Skull Valley lawmaker wants both side...

Skull Valley lawmaker wants both sides of climate change taught to students

There are 1632 comments on the Verde Independent story from Feb 5, 2013, titled Skull Valley lawmaker wants both sides of climate change taught to students. In it, Verde Independent reports that:

Saying students are getting only one side of the debate, a state senator wants to free teachers to tell students why they believe there is no such thing human-caused "global warming.' The proposal by Sen.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Verde Independent.

Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#547 Mar 11, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>At best, F.G. offers empirical evidence, not an experimental test on climate. As the oceans warm, they release CO2, coincidence isn't causality.
The empirical evidence on CO2 and warming proves you are wrong.

The fact that you keep repeating the claim that warming oceans have released CO2 proves you are a liar.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#548 Mar 11, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>At best, F.G. offers empirical evidence, not an experimental test on climate.
By your chosen definition of an experiment (one from the field of psychiatric medicine, which proves you are a cretin, but nevertheless) it's an experiment.
Brian_G wrote:
The single-subject experimental paradigm, a research paradigm, can also be a powerful decision-making tool in clinical evaluation. To support this thesis, a brief review of the single-subject paradigm is presented, including a discussion of its 1) place in the continuum of methods to develop knowledge, 2) essential characteristics, 3) similarities to the therapeutic process, 4) validity, and 5) generality of findings. Usefulness of designs in this paradigm is illustrated with examples from the physical therapy literature, the ABA and the multiple-baseline designs. Also illustrated is the precision of information gained through individual data analysis....
http://physther.org/content/69/7/601.short
We observed radiation leaving the Earth (baseline).
We added more CO2 to the atmosphere (intervention) and collected data on the dependent variable (radiation leaving the Earth was less).

What's the next stage in the experimental paradigm *you* chose?

Reversal: we should reduce CO2 and see what happens.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-subject_d...

Of course the fact that your arguments are demonstrably foolish won't stop you bleating "there is no experiment" two minutes later.

Many intelligent people have responded to you on this thread. The only person you have convinced is an obvious nutter.

Yet you continue to repeat the same argument as if it had not been shown to be imbecilic.

I think the intelligent people here are beginning to realise something that people who have been here longer realised a long time ago: that you are simply a troll.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#549 Mar 11, 2013
Lil Ticked wrote:
Your point being what?

“There is no such thing”

Level 3

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#550 Mar 12, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Your point being what?
If you can not connect the dots that is not my problem.

“There is no such thing”

Level 3

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#551 Mar 12, 2013

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#552 Mar 12, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
By your chosen definition of an experiment (one from the field of psychiatric medicine, which proves you are a cretin, but nevertheless) it's an experiment. We observed radiation leaving the Earth (baseline). We added more CO2 to the atmosphere (intervention) and collected data on the dependent variable (radiation leaving the Earth was less).
Our CO2 emissions are not controlled, they aren't part of an experiment.

.
Fair Game wrote:
What's the next stage in the experimental paradigm *you* chose? Reversal: we should reduce CO2 and see what happens.[URL deleted] Of course the fact that your arguments are demonstrably foolish won't stop you bleating "there is no experiment" two minutes later.
The next step should be learning what's an experiment. It's intentional, not an accidental byproduct of life.

.
Fair Game wrote:
Many intelligent people have responded to you on this thread. The only person you have convinced is an obvious nutter. Yet you continue to repeat the same argument as if it had not been shown to be imbecilic. I think the intelligent people here are beginning to realise something that people who have been here longer realised a long time ago: that you are simply a troll.
I'm not a scientist, I don't do experiments for my living. If you don't like the experimental history on the man made greenhouse gas effect, don't blame me. I'm just observing there are no experiments testing climate change mitigation, not suggesting experiments.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#553 Mar 12, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL US emissions were at a 20 year low in 2012. The US is currently on target to reach a 16% reduction by 2020, missing it's projected 17% reduction by only 1%. But there's still better than 6 years to go before we see the final numbers.
I take it you don't live in the US. Well my country's lack of dollars is your problem if you were thinking you were going to get some of them. And yes the US is more likely than not to fail to provide the money Obama promised in 2009.
Most Americans who do think that climate change is real, hard to believe there are some who don't, still don't think money can fix it. And we are pretty much convinced our government doesn't have either the money or the investment expertise to be spending our tax dollars on unproven experiments.
We have federal employees facing a 20% reduction in pay from sequestration because our government can't manage our money. Paying for climate change is not going to get to the top of our list this year.
Is that for the year or the first quarter? I cant find anthing for the entire year
http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm...

