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.
If they will be relying on the same defective models that are proving to be inaccurate and misleading, what's the point?
The notion that we can predict what the environment/climate will look like in 40 years is a fantasy - yet they base their agenda - wealth distribution, taxes, curtailing consumption and ending dependence on fossil fuels, on these defective and highly biased computer models.
What you're failing to see in all of this mixing of politics with science is that the scientific predictions have not failed, they are simply adjusted as more information and time goes on. Like any good scientist, they do not adhere to a specific outcome if more evidence changes it.
So, shifting the date at which the Arctic will melt is not denying that the Arctic will melt. In fact, in another couple years with a warm summer their predictions could be right back to 2013-2030.
Similarly, predictions of when we will reach peak oil vary rather significantly, but none refute the fact that at some point in the recent past or near future, we have / will reach that point.
Your argument about the ice age and the different climate situation going on then suggests to me you're not really grasping this issue, and your denial to acknowledge that these changes are coming at some point within the near future is baffling to me.
We built a society on cheap oil and that model has failed. Now we simply need to build a new one for a new era.
Climatic change is a fact of life on this planet. Look it up: the "Little Climatic Maximum," which occurred in Medieval times, was responsible for relative warmth and the possibility of agriculture in Greenland--the Vikings called it that because there was appreciable greenery there at the time! When it ended in the 15th century, the weather got nasty and the Viking colony in Greenland packed up and went home.
Deniers should simply drop their continued references to the so-called Little Ice Age and Medieval Warm Period unless they can produce evidence that similar patterns were being concurrently observed in say China. I will save folks some trouble. There is no such evidence. These two effects were minor changes in regional weather patterns brought about by among other things normal variations in wind and sea current patterns. They were not even remotely hemispheric in scope, while the problems we confront today are global.
Yet you have perhaps half a dozen posts in this thread alone contending that climate change as observed today is some inseparable and indistinguishable part of natural cycles that occur over millions and billions of years.
The alarmists, like you, need them to be separate from the whole in order to further the agenda. Taken in a historical perspective, as part of the whole, the "theory" falls to pieces, as well the alarmists know. There is a very good reason time started 150 years ago for them.
What you're failing to see in all of this mixing of politics with science is that the scientific predictions have not failed, they are simply adjusted as more information and time goes on. Like any good scientist, they do not adhere to a specific outcome if more evidence changes it.
So, what they base their doomsday scenarios on is constantly changing? What they base their need for massive taxes and restrictions on lifestyle is constantly changing? What they base their world-wide agenda of wealth distribution is constantly changing? Seems like they have determined exactly what outcomes should be dictated based on ever-changing criteria.
Quote:
So, shifting the date at which the Arctic will melt is not denying that the Arctic will melt. In fact, in another couple years with a warm summer their predictions could be right back to 2013-2030.
Just as they made the prediction of an ice age in the 80's, the boiling of the oceans by 2000, this is just another prediction that has fallen by the wayside. Al Gore said the ice cap would be gone in 5 years, 1 1/2 years ago, based on scientific predictions. How can we have any sense of confidence in future predictions?
Quote:
Similarly, predictions of when we will reach peak oil vary rather significantly, but none refute the fact that at some point in the recent past or near future, we have / will reach that point.
We have plenty of oil.
Quote:
Your argument about the ice age and the different climate situation going on then suggests to me you're not really grasping this issue, and your denial to acknowledge that these changes are coming at some point within the near future is baffling to me.
You said;
Quote:
Look at the graphs for yourself - the undulations that create ice ages and warming spells have suddenly begun exponentially escalating to levels many, many times higher than anything nature creates.
Please, point out the results, today, of this sudden "exponential escalation many, many times higher than anything created by nature". Your rhetoric is just that, a lot of hot air and short on examples and facts.
Quote:
We built a society on cheap oil and that model has failed. Now we simply need to build a new one for a new era.
Right. In a few short years, we have accomplished more than any other nation in history - a land of prosperity, opportunity and wealth, which attracts people from all over the world, clamoring to live here.
