Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

Scientists from around the world are providing even more evidence of global warming, one day after President Barack Obama renewed his call for climate legislation. Full Story
PHD

Overton, TX

#24619 Mar 24, 2013
No, scientists discover new data to correct their errors to discover that their corrections are in error. If NASA was so great why did they make the USA space hitchhikers?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#24620 Mar 24, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
So you're "not a scientist" & you can't "design experimental tests" to see whether AGW/CC mitigation is a "hoax" (your words). That's profoundly anti-scientific & illogical.
I'm being honest, you don't have to be a scientist to search for an experimental record of climate change mitigation. Don't blame me for the fact their are no experiments, demonstrations, trials or test that show we can mitigate or change global climate.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
You admit NO possibility of proving the null hypothesis.
Show me a compelling experiment for man made climate change or climate change mitigation and I'll change my views. I have an objective standard. Let me ask you: What would it take for you to change your views of climate change mitigation? If you can't answer, I'd suggest that's because your beliefs aren't based on science.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
It's a bit like you saying "prove to me that Beethoven was a great composer" but then saying you refuse to listen to any of his music. It's the ultimate in closed-mindedness.
The existence of nonexistence of an experimental test of climate change mitigation isn't a matter of opinions, it's a matter of fact. You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
In point of fact, EVERYTHING you say about policy is exactly backward. The "proven disaster" would be NOT instituting a very stiff carbon tax, or NOT funding clean energy, or CONTINUING to fight oil wars in the Middle East. The LACK of government policies strongly encouraging conservation is an absolutely proven, profound disaster.
A very stiff carbon tax would harm our economy, just as its been shown to harm the economies where it's been tried. There's no evidence it will help the climate. Adding a tax to oil won't stop oil use, it will just make oil more expensive and give more profit to OPEC. That's why Al Jazeera supports your climate tax, it adds costs and increases the perception of value and rarity to oil prices.

We fight wars in the Middle East because the Taliban government of Afghanistan sheltered Al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein in Iraq was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction and Iraq invaded Kuwait back in 1990. After we'd won, we didn't take their oil.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
It's OK to be spectacularly wrong, & you sure are. But just tell us how much they pay you. Be honest JUST THIS ONCE. It'd enhance your credibility.
Who is 'they' and why should they pay me for posting here? Do they pay you for posting opposite views?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#24621 Mar 24, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
The proof is in scientific journals, where deliberate deception is virtually impossible...
Science hoaxes:

No. 1- Piltdown Man
The whole thing started in 1912 when Charles Dawson claimed to find some interesting bones in a gravel pit.

A palaeontologist at the British Museum assembled the bones and believed that they represented the "missing link" between humans and apes.

40 years later scientists proved that the Piltdown man was a deliberate attempt at paleontological fraud.

No. 2- Archaeoraptor
In 1999 National Geographic described this creature as the "missing link" between dinosaurs and birds.

Yeah, not so much.

Turns out this "fossil" found in China was actually a forgery constructed from rearranged pieces of real fossils from different species.

No. 3 - El Chupacabra
This savage chicken-eater was actually a hairless wolf.

No. 4 - Rabbit Mother
In 18th-century England, Mary Toft convinced doctors she had given birth to 16 rabbits.

A Short Narrative of an Extraordinary Delivery of Rabbets was written by King George's surgeon about her case. People stopped serving rabbit stew.

Once the hoax was discovered, the medical community suffered great embarrassment…to put it mildly.

No. 5 - The Fiji Mermaid
This artifact in P.T. Barnum's museum was advertised as a gorgeous topless siren, but was actually the mummified corpse of an ape sewn to a fish.

No. 6 - The Turk
It was nearly impossible to beat this chess-playing automaton of 1770. Heralded as the next great venture into technology; it was even toured across Europe. Unfortunately, the Turk was discovered to be a chess whiz in a robot suit.

No. 7 - Alien Autopsy
In the 1990's English cameraman Ray Santilli claimed to own footage of an alien autopsy performed after the 1947 Roswell Incident.

