Chicago, Melbourne, Dubai, and Tel Aviv, will hold events to acknowledge their commitment to energy conservation.

Given our company's commitment to environmental awareness and energy efficiency, we strongly support the Earth Hour campaign, and have darkened our homepage today to help spread awareness of what we hope will be a highly successful global event.


It's to acknowledge a commitment to try and raise awareness of the environmental impact we're all making, not to make up in one fell swoop. Will it work? Doubtful considering the divide between "sides," but what is so wrong with people wanting to try and make a difference?

If it helps somebody think to develop more efficient ways for them to use energy, where's the harm?

Johnny_Blaze_47
03-29-2008, 08:33 PM
Does this mean I have to turn of everything in my home and use absolutely no electricity?

Not at all. The main point of this campaign is to show people and companies how easy it is to take action to avoid global warming. This does not mean you have to turn off your fridge, but we do encourage you to join us by switching off your lights and make a statement, as well as changing your habits in the long term.

CrazyOne
03-29-2008, 08:40 PM
Everybody turn off your lights for an hour... I need to recharge the flux capacitor in my DeLorean.

CuckingFunt
03-29-2008, 08:57 PM
google is.Google should make this a permanent change. I like the way it looks.

RuffnReadyOzStyle
03-29-2008, 09:07 PM
It's to acknowledge a commitment to try and raise awareness of the environmental impact we're all making, not to make up in one fell swoop. Will it work? Doubtful considering the divide between "sides," but what is so wrong with people wanting to try and make a difference?

Not having a go at you here Johnny, just need to comment on your post.

1. if you want to make a "commitment" to reducing environmental impact, surely more than one hour a year is required? How about action all year around? That is a commitment. And you know what, small changes in behaviour can lead to big energy savings that don't impact upon lifestyle but do save you money. I know because I've done it already.

2. the old "raising awareness" card always makes me laugh - like people don't know that the earth is in trouble? You're right in that awareness is being raised, but on the flipside participating in some tokenistic dross like this gives many people an excuse not to do any more...

3. "the divide between 'sides'" - and isn't that just the saddest thing here? Sides... what sides? Aren't we all for saving money for ourselves, and natural resources for the next generation? If not, why not? This should not be about sides (although you are right that it is) - even if you don't believe the scientists with regard to global warming (which, incidentally, is like telling your accountant that you know taxes better than her, or your mechanic that you know more about your car than him), resource depletion and other pollution issues are still extremely serious and potentially catastrophic. People who are against creating a sustainable future astound me.

4. "wanting to make a difference"? What difference? As I've pointed out, the impact of turning your lights off for one hour is virtually ZERO. Earth Hour is an exercise in salving the conscience.

Johnny_Blaze_47
03-29-2008, 09:12 PM
Not having a go at you here Johnny, just need to comment on your post.

1. if you want to make a "commitment" to reducing environmental impact, surely more than one hour a year is required? How about action all year around? That is a commitment. And you know what, small changes in behaviour can lead to big energy savings that don't impact upon lifestyle but do save you money. I know because I've done it already.

2. the old "raising awareness" card always makes me laugh - like people don't know that the earth is in trouble? You're right in that awareness is being raised, but on the flipside participating in some tokenistic dross like this gives many people an excuse not to do any more...

3. "the divide between 'sides'" - and isn't that just the saddest thing here? Sides... what sides? Aren't we all for saving money for ourselves, and natural resources for the next generation? If not, why not? This should not be about sides (although you are right that it is) - even if you don't believe the scientists with regard to global warming (which, incidentally, is like telling your accountant that you know taxes better than her, or your mechanic that you know more about your car than him), resource depletion and other pollution issues are still extremely serious and potentially catastrophic. People who are against creating a sustainable future astound me.

4. "wanting to make a difference"? What difference? As I've pointed out, the impact of turning your lights off for one hour is virtually ZERO. Earth Hour is an exercise in salving the conscience.

Did you even read my second quote?

I said (along with the EH FAQ) that it requires a larger commitment than simply one hour. It requires changing habits, which is what they're asking people to do.

RuffnReadyOzStyle
03-29-2008, 09:19 PM
Did you even read my second quote?

I said (along with the EH FAQ) that it requires a larger commitment than simply one hour. It requires changing habits, which is what they're asking people to do.

I don't think the quote added anything or changed anything I said. Also, as I said, I'm not having a go at you.

Anyway, you are absolutely right that it requires changing habits, but do you think that Earth Hour helps get that message through? I don't think it does. I think most people will do the earth hour thing, say "I've done my bit", and go back to whatever they usually do.

I think the key lies in education for sustainability from a young age through the school system (kids can influence their parents), and changing energy markets so that we all pay for the REAL price of the energy we consume.

Don Quixote
03-29-2008, 09:22 PM
I'm all for saving some green. That's the green that I believe in.

RuffnReadyOzStyle
03-29-2008, 09:24 PM
I'm all for saving some green. That's the green that I believe in.

Wasting less energy and water, and buying less stuff you don't need (or buying it second hand) will do exactly that - save you money.

