Started By
Message

re: What are your reasons for believing climate change is "a hoax"

Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:09 am to
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
170714 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:09 am to
quote:

So right wingers don't think the climate changes?

No. Not all right wingers are dumb asses. But there are some that think that there is 0 man made involvement. Those ones are dumb asses. Are we clear now?
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:10 am to
quote:


Except in this case the overwhelming majority of people who study the issue conclude that man made climate change is real. A very small percentage have doubts.


Well, that small percentage is FAR more knowledgeable than you on the subject. Just sayin.........

Not to mention, if THAT was how science was done, we still wouldn't know how to float Aircraft Carriers.
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
170714 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:11 am to
quote:



You are supplying NOTHING to the discussion.


Do you dispute that the overwhelming majority of scientists who study the issue believe that man made climate change is real?

quote:

Your entire contribution is, "welp, I counted the knowledgeable people on one side and counted the knowledgeable people on the other..........I'm in the room with the most.........see how smart I am!!!!"

With the immense volume of studies that have been done on the matter do you think it's smarter to be on the side of the very small minority?
Posted by Roaad
White Privilege Broker
Member since Aug 2006
82099 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:11 am to
Which right wingers don't believe the climate changes ever?

I want to laugh along with you at these rubes.

Point the finger!
Posted by goatmilker
Castle Anthrax
Member since Feb 2009
74396 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:11 am to
Why did you choose to use the term "climate change" which is a natural every day occurrence and not " Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW)" which is the correct term for your question?
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
62610 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:12 am to
quote:

I'm on the scientific movement
What was the last climate model or research you worked on?
Posted by Zanzibaw
BR
Member since Jun 2016
2954 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:12 am to
quote:

I'm on the scientific movement


Well then you should sleep well knowing that once the human race is gone from Earth it will completely heal itself and continue to cycle through "climate change" stages for billions more years until the sun explodes consuming the galaxy. I just don't see how my income tax is gonna play a big factor in that.
Posted by Lonnie Utah
Utah!
Member since Jul 2012
32613 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:12 am to
quote:

Were the Pre-humans driving SUVs and powering their espresso machines with Coal plants?


No, but plants have been sequestering CO2 from the atmosphere via photosynthesis for a long, long time. Corals and other invertebrates also lock up CO2 as calcium carbonate in their exoskeletons and shells. Respiration of those plant materials via consumption or release via natural combustion has also taken place releasing the CO2 back to the atmosphere. There's more to the carbon cycle than factories and cars.


As I said, I'm not here to debate "Climate change". I simply said that one cannot argue with empirical measured evidence of atmospheric CO2 levels. The measurements are what they are.

Oh, and one more thing.

LINK
This post was edited on 3/7/18 at 9:14 am
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
62610 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:13 am to
quote:

Except in this case the overwhelming majority of people who study the issue conclude that man made climate change is real.
That. Is. Not. a scientific argument.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
62610 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:14 am to
quote:

Your entire contribution is, "welp, I counted the knowledgeable people on one side and counted the knowledgeable people on the other..........I'm in the room with the most.........see how smart I am!!!!"
Classic bandwagoning.
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:15 am to
quote:


Do you dispute that the overwhelming majority of scientists who study the issue believe that man made climate change is real?

Nope. Do not dispute.

quote:


With the immense volume of studies that have been done on the matter do you think it's smarter to be on the side of the very small minority?

Neither one of those is actually a "smart" thing.

Any a-hole can count.

Hence, my questions in my first post.

The "smart" thing to do is to know a few things like.

1)There has been heavily accepted science before that turned out to be wrong.

2)It is VERY problematic that no governments will fund research designed by skeptics.......which is a FOUNDATION ELEMENT of the practice of science.

I suspect this is why you are willfully avoiding the funding reality that has been going on for at least 2 decades.

GOOD science seeks to prove itself wrong. That's how it becomes better and draws more solid conclusions.

But, today, all we get are studies funded to prove what they already believe done by people who know deviating will likely mean THEY will have to hope some fossil fuel company will fund the remainder of their careers.
Posted by Roaad
White Privilege Broker
Member since Aug 2006
82099 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:16 am to
quote:

There's more to the carbon cycle than factories and cars.
So what you are saying is that atmospheric Carbon levels have changed throughout Earth's history, and that CO2 levels have been as they are now. . .even without humans being here?
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:19 am to
quote:

Classic bandwagoning.



