Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#21 Oct 30, 2012
Dems required to own EVs wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to take into account all data, just not what the liberals preach...
A great many very informed scientists believe that any human contributions to that influence are negligible, undetectable and thereby grossly exaggerated by alarmists, while far more important natural climate drivers (both for warming and cooling), are virtually ignored. Particularly consequential among these are long-and short-term effects of ocean cycles along with changes in solar activity.
Here is a good article from Forbes for you to read so that you can broaden your perspective...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/05...
Larry Bell is a Tool of the Energy Industry(you said follow the money)
Bell uses the key technique that denialists use in debates, dubbed by Eugenie Scott the “Gish gallop”, named after a master of the style, anti-evolutionist Duane Gish. The Gish gallop raises a barrage of obscure and marginal facts and fabrications that appear at first glance to cast doubt on the entire edifice under attack, but which on closer examination do no such thing. In real-time debates the number of particularities raised is sure to catch the opponent off guard; this is why challenges to such debates are often raised by enemies of science. Little or no knowledge of a holistic view of any given science is needed to construct such scattershot attacks.
The approach also works somewhat in print, if the references are sufficiently obscure and numerous. Ideally, someone will take the time to answer such an attack, but there is a fundamental asymmetry of forces at work. It is, in fact, easier to form an allegation than to track down a reasonable explanation of what it means and how it really fits in to the balance of evidence. Also, the skills required to reflect the science are deeper than the ones required to attack it; hence the defenders are outnumbered and outgunned. Still, sometimes an article is prominent enough that it merits a detailed response.
The slightly out of the ordinary thing about Bell’s piece is that he casts his attack not as an attack on science (his usual method) but on the media:

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#22 Oct 30, 2012
Dems required to own EVs wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to take into account all data, just not what the liberals preach...
A great many very informed scientists believe that any human contributions to that influence are negligible, undetectable and thereby grossly exaggerated by alarmists, while far more important natural climate drivers (both for warming and cooling), are virtually ignored. Particularly consequential among these are long-and short-term effects of ocean cycles along with changes in solar activity.
Here is a good article from Forbes for you to read so that you can broaden your perspective...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/05...
"a great many(unnamed) scientists" is no match for "the vast majority of climate scientists" Sorry.
BodhiVickery speaks

Utica, NY

#23 Oct 30, 2012
Bodhisatva wrote:
<quoted text>"a great many(unnamed) scientists" is no match for "the vast majority of climate scientists" Sorry.
You're an imbecile. Peer reviewed scientists the world over have admitted your scam is a scam idiot. GOD don't you EVER get ONE single issue right moron? Do you think anyone CARES what your partythink brainwashed ignorant ass says or thinks?

Face it crybaby the USA SAW what Barry wants for the future and we decided we can't take another 4 years of your party's retarded shyt get it loser? No go away and learn a hobby since you own't be able to schill for Obama much longer he's losing his ass in the pools see you in Nov!

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#24 Oct 30, 2012
BodhiVickery speaks wrote:
<quoted text>You're an imbecile. Peer reviewed scientists the world over have admitted your scam is a scam idiot. GOD don't you EVER get ONE single issue right moron? Do you think anyone CARES what your partythink brainwashed ignorant ass says or thinks?
Face it crybaby the USA SAW what Barry wants for the future and we decided we can't take another 4 years of your party's retarded shyt get it loser? No go away and learn a hobby since you own't be able to schill for Obama much longer he's losing his ass in the pools see you in Nov!
Holy apoplectic run on misspelled diatribe of unconnected verbal diarrhea. Calm Down before you stroke out.
ObjectiveOne

Utica, NY

#25 Oct 30, 2012
Truth Dig wrote:
<quoted text>
Every scientific organization in the world recognizes global warming is occuring and is being caused by man's behavior- specificly, carbon emissions. But that's okay, the Republican Party doesn't like this fact, so just deny it.
You must do a lot of reading to know that "every scientific journal in the world" agrees with you. Wow!! PS, I am not a Republican. If and when man made global warming becomes a scientific fact as opposed to a theory, it will thus be recognized. Until then ,it is truly dumb to call it something it is not.
ObjectiveOne

