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.
Your logic is incorrect, the progression of conditions are not consistent. The correct logical sequence is this:
- America has institutions that specialize in solving difficult problems
- Difficult problems are too complex for an individual to solve, they require many people working on different parts of the problem
- America puts trust in these institutions (examples: NASA is entrusted with putting people in space and on the moon; NIH is entrusted with finding cures for diseases; the FBI is entrusted with fighting terrorism)
- Global Warming is a difficult problem
- America has institutions that study global warming.
- Therefore, America trusts those institutions and their results regarding global warming.
- Those institutions have overwhelmingly endorsed the conclusion that humans have affected the global climate.
If the fix for AGW costs, say, $1 per person per year in the USA, I guarantee you that there would not be a peep from any of the deniers. It would be a blip in the national dialog smaller than the blip of CFCs which at one time was a big stink and is no longer an issue.
But you cannot put a dollar value on the truth - it does not all of a sudden become untrue just because it is expensive. I would have a lot more respect for a politician who says "I believe in AGW - it exists, and humans are to blame. But it is too damn expensive to fix so we aren't going to do anything about it". Instead politicians (and some posters here) try to second-guess the scientists that we pay to study these problems and then when the scientists come up with an answer some people don't like, they attack the science. It makes no sense.
If you don't want to face the bill due, just man-up and admit it rather than attacking the very institutions you tasked with studying the thing.
Ok... Since you brought it up... What FINAL price tag amount will be required to stop this supposed AGW, and what will that amount be to reverse AGW? Then after you cite the amounts, PROVE that either will work.
Your very premise points out the flaw that is referred to as catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. That flaw is the fact that the ONLY potential solutions offered consist of SPENDING MONEY on...
Green energy to the tune of having our electric and overall energy rates necessarily skyrocket, in many cases by 8 times or more.
Grid scale energy storage (Technology that doesn't exist so we cannot even begin to price)
Carbon Dioxide capture and disposal. (Technology that doesn't exist so we cannot even begin to price)
End or at least greatly reduce consumerism because evil Americans are using more than their fair share.
Lower ALL energy consumption again because evil Americans are using more than their fair share.
Stop harvesting and eating meat because well because cows and pigs fart.
Drive Priuses and Tesla styled vehicles that run on poisonous batteries which need to be replaced every 5 years.
Develop technology that doesn't exist so we cannot even begin to price.
Etc.
This points to the FACT that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is nothing but a giant global redistribution of wealth scheme designed to bring down the evil western capitalist civilization. It IS Cultural Marxism. It IS Critical Theory. It is nothing else.
Last edited by KS_Referee; 02-25-2017 at 11:15 AM..
Cultural Marxism... Critical Theory... The Origins of Political Correctness.
I was referring to the post that pretty much said, to hell with everything, we're going to drill, frack, blah, blah to boost our economy, as if nothing else matters. I already posted scientific evidence of global warming, but apparently the tens of thousands of scientists I listed are also idiots. So I'll take that as a compliment. Fracking, for example, not only has an effect on methane pollution, but it can contaminate groundwater. It can also induce minor earthquakes and tremors by putting strains on the Earth's crust. For example, there has been a spike in earthquake activity in Oklahoma which many scientists believe is due to fracking. Maybe you think they're so minor that we should ignore them, but a 4,000% increase in a short time is nothing to joke about, unless I suppose you are a City-Data poster trying to prove a point.
I was referring to the post that pretty much said, to hell with everything, we're going to drill, frack, blah, blah to boost our economy, as if nothing else matters. I already posted scientific evidence of global warming, but apparently the tens of thousands of scientists I listed are also idiots. So I'll take that as a compliment. Fracking, for example, not only has an effect on methane pollution, but it can contaminate groundwater. It can also induce minor earthquakes and tremors by putting strains on the Earth's crust. For example, there has been a spike in earthquake activity in Oklahoma which many scientists believe is fracking. Maybe you think they're so minor that we should ignore them, but a 4,000% increase in a short time is nothing to joke about, unless I suppose you are a City-Data poster trying to prove a point.
Fracking = earthquakes? Causation? Correlation? Related at all? Theory or scientifically proven fact?
We have years with elevated seismic activity, then years with diminished seismic activity. To date, the top seismic activity professionals have NEVER ONCE been able to accurately predict when and where an earthquake will happen 1 year in advance yet somehow we are supposed to believe that climate scientists or even top geologists, geophysicists or seismic professionals can accurately determine the ROOT CAUSE seismic activity in a specific area, attributing it to a single man made activity even though seismic activity can be caused by an infinite number of interactions between elements, conditions, fluctuations, movement, porosity, water tables, fluctuations of magma pressure and flow, etc.
Again, nothing but political, Cultural Marxism driven Critical Theory talking points you were spoon fed.
You're too easy.
Last edited by KS_Referee; 02-25-2017 at 11:36 AM..