Fox aired a portion of it, but in 2006, Santilli 'fessed up to the hoax.

All the alien innards in the film were actually sheep brains, raspberry jam and chicken entrails.

No. 8 - Say No to Cake
In 1995, British fake news show Brass Eye conducted an "investigative report" on a street drug they invented called "cake," claiming it affected an area of the brain called "Shatner's Bassoon."

Members of the media lashed out against cake, and the British government even took the matter to Parliament. Whoops!

No. 9 - Disappearing Blonde Gene
Every generation or so, an alarm is sounded over the belief that natural blonds will soon go the way of the dodo.

The most hoax happened in 2002 when news organizations from the BBC to CNN quoted what they believed to be a World Health Organization report that blonds would disappear within 200 years, because blondness was caused by a recessive gene that was dying out.

Turns out the WHO had never done such a study.

No. 10 - The Nacirema Tribe
The Nacirema were supposedly a tribe of people living in North America, as described by Horace Miner in his anthropological paper, published in 1956.

The tribe Miner described had many odd rituals including "scraping and lacerating the surface of the face with a sharp instrument" and another ritual that "consists of inserting a small bundle of hog hairs into the mouth, along with certain magical powders, and then moving the bundle in a highly formalized series of gestures."

It was actually a satire of everyday American life. "Nacirema" is "American" spelled backward.

http://science.discovery.com/strange-science/...
PHD

Overton, TX

#24622 Mar 24, 2013
You’re spinning your wheels. They couldn't show you anything when they are in their best method of thinking. They only use the cut and paste method scientific science fiction.Have you noticed when you pin them against the wall they judge you badly or call you names? Yes I do respond in kind.

Since: Mar 09

Parsons, KS

#24623 Mar 24, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Science hoaxes:
No. 1- Piltdown Man
The whole thing started in 1912 when Charles Dawson claimed to find some interesting bones in a gravel pit.
A palaeontologist at the British Museum assembled the bones and believed that they represented the "missing link" between humans and apes.
40 years later scientists proved that the Piltdown man was a deliberate attempt at paleontological fraud.
No. 2- Archaeoraptor
In 1999 National Geographic described this creature as the "missing link" between dinosaurs and birds.
Yeah, not so much.
Turns out this "fossil" found in China was actually a forgery constructed from rearranged pieces of real fossils from different species.
No. 3 - El Chupacabra
This savage chicken-eater was actually a hairless wolf.
No. 4 - Rabbit Mother
In 18th-century England, Mary Toft convinced doctors she had given birth to 16 rabbits.
A Short Narrative of an Extraordinary Delivery of Rabbets was written by King George's surgeon about her case. People stopped serving rabbit stew.
Once the hoax was discovered, the medical community suffered great embarrassment…to put it mildly.
No. 5 - The Fiji Mermaid
This artifact in P.T. Barnum's museum was advertised as a gorgeous topless siren, but was actually the mummified corpse of an ape sewn to a fish.
No. 6 - The Turk
It was nearly impossible to beat this chess-playing automaton of 1770. Heralded as the next great venture into technology; it was even toured across Europe. Unfortunately, the Turk was discovered to be a chess whiz in a robot suit.
No. 7 - Alien Autopsy
In the 1990's English cameraman Ray Santilli claimed to own footage of an alien autopsy performed after the 1947 Roswell Incident.
Fox aired a portion of it, but in 2006, Santilli 'fessed up to the hoax.
All the alien innards in the film were actually sheep brains, raspberry jam and chicken entrails.
No. 8 - Say No to Cake
In 1995, British fake news show Brass Eye conducted an "investigative report" on a street drug they invented called "cake," claiming it affected an area of the brain called "Shatner's Bassoon."
Members of the media lashed out against cake, and the British government even took the matter to Parliament. Whoops!
No. 9 - Disappearing Blonde Gene
Every generation or so, an alarm is sounded over the belief that natural blonds will soon go the way of the dodo.
The most hoax happened in 2002 when news organizations from the BBC to CNN quoted what they believed to be a World Health Organization report that blonds would disappear within 200 years, because blondness was caused by a recessive gene that was dying out.
Turns out the WHO had never done such a study.
No. 10 - The Nacirema Tribe
The Nacirema were supposedly a tribe of people living in North America, as described by Horace Miner in his anthropological paper, published in 1956.
The tribe Miner described had many odd rituals including "scraping and lacerating the surface of the face with a sharp instrument" and another ritual that "consists of inserting a small bundle of hog hairs into the mouth, along with certain magical powders, and then moving the bundle in a highly formalized series of gestures."
It was actually a satire of everyday American life. "Nacirema" is "American" spelled backward.
http://science.discovery.com/strange-science/...
Those are cases of fraud, usually perpetrated by a single individual. Climate science is supported by the science community at large. Why do some folks disregard the science in favor of political agenda?

