I don't understand "climate change" fanatics/liberals..... (Maine, million, recession)
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.
Post them. I won't go looking for things that may not even be there. You obviously have found them, it's as easy to post a link. I've been there before.
What are you talking about, I posted citations with the DOI, authors names, journal, etc. Are you so intellectually lazy you cannot go to google scholar?
Quote:
I didn't say that. When people are unable to be honest...........
I can remember reading about the Archaeoraptor in scientific publications.
Come on, you can't be serious!
Are you going to call national geographic a "scientific publication"?? It is a great magazine, but it no more publishes primary literature than Scientific American or Popular Mechanics.
Archaeoraptor, was already being called out in the ACTUAL scientific literature (of which National Geographic is NOT) before that article was even published. Who do you think actually proved that it was a forgery? Scientists.
See that is what you don't get, peer review is built into science, we are literally trained to try to disprove each other. Which is why when there is such a strong concensus as exists with anthropogenic climate change it is so meaningful.
Any tax that the government pays is paid by the people and any tax that a corporations pays is passed on to the consumers.
First, it won't be passed on entirely, because as has been shown in places they have actually implemented carbon tax systems, companies quickly realize it is better for the bottom line to become more efficient.
Second, we the tax payer and consumer are already paying. We support the national flood insurance program, we pay for emergency relief when those greater intensity hurricanes hit, we pay to build reparians zones, mitigate whatever.
Finally, if even 10% of the climate predictions come true, it will be poor people who disproportionately suffer from them.
What are you talking about, I posted citations with the DOI, authors names, journal, etc. Are you so intellectually lazy you cannot go to google scholar?
I'm done with this. Post the relative information or not.......I do not care.
Quote:
Come on, you can't be serious!
Are you going to call national geographic a "scientific publication"?? It is a great magazine, but it no more publishes primary literature than Scientific American or Popular Mechanics.
Archaeoraptor, was already being called out in the ACTUAL scientific literature (of which National Geographic is NOT) before that article was even published. Who do you think actually proved that it was a forgery? Scientists.
See that is what you don't get, peer review is built into science, we are literally trained to try to disprove each other. Which is why when there is such a strong concensus as exists with anthropogenic climate change it is so meaningful.
I'm sure we all recall the IPCC claiming papers were peer reviewed when they were anything but. There is a valid reason why this remains at the bottom of the list of things people worry about. In part that is sad because as I said, cleaning up should be a priority. These boogeymen claims do nothing but hurt our ability to come together to do that.
First, it won't be passed on entirely, because as has been shown in places they have actually implemented carbon tax systems, companies quickly realize it is better for the bottom line to become more efficient.
That a generalization that means absolutely nothing and even at that, the poor cant afford it being passed on even in part.
Quote:
Second, we the tax payer and consumer are already paying. We support the national flood insurance program, we pay for emergency relief when those greater intensity hurricanes hit, we pay to build reparians zones, mitigate whatever.
We aren't going to stop that. We can not control the weather.
Quote:
Finally, if even 10% of the climate predictions come true, it will be poor people who disproportionately suffer from them.
Warmer weather is extremely good for the poor. Longer growing seasons. Less need for energy. etc.
That a generalization that means absolutely nothing and even at that, the poor cant afford it being passed on even in part.
You seem to have a habit of ignoring new information that challenges your beliefs. I think this will limit your ability to make logical choices.
Quote:
We aren't going to stop that. We can not control the weather.
Tell that to cloud seeders.
But it is sort of a basic, like 8th grade science, that climate and weather are not the same thing. You may want to read up.
Quote:
Warmer weather is extremely good for the poor. Longer growing seasons. Less need for energy. etc.
So wait, not climate change is occurring but it is good for people? As I have posted and you have chosen to ignore again and again, with a changed climate comes changes in precipitation, with less rain events and more storm events. If you ever meet a farmer ask him which is better for crops, regular soaking rains, or extreme storm events.
You have evidenced a distinct ignorance when it comes to science in all forms, climate science, basic earth science, astronomy, botany, and so on. This is getting a bit boring as it feels more like I am tutoring you than having a discussion.
How about we start off with the very simple question of when has the climate ever remained the same? Ever?
Why is getting warmer (if true) necessarily even bad???
Yes, the climate is naturally variable. This is called the Milankovitch cycle, and it is due to orbital issues like obliquity, precession, eccentricity, etc. It is completely measurable, and is not responsible for the current climate variation because based on Milankovitch factors, we should be cooling.
The following are facts.
1.Carbon dioxide, methane, NOx, ozone, etc. are all greenhouse gases.
2.Increasing greenhouse gases increases greenhouse effect.
3. Human activities like producing concrete, and burning fossil fuels, gives off greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.
Now how much we are effecting the atmosphere is debatable, as are what the predicted effects will be.
As for why changing the climate is "bad", you first need to realize it is not just getting warmer. Increased drought in some areas, extreme storms in other, change in species and biota, increase in communicable disease outside of the tropics, spread of pests outside their natural habitats and many many more.
Shall I go on?
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.
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.