Who cares what reason you do it for as long as it gets done?

midgetonadonkey
03-29-2008, 10:00 PM
I forgot to turn my lights out. I wasn't even home actually. I was at the liquor store. But I do my part to help the environment, I bought a Honda Civic.

mrsmaalox
03-29-2008, 10:52 PM
If it helps somebody think to develop more efficient ways for them to use energy, where's the harm?

I'm with you, JB. Sure it won't solve anything, but it certainly won't hurt.

NASpurs
03-29-2008, 10:55 PM
So I had all my lights on with all the tvs as well plus my PS3 and 360 with my two computers sucking energy.



As for this attitude, WTF is wrong with you? Energy wastage COSTS YOU MONEY! It also uses non-renewable resources and creates pollution, but first and foremost you hurt YOURSELF. You may as well burn some money.

I will never understand that attitude.:lmao you're a funny man

T Park
03-29-2008, 10:58 PM
If it makes the people that have bought into the pathetic hoax feel better, more power to em.

btw, literally all the lights are on in the house.

Take that Al Gore.

curtismedellin
03-29-2008, 10:58 PM
Earth Hour!!!???? Fuckin tree huggers.....I'm leaving my lights on and falling asleep with the TV on.... Oh I do that EVERY NIGHT

RuffnReadyOzStyle
03-29-2008, 11:03 PM
:lmao

You people (last 3 posters) are fucking idiots. Stick it to the tree huggers and Al Gore, huh? You are sticking it to YOURSELVES by costing yourselves money. And then when the local power generator needs another $500mil power plant to cope with the extra demand, who will pay for it? YOU WILL.

Talk about stupid, you define it. You'd rather waste non-renewable resources to stick it to someone who will never even know you stuck it to them, while costing yourself money, than do something that costs you no time or effort and saves you money. Fucking idiots.

midgetonadonkey
03-29-2008, 11:08 PM
If it makes the people that have bought into the pathetic hoax feel better, more power to em.

btw, literally all the lights are on in the house.

Take that Al Gore.

How is global warming a hoax?

Please explain.

marini martini
03-29-2008, 11:08 PM
Whew had to go back to the first page to make sure I wasn't in the (last 3 poster) :clap

curtismedellin
03-29-2008, 11:13 PM
: You'd rather waste non-renewable resources to stick it to someone who will never even know you stuck it to them...

Naw, now you know who stuck it to you

T Park
03-29-2008, 11:13 PM
How is global warming a hoax?

Please explain.

I don't have to.

The hundreds of thousands of scientists have already.

Hell they just had a meeting in New York to all come to the agreement that global warming doesn't exist.

NASpurs
03-29-2008, 11:13 PM
:lmao

You people (last 3 posters) are fucking idiots. Stick it to the tree huggers and Al Gore, huh? You are sticking it to YOURSELVES by costing yourselves money. And then when the local power generator needs another $500mil power plant to cope with the extra demand, who will pay for it? YOU WILL.

Talk about stupid, you define it. You'd rather waste non-renewable resources to stick it to someone who will never even know you stuck it to them, while costing yourself money, than do something that costs you no time or effort and saves you money. Fucking idiots.Oh man your hits keep on coming you stupid fuck. I was being sarcastic but obviously you being a self pompous ass blocks whatever sarcasm detection you have.

Now I just feel like doing what I said I was going to do out of spite.

curtismedellin
03-29-2008, 11:14 PM
How is global warming a hoax?

Please explain.
Global warming is not a hoax.

We've had global warming since the Ice Age.

NASpurs
03-29-2008, 11:14 PM
One more time because it makes me laugh....


:lmao

You people (last 3 posters) are fucking idiots. Stick it to the tree huggers and Al Gore, huh? You are sticking it to YOURSELVES by costing yourselves money. And then when the local power generator needs another $500mil power plant to cope with the extra demand, who will pay for it? YOU WILL.

Talk about stupid, you define it. You'd rather waste non-renewable resources to stick it to someone who will never even know you stuck it to them, while costing yourself money, than do something that costs you no time or effort and saves you money. Fucking idiots.:lmao what a fucking moron

T Park
03-29-2008, 11:17 PM
Global Warming is a Hoax (http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm)

Go ahead and chew on that for a bit Reverend.

mrsmaalox
03-29-2008, 11:20 PM
I don't have to.

The hundreds of thousands of scientists have already.

Hell they just had a meeting in New York to all come to the agreement that global warming doesn't exist.

Are they the same guys that decide if there was really a holocaust?

curtismedellin
03-29-2008, 11:23 PM
Good stuff T.

Can i fall asleep with the TV on now?

T Park
03-29-2008, 11:38 PM
Are they the same guys that decide if there was really a holocaust?


Uh no.

T Park
03-29-2008, 11:38 PM
Good stuff T.

Can i fall asleep with the TV on now?


Go for it.

Im leaving all 3 computers and all 3 TVs on.

marini martini
03-29-2008, 11:43 PM
That does it, I'm pulling the plug on my hubbies Oxygen tank :lol

PEP
03-29-2008, 11:44 PM
Is there anyone on here that has actually bought carbon credits??