The fact is that burning fossil fuel releases CO2 into the atmosphere that has a proven effect of warming the atmosphere.
d pantz

United States

#24624 Mar 24, 2013
I wonder if these "scientists" also agree that un agenda 21 is the solution to the "problem" created by corporate industry. Punish the poor for the fault of the super rich! http://azstarnet.com/news/local/govt-and-poli...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24625 Mar 24, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Science hoaxes:
No. 1- Piltdown Man
The whole thing started in 1912 when Charles Dawson claimed to find some interesting bones in a gravel pit.
A palaeontologist at the British Museum assembled the bones and believed that they represented the "missing link" between humans and apes.
40 years later scientists proved that the Piltdown man was a deliberate attempt at paleontological fraud.
No. 2- Archaeoraptor
In 1999 National Geographic described this creature as the "missing link" between dinosaurs and birds.
Yeah, not so much.
Turns out this "fossil" found in China was actually a forgery constructed from rearranged pieces of real fossils from different species.
No. 3 - El Chupacabra
This savage chicken-eater was actually a hairless wolf.
No. 4 - Rabbit Mother
In 18th-century England, Mary Toft convinced doctors she had given birth to 16 rabbits.
A Short Narrative of an Extraordinary Delivery of Rabbets was written by King George's surgeon about her case. People stopped serving rabbit stew.
Once the hoax was discovered, the medical community suffered great embarrassment…to put it mildly.
No. 5 - The Fiji Mermaid
This artifact in P.T. Barnum's museum was advertised as a gorgeous topless siren, but was actually the mummified corpse of an ape sewn to a fish.
No. 6 - The Turk
It was nearly impossible to beat this chess-playing automaton of 1770. Heralded as the next great venture into technology; it was even toured across Europe. Unfortunately, the Turk was discovered to be a chess whiz in a robot suit.
No. 7 - Alien Autopsy
In the 1990's English cameraman Ray Santilli claimed to own footage of an alien autopsy performed after the 1947 Roswell Incident.
Fox aired a portion of it, but in 2006, Santilli 'fessed up to the hoax.
All the alien innards in the film were actually sheep brains, raspberry jam and chicken entrails.
No. 8 - Say No to Cake
In 1995, British fake news show Brass Eye conducted an "investigative report" on a street drug they invented called "cake," claiming it affected an area of the brain called "Shatner's Bassoon."
Members of the media lashed out against cake, and the British government even took the matter to Parliament. Whoops!
No. 9 - Disappearing Blonde Gene
Every generation or so, an alarm is sounded over the belief that natural blonds will soon go the way of the dodo.
The most hoax happened in 2002 when news organizations from the BBC to CNN quoted what they believed to be a World Health Organization report that blonds would disappear within 200 years, because blondness was caused by a recessive gene that was dying out.
Turns out the WHO had never done such a study.
No. 10 - The Nacirema Tribe
The Nacirema were supposedly a tribe of people living in North America, as described by Horace Miner in his anthropological paper, published in 1956.
The tribe Miner described had many odd rituals including "scraping and lacerating the surface of the face with a sharp instrument" and another ritual that "consists of inserting a small bundle of hog hairs into the mouth, along with certain magical powders, and then moving the bundle in a highly formalized series of gestures."
It was actually a satire of everyday American life. "Nacirema" is "American" spelled backward.
http://science.discovery.com/strange-science/...
THANK YOU for proving my point. In science, the truth ALWAYS comes out. In an active field like climatology, it comes out very quickly. That's why climatologists don't lie in scientific journals.

