Sorry, but I cried wolf on climate change

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Poohbear, Jun 30, 2020.

  1. LoneStarGal

    LoneStarGal Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2019
    Messages:
    15,050
    Likes Received:
    18,807
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Some people believe all political propaganda is pure crap, but very entertaining. You think any party, or politician, is really working for your benefit? LOL

    It's all about power, my friend. Not your power. Not my power.
     
  2. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's the typical argument.

    Environmentalists only really care about the cute fluffy animals, the rest don't matter.
     
    US Conservative likes this.
  3. Lee Atwater

    Lee Atwater Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2017
    Messages:
    45,403
    Likes Received:
    26,531
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Are you one of those folks who thinks the people who control the world meet secretly in their basements? Here's a thought exercise. What if Dems and Repubs decided collectively that all campaigns must be funded publicly rather than through private campaign contributions? That the Citizens United decision (that Dems opposed) is a fraud. What if the people decided to back our government back from lobbyists? What if we banned them? Or simply cut them off at the knees by refusing to vote for anyone who took their money? What if we decided to inform ourselves so big business could not pass tax loopholes and other subsidies?
    "We the people," as a country, are apathetic and ignorant. But we possess the power to change that just as we possess the power to govern ourselves in ways that are in our interests. Don't for a minute think otherwise.
     
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2020
    Lesh likes this.
  4. LoneStarGal

    LoneStarGal Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2019
    Messages:
    15,050
    Likes Received:
    18,807
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree with most of that. I've voted 3rd party for the last 3 elections. There is certainly a lack of campaign contributions, and no free media there. One does have to more aware and informed than just picking candidate A or B out of habit, or because society "says so".
     
  5. Lesh

    Lesh Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2015
    Messages:
    42,206
    Likes Received:
    14,119
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How exactly?
     
  6. Lesh

    Lesh Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2015
    Messages:
    42,206
    Likes Received:
    14,119
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your claim was that there was a scientific consensus that we were in a period of Global Cooling in the 70s. I showed that be false.

    Accept you losses sand slink way now
     
  7. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, I was merely pointing out that what is real about AGW -- CO2 is a greenhouse gas whose emission by human use of fossil fuels has warmed the earth -- and what is claimed by CO2 AGW theory -- increased CO2 caused most of the 20th century warming, and can be expected to cause proportional additional warming as it continues to increase -- are two quite different things. I couldn't care less if you want to debate that or not.
    OK. I agree. Where we disagree is on just exactly what that consensus is. Please state as specifically as you can exactly what you understand it to be, so I'm not just dealing with deceitful propaganda.
     
  8. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    By noticing that the climate hasn't changed.
     
  9. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, that is false. Your claim is false. You are making a false claim. The consensus was that there HAD BEEN a period of global cooling from the 1940s to the 1970s, not that it was necessarily still in effect, or would continue or worsen in the future. That's the difference between an observed fact of empirical climate science and a hypothesis.
    You only falsely claimed you did, based on the strawman "consensus" of predicted global cooling, not the actual consensus of observed global cooling.
    <yawn> Claim all the victories you like over strawmen. You have not even attempted to refute the consensus of the early 1970s that the earth had cooled significantly in the preceding few decades.
     
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2020
  10. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    42,517
    Likes Received:
    18,640
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There are thousands of peer-reviewed studies in many areas of science that the CO2 AGW theory is accurate. Debating it at this point would be like debating if the Earth is a flat surface around which the planets and the Sun revolve. For this reason the term "flat-earther" is appropriately used to describe those who still insist on debating this with ZERO peer-reviewed studies under their belt.

    Well... let me see. In a nutshell that we can state with a high level of confidence that the average global surface temperature of the Earth is increasing abnormally as a result of human activity producing an exceeding amount of greenhouse gases, and that this increase is happening so rapidly that the effects of this (some of which are yet TBD) will have dire consequences (the exact nature of which are also yet TBD) for human societies and human individuals.
     
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2020
    hellofromwarsaw likes this.
  11. hellofromwarsaw

    hellofromwarsaw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the bought off GOP is the only political party in the world that denies global warming along with the pandemic and any other facts you care to name.....
     
  12. hellofromwarsaw

    hellofromwarsaw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Bologna. Or a link
     
  13. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,991
    Likes Received:
    11,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Another exaggeration. Have you checked every political party in the world? I doubt it.
     