Don Quixote
03-29-2008, 11:50 PM
Is there anyone on here that has actually bought carbon credits??

I got some. A whole bunch! What color paper do you want them on? I got red, green, yellow, and purple.

Only a $1 each.

midgetonadonkey
03-30-2008, 12:10 AM
Global Warming is a Hoax (http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm)

Go ahead and chew on that for a bit Reverend.

Once you are done chewing on mass amounts of funnel cake and corn dogs, chew on this http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/.

midgetonadonkey
03-30-2008, 12:11 AM
Go for it.

Im leaving all 3 computers and all 3 TVs on.

Your Jesus hates gluttons.

RuffnReadyOzStyle
03-30-2008, 12:32 AM
Oh man your hits keep on coming you stupid fuck. I was being sarcastic but obviously you being a self pompous ass blocks whatever sarcasm detection you have.

Now I just feel like doing what I said I was going to do out of spite.

You're such a brilliant writer that I missed your incredibly clever sarcasm. There are plenty of people who aren't sarcastic when they say what you said.

As for you, T Park, the guy who wrote that article is Tom Harris from the Natural Resources Stewardship Project, which is an energy industry lobby front. In other words, it has no credibility.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Natural_Resources_Stewardship_Proj ect

There are 68 "scientists", mostly ex-geologists turned energy lobbyists, who routinely dispute global warming theory. The same guys have been doing so for the last 20 years, irrespective of the mounting and now overwhelming evidence to prove that global warming is upon us and is a consequence of man's actions.

Try addressing the science and not the politics of the issue (forget Al Gore, he is just a bystander) and you'd find that actually global warming is not a hoax, that there are thousands of scientific articles stretching back 30 years that support it. However, I know you won't because you think you know better, even though you don't.

Anyway, I'll leave this thread adn all like it alone now. There is no point discussing the state of the environment with people because they always think they know more than you do even if it's your life and career. Do they do that to their doctor/lawyer/mechanic/etc etc? No. but, of course, everyone knows more about the environment than environmental scientists do. :rolleyes

T Park
03-30-2008, 12:34 AM
which is an energy industry lobby front. In other words, it has no credibility.


as opposed to guys like Al Gore who make millions off scaring people into this hoax?

Sure thing.

RuffnReadyOzStyle
03-30-2008, 12:36 AM
as opposed to guys like Al Gore who make millions off scaring people into this hoax?

Sure thing.

FUCK Al Gore. He is a politician. I don't give a fuck what Al Gore says or does.

Look at the science and talk to the scientists.

PS :lmao Al Gore makes millions, sure he does, and that pales into insignificance, as does the money made by all the scientists in the world, when compared with the money flowing through the fossil fuel industry.

T Park
03-30-2008, 12:40 AM
Look at the science and talk to the scientists

Yeah the 300 scientists who met in New York last month to agree that Global Warming doesn't exist, convinced me.

midgetonadonkey
03-30-2008, 12:41 AM
as opposed to guys like Al Gore who make millions off scaring people into this hoax?

Sure thing.

Saying it's a hoax is just ignorant. Do you really believe that years of burning oil and coal by millions of households and automobiles would have absolutely no effect on the environment? Thinking otherwise is just being close minded.

I understand that there are natural fluctuations in the natural weather cycles of the world, but to think that humans have no negative effect on the world is just ridiculous.

midgetonadonkey
03-30-2008, 12:41 AM
Yeah the 300 scientists who met in New York last month to agree that Global Warming doesn't exist, convinced me.

I thought there were hundreds of thousands? Now there are only 300?

marini martini
03-30-2008, 12:43 AM
Saying it's a hoax is just ignorant. Do you really believe that years of burning oil and coal by millions of households and automobiles would have absolutely no effect on the environment? Thinking otherwise is just being close minded.

I understand that there are natural fluctuations in the natural weather cycles of the world, but to think that humans have no negative effect on the world is just ridiculous.

Okay, Okay, so I will not take a dump in the woods, already

mrsmaalox
03-30-2008, 12:45 AM
100,000's > 300

midgetonadonkey
03-30-2008, 12:51 AM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6341451/

updated 7:10 a.m. CT, Wed., Oct. 27, 2004

IOWA CITY, Iowa - The Bush administration is trying to stifle scientific evidence of the dangers of global warming in an effort to keep the public uninformed, a NASA scientist said Tuesday night.

“In my more than three decades in government, I have never seen anything approaching the degree to which information flow from scientists to the public has been screened and controlled as it is now,” James Hansen told a University of Iowa audience.

Hansen is director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and has twice briefed a task force headed by Vice President Dick Cheney on global warming. He was also one of the first government scientists tasked with briefing congressional committees on the dangers of global warming, testifying as far back as the 1980s.

Hansen said the administration wants to hear only scientific results that “fit predetermined, inflexible positions.” Evidence that would raise concerns about the dangers of climate change is often dismissed as not being of sufficient interest to the public.

“This, I believe, is a recipe for environmental disaster.”

Hansen said the scientific community generally agrees that temperatures on Earth are rising because of the greenhouse effect — increased emissions of carbon dioxide and other materials into the atmosphere that trap heat. Most of that increase comes from burning fossil fuels.

These rising temperatures, scientists believe, could cause sea levels to rise and trigger severe environmental consequences, he said.

Hansen said such warnings are consistently suppressed, while studies that cast doubt on such interpretations receive favorable treatment from the administration.

He also said reports that outline potential dangers of global warming are edited to make the problem appear less serious. “This process is in direct opposition to the most fundamental precepts of science,” he said.

White House science adviser John H. Marburger III has denied charges that the administration refuses to accept the reality of climate change, noting that President Bush pointed out in a 2001 speech that greenhouse gases have increased substantially in the past 200 years.

The president has also said that while he believes warming is a serious problem, he doesn't feel the threat his imminent and has instead ordered more research. He has also sought voluntary steps by industry and pumped federal dollars into technology projects like capturing and sequestering carbon dioxide emissions.

Hansen said he was speaking as a private citizen, not as a government employee, and paid his own way for the Iowa appearance. He described himself as moderately conservative, but said he will vote for John Kerry in the presidential election.

“He certainly is not in denial of the existence of climate change problems,” Hansen said.

NASpurs
03-30-2008, 12:51 AM
You're such a brilliant writer that I missed your incredibly clever sarcasm. There are plenty of people who aren't sarcastic when they say what you said.

Doesn't fucking matter. I could be the worst writer in the world but that doesn't excuse you jumping the gun. I'll be sure to use the blue sarcasm font color for you next time.

T Park
03-30-2008, 12:58 AM
This is a small list of the scientists that disagree with it...