Fortunately with the election of Donald Trump, AGW as an issue here is dead. Nothing is going to be done about it for the next 8 years. And, given that the data is cooked books and hustling for tax money to redistribute to the crony companies of the environmental-industrial complex, that's a good thing. Climate is always changing, and the best solution is to utilize all the carbon based fuels as quickly as possible and as fully as possible. Then, the free market will price oil up as it runs out, which will then make it profitable to move to nuclear, solar, wind, wave, and whatever we invent next. But for now, with Trump, and control of the government, sayonara AGW and good riddance. They can talk about it and cry about it in collectivist Europe. Over here, we are going to drill, frack, and enjoy a robust and successful economy.
Yay!
So, tell us, Marc Paolella: Would you be cool with the environment in (what I'm guessing are very upscale areas of) New Jersey where YOU SELL HOMES being abused? Or, do you celebrate "nothing being done about it for the next 8 years" just so long as it's not in YOUR backyard? I'll bet I know the answer to that question.
Your posts are always classic examples of NIMBYism.
Fracking = earthquakes? Causation? Correlation? Related at all? Theory or scientifically proven fact?
We have years with elevated seismic activity, then years with diminished seismic activity. To date, the top seismic activity professionals have NEVER ONCE been able to accurately predict when and where an earthquake will happen 1 year in advance yet somehow we are supposed to believe that climate scientists or even top geologists, geophysicists or seismic professionals can accurately determine the ROOT CAUSE seismic activity in a specific area, attributing it to a single man made activity even though seismic activity can be caused by an infinite number of interactions between elements, conditions, fluctuations, movement, porosity, water tables, fluctuations of magma pressure and flow, etc.
Again, nothing but political, Cultural Marxism driven Critical Theory talking points you were spoon fed.
You're too easy.
I'd love to hear what you know about "Cultural Marxism driven Critical Theory."
The demographic that rejects global warming is roughly the same as those who reject evolution.
All science they dont agree with is bogus science because they dont understand it and it conflicts with their basic ideology, whether that ideology is conservative Christianity or American capitalism, or quite often , both .
Not true. Evolution is a fact. And so is the fact that climate scientists are part of Left wing collectivist academia, and they operate in lockstep with Left wing collectivist academia. Therefore, they are non-objective and have an axe to grind. They are haters of Capitalism, partly because they make a living off the public dole and operate under a "publish or perish" mentality in order to keep the Big Science welfare payments coming in.
Scientists are now subjectivists and relativists and really the entire field of Science is debauched and untrustworthy. It's tragic, but climate scientists are in the same league as journalists. They are envious haters of Capitalism and achievement in general, and they will do and say anything to promote the collectivist political agenda. It's a disgrace and an embarrassment, but scientists are no longer to be trusted, and everything they say is to be taken with a grain of salt.
This is a tragedy, because we really need good scientists. But we don't have them, and we won't have them, because they are on the public dole and will armageddonize everything to keep the welfare dollars pouring in.
Not true. Evolution is a fact. And so is the fact that climate scientists are part of Left wing collectivist academia, and they operate in lockstep with Left wing collectivist academia. Therefore, they are non-objective and have an axe to grind. They are haters of Capitalism, partly because they make a living off the public dole and operate under a "publish or perish" mentality in order to keep the Big Science welfare payments coming in.
Scientists are now subjectivists and relativists and really the entire field of Science is debauched and untrustworthy. It's tragic, but climate scientists are in the same league as journalists. They are envious haters of Capitalism and achievement in general, and they will do and say anything to promote the collectivist political agenda. It's a disgrace and an embarrassment, but scientists are no longer to be trusted, and everything they say is to be taken with a grain of salt.
This is a tragedy, because we really need good scientists. But we don't have them, and we won't have them, because they are on the public dole and will armageddonize everything to keep the welfare dollars pouring in.
Very sad.
Do you care to elaborate? The public needs to know...
Not true. Evolution is a fact. And so is the fact that climate scientists are part of Left wing collectivist academia, and they operate in lockstep with Left wing collectivist academia. Therefore, they are non-objective and have an axe to grind. They are haters of Capitalism, partly because they make a living off the public dole and operate under a "publish or perish" mentality in order to keep the Big Science welfare payments coming in.
Scientists are now subjectivists and relativists and really the entire field of Science is debauched and untrustworthy. It's tragic, but climate scientists are in the same league as journalists. They are envious haters of Capitalism and achievement in general, and they will do and say anything to promote the collectivist political agenda. It's a disgrace and an embarrassment, but scientists are no longer to be trusted, and everything they say is to be taken with a grain of salt.
This is a tragedy, because we really need good scientists. But we don't have them, and we won't have them, because they are on the public dole and will armageddonize everything to keep the welfare dollars pouring in.
Very sad.
A delusional post from start to finish, excepting the part about evolution being true. Can you cite facts to support any of this nonsense?
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.
