Climate Deniers, I Want An Explanation (lobby, dollar, billion, tax)

[SourD]

Originally Posted by Redraven

For the moment, let's forget the ongoing argument about what is causing climate change.
Let's instead, cut to the nitty-gritty of it all:
1. What EXACTLY, can we expect to happen if the "warming" continues?
2. What proof is there that what is expected will actually happen?
3. What is being done, AT THE PRESENT TIME, to allow mankind to adapt to the inevitable changes?
4. If nothing is being done to adapt to the inevitable, WHY NOT?
5. Nature is, and has always been, "The survival of the Fittest!" and "ADAPT OR DIE!" IS mankind the fittest, and will we adapt or die?

IMO, if nothing is being done to adapt, it means that there is no reason to adapt, which means that it is all much ado about nothing, and all the dire doom and gloom predictions of decreased crop lands and rising sea levels are simply scare tactics. If they were REAL threats, SOMEBODY, SOMEWHERE, would be doing something to adapt to the threat.
Is any coastal country building seawalls and dikes to hold back the rising sea? NO? WHY NOT!!!

The answer is very simple. They want to MAKE money on this not SPEND money on it.

[daylux]

No one is arguing that the climate changes. The argument is that mankind can do anything substantial about it.

[Opin_Yunated]

Originally Posted by T-310

Welcome to Forbes
Did Murdoch's The Australian Misrepresent IPCC Chair Pachauri on Global Warming?
‘No global warming for 17 years 3 months’ — A Monckton Analysis | Climate Depot

I've done enough homework for you. I am sure you will like the last link; full of the types of graphs you love so much.

Those graphs are made up. They make it impossible to zoom.

I call this propaganda.

Now, feel free to call 97% of the world's scientists "liberals."

[Opin_Yunated]

Originally Posted by SourD

They will just shoot down the sources and remain obtuse.

All the evidence says the contrary.

Post as many right-wing blogs from the bribed 3% of world scientists that you can.

Once again, where is your explanation for the graphs provided in the OP from NASA and NOAA?

[Volobjectitarian]

Originally Posted by ErikBEggs

Why should we explain the ins and outs of science for you?

MMGW theory isn't science. It's politically motivated summary of cherry picked data, employing all of the fallacies Mircea listed already, in order to advance political/economic agendas.

Science, dear lad, is the reason I cannot accept MMGW theory as espoused by the IPCC, nor the conclusions and recommendations thereof. I simply do not have enough controlled, repeatable, reliable, and irrefutable evidence to make a long term prediction about a system of infinite complexity. Science, mathematics, logic and the scientific method prevent me from being able to casually jump on board what is almost wholly confirmation bias and consensus perception.

So I don't need to explain denying anything. I deny basing a conclusion on insufficient, sketchy, unreliable data and extrapolations thereof, and the denial speaks for itself.

[SourD]

Originally Posted by ErikBEggs

All the evidence says the contrary.

Post as many right-wing blogs from the bribed 3% of world scientists that you can.

Once again, where is your explanation for the graphs provided in the OP from NASA and NOAA?

97% Study Falsely Classifies Scientists' Papers, according to the scientists that published them

You can take your false 97% number and pack your pipe with it.

[sanspeur]

Originally Posted by SourD

97% Study Falsely Classifies Scientists' Papers, according to the scientists that published them

You can take your false 97% number and pack your pipe with it.

And you can take your lying denialist blog and shove it where the sun don't shine.

[Opin_Yunated]

Originally Posted by SourD

97% Study Falsely Classifies Scientists' Papers, according to the scientists that published them

You can take your false 97% number and pack your pipe with it.

Tell that to NASA and every government science agency on the entire planet.

You have the explaning to do. Or is the whole world just in one conspiracy to inconvenience American conservatives?

[urbanlife78]

Originally Posted by daylux

No one is arguing that the climate changes. The argument is that mankind can do anything substantial about it.

We can learn the effect we have on it, what is happening with climate change, and what we need to do to adapt to it to ensure the survival of mankind.

[Opin_Yunated]

Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian

MMGW theory isn't science. It's politically motivated summary of cherry picked data, employing all of the fallacies Mircea listed already, in order to advance political/economic agendas.

Science, dear lad, is the reason I cannot accept MMGW theory as espoused by the IPCC, nor the conclusions and recommendations thereof. I simply do not have enough controlled, repeatable, reliable, and irrefutable evidence to make a long term prediction about a system of infinite complexity. Science, mathematics, logic and the scientific method prevent me from being able to casually jump on board what is almost wholly confirmation bias and consensus perception.

So I don't need to explain denying anything. I deny basing a conclusion on insufficient, sketchy, unreliable data and extrapolations thereof, and the denial speaks for itself.

I asked for an explanation for the graphs, not more excuses.

The scientific method was used to draw those conclusions. You are free to do as much research onto the subject as you want.

I know it is a sound "theory" because I studied Earth systems in college. Climatic changes in the Earth are cyclical. Recent (last 50-150 years) changes far exceed the natural climatic patterns of the Earth. What happened 50-150 years ago?

Why is the Earth suddenly warming at an unprecedeted pace?

The question is there.. you just don't like the answer and don't want it answered. That makes it easy to deny.