A. Alan Moghissi, Ph.D. Physical Chemistry, Technical University of Karlsruhe, Germany
Aksel Wiin-Nielsen, Professor of Geophysical Science, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Albrecht Glatzle, Ph.D. Agricultural Biology, University of Hohenheim, Germany
Alfred (Al) H. Pekarek, Ph.D. Geology, Associate Professor of Geology, St. Cloud State University, USA
Allan M.R. MacRae, B.Sc., M.Eng., P.Eng, Canada
Andreas Prokoph, B.Sc. Geology, Ph.D. Earth Sciences, University Tubingen, Germany
Anthony R. Lupo, Ph.D. Atmospheric Science, Purdue University, USA
Antonino Zichichi, Professor Emeritus of Advanced Physics, University of Bologna, Italy
Arthur B. Robinson, Ph.D. Chemistry, University of California, San Diego, USA
Arthur Rorsch, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Molecular Genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands
Ben Herman, Ph.D. Atmospheric Sciences, University of Arizona, USA
Bjarne Andresen, Ph. D. Theoretical Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Bob Durrenberger, Retired Climatologist, Former President of the American Association of State Climatologists, USA
Boris Winterhalter, M.Sc., Ph.D. Geology, Helsinki University, Finland
Brian Pratt, Ph.D. Professor of Geology, Sedimentology, University of Saskatchewan, Canada
Bruce N. Ames, Ph.D. BioChemistry, California Institute of Technology, USA
Bruno Wiskel, B.Sc. Geology, University of Albert, Canada
Bryan Leyland, M.Sc. Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, New Zealand
Carl Johan Friedrich (Frits) Böttcher, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Physical Chemistry, University of Leiden, The Netherlands
Charles Gelman, B.S. Chemistry, M.S. Public Health, University of Michigan, USA
Chauncey Starr, Ph.D. Physics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, USA
Chris de Freitas, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Christiaan Frans van Sumere, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry, University of Gent, Belgium
Christoph C. Borel, Ph.D. Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Massachusetts, USA
Christopher Essex, Ph.D. Professor of Applied Mathematics, University of Western Ontario, Canada
Christopher Landsea, Ph.D. Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, USA
Claude Allegre, Ph.D. Physics, University of Paris, France
Cliff Ollier, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Geology, University of Western Australia, Australia
Clinton H. Sheehan, Ph.D. Physics, University of Western Ontario, Canada
Craig D. Idso, M.S. Agronomy, Ph.D. Geography, Arizona State University, USA
Dan Carruthers, M.Sc. Wildlife Biology Consultant, Specializing in Animal Ecology in Arctic and Subarctic Regions, Canada
Daniel B. Botkin, Ph.D. Biology, Rutgers University, USA
David Deming, B.S. Geology, Ph.D. Geophysics, University of Utah, USA
David E. Wojick, B.S. Civil Engineering, Ph.D. Mathematical Logic, University of Pittsburgh, USA
David Evans, B.Sc. Applied Mathematics and Physics, M.S. Statistics, Ph.D. Electrical Engineering, Stanford, USA
David G. Aubrey, B.S. Geological Sciences, Ph.D. Oceanography, University of California at San Diego, USA
David H. Douglass, Ph.D. Physics, MIT, USA
David J. Bellamy, B.Sc. Botany, Ph.D. Ecology, Durham University, UK
David Kear, Ph.D. Geology, New Zealand
David L. Hill, Ph.D. Physics, Princeton University, USA
David Nowell, M.Sc. Meteorology, Royal Meteorological Society, Canada
David R. Legates, Ph.D. Climatology, University of Delaware, USA
Dennis P. Lettenmaier, Ph.D. Professor of Hydrology, University of Washington, USA
Dick Thoenes, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Chemical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands
Don J. Easterbrook, Ph.D. Geology, University of Washington, USA
Donald G. Baker, Ph.D. Soils, Geology, University of Minnesota, USA
Douglas V. Hoyt, Solar Physicist and Climatologist, Retired, Raytheon, USA
Duncan Wingham, Ph.D. Physics, University of Bath, UK
Eckhard Grimmel, Ph.D. Geography, University of Hamburg, Germany
Edward Wegman, Ph.D. Mathematical Statistics, University of Iowa, USA
Eigil Friis-Christensen, Ph.D. Geophysics, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Dirk_is_my_daddy_Dirk_is_my_daddy_Dirk_is_my_daddy _Dirk_is_my_daddy_Dirk_is_my_daddy_Dirk_is_my_dadd y_ Abrams, M.S. Meteorology, Penn State, USA
Eric S. Posmentier, Adjunct Professor of Earth Sciences, Dartmouth, USA
Ernst-Georg Beck, M.Sc. Biology, Merian-Schule, Germany
Fred Goldberg, Ph.D. Mechanical Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden
Fred Michel, B.Sc. Geological Sciences, M.Sc., Ph.D. Earth Sciences, University of Waterloo, Canada
Fred W. Decker, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, USA
Freeman Dyson, Professor Emeritus of Physics, Princeton University, USA
G. Cornelis van Kooten, B.Sc. Geophysics, Ph.D. Agricultural & Resource Economics, Oregon State University, USA
Gabriel T. Csanady, Ph.D. Mechanical Engineering, University of New South Wales, Australia
Garth Paltridge, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus, Institute of Antarctic and Southern Ocean Studies, University of Tasmania, Australia
Gary D. Sharp, Ph.D. Marine Biology, University of California, USA
Gary Novak, M.S. Microbiology, USA
Geoff L. Austin, Ph.D. Professor of Physics, University of Auckland, New Zealand
George E. McVehil, B.A. Physics, M.S., Ph.D. Meteorology, AMS Certified Consulting Meteorologist, USA
George H. Taylor, M.S. Meteorology, University of Utah, USA
