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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-24-2009, 11:24 PM
 
2,654 posts, read 5,484,969 times
Reputation: 1946

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingForward View Post
The repeated connection that right-wingers make between Gore and climate science exposes their ignorance about climate science. Gore did not invent climate science, he did not create the theories, he is not a climate scientist. He simply educated himself on the subject, and because he has children and is desperately concerned for their future--and the future of all children--he does his part in trying to share the information. Predictably, however, the right-wingers fly, like bats, out of the dark ignorance of their cave and begin to excoriate Gore. It's idiotic. Gore is beside the point.

Here's the leading venture capitalist in the U.S. on climate change. I guess he's in league with the nefarious underground "liberal" conspiracy, as well?

John Doerr sees salvation and profit in greentech | Video on TED.com
So let me get this straight, Gore raises concern for a problem and generates the demand for solutions to it then partners with a bunch of VC guys to sell the solutions and you don't see the potentail conflict of intrest here?

Oh, right, like you said - "its for the children"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-24-2009, 11:29 PM
 
7,359 posts, read 10,306,751 times
Reputation: 1893
Quote:
Originally Posted by OC Investor2 View Post
So let me get this straight, Gore raises concern for a problem and generates the demand for solutions to it then partners with a bunch of VC guys to sell the solutions and you don't see the potentail conflict of intrest here?

Oh, right, like you said - "its for the children"
Oh, right, like you said: IT'S ALL A GRAND CONSPIRACY. Gore and Doerr are now in on it together. People actually and authentically caring about the planet--and the future of other generations: how absurd! But, actually, I understand your position. Right-wing haters feel little compassion for anyone, so I can perfectly understand the mockery of compassion as being mere performance. On another note: You obviously didn't watch the whole video: you haven't had time to do so.

Good lord, the rightwing is truly, completely, and utterly a pack of paranoid lunatics.

Good night, and good luck to you and your kind. Indulge your smug ignorance, if you must. Meanwhile, the rest of us will do what we can to save your children's future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2009, 11:47 PM
 
1,156 posts, read 1,395,168 times
Reputation: 139
Yawn, no answers as to why other planets in the solar system are also warming though I suspect it may be all the hot gases escaping the bloated Goracle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2009, 11:51 PM
 
1,156 posts, read 1,395,168 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by OC Investor2 View Post
Sorry, but I'll never believe in a theory whose adherents unilaterally declare the debate over and begin to attempt to destroy anyone who disagrees with them. That is not science rigorous enough to base policy on. Usually when someone is afraid to debate with facts or answer questions, its because they're lying or hiding other agendas.
Just remember that the solution is to allow the same level of pollution as before but to redistribute the US's money to poor nations. Additionally, remember that if we don't listen to Gore THIS INSTANT, the world is doomed and that is why he owns a huge enregy-wasting house and he flies all over the planet continuing to pollute it when he could easily spread his message via video instead of polluting the earth further.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2009, 11:54 PM
 
1,156 posts, read 1,395,168 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingForward View Post
There is no "other side" to the issue. In 15-20 years, approximately 1 billion people in Southeast Asia will have no water source, due to the melting of the ice cover on the Himalayas. Expect massive migration and civil war. You people in la-la denial land need to wake up.

How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: Responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming | A Grist Special Series | Grist
We could probably buy a year or two if the Goracle sold his oversized house and quit flying private jets all over the planet spewing tons of carbon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2009, 11:58 PM
 
1,156 posts, read 1,395,168 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingForward View Post
Are you INSANE? If you truly think that the politically motivated anti-climate change idiocy promoted by ONE SCIENTIST--in concert with a right-wing, Republican organization--somehow overrides the opposite opinion, held by the VAST MAJORITY of the world's climate scientists, you are not living in the real world. That defies simple logic. Because what you are saying, in effect, is that world scientists are in on some nefarious plan to scam the people of the world about climate change. This is simply conspiracy theory of the tinfoil hat variety.

The environmentalist website I cited is highly reputable. The fact that you are so blinded by right-wing ideology that anything AT ALL that comes from a so-called "liberal" point of view--which actually doesn't apply in this case, since many, many climate scientists are apolitical--is somehow suspect--well, that's just sad.
Do us a favor and Google Logical Falalcy then look down the list and find Appeal to Popularity. Actually, why don't you read them all. You've committed quite a few here. Not to say you're not logical but you're not logical.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2009, 12:01 AM
 
1,156 posts, read 1,395,168 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingForward View Post
First of all, nobody's trying to "destroy" anybody. Don't be a drama queen.

