Started By
Message

re: Is the claim of GW just the GW truthers using the politics of fear?

Posted on 9/25/14 at 3:59 pm to
Posted by DawgfaninCa
San Francisco, California
Member since Sep 2012
20092 posts
Posted on 9/25/14 at 3:59 pm to
quote:

Since the term "truther" is used to refer to someone who believes something that is crazy to believe, I coined the term "Global Warmer truther" to refer to someone who believes Global Warming is occurring solely because of the activities of human beings.


quote:


truthers of anything don't have anything to back it up. Global warming supporters actually do have evidence to back up their claims...97% of scientist believe global warming is real and is primarily caused bv humans. Not a single scientific body around the world disagrees with this view...97% of scientist believe global warming is real and is primarily caused bv humans. Not a single scientific body around the world disagrees with this view...You can't use the word truther in this situation.


Like hell I can't.

I didn't say a GW truther is someone who believes GW is real and is primarily caused bv humans.

I said a GW truther is someone who believes GW is occurring solely because of the activities of human beings

However, someone who believes GW is real and is primarily caused bv humans is just plain nuts.

This post was edited on 9/25/14 at 4:06 pm
Posted by DawgfaninCa
San Francisco, California
Member since Sep 2012
20092 posts
Posted on 9/25/14 at 4:26 pm to
quote:


GW advocates fall into several groups:


a. Scientists whose income is from grants from foundations who want a GW = true outcome from all research.

b. De-developers who don't like growth and think man should live in harmony with nature in a small shack.

c. Marxists who see GW as a way to attack capitalism.


I agree that GW advocates fall into the "a", "b"and "c" groups.

However, there is also a "d" group.

d. People including scientists and politicians who are investing in green energy.

quote:

Dems obviously relate to 'b' and 'c'. But it doesn't get them a lot of votes. People don't go to the polls and vote based on GW.


GW is just one of the many political fear lies that the left is using in order to get people to go to the polls and vote for the Democrats and against the Republicans.

There are also the political fear lies that Republican's have a "war on women" because they are opposed to abortion and the lie that Republicans want women back in the kitchen; the lie that Republicans are homophobes because they are opposed to same sex marriage; the lie that Republicans are racists because they are opposed to illegal aliens and the lie that if Republicans could they would restore slavery; the lie that Republicans hate poor people because they are against welfare and they exploit the poor through capitalism in order to get rich.

All of those political fear lies added together bring a lot of people to the polls to vote for the Democrats and against the Republicans.
This post was edited on 9/25/14 at 4:32 pm
Posted by Al Dante
Member since Mar 2013
1858 posts
Posted on 9/25/14 at 4:43 pm to
quote:

only in the USA is the public divided on the issue


bullshite. The link below shows the percentage of people who think GW is man made, country by country. The public is divided in almost all countries. I think you'd be surprised. The Netherlands, Norway, and the UK among others, believe less in human caused GW than the U.S.

LINK
This post was edited on 9/25/14 at 4:50 pm
Posted by DawgfaninCa
San Francisco, California
Member since Sep 2012
20092 posts
Posted on 9/25/14 at 5:17 pm to
Here's an example of a GW truther lie.

Here in San Francisco the GW truthers are saying San Francisco is in a 3 year "extreme drought" due to GW because in 2011-2012 it rained only 15.64 inches, in 2012 -2013 it rained only 16.61 inches and in 2013-2014 it rained only 12.54 inches.

However, here are the annual rainfall totals of San Francisco since 1849-1850:

ANNUAL RAINFALL OF SAN FRANCISCO



1849-1850 33.10
1850-1851 7.42
1851-1852 18.55
1852-1853 35.26
1853-1854 23.87
1854-1855 23.83
1855-1856 21.66
1856-1857 19.91
1857-1858 21.81
1858-1859 22.22
1859-1860 22.27
1860-1861 19.72
1861-1862 49.27
1862-1863 13.74
1863-1864 10.08
1864-1865 24.73
1865-1866 22.93
1866-1867 34.92
1867-1868 38.84
1868-1869 21.35
1869-1870 19.31
1870-1871 14.11
1871-1872 30.78
1872-1873 15.66
1873-1874 24.73
1874-1875 20.56
1875-1876 31.19
1876-1877 11.04
1877-1878 35.18
1878-1879 24.44
1879-1880 26.66
1880-1881 29.86
1881-1882 16.14
1882-1883 20.12
1883-1884 32.32
1884-1885 18.10
1885-1886 33.05
1886-1887 19.04
1887-1888 16.74
1888-1889 23.86
1889-1890 45.85
1890-1891 17.58
1891-1892 18.53
1892-1893 21.75
1893-1894 18.47
1894-1895 25.70
1895-1896 21.25
1896-1897 23.43
1897-1898 9.38
1898-1899 16.87
1899-1900 18.47
1900-1901 21.17
1901-1902 18.98
1902-1903 18.28
1903-1904 20.59
1904-1905 23.45
1905-1906 20.42
1906-1907 26.17
1907-1908 17.35
1908-1909 25.57
1909-1910 19.52
1910-1911 25.49
1911-1912 14.06
1912-1913 11.97
1913-1914 29.60
1914-1915 27.41
1915-1916 27.12
1916-1917 15.78
1917-1918 11.48
1918-1919 25.64
1919-1920 10.46
1920-1921 23.16
1921-1922 19.91
1922-1923 22.17
1923-1924 11.62
1924-1925 30.81
1925-1926 20.69
1926-1927 25.43
1927-1928 19.64
1928-1929 15.21
1929-1930 16.28
1930-1931 13.54
1931-1932 21.09
1932-1933 14.93
1933-1934 12.91
1934-1935 23.22
1935-1936 24.96
1936-1937 22.39
1937-1938 25.48
1938-1939 12.53
1939-1940 27.17
1940-1941 35.05
1941-1942 26.66
1942-1943 21.88
1943-1944 17.86
1944-1945 21.82
1945-1946 21.64
1946-1947 14.89
1947-1948 15.59
1948-1949 18.28
1949-1950 16.78
1950-1951 24.00
1951-1952 32.56
1952-1953 21.10
1953-1954 14.27
1954-1955 15.74
1955-1956 27.17
1956-1957 15.04
1957-1958 36.48
1958-1959 10.46
1959-1960 15.47
1960-1961 13.87
1961-1962 17.65
1962-1963 22.15
1963-1964 12.32
1964-1965 22.29
1965-1966 16.33
1966-1967 29.41
1967-1968 14.46
1968-1969 25.09
1969-1970 20.80
1970-1971 18.79
1971-1972 11.06
1972-1973 34.36
1973-1974 27.96
1974-1975 18.33
1975-1976 8.05
1976-1977 11.08
1977-1978 27.86
1978-1979 18.70
1979-1980 24.57
1980-1981 14.63
1981-1982 36.63
1982-1983 38.17
1983-1984 22.47
1984-1985 20.01
1985-1986 28.68
1986-1987 13.86
1987-1988 17.74
1988-1989 17.43
1989-1990 14.32
1990-1991 14.08
1991-1992 19.20
1992-1993 26.66
1993-1994 15.22
1994-1995 34.02
1995-1996 24.89
1996-1997 22.63
1997-1998 47.22
1998-1999 23.49
1999-2000 24.89
2000-2001 19.47
2001-2002 25.03
2002-2003 23.87
2003-2004 20.54
2004-2005 31.87
2005-2006 34.42
2006-2007 16.89
2007-2008 17.35
2008-2009 18.11
2009-2010 24.09
2010-2011 28.87
2011-2012 15.64
2012-2013 16.61
2013-2014 12.54

LINK

Average annual rainfall of San Francisco - 20.78 inches

Average annual rainfall of California - 20.20 inches

LINK

This post was edited on 9/25/14 at 5:34 pm
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69227 posts
Posted on 9/25/14 at 5:23 pm to
quote:

Only in the USA is public opinion divided on the issue.

You pulled that right out of your arse. Norway, Iceland, The united Kingdom, Austria, and other comparable nations all have public opinion as divided. Read the wiki link.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57061 posts
Posted on 9/25/14 at 5:27 pm to
quote:

Only in the USA is public opinion divided on the issue.
False.
Posted by TutHillTiger
Mississippi Alabama
Member since Sep 2010
43700 posts
Posted on 9/25/14 at 5:35 pm to
Nah, it is almost certainly real. I was not certain about this but many years ago watched a show on NOVA about global dimming. (We are getting less sunlight now than we were 50 years ago, total accidentally discovery btw.) Turns out in weeks after 9-11 just not having in flights in the air global temperature shot up 1-2 degrees. That is scary shite.

Basically without all the air pollution Gores model would already be correct. Link explains what is going on as well. So bizarrely if we clean up all population may seal our fate. (LOL) Doubt is being manufactured by the same ole sources. Cigarettes are good for you, asbestos can not hurt you, GMA are proven safe, hormones in milk cant hurt people, Firestone tires are safe, benzene does not cause cancer, etc etc.
Within a decade this will be a non-issue.

What to do about it, that is a big issue and I just hope to b dead and buried before shite hits the fan.

LINK

LINK
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram