Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
Rory wrote:..
But I love how, such credible (4th dimensional shapeshifting lizards) witnesses such as Ike/Jones, dismiss it all out of hand because it must be the NWO crowd. And credulous fools dismiss actual science, not on any kind of logic basis, but because a conspiraloon for profit, like Ike says so.
Who is working towards the aims of TPTB again?
The fact that ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, and the Heritage Foundation have convinced otherwise intelligent, reality-based people that climate change is a "myth"
professorpan wrote:I can't event tolerate these discussions anymore. Seriously. The fact that ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, and the Heritage Foundation have convinced otherwise intelligent, reality-based people that climate change is a "myth" they should be "skeptical" about makes me want to blast off in a homemade rocket and live the last of my days in Gingrich's 51st state Moon colony.
Really, it is just overwhelmingly depressing.
Sounder wrote:
First of all climate changes. But go ahead with your sloppy use of language and accuse folk of things they would not say. Anything it takes I suppose, in order that your opponent can be painted into the box of irrationality.
2 the hubris involved about fixing it with a tax is beyond absurd.
Agreed. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to fix it though.
3 you have no standing to paint skeptics motives as being derived from those of polluters.
4 have you ever heard of government telling the truth?
No, but I'm pretty used to scientists doing so. Scientists are people, just like you and me, some are nice, some are not, and that's the beauty of peer review. The people checking your results are often the same people you're competing for grant money with, or they are just normal bastards who take delight in pointing out other people's errors.
5 the claimed objectivity of science is a brazen conceit.
Yes, that's why we have absolutely no clue about the world around us or how it works, and no computers, no world wide web, no cell phones, no rockets, no average lifespan of 80 years, no vaccines, no way to cure any disease, and it's also why your brain boils every time you use the microwave.
Oh, wait..
6 AGW has already jumped the shark, so who cares what you think.
um... no.
7 I still don't understand how folk can consider that the scale of effects from AGW could be on par with Fukushima or DU or GMO's or glyphosphates
The G in AGW is a good indicator here.
But that's just me and I only wish that others would think for themselves also.
Which naturally would include people on the AGW side of things, because this world is complicated and the science is not settled.
Yes it is, or at least the fact that the planet is getting warmer. The dispute now is basically only about how bad the consequences will be.
they can't think outside the confines of material reality and therefore are mentally blind to the larger reality that we know exists. Iow, they are materialists
professorpan wrote:HEY KIDS! Here's how you can point out the fallacy of climate change "skeptics" in a few simple steps!
Step 1. "Skeptic" friend points to article. "Look at this! It's written by (Mr. Esteemed Climate Scientist) and it's posted on (Fancy Looking Climate Skeptic Blog) and it clearly shows that burning tons of coal and oil is NOT causing the planet to warm! So there, Mr. Al Gore-smartypants!"
Step 2. Go to SourceWatch.org. Plug name of Mr. Esteemed Climate Scientist and Fancy Looking Climate Skeptic Blog into search field.
Step 3. Discover Mr. Esteemed Climate Scientist never published anything related to climate, but has a degree in Sports Medicine, and that Fancy Looking Blog is funded by ExxonMobil, CATO, Heartland Institute, and North American Coal Corporation.
Step 4. Show "Skeptic" friend the information, with clear documentation. Watch as "Skeptic" friend completely ignores the links to industries that burn shit and don't want people to believe it's doing bad things to our home planet and instead rushes off to find further evidence to support his nutty preconceptions.
Step 5. Bash head against wall repeatedly while cursing the American educational system and the power of well-funded propaganda. Go get drunk in attempt to dull the pain.
Simulist wrote:professorpan wrote:HEY KIDS! Here's how you can point out the fallacy of climate change "skeptics" in a few simple steps!
Step 1. "Skeptic" friend points to article. "Look at this! It's written by (Mr. Esteemed Climate Scientist) and it's posted on (Fancy Looking Climate Skeptic Blog) and it clearly shows that burning tons of coal and oil is NOT causing the planet to warm! So there, Mr. Al Gore-smartypants!"
Step 2. Go to SourceWatch.org. Plug name of Mr. Esteemed Climate Scientist and Fancy Looking Climate Skeptic Blog into search field.
Step 3. Discover Mr. Esteemed Climate Scientist never published anything related to climate, but has a degree in Sports Medicine, and that Fancy Looking Blog is funded by ExxonMobil, CATO, Heartland Institute, and North American Coal Corporation.
Step 4. Show "Skeptic" friend the information, with clear documentation. Watch as "Skeptic" friend completely ignores the links to industries that burn shit and don't want people to believe it's doing bad things to our home planet and instead rushes off to find further evidence to support his nutty preconceptions.
Step 5. Bash head against wall repeatedly while cursing the American educational system and the power of well-funded propaganda. Go get drunk in attempt to dull the pain.
That's gorgeous. And right on.
slimmouse wrote:Simulist wrote:professorpan wrote:HEY KIDS! Here's how you can point out the fallacy of climate change "skeptics" in a few simple steps!
Step 1. "Skeptic" friend points to article. "Look at this! It's written by (Mr. Esteemed Climate Scientist) and it's posted on (Fancy Looking Climate Skeptic Blog) and it clearly shows that burning tons of coal and oil is NOT causing the planet to warm! So there, Mr. Al Gore-smartypants!"
Step 2. Go to SourceWatch.org. Plug name of Mr. Esteemed Climate Scientist and Fancy Looking Climate Skeptic Blog into search field.
Step 3. Discover Mr. Esteemed Climate Scientist never published anything related to climate, but has a degree in Sports Medicine, and that Fancy Looking Blog is funded by ExxonMobil, CATO, Heartland Institute, and North American Coal Corporation.
Step 4. Show "Skeptic" friend the information, with clear documentation. Watch as "Skeptic" friend completely ignores the links to industries that burn shit and don't want people to believe it's doing bad things to our home planet and instead rushes off to find further evidence to support his nutty preconceptions.
Step 5. Bash head against wall repeatedly while cursing the American educational system and the power of well-funded propaganda. Go get drunk in attempt to dull the pain.
That's gorgeous. And right on.
Or, you could ignore all of the above and think about exotic technology ( Tesla, Pons- Fleishchmann etc), the history of the suppression of the said technology or at least its lack of finance in the face of the current energy monsters, and subsequently reach the logical understanding that this entire debate is the ultimate shell game ?
I wont, of course hold my breath, but I do live in hope for you folks.
Simulist wrote:"Lord save us all from a hope tree that has lost the faculty of putting out blossoms."
— Mark Twain
slimmouse wrote:Simulist wrote:"Lord save us all from a hope tree that has lost the faculty of putting out blossoms."
— Mark Twain
...because we cant afford it , cos we need to destroy the tree to free ourselves !
Such is the climate change discussion
Simulist wrote:We can't afford what, exactly?
Simulist wrote:And what do you think we need to destroy? And why?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests