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.
It is a scam and a hoax, and if they want to prove otherwise, do so. If it wasn't the elites would be selling their beach houses, private jets, and SUV's.
You post a graph from the most notoriously known climate denialist blog site (wattsupwiththat) and expect this to validate your claims?
The quote above pretty much sums up my problem with this argument and the reason I wrote the OP! Instead of discussing the ideas presented, you attack the source. I don't have a problem with Watts up with that. I don't blindly believe everything I read there but I don't summarily dismiss it automatically either. Anthony Watts, like Judith Curry, started out believing in the consensus view of climate change but they had the intellectual courage to re-examine their beliefs.
You will open your mind once you accept that there can be validity on BOTH sides of the argument instead of dismissing one side as "deniers" or being paid off by corporate America or Big Oil.
I have a huge problem with THAT argument too! How come it's assumed that only the SKEPTICAL scientists are capable of being corrupted or influenced negatively?!
There are BILLIONS of dollars YEARLY in funding that is ALL predicated and conditional on there being a crisis to address re:CLimate Change. I'm not saying scientists are getting rich off it but there must be this huge pressure to conform to the status quo in that environment. Can you imagine getting funding for science that says there might be nothing to worry about or God forbid, actually exists to advance knowledge and understanding with a totally blind eye to where that leads?
Forget thinking about all of that though! It's much easier to just call people "denier".
Under Obama it was and continues in many ways. Both NASA, and NOAA were outed as changing temperature data to make it look like the Earth was warming. Look it up.
Did you look at the data? Do you think it's fake?
Are you seriously proposing that employees at NASA are Communists?
Science changes constantly by default. Claiming something is settled and will never be refuted is just stupid.
And you follow that with:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Guess that puts the Earth back at the center of the universe then...
That was 1AngryTaxPayer's point - back when people thought the Earth was the center of the universe, that science was "settled" for the time. Over time, that "settled" science got decidedly less settled in favor of more science.
And that is what is happening with MMGW - the "settled" science gets less "settled" over time. Take for example the "world ends in 12 years if we don't do X" prediction. Right now, that is part of settled science, but in 12 years, when we have done nothing and the world doesn't end, that "science" will be less "settled."
And 30 years on, a ton of the predictions about MMGW that were "settled" have become a bunch less settled over that time frame.
That's why making definitive "it's settled" statements about anything scientific is, as 1AngryTaxPayer notes, folly. Your rebuttal? quote is a case in point of how that which was settled became less settled over time.
It’s a common (and dirty) tactic to label one’s opponent in debate. Calling someone a “science denier” or “pro-abortion” or “anti-choice” or “anti-vaxxer” or “gun-nut” “quack” “conspiracy theorist”,etc. all serve one purpose and this is to label and shut them, cast doubt in people’s minds and shut them down before they can even get started.
Science has become a religion rather then a field of study and people refuse to dig deeper or even understand the fact that people influence scientific research, money influences scientific research, politics influences scientific research. Whenever anyone claims, “science is settled” I cringe. But then again, it’s an effective tool that people use to win debates. Some people care more about winning then understanding. It’s frustrating for sure.
Wrong, the science is settled that climate change is real except in the mind of deniers who are sadly victims of minds polluted with junk science and greed. They refuse to acknowledge obvious.
Here's another Pearl of Wisdom from Master Tree Beard:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeBeard
Climate change is real except to the lunatic right with their false science, religious fanaticism and ideologically polluted minds that keep them from accepting the truth and facts.
Forums should ban deniers and their idiocy as it is stifling discussion on how to deal with this crisis. All these people do is deal in false and misleading information.
Please define "lunatic right" -- other than all those who do not agree with your Holy Writ.
Your spew proves again that behind the most militant segments of the environmental movement lies a Fascist mindset.
it's stridency such as this which causes so many of us who live closer to the real world to dismiss most, if not all environmental alarmism.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 04-03-2019 at 05:17 PM..