George Kukla, Micropalentologist, Special Research Scientist of Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University, USA
George V. Chilingarian, Ph.D. Geology, University of Southern California, USA
George Wilhelm Stroke, Ph.D. Physics, University of Paris, France
Gerd-Rainer Weber, Ph.D. Consulting Meteorologist, Germany
Gerhard Gerlich, Ph.D. Physics, Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany
Gerrit J. van der Lingen, PhD Geology, New Zealand
Gordon E. Swaters, Ph.D. Applied Mathematics and Physical Oceanography, University of British Columbia, Canada
Gordon J. Fulks, Ph.D. Physics, University of Chicago, USA
Graham Smith, Associate Professor of Geography, University of Western Ontario, Canada
H. Grant (H.G.) Goodell, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, USA
H. Michael (Mike) Mogil, M.S. Meteorology, Florida State University, USA
Hans Erren, B.Sc. Geology and Physics, M.Sc. Geophysics, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Hans Jelbring, Ph.D. Climatology, Stockholm University, Sweden
Harry N.A. Priem, Professor Emeritus of Isotope and Planetary Geology, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Hartwig Volz, Geophysicist, RWE Research Lab, Germany
Hendrik Tennekes, Former Director of Research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute, The Netherlands
Henrik Svensmark, Solar System Physics, Danish National Space Center, Denmark
Henry R. Linden, Ph.D. Chemical Engineering, Illinois Institute of Technology, USA
Howard C. Hayden, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Physics, University of Connecticut, USA
Hugh W. Ellsaesser, Ph.D. Meteorology, Formerly with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, USA
Ian D. Clark, Ph.D. Professor of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa, Canada
Ian R. Plimer, Ph.D. Professor of Geology, University of Adelaide, Australia
Indur M. Goklany, Ph.D. Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, India
J. Scott Armstrong, B.A. Applied Science, B.S. Industrial Engineering, Ph.D. MIT, USA
Jack Barrett, Ph.D. Physical Chemistry, Manchester, UK
James A. Peden, B.S. Physics and Mathematics, M.S. Experimental Physics, University of Pittsburgh, USA
James (Jim) Goodridge, Retired California State Climatologist, USA
James J. O’Brien, Ph.D. Meteorology, Texas A&M University, USA
James R. Stalker, Ph.D. Atmospheric Science, University of Alabama, USA
Ján Veizer, Professor Emeritus of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa, Canada
Jay H. Lehr, Ph.D. Groundwater Hydrology, University of Arizona, USA
Jennifer Marohasy, Ph.D. Biology, University of Queensland, Australia
Joel M. Kauffman, Ph.D. Organic Chemistry, MIT, USA
Joel Schwartz, B.S. Chemistry, M.S. Planetary Science, California Institute of Technology, USA
John Brignell, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus, Department of Electronics & Computer Science, University of Southampton, UK
John E. Gaynor, M.S. Meteorology, UCLA, USA
John E. Oliphant, B.A. Mathematics and Physics, M.S. Meteorology Penn State, USA
John K. Sutherland, Ph.D. Geology, University of Manchester, UK
John R. Christy, B.A. Mathematics, M.S., Ph.D. Atmospheric Sciences, University of Illinois, USA
Joseph Conklin, M.S. Meteorology, Rutgers University, USA
Joseph D’Aleo, M.S. Meteorology, University of Wisconsin, USA
Joseph (Joe) P. Sobel, Ph.D. Meteorology, Penn State, USA
Keith D. Hage, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Meteorology, University of Alberta, Canada
Keith E. Idso, Ph.D. Botany, Arizona State University, USA
Kelvin Kemm, Ph.D. Nuclear Physics, Natal University, South Africa
Kenneth E.F. Watt, Ph.D. Zoology, University of Chicago, USA
Khabibullo Abdusamatov, Ph.D. Astrophysicist, University of Leningrad, Russia
Klaus Wyrtki, Ph.D. Oceanography, Physics, Mathematics, University of Kiel, Germany
Lance Endersbee, Professor Emeritus of Engineering, Monash University, Australia
Lee C. Gerhard, Ph.D. Geology, University of Kansas, USA
Lee Raymond, Ph.D. Chemical Engineering, University of Minnesota, USA
Louis Hissink, M.Sc. Geology, Macquarie University, Australia
Luboš Motl, Ph.D. Theoretical Physics, Rutgers, USA
Madhav Khandekar, B.Sc. Mathematics and Physics, M.Sc. Statistics, Ph.D.
Martin Livermore, B.S. Chemistry, University of Oxford, UK
Meteorology, Florida State University, USA
Manik Talwani, Ph.D. Physics, Columbia University, USA
Marcel Leroux, Professor Emeritus of Climatology, University of Lyon, France
Mel Goldstein, Ph.D. Meteorology, NYU, USA
Michael Crichton, A.B. Anthropology, M.D. Harvard, USA
Michael D. Griffin, B.S. Physics, M.S. Applied Physics, Ph.D. Aerospace Engineering, University of Maryland, USA
Michael E Adams, Ph.D. Meteorology, Lyndon State College, USA
Michael Savage, B.S. Biology, M.S. Anthropology, M.S. Ethnobotany, Ph.D. Nutritional Ethnomedicine, USA
Michael R. Fox, Ph.D. Physical Chemistry, University of Washington, USA
Michel Salomon, M.D. University of Paris, Director, International Centre for Scientific Ecology, France
Noah E. Robinson, Ph.D. Chemistry, California Institute of Technology, USA
Neil Frank, Ph.D. Meteorology, Florida State University, USA
Nils-Axel Mörner, Professor Emeritus of Palegeophysics and Geodynamics, Stockholm University, Sweden
Nir J. Shaviv, Ph.D. Astrophysicist, Israel Institute of Technology, Israel
Norman Brown, Professor Emeritus of Chemistry, University of Ulster, UK
Ola M. Johannessen, Professor, Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center, Norway
Olavi Kärner, Ph.D. Atmospheric Physics, Leningrad Hydrometeorological Institute, Estonia