And of course fracking helps, such a pity it does so much damage to the environment otherwise it could be the perfect solution.

However I did find this
http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2013/02/the-u...

Quote
At first glance, a new report from the World Resources Institute (WRI) might look like good news for US greenhouse gas emissions.
Although the world's largest economy is currently missing its 2020 emissions reduction target, it should be possible for the president to make the target without help from a stubborn Congress.
Endquote
Quote
The US has made some progress towards this goal - for a range of reasons. But federal climate action stalled in 2010 after Obama failed to get climate change legislation passed in the Senate.
Endquote

Yes only a blog but from a reputable site and very interesting reading particularly putting your statement of “US emissions were at a 20 year low in 2012” into context.

Why would I want to live in the US? Been a few times, country is quite nice in places and as big a dumb as just about anywhere in others, however the thing that lets it down are that percentage of the people who are just like you. And why would I want any of your dollars, I have my own pounds and euros thank you, I have done investing in the US when the US b(w)ankers ripped the world off. That little escapade in American greed cost me 80 grand (GBP), does not happen twice.

See also http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/
Particularly the subheadings
Climate change is happening
Our Earth is warming
The evidence is clear.
Humans are largely responsible for recent climate change

You are coming across as the typical whining American and the reason you country is enjoying such a poor standing in the world at the moment. I realise that this may a bit controversial but have you ever considered of paying a higher tax rather than winging and trying to shoulder the blame the world economic depression (caused by US b(w)ankers) on anyone else but where it belongs? You (as a nation) are the one who demanded such services as supplied by your government when times were good. Now they are not so good, high unemployment and so less tax dollars coming in perhaps you need to reduce your greed or pay more tax.

Priorities are obviously different when you can only think of yourself and profit now and screw the kids.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#554 Mar 12, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Experiment: A test under controlled conditions that is made to demonstrate a known truth, examine the validity of a hypothesis, or determine the efficacy of something previously untried.
Computer models that aren't reconciled with real world test (the way airframe and wing models are reconciled) aren't experiments.
I'm still waiting for anyone to cite a compelling experimental test for climate change mitigation.
.
<quoted text>Don't blame me for your bad posts.
.
<quoted text>Coincidence isn't causality; there are no experiments in the atmosphere that show man can change or control global climate.
.
<quoted text>Coincidence isn't causality. There are more pyramid shaped buildings now, than at any time in the past. Don't you find it odd that there's the same number of experiments that attribute global warming to pyramids as there are that attribute it to man made greenhouse gas emissions; zero.
.
<quoted text>I'm not complaining about academic articles; there are plenty of those. I'm just observing there are no experimental tests of climate change mitigation. Don't blame me, I'm not a climate scientist.
.
<quoted text>Restricting greenhouse gas emissions might be the biggest waste ever created; we won't know until its been experimentally tested.
Yes just as computer models do so that makes no difference to the outcome and you do need to remember that I (and several others) provided documentation of physical tests that YOU IGNORE.

No - you are simply IGNORING those test and if you keep waiting in the same ignorant way just proves your ignorance.

Nothing wrong with the post, the problem lies in your own deliberate ignorance and refusal to accept any proposal but your own. So typically childish to try an pin the blame for your own stupidity on others.

Coincidence or causality! It is happening, it is the scientific and governmental consensus that that the rapid and unprecedented increase in climate change is man made. Your denial is irrelevant.

Acting like a child and lying does not help your cause, it is the scientific and governmental consensus, a consensus based on experimentation and hard data (that you ignore) that that the rapid and unprecedented increase in climate change is man made. Your denial is irrelevant.

Yes we know you are not a climate scientist, you make that obvious by your childish behaviour and the way you do not even consider the evidence.

Or until the earth is ruined, whichever comes first. And no experimental test will make the slightest bit of difference to the extreme flooding that northern Europe and India has seen increasingly over the last couple of decades. The increase in the ferocity of hurricanes, cyclones and tropical storms seen over the last few years. The melting icecaps and consequent rise in sea level etc…

Some more of the effects of climate change;.
http://www.businessinsider.com/16-irrefutable...
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#555 Mar 12, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Our CO2 emissions are not controlled, they aren't part of an experiment.
The experimental paradigm *you* proposed doesn't require a control. Make your mind up, idiot.
I'm not a scientist...
No, you're a stupid troll. You prove that with every post.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#556 Mar 12, 2013
PHD wrote:
Actually it's called scientific science fiction.
Is that the only mantra you have?

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#557 Mar 12, 2013
Lil Ticked wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =VnAhAX98HY4XX
Oxygen is killing you
Yes and so is cyanide and radiation from the 1950/60s nuclear test and Chernobyl etc, and smoking and processed meat and being run over by a bus and old age and much, much more.

However oxygen is NOT increasing, is combining with the carbon in an unprecedented rate and creating CO2.

So how about going into a room full of oxygen for 10 minutes and then a room full of carbon dioxide 10 minutes and seeing which kills you first.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#558 Mar 12, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
The experimental paradigm *you* proposed doesn't require a control. Make your mind up, idiot.
The single subject experimental paradigm uses time and sometime a reversal in the proposed "cure/cause" variable. If you want to criticize the single subject experimental paradigm, first learn how it works.

Since more than one subject can't be found, the independent variable is changed over time while a measuring change in the dependent variable over time. Good thing, the greenhouse effect works at light speed; this should be a piece of cake.

.
Fair Game wrote:
No, you're a stupid troll. You prove that with every post.
I'm not a scientist, I never claimed to be. I just happen to know what an experiment is and how they are used in science.

I don't need to insult climate change alarmists; the facts are on my side. If you come up with any experiment that shows a change in climate temperature from man made greenhouse gas; then call me anything you want. Until then, ad hominem is still childish and fallacious.

###
ChristineM wrote:
Yes just as computer models do so that makes no difference to the outcome and you do need to remember that I (and several others) provided documentation of physical tests that YOU IGNORE.
Computer models are not real world experiments on climate change; they are more akin to video games. Computer models produce outcomes defined by the input but climate is more random and chaotic. Please cite the most compelling experiment you've found that proves either man made catastrophic climate change or that we have the ability to change or mitigate climate. That shouldn't be difficult, I'll wait here.

.
ChristineM wrote:
No - you are simply IGNORING those test and if you keep waiting in the same ignorant way just proves your ignorance.
I'm trying to learn, not insult other posters. I'm sorry if that doesn't meet your standards, but I'm not going to change that position, out of respect of others.

.
ChristineM wrote:
Nothing wrong with the post, the problem lies in your own deliberate ignorance and refusal to accept any proposal but your own. So typically childish to try an pin the blame for your own stupidity on others.
Again, sorry if you feel I've blamed you for something; I blame climate scientists for not producing compelling experimental evidence, not other Topix loggers.

.
ChristineM wrote:
Coincidence or causality! It is happening, it is the scientific and governmental consensus that that the rapid and unprecedented increase in climate change is man made. Your denial is irrelevant.
Coincidence or causality is the question; climate always happens. Only what scientists can do by experiment is relevant, the rest is only rhetoric.