Here's another Pearl of Wisdom from Master Tree Beard:
Please define "lunatic right" -- other than all those who do not agree with your Holy Writ
Your spew proves again that behind the most militant segments of the environmental movement lies a Fascist mindset.
it's stridency such as this which causes so many of us who live closer to the real world to dismiss most, if not all environmental alarmism.
My point was there is a time for debate and time for action. The time for debate is over. Arguing over whether the world is flat or round makes no sense anymore. We know it is round.
Same goes for anthropogenic climate change. We know the role fossil fuels is playing in our changing climate.
Denialism has been part of conservative opposition to any health or environmental initiatives. Whether it is tobacco, cfcs, DDT, acid rain, clean air or clean water legislation, it is the same crap we heard from industry and conservatives as we hear today on climate change.
Your side has always been wrong when it comes to these issues.
It is time for action on anthropogenic climate change. It is time to relegate the denialist movement to the trash heap of history where it belongs.
It’s a common (and dirty) tactic to label one’s opponent in debate. Calling someone a “science denier” or “pro-abortion” or “anti-choice” or “anti-vaxxer” or “gun-nut” “quack” “conspiracy theorist”,etc. all serve one purpose and this is to label and shut them, cast doubt in people’s minds and shut them down before they can even get started.
Science has become a religion rather then a field of study and people refuse to dig deeper or even understand the fact that people influence scientific research, money influences scientific research, politics influences scientific research. Whenever anyone claims, “science is settled” I cringe. But then again, it’s an effective tool that people use to win debates. Some people care more about winning then understanding. It’s frustrating for sure.
It's easy to see where you stand on the issue....A couple of labels you are forgetting....I have been compared to a doomsday cultist and alarmist and a few other things...You call climate science a religion? How many times have I heard that I wonder... The science is neither a religion, hoax, nor a conspiracy.... Science has the facts, deniers have nothing but opinions.
In any case what is your objection to calling things what they are?...A person that is for abortion IS pro-abortion. A person who is against vaccinations is an anti-vaxxer and a person who denies science a science denier.
If these things bother you so much perhaps you should not participate in controversial debates.
It's easy to see where you stand on the issue....A couple of labels you are forgetting....I have been compared to a doomsday cultist and alarmist and a few other things...You call climate science a religion? How many times have I heard that I wonder... The science is neither a religion, hoax, nor a conspiracy.... Science has the facts, deniers have nothing but opinions.
In any case what is your objection to calling things what they are?...A person that is for abortion IS pro-abortion. A person who is against vaccinations is an anti-vaxxer and a person who denies science a science denier.
If these things bother you so much perhaps you should not participate in controversial debates.
I’m speaking directly to the topic. Perhaps I’d like to hold debate to a higher standard. It’s much more interesting that way. Name calling and labeling brings conversations down.
It’s easy to see where I stand on the issue? The issue of fair debate? Or the issue of climate change?
Also, you may want to go back and read what I wrote because I never called “climate science” a religion.
but I've read and learned enough about what happens when "Pop Science" runs up against hard science and hard economics to take reports like this one with a large grain of salt.
The biggest problem I have with the AGW crowd is that their calls for action are being pushed at a time when so little is actually known about how to deal with the supposed CO2 overload. And as is too often the case with environmentalists, establishment and funding of a large new bureaucracy, with yet-to-be-defined roles and salaries for their "climate scientist" fellow travelers, is central to the deal.
You cannot develop an answer to the climate change issue on a combination of fear-mongering and coercion alone; if a market-based standard falls short of immediate sustainability, it at least represents an approach which might be improved upon as technology progresses. But too many of the polar-bear-hugging zealots have absolutely no interest in, nor respect for this point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
What is your objection to calling those who deny the science a denier? What would you call them? I'm open to suggestions.
You can begin by replacing the word "denier" with "dissident", which at least shows some respect. But Just as with the catch-all term "right wing", it's much more important to lump all those who don't subscribe to "progressive" Holy Writ in with the Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan, for the "benefit" of the young, the impressionable, and the non-technically-oriented.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 04-03-2019 at 06:44 PM..
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.
