Forum Index
Economics, Portfolio Optimization, and Technical Analysis
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Log inFast Charts

Gun Control - Global Warming

Post new topic   Reply to topic Forum Index -> Articles
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Site Admin

Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 10978

PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2015 2:52 pm    Post subject: Gun Control - Global Warming Reply with quote


There’s no proof the human race has a significant or lasting effect on temperatures in nature.

If the human race does, we can’t measure it.

For example, does anyone believe we can slow an ice age?

And, if we could, how do we measure the human effect?

Do we just say if it weren’t for our efforts, the July high in Florida would’ve been 45 degrees instead of 50 degrees?

And, how much did it cost?


Climate cycles take place without fossil fuels or human activity. See the “Last Glacial Maximum.”


Kevin, there’s no proof the human race has a significant or lasting effect on CO2 cycles.

And, in the warming cycle that began 25,000 years ago, the planet generally remains in a CO2 drought.

What’s “profound” is the Last Glacial Maximum shows how fast climate can change without human activity.


Kevin, you’re the “weasel” ignoring the proven forces of nature and blaming it on human activity.

And, you’re the weasel assuming CO2 can’t be absorbed. Nature will provide new CO2 for billions of years.

You should be thankful we’re in a warming cycle with a CO2 drought. And, I answered your question.


Also, I may add, even if that CO2 trend, since 1850, is accurate, it should be noted, many scientists have stated it’s easier to say temperature causes CO2 than CO2 causes temperature. NASA has stated the “Little Ice Age” ended in 1850. So, it seems, the warming cycle, since 1850, is one significant factor raising the CO2 level. Even today’s CO2 level is historically extremely low.


Kevin, if you knew anything about science, you’d know a model can be created to tell you whatever you want. For example, a scientist can create a model that assumes CO2 causes temperature and if that assumption is false, then his model is also false (why does the paper you cite say we’ll all “regret” using fossil fuels – sounds a little biased).

The University of Leeds did a study that shows 40% of CO2 from fossil fuels is absorbed each year. Are we to blindly accept that’s correct or accurate too?

Economists cannot even create an accurate general equilibrium model of a large economy. Yet, climatologists can create an accurate model many times more complex – to understand the interrelationships and interactions of hundreds of dynamic variables? I don’t think so.


Kevin, no one really understands the “planetary carbon cycle.” To believe you know based on theories you choose to believe is a religion, not science.

For example, one study shows there’s a positive correlation between CO2 in the atmosphere and the capacity of the earth to absorb CO2. It’s a dynamic system with hundreds of influential variables.


If they want to kill as many people as possible, they’ll find a way, including smuggling guns or buying them on the black market.

They seem to prefer soft targets. More gun laws haven’t solved the problem.


Robert, if you outlaw guns, then only criminals will have them.

Private citizens in this country have the right to defend themselves.

Guns saved many private citizens from criminals and reduced mass murders, in this country, which you rarely hear from the mainstream media.


Jason, that’s not true. The U.S. has remarkably few homicides per 100,000 people, given how many guns there are per 100,000 people in the U.S. compared to other countries.

Although, more guns like more cars kill people, guns in the U.S. work as a deterrent.


The U.S. has far more guns per capita, 112 per 100, than any other country.

Yet, there are many countries with higher firearm related death rates, which include suicides.

If criminals can have assault rifles, why not non-criminals?

It should be noted, blacks commit over 50% of the homicides and Hispanics commit many more homicides than whites.


Menzie Chinn, according to Race and Crime in the U.S. – Wikipedia:

“The UCR classifies most Hispanics into the “white” category. The NCVS classifies some Hispanic criminals as “white” and some as “other race”. The victim categories for the NCVS are more distinct.

…a study of government data from 1980–2008 found that the reduction in Black violent crime relative to White violent crime was an artifact of those previous studies, which was due to Hispanic offenders being counted as White in the comparison. The Hispanic population has been increasing rapidly and Hispanics have violence rates higher than that of Whites but lower than that of Blacks.”


Menzie Chinn, I wasn’t clear about homicide rates. If Hispanic homicides are under-counted and white, and “other,” homicides are over-counted, then the Hispanic homicide rate is actually higher, and perhaps higher or much higher than the white homicide rate.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Forum Index -> Articles All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by PeakTrader 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002