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 05-25-2017, 05:53 PM
 
2,593 posts, read 5,289,910 times
Reputation: 5188

Advertisements

1. The work being denied is done by professionals who have a professional interest in not being wrong. Scientists and economists have politics, but in almost all cases their profession is a higher calling.

2. The mechanisms make sense. The chemistry behind predictions of global warming is indisputable even if the magnitudes are debatable. It is obvious that old, low-income people will drop insurance if it costs a considerable fraction of their income. Etc., etc.

3. There is broad agreement about the direction of change, even if there are debates about the numbers. In science consensus is not the same as unanimity. Same in economics.

4. Exact and indisputable predictions are not required to choose an action. Denial is likely to lead to disaster.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-25-2017, 05:58 PM
 
23,963 posts, read 11,923,743 times
Reputation: 10183
The earth heats and cools periodically.

The climate always changes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2017, 06:00 PM
 
34,270 posts, read 18,570,773 times
Reputation: 7568
Quote:
Originally Posted by rational1 View Post
1. The work being denied is done by professionals who have a professional interest in not being wrong. Scientists and economists have politics, but in almost all cases their profession is a higher calling.

2. The mechanisms make sense. The chemistry behind predictions of global warming is indisputable even if the magnitudes are debatable. It is obvious that old, low-income people will drop insurance if it costs a considerable fraction of their income. Etc., etc.

3. There is broad agreement about the direction of change, even if there are debates about the numbers. In science consensus is not the same as unanimity. Same in economics.

4. Exact and indisputable predictions are not required to choose an action. Denial is likely to lead to disaster.
Bad numbers in.....bad number out....

The ACA was not supposed to cost over 1T, and in the beginning, it did not....where is it now?

Bad numbers in...bad numbers out...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2017, 06:08 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
2,919 posts, read 1,960,385 times
Reputation: 2450
Everything you said is false. The scientists are bought and paid for. When you're being paid to show that humans are causing temperature to rise, you do what your financier wants. By the way, 66% of "scientists" from the cook study have no opinion regarding anthropological global warming. Only 0.7 believe that humans are causing most of the warming. Not 97%. That's a lie that traveled around the world.

The science does not support anthropological global warming. Look at the post war economic boom period. NO warming for 30 years! The Danish Meteorilogical Institute has shown that it's the SUN that controls temperature. The data fits like a glove.

“The Sun is a primary driver of climate change — and has a far greater impact than changes in CO2." "This warming and cooling of arctic temperatures agrees almost perfectly with the changes in the sun's energy output.” -- Dr. Wie-Hock “Willie” Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Ice core data shows that temperature swings are normal.

18,000 years ago New York was under a mile of ice. That tells you that temperature change is normal.

And what caused temperatures to spike upward from 1910 to 1940? This was BEFORE the spike in our CO2 emissions.

"Climate Change" is a globalist scam used to raise our taxes.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2017, 06:15 PM
 
26,304 posts, read 12,846,139 times
Reputation: 12550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big-Bucks View Post
Everything you said is false. The scientists are bought and paid for.
blah blah.

Did you even read the topic? Really?

Or do you just post that nonsense everywhere randomly?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2017, 06:19 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
20,357 posts, read 13,878,171 times
Reputation: 5233
Quote:
Originally Posted by rational1 View Post
1. The work being denied is done by professionals who have a professional interest in not being wrong. Scientists and economists have politics, but in almost all cases their profession is a higher calling.

2. The mechanisms make sense. The chemistry behind predictions of global warming is indisputable even if the magnitudes are debatable. It is obvious that old, low-income people will drop insurance if it costs a considerable fraction of their income. Etc., etc.

3. There is broad agreement about the direction of change, even if there are debates about the numbers. In science consensus is not the same as unanimity. Same in economics.

4. Exact and indisputable predictions are not required to choose an action. Denial is likely to lead to disaster.
Wow, you have really drunk the Kool-aid.

When the CBO scored the ACA, they were way off on a lot of their predictions. They are not gods. not omniscient.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2017, 06:19 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
2,919 posts, read 1,960,385 times
Reputation: 2450
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
blah blah.

Did you even read the topic? Really?

Or do you just post that nonsense everywhere randomly?
Sorry to offend you with facts, logic and truth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2017, 06:21 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
20,357 posts, read 13,878,171 times
Reputation: 5233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big-Bucks View Post
Everything you said is false. The scientists are bought and paid for. When you're being paid to show that humans are causing temperature to rise, you do what your financier wants. By the way, 66% of "scientists" from the cook study have no opinion regarding anthropological global warming. Only 0.7 believe that humans are causing most of the warming. Not 97%. That's a lie that traveled around the world.

The science does not support anthropological global warming. Look at the post war economic boom period. NO warming for 30 years! The Danish Meteorilogical Institute has shown that it's the SUN that controls temperature. The data fits like a glove.

“The Sun is a primary driver of climate change — and has a far greater impact than changes in CO2." "This warming and cooling of arctic temperatures agrees almost perfectly with the changes in the sun's energy output.” -- Dr. Wie-Hock “Willie” Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Ice core data shows that temperature swings are normal.

18,000 years ago New York was under a mile of ice. That tells you that temperature change is normal.

And what caused temperatures to spike upward from 1910 to 1940? This was BEFORE the spike in our CO2 emissions.

"Climate Change" is a globalist scam used to raise our taxes.
Compared to the average over the past 10,000 years, we are currently living in a rather cool period

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2017, 06:43 PM
 
26,304 posts, read 12,846,139 times
Reputation: 12550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big-Bucks View Post
Sorry to offend you with facts, logic and truth.
On a completely unrelated topic? You can argue whether your nonsense is facts or truth....but maybe do it on some climate change thread instead of one on the CBO?

as for their accuracy on the ACA, they were pretty good:
CBO's Obamacare Predictions: How Accurate? - FactCheck.org
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2017, 06:53 PM
 
Location: Long Island
33,003 posts, read 13,929,165 times
Reputation: 7025
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee View Post
Bad numbers in.....bad number out....

The ACA was not supposed to cost over 1T, and in the beginning, it did not....where is it now?

Bad numbers in...bad numbers out...
It's difficult to predict behavior especially with all the external factors. This is the republican theme, the CBO, NASA, FBI, MSM, courts are all wrong, just trust our opinion which is based on ......?
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
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top