Oliver W. Frauenfeld, Ph.D. Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, USA
Paavo Siitam, M.Sc. Agronomist, Canada
Paul Copper, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Earth Sciences, Laurentian University, Canada
Paul Driessen, B.A. Geology and Field Ecology, Lawrence University, USA
Paul Reiter, Professor of Medical Entomology, Pasteur Institute, France
Patrick J. Michaels, Ph.D. Ecological Climatology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA
Patrick Moore, B.Sc. Forest Biology, Ph.D. Ecology, University of British Columbia, Greenpeace co-founder, Canada
Peter Stilbs, Ph.D. (TeknD) Physical Chemistry, Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden
Petr Chylek, Ph.D. Physics, University of California, USA
Philip Stott, Professor Emeritus of Biogeography, University of London, UK
Piers Corbyn, B.Sc. Physics, M.Sc. Astrophysics, Queen Mary College, UK
R.G. Roper, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA
R. Timothy (Tim) Patterson, B.Sc. Biology, Ph.D. Professor of Geology, Carleton University, Canada
R. W. Gauldie, Ph.D. Research Professor, Hawaii Institute of Geophysics and Planetology, School of Ocean Earth Sciences and Technology, University of Hawaii, USA
Ralf D. Tscheuschner, Ph.D. Physics, University of Hamburg, Germany
Randall Cerveny, Ph.D. Geography, University of Nebraska, USA
Reid A. Bryson, B.A. Geology, Ph.D. Meteorology, University of Chicago, USA
Richard C. Willson, Ph.D. Atmospheric Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, USA
Richard S. Courtney, Ph.D. Geography, The Ohio State University, USA
Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT, USA
Rob Scagel, M.Sc., Forest Microclimate Specialist, Canada
Robert C. Balling Jr., Ph.D. Professor of Climatology, Arizona State University, USA
Robert C. Whitten, Physicist, Retired Research Scientist, NASA, USA
Robert E. Davis, Ph.D. Climatology, University of Delaware, USA
Robert G. Williscroft, B.Sc. Marine & Atmospheric Physics, M.Sc., Ph.D. Engineering, California Coast University, USA
Robert Giegengack, Ph.D. Geology, Yale, USA
Robert H. Essenhigh, M.S. Natural Sciences, Ph.D. Chemical Engineering, University of Sheffield, UK
Robert L. Kovach, Professor of Geophysics, Stanford University, USA
Robert (Bob) M. Carter, B.Sc. Geology, Ph.D. Paleontology, University of Cambridge, Australia
Robin Vaughan, Ph.D. Physics, Nottingham University, UK
Roger A. Pielke (Sr.), Ph.D. Meteorology, Penn State, USA
Roy Spencer, Ph.D. Meteorology, University of Wisconsin, USA
S. Fred Singer, B.E.E. Electrical Engineering, A.M. Ph.D. Physics, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, USA
Sallie Baliunas, Ph.D. Astrophysics, Harvard, USA
Sherwood B. Idso, Ph.D. Soil Science, University of Minnesota, USA
Simon C. Brassell, B.Sc. Chemistry & Geology, Ph.D. Organic Geochemistry, University of Bristol, UK
Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, Ph.D. Department of Geography, University of Hull, UK
Steve Milloy, B.A. Natural Sciences, M.S. Health Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, USA
Stephen McIntyre, B.Sc. Mathematics, University of Toronto, Canada
Stewart W. Franks, Ph.D. Environmental Science, Lancaster University, U.K.
Sylvan H. Wittwer, Ph.D. Horticulture, University of Missouri, USA
Syun-Ichi Akasofu, Ph.D. Geophysics, University of Alaska, USA
Tad S. Murty, Ph.D. Oceanography and Meteorology, University of Chicago, USA
Thomas Schmidlin, Ph.D. Professor of Geography, Kent State University, USA
Timothy (Tim) F. Ball, Ph.D. Geography - Historical Climatology, University of London, UK
Tom Harris, B. Eng. M. Eng. Mechanical Engineering (thermo-fluids), Canada
Tom V. Segalstad, B.S. Geology, University of Oslo, Norway
Ulrich Berner, Geologist, Federal Institute for Geosciences, Germany
Vern Harnapp, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Geography, University of Akron, USA
Vincent Gray, Ph.D. Physical Chemistry, Cambridge University, UK
Vitaliy Rusov, Ph.D. Physics and Mathematics, Professor of Physics, Odessa Polytechnic University, Ukraine
W. Dennis Clark, Ph.D. Botany, Sacramento State College, USA
Walter Starck, Ph.D. Marine Science, University of Miami, USA
Warwick Hughes, B.S. Geology, Auckland University, Australia
Wm. Robert Johnston, B.A. Astronomy, M.S. Physics, University of Texas, USA
Wibjorn Karlen, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden
Willem de Lange, Ph.D. Senior Lecturer, Department of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Waikato University, New Zealand
William B. Hubbard, Ph.D. Professor of Planetary Atmospheres, University of Arizona, USA
William (Bill) Bauman, B.S., Meteorology, M.S., Ph.D. Atmospheric Sciences, North Carolina State University, USA
William Cotton, M.S. Atmospheric Science, Ph.D. Meteorology, Pennsylvania State University, USA
William E. Reifsnyder, B.S. Meteorology, M.S., Ph.D. Forestry, Yale, USA
William J.R. Alexander, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus, Department of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa
William M. Briggs, B.S. Meteorology and Math, M.S. Atmospheric Science, Ph.D. Statistics, Cornell University, USA
William (Bill) M. Gray, M.S. Meteorology, Ph.D. Geophysical Sciences, University of Chicago, USA
Willie Soon, Ph.D. Astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, USA
Wolfgang Thüne, Ph.D. Geography, University of Wuerzburg, Germany
Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc., Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Poland