And it's even worse than bandwagoning because the numbers are being directly driven by political choices.

Hell. Einstein was barely done with his theory of relativity when other scientist and HE HIMSELF saw thing in it that seemed at odds with current knowledge and needed to be tested. So, they devised tests that basically were gonna be pass/fail. IE....if the test didn't go as predicted, blammo, theory drawing board time.

Moreover, some of the people funded to do these experiments were people who BELIEVED EINSTEIN TO BE WRONG!!!

I mean, it wouldn't be terribly good science if everyone checking to see if Einstein was right were people who had already professed the view that Einstein was right!
Posted by Enadious
formerly B5Lurker City of Central
Member since Aug 2004
18539 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:19 am to
quote:

What is the conspiracy that I'm missing?


I haven't read the other post. It's really simple. What's the proposed solution to 'climate change'?

Tax. So, it's a money grab. There is little man can do to keep the temperature from rising if nature says it's so.

NASA has said so, even if ALL of human activity were to cease.

So, again. Follow the money. How in the frick is me paying more of electricity or buying a carbon credit going to affect the temperature?
Posted by msu202020
Member since Feb 2011
4317 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:19 am to
This was exactly what you said...

quote:

climate change is real and humans are causing it.


So how much of climate change, in your opinion, is directly caused by humans?
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
170714 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:19 am to
quote:


Well, that small percentage is FAR more knowledgeable than you on the subject. Just sayin.........

Not to mention, if THAT was how science was done, we still wouldn't know how to float Aircraft Carriers.


OK I'm going to give you the benefit of a doubt here. Let's analyze the following 2 positions and you tell me the fundamental difference.

1. The overwhelming majority of scientists that study climate science have concluded that climate change is impacted by humans. However I reject that as a conspiracy due to my conservative views on politics.

2. The overwhelming majority of scientists that study agriculture tell me that genetically modified foods are safe to consume. However I reject that as a conspiracy because big agricultural businesses are evil according to my liberal views on politics.

Please tell me the fundamental difference in the 2 above view points. I'm trying really hard to give you the benefit of a doubt here.
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:20 am to
quote:

Taxing Authority



I'll let you guys finish from here. I actually have work to do and I think Pman is gagging on my show as it is.
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
170714 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:21 am to
quote:



I haven't read the other post. It's really simple. What's the proposed solution to 'climate change'?

Tax. So, it's a money grab. There is little man can do to keep the temperature from rising if nature says it's so.

Is it possible that the proposed solution is wrong but the problem does exist?

Poverty exists. The war on poverty has failed. But that doesn't mean poverty never existed does it? A poor solution to a problem doesn't mean that the problem didn't exist. It only means that the solution was poorly thought out.
Posted by Enadious
formerly B5Lurker City of Central
Member since Aug 2004
18539 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:21 am to
quote:

So what you are saying is that atmospheric Carbon levels have changed throughout Earth's history, and that CO2 levels have been as they are now. . .even without humans being here?


I'll say that's true. Read Rare Earth by Ward and Brownlee.
I think the Earth has been an ice ball two times in its history too.
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 3/7/18 at 9:22 am to
quote:

1. The overwhelming majority of scientists that study climate science have concluded that climate change is impacted by humans. However I reject that as a conspiracy due to my conservative views on politics.



quote:

2. The overwhelming majority of scientists that study agriculture tell me that genetically modified foods are safe to consume. However I reject that as a conspiracy because big agricultural businesses are evil according to my liberal views on politics.


quote:

Please tell me the fundamental difference in the 2 above view points. I'm trying really hard to give you the benefit of a doubt here.


No you aren't. You're simply trying to expand on your appeal to authority AND adding strawmen.

Unlike you, I've actually supplied some of my own ideas........go back to my first post. Ya know. The one where you basically said, "frick it, I ain't gonna even answer this shite". :rotflmao:
Jump to page
Page First 11 12 13 14 15 ... 40
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 13 of 40Next pagelast page

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

FacebookXInstagram