  14. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Because they get published regardless of merit thanks to pal-review fraud, and that pays the bills. I've read enough of them to know they are mostly junk science, just a way to get an easy publication.
    That is false, absurd, and disingenuous garbage. Many respected scientists are skeptical of the CO2 AGW theory, and there are literally thousands of peer-reviewed studies that call it into question:

    https://notrickszone.com/248-skeptical-papers-from-2014/
    https://notrickszone.com/250-skeptic-papers-from-2015/
    over 500 in 2016 alone:
    https://notrickszone.com/skeptic-papers-2016/
    The list goes on, and on, and on....
    There is most certainly no scientific consensus on any such hypothesis, and the claimed consensus on it has been thoroughly and conclusively debunked.
     
  15. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    42,517
    Likes Received:
    18,640
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Peer review is a way to get an easy publication????

    If there was any doubt about whether or not you knew what you were talking about, this would definitely answer that question (hint: you don't!)

    Thanks for playing....
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2020
  16. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, chanting CO2 AGW nonsense is, whereas refuting it is a quick way to not get published.
    Thanks for disingenuously changing the context to make it look like I said something I didn't say. As usual.
     
  17. Lesh

    Lesh Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2015
    Messages:
    42,206
    Likes Received:
    14,119
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Que??
     
    Golem likes this.
  18. hellofromwarsaw

    hellofromwarsaw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You what a ridiculous argument....Google it for crying out loud oh that's communist too I suppose LOL
     
  19. hellofromwarsaw

    hellofromwarsaw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Congratulations you are totally bought by big oil just like the GOP.... You are a world wide laughing stock and horror. Totally wrong on how much taxes the rich pay, global warming, the pandemic until yesterday I suppose and everything else.
     
  20. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    42,517
    Likes Received:
    18,640
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You have no idea how scientific research works, do you? Refuting the dominant scientific positions is the quickest way to get you, not only published, but make you very famous and rich and in contention for a Nobel. It would be a dream come true for an up and coming scientist to challenge established science. And it would immortalize any scientist alive.

    You again demonstrate why my decision to stop wasting my time on those who think that cutting and pasting something they read on a science denialist page is "science"

    No idea what that might be. And I'm sure there must be a reason why you don't say. But there can be no doubt that here you said that scientists don't get published if they refute something in science. That will come as a surprise to all the scientists who have produced progress and innovation since... Galileo.

    Thanks for trying, though.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2020
  21. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,991
    Likes Received:
    11,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What you said is simply not true. You have not checked every political party on earth.
     
  22. hellofromwarsaw

    hellofromwarsaw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    every respected media in the world has checked and there is no other major party that denies global warming curious Google it Google the GOP is the only major party that denies global warming. Your admiration for ignorance is noted....
     
  23. hellofromwarsaw

    hellofromwarsaw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As long as the GOP is in charge of national politics tax policy and obstruction you're right. Change the channel. Eisenhower had 90% is the top straight can you cut it to 70% and had success, Reagan cut it to 50% and had success and going out the door he gave us a 28% tax rate and the country has been going to hell ever since. Shaquille he has reconciliation so they only need 51 votes to cut taxes on themselves. Quite the skam. Only garbage propaganda and ignoramuses make it possible
     

    Attached Files:

  24. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,991
    Likes Received:
    11,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There are probably around five hundred political parties in the world. I doubt that they agree one hundred percent on anything. Additionally, I have seen nothing says that the GOP denies global warming.

    The earth has had global warming. It has also had global cooling. Man has an influence and that influence is most likely to warm the earth because there is almost no way it could causes net cooling. It really comes down to a few basic issues.

    How much influence has man had?

    Can man significantly change the result?

    Can man predict the result?

    Those are serious questions and there is far from agreement by scientists on those three questions.

    So, I will ask you. Why do you believe in AGW? It is most likely one of these three answers.

    1. You have understanding of the science sufficient to say you are in agreement.

    2. You believe because there is a scientific consensus?

    3. You believe because it is the politically correct thing to do?

    Now which of those three reasons do you believe in AGW or another reason, if you have one.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2020
    LoneStarGal likes this.
  25. hellofromwarsaw

    hellofromwarsaw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    maybe because every respected scientist in the world who's not bought by big oil every environmentalist do you ever watch any nature programs? Wake up and smell the coffee
     

Share This Page