Utica, NY

#26 Oct 30, 2012
Bodhisatva wrote:
<quoted text>Larry Bell is a Tool of the Energy Industry(you said follow the money)
Bell uses the key technique that denialists use in debates, dubbed by Eugenie Scott the “Gish gallop”, named after a master of the style, anti-evolutionist Duane Gish. The Gish gallop raises a barrage of obscure and marginal facts and fabrications that appear at first glance to cast doubt on the entire edifice under attack, but which on closer examination do no such thing. In real-time debates the number of particularities raised is sure to catch the opponent off guard; this is why challenges to such debates are often raised by enemies of science. Little or no knowledge of a holistic view of any given science is needed to construct such scattershot attacks.
The approach also works somewhat in print, if the references are sufficiently obscure and numerous. Ideally, someone will take the time to answer such an attack, but there is a fundamental asymmetry of forces at work. It is, in fact, easier to form an allegation than to track down a reasonable explanation of what it means and how it really fits in to the balance of evidence. Also, the skills required to reflect the science are deeper than the ones required to attack it; hence the defenders are outnumbered and outgunned. Still, sometimes an article is prominent enough that it merits a detailed response.
The slightly out of the ordinary thing about Bell’s piece is that he casts his attack not as an attack on science (his usual method) but on the media:
And, the global warming scare industry is a $5 billion one of grants and studies, moast of which were fake.

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#27 Oct 30, 2012
ObjectiveOne wrote:
<quoted text>And, the global warming scare industry is a $5 billion one of grants and studies, moast of which were fake.
The Fossil Fuel Industry is Profitable in the $Trillions. THE MOST Profitable industry in the History of the World.
YOU Said follow the Money. Take your own advice.
On the other hand

Utica, NY

#28 Oct 30, 2012
Bodhisatva wrote:
<quoted text>The Fossil Fuel Industry is Profitable in the $Trillions. THE MOST Profitable industry in the History of the World.
YOU Said follow the Money. Take your own advice.
Actually the fossil fuel industry operates at lower profit margin than many other industries. Their large profits are simply a matter of the fact that we all use fossil fuels. In other words, they have billions of $ of profits because they have trillions of $ of sales, but their profit margins are not as high as many other industries.

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#29 Oct 31, 2012
On the other hand wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the fossil fuel industry operates at lower profit margin than many other industries. Their large profits are simply a matter of the fact that we all use fossil fuels. In other words, they have billions of $ of profits because they have trillions of $ of sales, but their profit margins are not as high as many other industries.
I think the point was to compare the levels of spending to fund research into Climate Change to The Money the Energy Companies are spending to buy Climate Change deniers. I understand the "profit margin" argument is a common tool used by the industry to support their need for subsidies and Tax breaks. Whatever.

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#30 Oct 31, 2012
On the other hand wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the fossil fuel industry operates at lower profit margin than many other industries. Their large profits are simply a matter of the fact that we all use fossil fuels. In other words, they have billions of $ of profits because they have trillions of $ of sales, but their profit margins are not as high as many other industries.
Don't forget We the Tax payers foot the Bill for all the external costs of The Oil Industry, The Cancers caused down wind from the refineries, the Shipping lanes kept open by virtue of our Military, the devastation to our lands when there is a spill, etc.

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#31 Oct 31, 2012
ObjectiveOne wrote:
<quoted text>You must do a lot of reading to know that "every scientific journal in the world" agrees with you. Wow!! PS, I am not a Republican. If and when man made global warming becomes a scientific fact as opposed to a theory, it will thus be recognized. Until then ,it is truly dumb to call it something it is not.
Every major scientific origanization, including EVERY NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE OF EVERY INDUSTRIALIZED NATION IN THE WORLD, agrees that global warming is occuring and is being caused by man's activities. That is a fact. Why people would deny this, and/or attribute it to a massive conspiracy, is simple: they are stupid f.cking lunatics.
BS

Utica, NY

#32 Oct 31, 2012
Bodhisatva wrote:
<quoted text>Don't forget We the Tax payers foot the Bill for all the external costs of The Oil Industry, The Cancers caused down wind from the refineries, the Shipping lanes kept open by virtue of our Military, the devastation to our lands when there is a spill, etc.
Then I think you should stop using oil
More info please

Camillus, NY

#33 Oct 31, 2012
Truth Dig wrote:
<quoted text>
Every major scientific origanization, including EVERY NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE OF EVERY INDUSTRIALIZED NATION IN THE WORLD, agrees that global warming is occuring and is being caused by man's activities. That is a fact. Why people would deny this, and/or attribute it to a massive conspiracy, is simple: they are stupid f.cking lunatics.
Please provide a published resource that identifies and states
"EVERY NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE OF EVERY INDUSTRIALIZED NATION IN THE WORLD agrees that global warming is occuring and is being caused by man's activities"

Thank You....
Global Cooliing

Camillus, NY

#34 Oct 31, 2012
Remember Global cooling in the 1970's???
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

This just shows how there are climate changes that continue to occur throughout time. The earth has been warming since the last ice age and there were limited carbon emissions prior to the industrial revolution and worldwide population growth....
global HOAX

New Hartford, NY

#35 Oct 31, 2012
the global warming hoax is only believed by morons.

