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.
And the climate scientists in every other nation in the world? Are they, too, funded by Exxon-Mobil? Has Exxon-Mobil managed to take control of every major scientific institution in the WORLD??
They're funded by other governments, who base those funds on fear.
Not only do governments more or less have to give more money to fearmongering scientists than regular ones, but AGW is obviously a great way to expand control over the proles, anyway.
Do scientists in Canada, Germany, Australia and other countries also get their money from NASA and NOAA?
And suppose what you are saying is true, what's in it for the government to keep giving money to those organizations? Also, Republicans controlled the federal government (and thus the purse strings) for the better part of this decade (with Bush and Cheney being noted oilmen). I doubt there was much money to be made from them by touting green energy and climate change.
Jeez, I guess buying into the global warming myth really would require a mind-boggling depth of naïvetè, as well as gullibility. The scientists in the countries even more socialist than the US are therefore even more dependent upon government for their money.
A government that did NOT give more money to scientists that claimed doom was coming, than to scientists who said everything was OK, would be irresponsible to the taxpayers.
Aside from that obviously practical reason that governments more or less have to reward fearmongering, though, notice exactly what each government is doing in response to AGW: Increasing taxes and regulations. In effect, expanding its power over its populace.
Human caused climate change has been proven and documented. Many people do not want to believe this because it would make people, not God, responsible for maintaining a habitable environment. This might require long term economic sacrifice but also points out that God is completely indifferent to conditions on the surface of the planet and suitability for human survival.
"Living in an indifferent universe is not for wimps." - Hal Clemet
I no longer see any sense in arguing this point with the True Believers. They, along with short term profit oriented business and finance; will make certain the long term future of the planet’s suitability for human habitation at the population densities forecasted by the growth forever and ever economists, is ignored for current growth. I expect to be dead before the climate becomes seriously compromised but I hope to last long enough to see the shortsighted recognize they have chosen a course to a slow and final Armageddon foe the human race.
You will reap what you have sown. Be careful of the seeds you choose.
Human caused climate change has been proven and documented.
Looks like we STILL don't have anyone who can point to a single actual study that provides factual links between man's activities and global warming/cooling/whichever. Just the usual mindless "Yes it is, yes it is, yes it is...." with no attempt to back it up.
It's becoming unanimous: Every member of the board who posts, produces no evidence whatsoever.
There's a pattern here somewhere.
And this after 40 years of looking for such a factual connection.
Looks like we STILL don't have anyone who can point to a single actual study that provides factual links between man's activities and global warming/cooling/whichever. Just the usual mindless "Yes it is, yes it is, yes it is...." with no attempt to back it up.
It's becoming unanimous: Every member of the board who posts, produces no evidence whatsoever.
There's a pattern here somewhere.
And this after 40 years of looking for such a factual connection.
You know, it doesn't matter if climate change is man-made or natural. We should confront climate change because the climate has a profound impact on the environment on which humans are dependent for our survival. It is perfectly rational to evaluate how humans will be affected, and what strategies would serve us best in meeting those challenges.
Human caused climate change has been proven and documented. Many people do not want to believe this because it would make people, not God, responsible for maintaining a habitable environment. This might require long term economic sacrifice but also points out that God is completely indifferent to conditions on the surface of the planet and suitability for human survival.
"Living in an indifferent universe is not for wimps." - Hal Clemet
I no longer see any sense in arguing this point with the True Believers. They, along with short term profit oriented business and finance; will make certain the long term future of the planet’s suitability for human habitation at the population densities forecasted by the growth forever and ever economists, is ignored for current growth. I expect to be dead before the climate becomes seriously compromised but I hope to last long enough to see the shortsighted recognize they have chosen a course to a slow and final Armageddon foe the human race.
You will reap what you have sown. Be careful of the seeds you choose.
I would like to see a single "proof". I can certainly provide several solid references that suggest the "proofs" lack credibility.
As for the comment about God and the environment, you couldn’t be more wrong. At least in the Christian version. the NT clearly teaches we are to be good stewards of all that God has given us.
Someone needs to splain to me how CO2 can be an indicator of global warming when CO2 is a lagging indicator that the earth has warmed... or cooled....
You know, it doesn't matter if climate change is man-made or natural. We should confront climate change because the climate has a profound impact on the environment on which humans are dependent for our survival. It is perfectly rational to evaluate how humans will be affected, and what strategies would serve us best in meeting those challenges.
How do you confront it if is natural? One volcanic eruption emits more co2 than all humans combined. Man is arrogant if he thinks he can control the environment.
You know, it doesn't matter if climate change is man-made or natural. We should confront climate change because the climate has a profound impact on the environment on which humans are dependent for our survival. It is perfectly rational to evaluate how humans will be affected, and what strategies would serve us best in meeting those challenges.
hey, I can agree with that.
Warming has always meant better days for people. The warmer it is, the better the growing seasons and the more land available for farming.
For ever 1 degree centegrade, the growing area moves toward the poles by about a hundred miles or so.
So if we can warm the planet, we can get skads more land in canada and Siberia for growing crops!
How do you confront it if is natural? One volcanic eruption emits more co2 than all humans combined. Man is arrogant if he thinks he can control the environment.
We can put a man on the moon , I think we can put a filter on a volcano.
How do you confront it if is natural? One volcanic eruption emits more co2 than all humans combined. Man is arrogant if he thinks he can control the environment.
How do you confront anything, natural or not? A bear attacking you in the wild is natural. Would there be any value before you go camping to determine if there is a bear threat and what are the best ways to deal with a bear attack?
Is that any different from trying to figure out how climate change is going to impact human beings, and what the best ways of dealing with those impacts are?
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.