Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-21-2013, 12:16 AM
 
Location: Miami,FL
2,886 posts, read 4,106,389 times
Reputation: 715

Advertisements

I couldn't careless about global warming. now back to the important issues like when is the usa going to follow the constitution?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-21-2013, 12:21 AM
 
Location: Here and There
2,538 posts, read 3,875,931 times
Reputation: 3790
I have to say, it blows my mind that there are still so many people that don't believe GW is real. Why do we always have to be the country the whole world thinks is mathematically and scientifically challenged?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 12:26 AM
 
Location: None of your business
5,466 posts, read 4,421,655 times
Reputation: 1179
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyegirl View Post
I have to say, it blows my mind that there are still so many people that don't believe GW is real. Why do we always have to be the country the whole world thinks is mathematically and scientifically challenged?
You do realize that when you exhale the air you exhale is "CO2"? So if you are such a hard nosed believer STOP BREATHING.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 12:40 AM
 
Location: Here and There
2,538 posts, read 3,875,931 times
Reputation: 3790
Quote:
Originally Posted by eRayP View Post
You do realize that when you exhale the air you exhale is "CO2"? So if you are such a hard nosed believer STOP BREATHING.
Wow. That was a well thought out reply. Typical.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 01:18 AM
 
Location: None of your business
5,466 posts, read 4,421,655 times
Reputation: 1179
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyegirl View Post
Wow. That was a well thought out reply. Typical.
Facts are facts but oh so inconvenient for your agenda. You talk the talk but don't walk the walk... typical!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 07:25 AM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,948,311 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyegirl View Post
I have to say, it blows my mind that there are still so many people that don't believe GW is real. Why do we always have to be the country the whole world thinks is mathematically and scientifically challenged?
You need to be more specific. Global Warming is a fact, though when, how much, and precedence is debatable. Anthropogenic Global Warming is a fact, though again... how much man influences and its significance is debatable. Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming is a failed hypothesis (ie it consistently fails tests via observed evidence).

Statistical evaluation is not a validation mechanism. That is, you can not establish a known when you have too many unknowns. If you have to "estimate" a possible conclusion from the test, then you are not applying scientific process of validation.

For someone who makes such an arrogant statement about such topics, it would be prudent to actually understand them in order to avoid looking foolish.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 07:33 AM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,948,311 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aldous9 View Post
when someone denies global warming they are just saying loud and clear that they are an uneducated rube.
What are they denying? Be more specific. Using coined talking points to vaguely describe your opposition serves no purpose other than to allow ignorant people to appear as if they have any clue what they are talking about. So, in order to avoid being categorized as such, it might be beneficial to actually step into the discussion and make a point that can be logically defended rather than hiding behind vague mention.

So, again, be more specific on your comment. Also, maybe you would like to comment on the questions I made concerning the IPCC's claims? The poster I was discussing with appeared to avoid answering to those specifics, since you are so "educated" as you seem to imply, maybe you could provide some discussion on the matter?


Or are we to expect more generalized vague references to some unsupported accusation so you can convince yourself you are intelligent?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 08:04 AM
 
2,083 posts, read 1,620,356 times
Reputation: 1406
Is climate change real? Yes.
Are humans a factor? Yes.
Are humans the driving factor? Probably not.

It's naive to think that human beings don't have an impact on our environment, but it's equally naive to think that we're the sole catalyst driving climate change. This planet has warmed and cooled many times on its own long before humans were a factor, so I'm reluctant to think otherwise.

When you consider that there's a ton of money invested in proving AGW to be true, it makes believing the claims about AGW that much harder. We're taking the word of people whose careers and funding are dependent upon coming to pre-conceived conclusions about climate change -- the manipulated data we've come across in the past few years only makes this assumption more likely.

In addition, the current government is loaded with people who are aligned to make millions, if not billions of dollars pushing green energy initiatives. Its in their best interest to push global warming as "settled science" so they can profit from environmental alarmism. Disagree with their position and you're treated as either a moron or someone who hates Mother Earth. They've found a niche where they can profit immensely and any criticisms of their motives are treated with hostility. How could anyone be against fighting climate change, after all?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 10:45 AM
 
46,267 posts, read 27,085,436 times
Reputation: 11120
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyegirl View Post
Wow. That was a well thought out reply. Typical.
So, somehting that is factual, you disagree with?

LOL....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top