Lots of the things you cite were obvious jokes, intended that way at the time. AGW/CC is no joke, as you will find out if you live long enough.

Your progeny, should you have any, will despise you. I hope it's worth it for a few shekels.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24626 Mar 24, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Science hoaxes:
No. 1- Piltdown Man
The whole thing started in 1912 when Charles Dawson claimed to find some interesting bones in a gravel pit.
A palaeontologist at the British Museum assembled the bones and believed that they represented the "missing link" between humans and apes.
40 years later scientists proved that the Piltdown man was a deliberate attempt at paleontological fraud.
No. 2- Archaeoraptor
In 1999 National Geographic described this creature as the "missing link" between dinosaurs and birds.
Yeah, not so much.
Turns out this "fossil" found in China was actually a forgery constructed from rearranged pieces of real fossils from different species.
No. 3 - El Chupacabra
This savage chicken-eater was actually a hairless wolf.
No. 4 - Rabbit Mother
In 18th-century England, Mary Toft convinced doctors she had given birth to 16 rabbits.
A Short Narrative of an Extraordinary Delivery of Rabbets was written by King George's surgeon about her case. People stopped serving rabbit stew.
Once the hoax was discovered, the medical community suffered great embarrassment…to put it mildly.
No. 5 - The Fiji Mermaid
This artifact in P.T. Barnum's museum was advertised as a gorgeous topless siren, but was actually the mummified corpse of an ape sewn to a fish.
No. 6 - The Turk
It was nearly impossible to beat this chess-playing automaton of 1770. Heralded as the next great venture into technology; it was even toured across Europe. Unfortunately, the Turk was discovered to be a chess whiz in a robot suit.
No. 7 - Alien Autopsy
In the 1990's English cameraman Ray Santilli claimed to own footage of an alien autopsy performed after the 1947 Roswell Incident.
Fox aired a portion of it, but in 2006, Santilli 'fessed up to the hoax.
All the alien innards in the film were actually sheep brains, raspberry jam and chicken entrails.
No. 8 - Say No to Cake
In 1995, British fake news show Brass Eye conducted an "investigative report" on a street drug they invented called "cake," claiming it affected an area of the brain called "Shatner's Bassoon."
Members of the media lashed out against cake, and the British government even took the matter to Parliament. Whoops!
No. 9 - Disappearing Blonde Gene
Every generation or so, an alarm is sounded over the belief that natural blonds will soon go the way of the dodo.
The most hoax happened in 2002 when news organizations from the BBC to CNN quoted what they believed to be a World Health Organization report that blonds would disappear within 200 years, because blondness was caused by a recessive gene that was dying out.
Turns out the WHO had never done such a study.
No. 10 - The Nacirema Tribe
The Nacirema were supposedly a tribe of people living in North America, as described by Horace Miner in his anthropological paper, published in 1956.
The tribe Miner described had many odd rituals including "scraping and lacerating the surface of the face with a sharp instrument" and another ritual that "consists of inserting a small bundle of hog hairs into the mouth, along with certain magical powders, and then moving the bundle in a highly formalized series of gestures."
It was actually a satire of everyday American life. "Nacirema" is "American" spelled backward.
http://science.discovery.com/strange-science/...
When you post individual exceptions to prove the community is wrong, it's pretty weak & stupid. Hey, a granny stuck up a convenience store...QED... Grannys are maser criminals ??? Sorry LOSER, this was weak....
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24627 Mar 24, 2013
When you post individual exceptions to prove the community is wrong, it's pretty weak & stupid. Hey, a granny stuck up a convenience store...QED... Grannies are maser criminals ??? Sorry LOSER, this was weak....

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24628 Mar 24, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>.
<quoted text><quoted text>...A very stiff carbon tax would harm our economy, just as its been shown to harm the economies where it's been tried...

