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.
Why can life survive at crushing depths where volcanic vents spew forth sulphuric acid? Life goes on. I get that.
I never SAID that "life cannot survive"... What I am suggesting is that human life cannot thrive the way it has for the last 2000 years in certain projected conditions...
So let's get this straight. If life is not in danger of survival because of rising CO2, then what is the pressing issue again? Why do we need to be taxed to death for CO2?
Would be a fun project to see where the scientists that say, "Nothing is going on.... Carry on!!!" are coming from as well. So if you have the time to provide sources from your angle it might be a hoot to see, perhaps, where they're getting their funding, etc....
Dontcha think?
Nobody is claiming that nothing at all is going on, we are claiming that it is a natural cycle and not man made? Got it finally?
I'm sorry. Why on Earth does everyone here seem to think one side of this has to "prove it" and the other doesn't?
Mind-boggling really....
Again, Occam's Razor.... What is more likely:
A) That a bunch of scientists who make $250K a year or less got together and decided that they were going to create a scare over climate change.
OR
B) That multi-trillion dollar fossil fuel companies are paying off other scientists to convince us that there's no harm being done by the burning of their cash-cow product?
What do you believe the government's motive here is?
"Hey, let's convince everyone that we need to stop using oil and coal... That would be funny!!!!"
I mean seriously. The EASY thing to do would be to not change a thing we're doing (until oil prices skyrocket again). I get that.
Red Herring
I simply asked you to provide a source to support your position. I didn't say it "proved" or "disproved" anything specifically. You made the following statement concerning the emails implying that there was much more evidence out there to support the issue.
Quote:
One data source has been drawn into question, so now EVERY source is "false"???
I simply asked what other sources?
You response was a Deflection and then a Red Herring.
So again, I ask... What other sources are you basing your position on?
by the way my little sheep, scientists are now saying that the Earth's warming is caused by solar radiation. Which is much, much closer to the truth than CO2 causing it.
I can provide sources and analysis all day long with this topic. The question is, can you provide anything? you keep claiming there are all these other sources and that the CRU is irrelevant, but you do not provide any other source? Don't you find that odd?
Give me one source, an author, the IPCC, CSIRO, NASA, etc... pick something.
I mean I see what you're doing.... I pick actual sources so you can attempt to pick them apart. You provide nothing, and thus nothing that I can refute.
Again I ask... Why must I be the one providing sources here?
Yes, I could go on all day giving you sources as well. I think it's well documented that there are plenty of scientists on both sides of the fence. Yet YOU get to claim that due to these emails that one side must be completely bogus....
How bout if I show you one scientist who claims global warming is bogus that happens to be funded by an oil company or lobby? Would that discount YOUR entire half of the argument?
by the way my little sheep, scientists are now saying that the Earth's warming is caused by solar radiation. Which is much, much closer to the truth than CO2 causing it.
May be so, though my focus on the reading of this stuff has been similar to McIntyre's position. The research isn't adding up, proper due diligence is not being applied, and the science is acting far more political than it is "scientific".
I honestly don't really care as to the "results", but more so on how they get to those results.
by the way my little sheep, scientists are now saying that the Earth's warming is caused by solar radiation. Which is much, much closer to the truth than CO2 causing it.
Okay, just to be sure..... Your group of 50 scientists meet and give this conclusion and it must be correct, and the group of 15,000 scientists meeting about global warming are all just dolts and "sheeple", right?
I mean I see what you're doing.... I pick actual sources so you can attempt to pick them apart. You provide nothing, and thus nothing that I can refute.
Again I ask... Why must I be the one providing sources here?
Yes, I could go on all day giving you sources as well. I think it's well documented that there are plenty of scientists on both sides of the fence. Yet YOU get to claim that due to these emails that one side must be completely bogus....
How bout if I show you one scientist who claims global warming is bogus that happens to be funded by an oil company or lobby? Would that discount YOUR entire half of the argument?
See the pull down on the left? Those are all the topics McIntyre has dealt with. They are archived and vary between topic, researcher, and organization.
He focuses directly on the science, policy, and procedure with some odds and ends at times that may be humors or completely off topic.
So let's get this straight. If life is not in danger of survival because of rising CO2, then what is the pressing issue again? Why do we need to be taxed to death for CO2?
You understand this little comparison right?
All Humans are living things
NOT all living things are human
"LIFE" is not in danger. Humanity, in it's current form might be to some extent....
Okay, just to be sure..... Your group of 50 scientists meet and give this conclusion and it must be correct, and the group of 15,000 scientists meeting about global warming are all just dolts and "sheeple", right?
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.