.
ChristineM wrote:
Acting like a child and lying does not help your cause, it is the scientific and governmental consensus, a consensus based on experimentation and hard data (that you ignore) that that the rapid and unprecedented increase in climate change is man made. Your denial is irrelevant. Yes we know you are not a climate scientist, you make that obvious by your childish behaviour and the way you do not even consider the evidence.
^^^ More ad hom, it's in the playbook. If you can't win by reason, why behave reasonably?

I cede this point.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#559 Mar 12, 2013
.
ChristineM wrote:
Or until the earth is ruined, whichever comes first. And no experimental test will make the slightest bit of difference to the extreme flooding that northern Europe and India has seen increasingly over the last couple of decades. The increase in the ferocity of hurricanes, cyclones and tropical storms seen over the last few years. The melting icecaps and consequent rise in sea level etc… Some more of the effects of climate change;.[URL deleted]
Don't panic, you won't ruin the earth by emitting CO2; that's life. We are biological carbon emission devices, just doing what we must to live. Nature has adapted to our evil greenhouse emitting ways.

Get with the program, climate changes so deal with it. Don't whine if the weather is bothersome, take a vacation to someplace better.

Tropical storms have always happened, please get hold of yourself.

“There is no such thing”

Level 3

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#560 Mar 12, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that for the year or the first quarter? I cant find anthing for the entire year
http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm...
And of course fracking helps, such a pity it does so much damage to the environment otherwise it could be the perfect solution.
However I did find this
http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2013/02/the-u...
Quote
At first glance, a new report from the World Resources Institute (WRI) might look like good news for US greenhouse gas emissions.
Although the world's largest economy is currently missing its 2020 emissions reduction target, it should be possible for the president to make the target without help from a stubborn Congress.
Endquote
Quote
The US has made some progress towards this goal - for a range of reasons. But federal climate action stalled in 2010 after Obama failed to get climate change legislation passed in the Senate.
Endquote
Yes only a blog but from a reputable site and very interesting reading particularly putting your statement of “US emissions were at a 20 year low in 2012” into context.
Why would I want to live in the US? Been a few times, country is quite nice in places and as big a dumb as just about anywhere in others, however the thing that lets it down are that percentage of the people who are just like you. And why would I want any of your dollars, I have my own pounds and euros thank you, I have done investing in the US when the US b(w)ankers ripped the world off. That little escapade in American greed cost me 80 grand (GBP), does not happen twice.
See also http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/
Particularly the subheadings
Climate change is happening
Our Earth is warming
The evidence is clear.
Humans are largely responsible for recent climate change
You are coming across as the typical whining American and the reason you country is enjoying such a poor standing in the world at the moment. I realise that this may a bit controversial but have you ever considered of paying a higher tax rather than winging and trying to shoulder the blame the world economic depression (caused by US b(w)ankers) on anyone else but where it belongs? You (as a nation) are the one who demanded such services as supplied by your government when times were good. Now they are not so good, high unemployment and so less tax dollars coming in perhaps you need to reduce your greed or pay more tax.
Priorities are obviously different when you can only think of yourself and profit now and screw the kids.
http://www.noteviljustwrong.com/General/educa...

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#561 Mar 12, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Don't whine if the weather is bothersome, take a vacation to someplace better.
Ah, so this is the "other side of climate change" that students need to be taught. Excellent.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#562 Mar 12, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Since more than one subject can't be found, the independent variable is changed over time while a measuring change in the dependent variable over time.
We've changed the concentration of CO2 over time and observed the change in temperature. The results of your experiment are in.

http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/oceanogr...
I don't need to insult climate change alarmists... Until then, ad hominem is still childish and fallacious.
Predictable pearl clutching.

You do nothing but insult us every day. Your only response to smart people having the facts on their side is to make really stupid remarks, and then when smart people point out how stupid you are, to appeal to the sympathy vote from any stupid people reading who might feel you are being condescended to.

You are a stupid troll who insults the intelligence of everybody reading,

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#563 Mar 13, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
Ah, so this is the "other side of climate change" that students need to be taught. Excellent.
The 'other side' is the fact, not one single experiment shows climate change mitigation is feasible or even possible. Weather isn't climate.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#564 Mar 13, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
We've changed the concentration of CO2 over time and observed the change in temperature. The results of your experiment are in.
Our carbon dioxide emissions aren't an experiment, most climate change mitigators don't know what an experiment is or how they are used in science.