<quoted text>Who is 'they' and why should they pay me for posting here? Do they pay you for posting opposite views?
A very stiff carbon tax is the ONLY way to save civilization & billions of lives. It most assuredly has NOT harmed the economies of the many countries where it's been instituted.

The consequences of AGW/CC, however, have already harmed economies, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars for the US, & ~1.6% of the worldwide GDP. Yet you want us to pay more & more of these things because you want to save a few pennies at the pump. You are penny wise & dollar foolish.

"They" are people who represent the oil (& other fossil fuel) companies & related entities. If you're not being paid by them, then you're either ideological, ignorant or psychotic.

No, I'm not being paid to post here. I post because I'm concerned about the future of the only planet we have.
Kyle

Knox, IN

#24629 Mar 24, 2013
PHD wrote:
Have you noticed when you pin them against the wall ....
ROTFL! There are no limits to this nutters delusions!
Kyle

Knox, IN

#24630 Mar 24, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
What experiments have you got? Can you cite a compelling experiment for climate change mitigation?
You may actually think you're making sense and not be a troll or paid disruptor. Either way. answer these effin' questions or go tf away:

1) What experiments have deniers like you allowed to take place?

2) You admit to not being a scientist, but I still have to ask - What would such an experiment look like in your mind? My guess is that you can only conceive of simplistic "Change only one variable and measure the difference in response" experiments, right?

3) Where is the alternate Earth that we should use as the control for such an experiment? That's rhetorical, of course. My real question is - Are you using this lack of understanding of science to claim that it's impossible to predict the effects of any mitigation measures?

4) What experiments would deniers like you allow to take place?

5) If you don't accept that GW is happening, you're simply a denier, too ignorant of science to know better, and/or a conspiracy theorist. If you accept that GW is happening, you have de facto accepted the scientific methods and data that have brought us to that conclusion.

This was done without an alternate Earth to use as a control. It was done by testing the many subcomponents of the climate against the basic physics that has been lab tested. Thus, we have showed that no other forcing function could possibly account for the climate's response. Thus, we showed that the details of the response have a signature that can only be the result of GHG's (upper atmospheric cooling, more warming at night, in winter, and near the poles). Thus we showed that the rate of warming is consistent with the basic physics applied to detailed models of the system; models that recreate past climates on the macro scale.

If you accept the science of global warming, you should - TO BE LOGICALLY CONSISTENT - accept the science of global warming mitigation. If not, then my final question is - WHY THE EFF NOT, YOU SIMPERING MORON?!
Brian_G wrote:
Adapting to climate is well tested,...
Respond to my previous response, jackass. Point by point. Else stfu:

1) The rate of climate change will be orders of magnitude more rapid than ever before in our species' history because the forcing function is increasing orders of magnitude faster.

2) Science tells us that much slower climate change nearly caused our extinction.

3) Our population is many orders of magnitude higher than during any of the far less rapid and severe changes.

4) Our population is now utterly dependent on agriculture, which is dependent on rather narrow climate windows, instead of upon hunting and gathering whatever naturally survives in each ecosystem (Which might be quite limited. Roasted cockroach, anyone?)
Brian_G wrote:
.... you can sample umbrellas for protection from rain,....
Thanks for providing the evidence that I was correct about your simplistic, uneducated, misunderstanding of science. Your concession is accepted.
Brian_G wrote:
.... nobody has mitigated climate change; there's the difference.
Respond, a-hole - What mitigation efforts have you deniers allowed to take place that is of sufficient magnitude and in place long enough to yield statistically significant responses? Rhetorical. There haven't been any. I suspect you know it. Catch 22 much, denier scum?
Brian_G wrote:
Architecture protects your home from climate; restricting greenhouse gas emissions does not.
Explain your logic, as this is clearly only a bare assertion. In fact, if you accept the science of climate change, you effectively admit that both protect your home.
Brian_G wrote:
There is a difference between fact and fiction. Look at samples, tests, trial and experiments to tell which is which.
There's a difference between a rational argument and hand-waving nonsense, too.
Kyle

Knox, IN

#24631 Mar 24, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I prefer logic and experimental evidence.
Really, now?! Certainly had me fooled.
Kyle

Knox, IN

#24632 Mar 24, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>You don't have to design experiments to recognize which technologies (climate change mitigation for one) have no experimental evidence.
You don't have to be a psychologist to recognize which deniers (you for one) has only one shredded argument.