midgetonadonkey
03-30-2008, 01:02 AM
That's not hundreds of thousands.

CuckingFunt
03-30-2008, 01:04 AM
This is a small list of the scientists that disagree with it...

I might be more impressed by that list, and your adherence to it, if I thought for one second that you had any knowledge of those scientists other than the alphabetical listing you copypasta'd.

marini martini
03-30-2008, 01:05 AM
TPark you left out Marco Pollo :madrun

mrsmaalox
03-30-2008, 01:07 AM
Wow. Any major dude will tell ya.

curtismedellin
03-30-2008, 01:10 AM
I might be more impressed by that list, and your adherence to it, if I thought for one second that you had any knowledge of those scientists other than the alphabetical listing you copypasta'd.

And what scientific knowledge do you go by to justify your argument?

CuckingFunt
03-30-2008, 01:13 AM
And what scientific knowledge do you go by to justify your argument?What argument? The post you quoted was (other than a comment that I liked the temporary Google color scheme) my first contribution to this thread.

Kori Ellis
03-30-2008, 02:09 AM
:lol @ Ruff getting upset that people might participate in this.

Did you think that maybe some people, if they do this for one hour, will decide they want to change their lifestyle? Even if a low percentage do, it's better than nothing. You picked such a weird thing to rant on about.

Melmart1
03-30-2008, 03:03 AM
there are 8760 hours in a year, so what's the point of acting for 1 hour whilst ignoring the other 8759???


So you are saying that doing nothing is better than doing something, even if its for one hour? Any awareness this brings to the cause is good, and should be embraced, imho.

As for those who think its funny to leave all of your electronics on all day on purpose, I wonder if you will laugh so hard once you get your electricity bill.

PEP
03-30-2008, 10:50 AM
I only use one square of toilet paper when I do doo-doo.

I got that idea from Sheryl Crow.

BigZak
03-30-2008, 11:58 AM
when you say disagree tpark, do you mean they feel that humans are having no impact on the current environmental changes that are happening, i.e. the melting of the glaciers that has increased 10 fold in just the last 20 years...

mrsmaalox
03-30-2008, 08:02 PM
So you are saying that doing nothing is better than doing something, even if its for one hour? Any awareness this brings to the cause is good, and should be embraced, imho.

You're right. Granted nothing is really going to change as a result of this, as nothing will probably change in our lifetime. But kids really take to this kind of campaign, and that's where it needs to start, for there to be a difference in the future.

makedamnsure
03-30-2008, 08:07 PM
Well I did it and it sucked and it made me realize how dependent I am on electricity to entertain me. I sat there for a while and read outside till it got dark then I decided to do crunches and then I just layed there until it was 9.

I think I'll do it once a week now.

RuffnReadyOzStyle
03-30-2008, 09:12 PM
Yeah, I don't know what the hell is wrong with me any more.

Basically I hate my life and everything in it.

Think I'll just go and stare at the ceiling.

Don Quixote
03-30-2008, 09:15 PM
Look ... whatever. I remember being indoctrinated in the whole global-warming thing in the 80s. It wasn't until I was through with college until I began to hear the other side of the story. At the very least, the findings about global warming are inconclusive, and we certainly don't want to make major changes in policy, let alone risk endangering our economy and entire way of life for something that is more than likely a hoax.\


Having said that ... who isn't for saving a few $$$$? So, turn out those lights when you leave. Turn the TV off if you're not watching it. Keep the AC at a reasonable level. Your wallet will thank you. :)

Don Quixote
03-30-2008, 09:21 PM
There's more to be said about global warming. I think following the logic that the enviro crowd is using would be helpful. Also, might we discuss some of the political motivations behind it? But in a non-nutty conspiracy, blame-Bush-for-everything way.

RuffnReadyOzStyle
03-30-2008, 09:27 PM
So, Don, what exactly were you studying when you found that the "findings about global warming are inconclusive", and when was that? The findings were inconclusive back in the late-80s, but since that time 25 years of new data and thousands of papers from all over the world has changed the picture and made the theory a lot stronger.

RuffnReadyOzStyle
03-30-2008, 09:36 PM
BTW, a little more on T Park's "300" scientist conference, the "International Conference on Climate Change":

"The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change was a conference held at the Marriott New York Marquis Times Square Hotel in New York between March 2-4 . The conference was organised and "sponsored" by the Heartland Institute, a U.S. think tanks that in preceding years received substantial funding from Exxon for its work downplaying the significance of global warming.

The conference was described by Washington Post reporter, Juliet Eilperin, as "a sort of global warming doppelganger conference, where everything was reversed." At the event, skeptics unveiled their response to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) report, edited by corporate-funded skeptic Fred Singer, argued that "recent climate change stems from natural causes." Eilperin notes that "while the IPCC enlisted several hundred scientists from more than 100 countries to work over five years to produce its series of reports, the NIPCC document is the work of 23 authors from 15 nations, some of them not scientists."[1]

The [[New York Times] reports that while the Heartland conference "was largely framed around science ... when an organizer made an announcement asking all of the scientists in the large hall to move to the front for a group picture, 19 men did so." The conference invitation identified its goal as "to generate international media attention to the fact that many scientists believe forecasts of rapid warming and catastrophic events are not supported by sound science."[2]

The Heartland Institute offered "$1,000 to those willing to give a talk," and "a free weekend at the Marriott Marquis in Manhattan, including travel costs, to all elected officials wanting to attend," according to the RealClimate blog.[3]"

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_2008_International_Conference_ on_Climate_Change

So, actually, there were 19 scientists at this conference which was funded by the "Heartland Foundation", previously a front for Exxon. Good old Fred Singer, he's been telling lies on behalf of fossil fuels for 2 decades now.

Yup, I believe these fossil fuel industry-funded hired guns instead of all the major universities and government scientific organisations in the world. :rolleyes

Not once have you actually addressed THE SCIENCE, T Park, and until you can you have no credibility.

marini martini
03-30-2008, 11:40 PM
I think if parents switched over to cloth diapers, that would help immensly!