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#36 Oct 31, 2012
BS wrote:
<quoted text>
Then I think you should stop using oil
I truly don't give a Rats Ass what you think. But, for the record I use considerably less than I used to, and considerably less than many. I have replaced all my windows, gutted and re-insulated every room in my home, keep my heat low, I walk to work and when I must drive I drive a fuel efficient Car.

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#37 Oct 31, 2012
More info please wrote:
<quoted text>
Please provide a published resource that identifies and states
"EVERY NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE OF EVERY INDUSTRIALIZED NATION IN THE WORLD agrees that global warming is occuring and is being caused by man's activities"
Thank You....
Here's a start.
http://www.ucsusa.org/ssi/climate-change/scie...

You're welcome.

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#38 Oct 31, 2012
More info please wrote:
<quoted text>
Please provide a published resource that identifies and states
"EVERY NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE OF EVERY INDUSTRIALIZED NATION IN THE WORLD agrees that global warming is occuring and is being caused by man's activities"
Thank You....
Maybe this will be better for you..

http://www.interacademycouncil.net/24026/2825...

You're welcome. Again.

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#39 Oct 31, 2012
I'm not a climate scientist. I'm also not a brain surgeon. But imagine suffering from agonizing headaches. You go to a neurlogist. He tells you that you've got a massive brain tumor that requires immediate treatment. Failure to act, and you will die a horribly painful death. The good news is if you act now, and aggressivly, and you'll likely live. You say you want a second opinion. Same diagnosis. Third opinion. Same diagnosis. And a fourth and a fifth and a sixth and a seventh. Each with the same sobering, but also somewhat encouraging, diagnosis.

Now imagine going to dozens and dozens of doctors, all of whom are brilliant and experts in the field and they tell you the same thing. Then, finally, you go to a proctologist, who says there's nothing to worry about. There is no brain tumor. He says "people have been getting headaches for millions of years. Don't worry about it." You say, "You're My Man, Ass Doctor!" and go on your way, ignoring the throbbing, and worsening, pain in the front of your brain.

Would a sane person do that? Would a sane person reject the expert diagnosis of dozens and dozens of brilliant, qualified people, those who have spent their entire professional lives studying in a particular field, and instead, take the advice of an unproven, unqualified, outlier? A quack?

Then why would people who know nothing about science reject the near unanimous conclusion of experts in the field of global climate change, and instead take heed from political lunatics, religous zealots, and freaks? What drives that thought process?
Romneys already winning

Utica, NY

#40 Oct 31, 2012
Bodhisatva wrote:
<quoted text>"a great many(unnamed) scientists" is no match for "the vast majority of climate scientists" Sorry.
Still twisting reality I see! LOL I can't wait till your failed messiah bite it so you and your retarded truth dick girlfriend can go find another retard hobby for reality challenged liberal partythink retards lol!

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.

Utica Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Dallas have up his family like a hot potatoe 12 min Nikki 8
Popeyes 20 min Mkj 4
mike mitrulli 23 min jon fartley 5
sylvan learning 33 min Snottiker 5
Utica is too busy for All-Star Game 35 min Riggie Stuffed Ut... 5
All-Star Game NOT Sold Out 38 min Riggie Stuffed Ut... 4
listen to the teachers whining 39 min end times 58
summit.com girl 1 hr Syraguy 13
How Much Does H & R Block charge To Do Your Taxes (Jan '09) 11 hr karen51 501
Sheldon Silver Arrested by FBI Today 15 hr joyce 35
Utica Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Utica People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 7:59 pm PST

Bleacher Report 7:59PM
Why the NY Giants Absolutely Must Draft ILB Denzel Perryman
NBC Sports 6:29 AM
Todd Bowles: I can't say now if Geno is or isn't our quarterback
NFL 7:51 AM
Bills GM: EJ Manuel knows he needs to 'step up'
Bleacher Report 8:03 AM
Did the Jets Get It Right? Grading Woody Johnson's Offseason Moves
Yahoo! Sports11:24 AM
New Browns OC unfazed by QB uncertainty
Bleacher Report11:36 AM
Ex-QB: Equipment Staff Fixes Brady's Balls
Bleacher Report 7:29 PM
How the Jets Can Make Most of Each Draft Pick
Bleacher Report 8:01 PM
5 2nd Round Prospects Jets Should Target
NBC Sports 5:15 AM
Friday morning one-liners
NBC Sports 7:09 AM
Perry Fewell to interview for position coach job with 49ers