All you have to do is watch as you repeat it endlessly while failing to respond to the aforementioned shredding.

Of course, ignoring that arguments have been refuted while repeating them endlessly is the signature characteristic of all science deniers and conspiracy theorists. Are you a creationist, too, perchance?
Kyle

Knox, IN

#24633 Mar 24, 2013
PHD wrote:
No, scientists discover new data to correct their errors to discover that their corrections are in error. If NASA was so great why did they make the USA space hitchhikers?
The quality of your arguments is as good as ever.
Kyle

Knox, IN

#24634 Mar 24, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I'm being honest,...
If so, you're honest but ignorant and duped beyond belief. I'm beginning to reach the conclusion that you're far from honest.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>... you don't have to be a scientist to search for an experimental record of climate change mitigation. Don't blame me for the fact their are no experiments, demonstrations, trials or test that show we can mitigate or change global climate........ Show me a compelling experiment for man made climate change or climate change mitigation and I'll change my views........ The existence of nonexistence of an experimental test of climate change mitigation isn't a matter of opinions,...
Just keeping repeating your one shredded non-argument, nutter. Whatever you do, don't address the rebuttals; don't answer any questions. Just repeat it endlessly and hope that none of the other nutters possess the critical thinking skills to appreciate your implosion.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>A very stiff carbon tax would harm our economy, just as its been shown to harm the economies where it's been tried.
Aha! You reveal your real issue with the science - and lie about the evidence for it. Back up your assertion.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>There's no evidence it will help the climate.
Could you repeat that BS one more time? Or a thousand?
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Adding a tax to oil won't stop oil use,...
How retarded are you? No one's talking about stopping oil use entirely, black and white "thinker". And it's not limited to oil.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>... it will just make oil more expensive and give more profit to OPEC.
"Just"? Bare assertion, again. Also a rejection of fundamental economic principles. Rejecting market forces now, nutter? As for adding to OPEC's profits?! RETARDED!!! The tax won't go to the producers! The higher after-tax price will reduce demand and LOWER the before-tax price, you MORON!
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>That's why Al Jazeera supports your climate tax, it adds costs and increases the perception of value and rarity to oil prices.
(face->palm) So, are you as ignorant of economics as you are of science or just simultaneously lying and employing an ad hominem argument (i.e., if Al Jazeera supports it, it must be wrong)?

You've utterly imploded. Of course, as a denier, you will not acknowledge having been wrong on even one trivial point and will continue to bang your drum sans any meaningful responses.
And thanks for that. You illustrate the intellectual bankruptcy of denial far better than scientists can when the audience is misinformed non-scientists.
Kyle

Knox, IN

#24635 Mar 24, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:

"The proof is in scientific journals, where deliberate deception is virtually impossible..."
We accept your concession. How else would a rational person interpret your latest evasive, steaming heap of nonsense?
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Science hoaxes:

No. 1- Piltdown Man
No. 2- Archaeoraptor
No. 3 - El Chupacabra
No. 4 - Rabbit Mother
No. 5 - The Fiji Mermaid
No. 6 - The Turk
No. 7 - Alien Autopsy
No. 8 - Say No to Cake
No. 9 - Disappearing Blonde Gene
No. 10 - The Nacirema Tribe
No. 1 - Thanks for providing the evidence that, besides being ancient, it was self-correcting, peer-reviewed SCIENCE that corrected this - "40 years later scientists proved that the Piltdown man was a deliberate attempt at paleontological fraud." - NOT admittedly scientifically illiterate wingnuts such as yourself.

No. 2 - Ditto #1 - "Turns out this "fossil" found in China was actually a forgery constructed from rearranged pieces of real fossils from different species."