.
Fair Game wrote:
Predictable pearl clutching. You do nothing but insult us every day. Your only response to smart people having the facts on their side is to make really stupid remarks, and then when smart people point out how stupid you are, to appeal to the sympathy vote from any stupid people reading who might feel you are being condescended to. You are a stupid troll who insults the intelligence of everybody reading,
I'm sorry Fair Game feels insulted; I don't blame him for the lack of experimental tests on climate change mitigation.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#565 Mar 13, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text> Computer models are not real world experiments on climate change; they are more akin to video games. Computer models produce outcomes defined by the input but climate is more random and chaotic. Please cite the most compelling experiment you've found that proves either man made catastrophic climate change or that we have the ability to change or mitigate climate. That shouldn't be difficult, I'll wait here.
.
<quoted text>I'm trying to learn, not insult other posters. I'm sorry if that doesn't meet your standards, but I'm not going to change that position, out of respect of others.
.
<quoted text>Again, sorry if you feel I've blamed you for something; I blame climate scientists for not producing compelling experimental evidence, not other Topix loggers.
.
<quoted text>Coincidence or causality is the question; climate always happens. Only what scientists can do by experiment is relevant, the rest is only rhetoric.
.
<quoted text>^^^ More ad hom, it's in the playbook. If you can't win by reason, why behave reasonably?
I cede this point.
You misunderstanding is simple and possibly deliberate misunderstanding. Computer models are not in no way akin to video games. Please consider that I do know what I am talking about here, I create the graphics for both video games and computer models and in some scenarios pioneered the techniques. The data used for video games is often based on reality but adapted for entertainment. The data used in computer modelling is accurate, checked, verified, scientifically generated, peer reviewed information. The only comparison is that they both run on computers, rather like the difference between watching a youtube Mickey mouse cartoon and the clock in the bottom right of your screen. Or in human terms, a mouse and you because you both breathe air.

You will wait forever because links to thousands of such experiments have been provided and you IGNORE that evidence. Your ignorance is not my problem

Nope you are not trying to learn, you are an incredulous liar of extreme deliberate ignorance who revels in denial of fact

There is no doubt that you attempted to blame my post for your deliberate ignorance, the evidence is in these very posts
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TVP...
but of course, as is your way you are simply going to deny that such evidence exists even in the face of the evidence. http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TVP...

Nope, science has little or nothing to do with climate change, why must you always try and put the blame where it does not belong?

So you consider the factual evidence ad hom.
Factual:- You act like a child by bringing up what you consider to be humorous attempts to ridicule and you lie in the face of evidence –
Now that does explain a lot.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#566 Mar 13, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
.
<quoted text>Don't panic, you won't ruin the earth by emitting CO2; that's life. We are biological carbon emission devices, just doing what we must to live. Nature has adapted to our evil greenhouse emitting ways.
Get with the program, climate changes so deal with it. Don't whine if the weather is bothersome, take a vacation to someplace better.
Tropical storms have always happened, please get hold of yourself.
Nope, we are doing more than we need to do to live, we are doing what we like to be comfortable.

You ignorant moron? So your solution to climate change is crapping on someone else’s doorstep, typical of your type I suppose.

The scientific evidence – if you would care to bother examining it – is that cyclones, hurricanes and tropical storms have increased in violence. However you are not a scientist so facts mean nothing to you – right?

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.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Science News (Sep '13) 10 min _Susan_ 3,612
Posting for Points in the Evolution Forum (Oct '11) 12 min _Susan_ 14,569
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 15 min syamsu 195,409
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 33 min Uncle Sam 11,510
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 49 min READMORE 29,496
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 2 hr Don Barros Serrano 150,596
News Neil deGrasse Tyson embraces intelligent design... 20 hr Rome Viharo 1
More from around the web