Second, nobody's "afraid" to debate him. His position has already been debunked by the worldwide scientific community. Holding a "debate" with this person would be equal to holding a "debate" about Obama's place of birth.

Third, there is no "debate" over climate change. Ten years ago, yes. Now, no. And, unless you're a climate scientist, you don't have the intellectual capital to declare that the science is not "rigorous enough."

Fourth, if Gore is "lying" or "hiding other agendas," then so are the majority of other climate scientists across the globe. Must be an international conspiracy, I guess. An enormous, secret, GLOBAL, "liberal" plan to take money from the wealth through cap-and-trade.

People who live in the dark ages about climate change need to educate themselves on the issue. This isn't a game. And it certainly isn't a partisan issue (unless you're claiming that scientists the world over are in secret league with American "liberals"). This is the most serious issue in the history of humanity. I know you don't want to believe that. In fact, apparently, it is simply too large a threat for you to believe. Understandable. Back in Galileo's day, the majority of the populace (not to mention the Pope) thought he, was well, was not only "lying," but had an anti-God "agenda." In general, the people who are climate skeptics are people who've never made a good faith effort to truly understand the issues. They take their "information" from right-wing political pundits and blogs, preferring to wrap themselves in the cloak of ignorance and denial, rather than confront the facts and have their whole world view fall apart.
So you're saying that if you were the Goracle and knew the end of the world was near unless man totally reversed his behavior with regards to pollution, you too would continue to fly around the planet in private jets and waste tons of energy with an oversized house then spend a few bucks on "carbon offsets" as if they would make a difference?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2009, 12:02 AM
 
1,156 posts, read 1,395,168 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingForward View Post
If you were actually educated on the state of climate science, you would know that the debate is over. Ten-fifteen years ago, climate scientists who believed that accelerated climate change was likely anthropogenic were still willing to say that there was a possibility--however small--that they were mistaken. They are no longer willing to say that. And the climate scientists who were more skeptical about the anthropogenic nature of accelerated climate change are no longer skeptical. Many climate scientists, however, DO continue to disagree on a number of other issues, radiating from the now-established threat of anthropogenic climate change.

‘The scientists aren’t even sure’—No scientist ever is | How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: Responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming | Grist
Now if only we could get the martians to rein in their pollution so their planet would stop warming too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2009, 12:04 AM
 
1,156 posts, read 1,395,168 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingForward View Post
Why don't you have the integrity of mind and intellect to actually inform yourself on the issue, rather than respond like a petulant child and challenge others to "persuade" you?
I don't care who you are...that there is a darn adult argument there.

Git 'er done.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2009, 01:13 AM
 
2,654 posts, read 5,484,969 times
Reputation: 1946
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingForward View Post
Yes, actually, the site IS apolitical--although I know you don't believe that.

The site is apolitical??? Are you on crack? Look at the headlines on the politics tab. Its full of fawning articles about democrats ("Energy Secretary Steven Chu, an avid bicyclist, is now being driven to work by a security detail -- and it doesn't make him happy") and snarky innuendo laced articles on republicans ("Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), a climate skeptic with some wacky theories of his own...", "Old dog, Newt tricks" ) And thats just the frickin headlines!! Yeah, uh-huh, that's right down the middle all right.


But this discussion is over, as far as I'm concerned. You know NOTHING about climate science; this is a COMPLETELY politicized issue for you;

It is a politicized issue - by YOU!! Your side is using global warming to advance an entire boatload of policy initiatives.

and I could spend MONTHS on this ONE THREAD trying to explain to you why the science is sound, and it wouldn't make any difference. I could cite source after source, read book after book aloud to you--by Nobel Peace Prize winners--and you would STILL insist that it's a subterranean liberal plot. Your position is, in fact, insane. It's functionally insane, but it's still insane. You have so much more faith in your paranoia, and are so much more profoundly emotionally invested in it--out of your hate for some imagined left-wing conspiracy--that any discussion with you on the issue is an exercise in self-flagellation.
I'm not the one who's over invested emotionally here. Nor am I paranoid.

I am skeptical about the sudden claim that a global warming problem exists that will require us to reorder our entire lifestyle & economy to solve when the same scientists making the claim were telling me in college 10 years earlier that we were on the verge of another Ice age.

I am skeptical of a movement that ignores existing technologies that will seriously mitigate the problem - nuclear energy - because it offends their dogma.

I am skeptical about a movement that insults and denigrates its critics and advances its agenda with absolute certainity when all its facts are based on theory, conjecture and computer modelling.

I am skeptical of any movement who's first answer to criticism is to question the critic's motives instead of adressing the criticism.
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 05:25 PM.

© 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