Nos. 3-9 - Not science at all! Just urban legends and other crap from mass media, you simpleton!

No. 10 - Well, at least this one was actually published science, but again - WHO DO YOU THINK CORRECTED IT, KNOW-NOTHINGS LIKE YOU?

If these are your arguments for science denial, I accept your concession. Because that's exactly what it is whether or not you admit it.

Your penchant for repeating tired, failed, anti-science arguments reeks of the work of a denier that knows they're wrong and is denying with deceptive intent, rather than as a result of being deceived.
Kyle

Knox, IN

#24636 Mar 24, 2013
d pantz wrote:
I wonder if these "scientists" also agree that un agenda 21 is the solution to the "problem" created by corporate industry. Punish the poor for the fault of the super rich! http://azstarnet.com/news/local/govt-and-poli...
I wonder if the run-of-the-mill deniers realize that the difference between them and the Reynolds' Wrap fedora crowd that d pantz represents is a difference in degree, not a difference in kind.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24637 Mar 24, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>
I wonder if the run-of-the-mill deniers realize that the difference between them and the Reynolds' Wrap fedora crowd that d pantz represents is a difference in degree, not a difference in kind.
Kyle

EXCELLENT series of posts. So if these are the categories of deniers, which is brain(NOT)_g in?

1. Ignorant
2. Ideological
3. Psychotic
4. Paid shill of oil (& other FFs) industry
5. Simple troll

These categories are not mutually exclusive, of course. It seems that brain(NOT)_g is most likely in category #4, but others certainly remain possible.

We are indeed releasing CO2 into the atmosphere at ~20,000 times the natural rate. One hopes that doesn't mean we melt the Greenland & Antarctic icepacks ~20,000 faster that natural forcings do.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#24638 Mar 24, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
A very stiff carbon tax is the ONLY way to save civilization & billions of lives.
If your politicians say a tax is the only way to save civilization and save billions of lives, then you can be sure there's no real problem. Greed is universal but climate change mitigation has never been tested.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
It most assuredly has NOT harmed the economies of the many countries where it's been instituted.
Taxes divert resources from private enterprise to the government. High taxes stunt private economies and expand government power.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
The consequences of AGW/CC, however, have already harmed economies, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars for the US, & ~1.6% of the worldwide GDP. Yet you want us to pay more & more of these things because you want to save a few pennies at the pump. You are penny wise & dollar foolish.
Climate is expensive, storms, floods and droughts have always happened. There's no way to tell how much climate change is man made and how much is natural without experimental tests.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
"They" are people who represent the oil (& other fossil fuel) companies & related entities. If you're not being paid by them, then you're either ideological, ignorant or psychotic.
I use fossil fuel; doesn't that make me represent oil companies? The customer is as much the market as the producer.

Do dividends count?

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
No, I'm not being paid to post here. I post because I'm concerned about the future of the only planet we have.
Nobody is paid to post here; wake up!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Minneapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Mpls. police: Driver who hit protester was flee... 59 min Liberal Lover 2
Thanks Black People For The Entertainment 2 hr No sympathy for T... 3
Car plows through protesters during Ferguson ra... 2 hr No sympathy for T... 5
Ferguson rioters destroy businesses, police car... 2 hr Liberal Lover 27
How do I explain this to my black students? 4 hr Space ace 26
The Gentle Violent Giant 9 hr Mammie brown 3
Burn Diss Place Down 9 hr Mammie brown 9
Minneapolis Dating
Find my Match

Minneapolis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Minneapolis News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Minneapolis

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 10:13 am PST

NBC Sports10:13AM
Watch No. 12: Tom Brady vs Aaron Rodgers - NBC Sports
Bleacher Report11:16 AM
Complete Preview for Vikings vs. Panthers
Bleacher Report11:16 AM
Complete Preview for Vikings vs. Panthers
Bleacher Report12:07 AM
Patriots vs. Packers: Complete Week 13 Preview for Green Bay
Bleacher Report 9:00 AM
How Vikings Can Build Around Teddy in 2015 NFL Draft