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.
I'm sure, only YOU in your infinite wisdom truly, truly understands anthropogenic global warming theory.
did you call....WordS dont mean nothin unless you dig the prosess and have interlized the answer...........Pascal said a lot of lofty THINGS, if you dig/ to FORSE MORALITY ON HIMSELF..........i SUSPECT IF YOU REALLY WANT IT AND CANT SEEM TO GET IT.......YOU FORGET ABOUT IT.........AND JUST SIT STILL IN A QUIET PLACE AND EXPERIENCE IT IN SILENCE AND THOUGHTLESS -NESS.........PUT DOWN THE RAGE, BUT DOWN THE LOOT.....THE WORLD WILL CHANGE WITH OUT YOUR HELP
Big business is funding global warming skeptics, actually, unless you think Big Oil is committing hari-kari.
Bottom line:
I know of no other branch of legitimate science that is willing to accept as FACT a theory while having such minimal evidence.
It’s a slap in the face of the scientific method.
I don't need bad science to tell me to be frugal, or to advocate wind power before oil and other non-renewable energy sources, or to drive a smaller economy car rather than gas-hog junk monster trucks, or to not guzzle bottled water from plastic containers, or to walk rather than drive when possible, or to live in a small dwelling rather than a giant barn, etc. IMO, that's common sense. I was doing that before any of this ridiculous global warming crap came along. You peg me as right-winger and a proponent of big business. If you only knew. The only thing I’m a proponent of is common sense, frugality, and personal freedom… and not being bilked by the ‘band wagon.’ And neither ‘wing’ is for that these days.
I know of no other branch of legitimate science that is willing to accept as FACT a theory while having such minimal evidence.
It’s a slap in the face of the scientific method.
What do you mean by accept as FACT. If it were accepted as FACT, it would be called a scientific LAW. As it is, it is a scientific THEORY. Now, science uses the term THEORY differently than popular culture does...so don't get carried away with the term like anti-evolutionists get carried away with the Theory of Evolution.
Quote:
I don't need bad science to tell me to be frugal, or to advocate wind power before oil and other non-renewable energy sources, or to drive a smaller car rather than gas-guzzling junk monster trucks, or to not guzzle water bottled from plastic containers, or to walk rather than drive when possible, or to live in a small dwelling rather than a giant barn, etc. IMO, that's common sense. I was doing that before any of this ridiculous global warming crap came along. You peg me as right-winger and a proponent of big business. If you only knew. The only thing I’m a proponent of is common sense, frugality, and personal freedom… and not being bilked by the ‘band wagon.’ And neither ‘wing’ is for that these days.
Anthropogenic climate change theory did not come from a political organization, it came from an understanding of the greenhouse effect and the carbon cycle. It came from an understanding that the earth is a closed system with natural mechanisms for absorbing carbon from the atmosphere so that the balance necessary to maintain life would be maintained. There is nothing wacky about anthropogenic climate change theory- it is a continuation of other theories that are not controversial. The vast bulk of the scientific community accepts anthropogenic climate change theory- there are no glaring inconsistencies that people who obviously don't understand its rudiments claim there are. One may argue that the impacts of theory are overblown, etc., but in order to do so I think one needs to understand the rudiments of the theory itself and be able to fairly specifically say something like "your calculations of what an additional 100ppm of carbon in the atmosphere would do to the climate are incorrect because x".
The vast majority of global warming skepticism comes from outside the scientific community, and it bolsters a miniscule minority of practicing, publishing scientists who share the skepticism. There will always be fringe scientists who will carry a nutty idea, but the bulk of the scientific community shares and analyzes information via peer-reviewed journals open to valid scientific criticism. Right-wing, free-market think tanks and several large industries fund the global warming skepticism PR campaign.
I know of no other branch of legitimate science that is willing to accept as FACT a theory while having such minimal evidence.
If you check ALL major scientific organization have accepted that anthropogenic global warming is occurring and that it is a pressing enough problem to take action on. The entire scientific community, speaking through their professional associations, have collectively concluded that the case has been made well enough to move forward with policy level decisions.
No scientist I know considers the issue of climate change a closed issue. They recognize that the cost of waiting for more data is substantially higher than the cost of moving forward to a more sustainable energy policy now. There are a whole slate of benefits beyond GHG minimization that accrue from moving to a sustainable energy policy -- improved national security, lower health care costs, increased high tech jobs, etc.
What do you mean by accept as FACT. If it were accepted as FACT, it would be called a scientific LAW. As it is, it is a scientific THEORY. Now, science uses the term THEORY differently than popular culture does...so don't get carried away with the term like anti-evolutionists get carried away with the Theory of Evolution.
Then debates should remain when something is not fact, especially when governments are gathering to discuss ways to tax everything to death even though there is no evidence to show that even if the man made global warming alarmists are right that we can do anything to reverse it.
Then debates should remain when something is not fact, especially when governments are gathering to discuss ways to tax everything to death even though there is no evidence to show that even if the man made global warming alarmists are right that we can do anything to reverse it.
Right...there is an ongoing debate...what's your point? Do you object to an insistence that the debate be an intelligent and educated one that actually understand the rudiments of the theory in question?
In addition, where do you get the idea that proponents of anthropogenic climate change saying that we can't do anything to reverse it? Pretty much all such proponents agree that dumping less carbon into the atmosphere will have a noticeable positive effect. Yes, there is question just how much an impact we can make at this late hour, but it's pretty universally accepted that we can mitigate the problem.
Right-wing, free-market think tanks and several large industries fund the global warming skepticism PR campaign.
Agreed. And what do left-wing think tanks fund?
None of us KNOW if man-made global warming exists. We’ll see how it plays out as more data is collected and analyzed. It’s futile to argue about it, because it is as a religious issue at this point.
Personally, I’m far more worried about things such as overpopulation, war, genocide, infectious disease pandemic, racial tension, religious fanaticism, subjugation/slavery, earthquakes, volcanoes, etc. Any one of these issues could easily render global warming irrelevant to us. Are those issues 'pressing enough to take action on'? It would be far more beneficial to humanity if we could eliminate some or all of them.
The overreaction of the global warming movement is like swatting at a weasel when you are in a den of lions. Can the weasel bite you? Sure. But, there are far bigger hazards to worry about.
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.
