Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
 
Old 04-09-2008, 12:26 PM
 
53 posts, read 84,309 times
Reputation: 15

Advertisements

The burden of proof is on those who would have us think that natural causes are solely or mainly responsible for this trend.

We know that CO2 causes warming. We do not know the likely rate within a factor of three. Ignorance is not a good basis for dealing with risk.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-09-2008, 12:28 PM
 
Location: Southern New Jersey
1,725 posts, read 3,114,877 times
Reputation: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJME View Post
The burden of proof is on those who would have us think that natural causes are solely or mainly responsible for this trend.
I think the burden of proof lies with those who want us to ignore the natural climate cycle of the earth...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2008, 12:33 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,065,889 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJME View Post
The burden of proof is on those who would have us think that natural causes are solely or mainly responsible for this trend.

We know that CO2 causes warming. We do not know the likely rate within a factor of three. Ignorance is not a good basis for dealing with risk.
The proof phase is over. We need to continue to refine the models to produce more accurate estimates, but we are into the policy phase of remediation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2008, 12:40 PM
 
53 posts, read 84,309 times
Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaBee View Post
I think the burden of proof lies with those who want us to ignore the natural climate cycle of the earth...
Nobody cares what you think. You've already proven yourself to be unwilling to look at the data such as the graphs provided by Frenchman and make an intelligent decision of your own. Instead you rely on people like Hegman, a professor of Mathmatics, to skew the data by applying statical equations. Have you read the report?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2008, 12:41 PM
 
Location: Southern New Jersey
1,725 posts, read 3,114,877 times
Reputation: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
The proof phase is over. We need to continue to refine the models to produce more accurate estimates, but we are into the policy phase of remediation.
Refine...you mean fabricate the models...

How can policy-makers (politicians) remediate something that not even scientists completely understand? LMFAO
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2008, 12:43 PM
 
Location: Southern New Jersey
1,725 posts, read 3,114,877 times
Reputation: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJME View Post
Nobody cares what you think. You've already proven yourself to be unwilling to look at the data such as the graphs provided by Frenchman and make an intelligent decision of your own. Instead you rely on people like Hegman, a professor of Mathmatics, to skew the data by applying statical equations. Have you read the report?
Nobody cares what you think either

I relied on Wegman's report that was a statistical verification of a previous report that disputed the climate change findings...and determined it to be accurate.

You have been proven to be gullible and easily swayed by those who stand to benefit financially.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2008, 12:46 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,065,889 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaBee View Post
Refine...you mean fabricate the models...

How can policy-makers (politicians) remediate something that not even scientists completely understand? LMFAO
We don't completely understand cancer, yet we find many ways to reduce its impact. We understand enough about the impact and causes of global warming to mitigate the damage we are causing. We are already starting in many states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2008, 12:49 PM
 
Location: Southern New Jersey
1,725 posts, read 3,114,877 times
Reputation: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
We don't completely understand cancer, yet we find many ways to reduce its impact. We understand enough about the impact and causes of global warming to mitigate the damage we are causing. We are already starting in many states.
Right, the CFL lightbulbs...and recycling centers...and hybrid cars...these will save us all!

You know, your argument does have a point. Many of us don't completely understand liberals, but we can find many ways to reduce their impact on society...knowledge is the first way to mitigate this scourge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2008, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,065,889 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaBee View Post
Right, the CFL lightbulbs...and recycling centers...and hybrid cars...these will save us all!

You know, your argument does have a point. Many of us don't completely understand liberals, but we can find many ways to reduce their impact on society...knowledge is the first way to mitigate this scourge.
That plus revised building codes, renewable portfolio standards for electric utilities, carbon taxes, cap and trade legislation. It all contributes and cumulatively will make a big difference.

And stand by for the election this year. I'm anticipating a clean sweep with the adults put back in charge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2008, 01:08 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,100 posts, read 39,258,323 times
Reputation: 4937
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaBee View Post
Right, the CFL lightbulbs...
I have enough "regular" lightbulbs, of all wattages, to last me for the rest of my life, my childrens life, and my grandchildrens life

And, as long as those "hybrids" don't better gas mileage - I have no incentive to even look at them. We have 2 Volvo SUV's - and they do just fine.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:38 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top