We built a society on cheap oil and that model has failed. Now we simply need to build a new one for a new era.
Actually, it was a huge success. Which is why the Chinese today -- somewhat understandably -- resent our having used cheap oil to become fabulously rich and powerful, and then just as they are about to undertake the same thing, we come along and say, no, no, no...you can't.
Meanwhile, the age of cheap oil began to collapse in the 1950's. Things only get worse from here, and we desperately do need some alternate paradigm to shift into.
Actually, it was a huge success. Which is why the Chinese today -- somewhat understandably -- resent our having used cheap oil to become fabulously rich and powerful, and then just as they are about to undertake the same thing, we come along and say, no, no, no...you can't.
Meanwhile, the age of cheap oil began to collapse in the 1950's. Things only get worse from here, and we desperately do need some alternate paradigm to shift into.
Well, that's true. I should say it worked for about 100 years, but now it's failing.
So, what they base their doomsday scenarios on is constantly changing? What they base their need for massive taxes and restrictions on lifestyle is constantly changing? What they base their world-wide agenda of wealth distribution is constantly changing? Seems like they have determined exactly what outcomes should be dictated based on ever-changing criteria.
Your continued integration of one small faction's political agenda with science baffles me.
You're attempting to discredit science in order to prevent your political opposition from gaining power.
As I said before, this could be the greatest period of innovation in human history, creating jobs, technologies, and lifestyles on an unprecedented scale. Yet, you remain attached to this model of "If I accept scientific research A, then I will be forced to live under political ideology B".
It's simply not true, and the sooner you can separate the two the sooner we will stop polluting.
Quote:
Just as they made the prediction of an ice age in the 80's, the boiling of the oceans by 2000, this is just another prediction that has fallen by the wayside. Al Gore said the ice cap would be gone in 5 years, 1 1/2 years ago, based on scientific predictions. How can we have any sense of confidence in future predictions?
Again, no prediictions have "fallen by the wayside". Entire island nations have abandoned their homes because of rising sea levels. There are hardly any snows left on major peaks worldwide.
Quote:
We have plenty of oil.
Hahaha ... haha. I only wish you were joking. But, as the saying goes, the stone age didn't end because they ran out of stones.
Time to evolve to new technologies. That's what progressing societies do. Join us.
Quote:
Please, point out the results, today, of this sudden "exponential escalation many, many times higher than anything created by nature". Your rhetoric is just that, a lot of hot air and short on examples and facts.
I'm not going to research your own pet issue. The science is there - not refuted science - for you to study for yourself. Seriously. Look it all up and then get back to me and tell me what you find.
Quote:
Right. In a few short years, we have accomplished more than any other nation in history - a land of prosperity, opportunity and wealth, which attracts people from all over the world, clamoring to live here.
So, join us in advancing that to the next level rather than fighting it. We can be the epicenter of solutions to the global climate crisis rather than the American auto industry that got dragged into the fuel efficient age kicking and screaming.
Your continued integration of one small faction's political agenda with science baffles me.
You're attempting to discredit science in order to prevent your political opposition from gaining power.
They are using the supposed scientific data to implement a world-wide agenda of wealth redistribution. You cannot separate the two - they are linked.
Quote:
Again, no prediictions have "fallen by the wayside". Entire island nations have abandoned their homes because of rising sea levels. There are hardly any snows left on major peaks worldwide.
OMG - are you serious? Wait for winter to arrive. The snow will be back, I guarantee it.
Quote:
I'm not going to research your own pet issue. The science is there - not refuted science - for you to study for yourself. Seriously. Look it all up and then get back to me and tell me what you find.
YOU made the claim that we are experiencing today an exponential escalation many, many, many times the levels anything nature has created. I should have realized that statement was nothing more than a bunch of bs and you are not able to back it up with ANY examples.
Come on, you must have some example in your little head that would corroborate your claim.
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.
Wait for winter to arrive. The snow will be back, I guarantee it.
