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

Feb 5, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Verde Independent

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.

Comments
721 - 740 of 1,645 Comments Last updated Wednesday Jul 23
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#742
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>To ricardo:

The first is a scientist, although he's also a religious nut: a "God's in his heaven, so global warming can't be a problem" creationist as I said before.
The second is a retired chemical engineer- expertise on climate science, none.
Getting desperate, aren't you?
Fake petitions, phoney lists and a handful of cranks and religious nut.
You deniers are so gullible.
Right on.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#743
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

SpaceBlues wrote:
Ricardo is missing a piece: a brain.
http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/sha...
Notice the passion from the alarmist, he has to call names and act childish. An insult to your religion? It's the Hoax of the century, Gore is flying around in his private jet visiting his mansions while you alarmists sit back worrying about the sky falling....LOL

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#744
Apr 5, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

SpaceBlues wrote:
How did you handle Y2K? LOL

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#745
Apr 6, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

In real science, a treatment or medicine is experimentally tested before its approved for use. Climate change mitigation hasn't been demonstrated so why would you prescribe snake oil for your planet's health?
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#746
Apr 7, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
In real science
When a troll has to preface a statement with 'in real'.. it indicates a complete lack of reality for which he is trying to compensate with words.
Brian_G wrote:
a treatment or medicine is experimentally tested before its approved for use.
And when you have only one patient, who do you try the 'clinical trial' on?
Brian_G wrote:
Climate change mitigation hasn't been demonstrated
Actually it has as every variation in solar insolation, aerosols and GHGs shows a corresponding change in surface temperature. Not only in theory but in experimental evidence. The factors are now well understood and not debated.
Brian_G wrote:
so why would you prescribe snake oil for your planet's health?
Because of the consequences of leaving the problem untreated.

Your post is really nonsensical and not really worth rebutting but there may be some weak minded readers with limited reasoning skills that might think it has substance so I have shown the errors in it.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#747
Apr 7, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
When a troll has to preface a statement with 'in real'.. it indicates a complete lack of reality for which he is trying to compensate with words.
I'm guessing he meant all the overstated climate models that have recently been debunked. Temperatures have not risen nearly as much as almost all of the climate models predicted and evidence that CO2 is not nearly as strong a climate driver as the IPCC has been assuming. This is the possibility they do not allow to be considered, because it would end all of their policy-changing goals. Pluto is also warmer, Can you please send in more money to Gore so he can fix it?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#748
Apr 7, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
When a troll has to preface a statement with 'in real'.. it indicates a complete lack of reality for which he is trying to compensate with words.
As opposed to the pseudoscience of climate change mitigation.

.
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
And when you have only one patient, who do you try the 'clinical trial' on?
That patient, you give your experimental treatment and stop, then reverse the treatment if possible and try again, recording symptoms and metabolic functions while searching for causal correlations over time. If there is only one patient then single subject experimental paradigms are used; hopefully your physician won't give up on science.

.
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
Actually it has as every variation in solar insolation, aerosols and GHGs shows a corresponding change in surface temperature. Not only in theory but in experimental evidence. The factors are now well understood and not debated.
Some have been experimentally tested, particulates in the atmosphere for example. They are short lived as they fall out of the air, and local. Man made CO2 on climate change hasn't been experimentally tested.

.
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
Because of the consequences of leaving the problem untreated.
Like doctors bleeding patients? That's what I mean by doctors giving up on science, they had this theory about humors, but they didn't test it experimentally.

.
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
Your post is really nonsensical and not really worth rebutting but there may be some weak minded readers with limited reasoning skills that might think it has substance so I have shown the errors in it.
Thanks for trying. Do you have more questions?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#749
Apr 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Notice the passion from the alarmist[name calling], he has to call names[sic] and act childish[name calling]. An insult to your religion? It's the Hoax of the century, Gore is flying around in his private jet visiting his mansions while you alarmists[name calling] sit back worrying[name calling] about the sky falling[name calling]....LOL
LOL. You did all this name calling just because I called you Ricardo.

Why do you use Ricardo in your name? Oh, it must be because you miss a piece called brain.

You probably don't remember our history but you are talking about Al Gore, long-time member of Congress, The Vice President of USA, presidential candidate, author of books, Nobel Laurate, journalist, etc. Jealous, aren't you?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#750
Apr 7, 2013
 
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>To b_gone:
When a troll has to preface a statement with 'in real'.. it indicates a complete lack of reality for which he is trying to compensate with words.
<quoted text>
And when you have only one patient, who do you try the 'clinical trial' on?
<quoted text>
Actually it has as every variation in solar insolation, aerosols and GHGs shows a corresponding change in surface temperature. Not only in theory but in experimental evidence. The factors are now well understood and not debated.
<quoted text>
Because of the consequences of leaving the problem untreated.
Your post is really nonsensical and not really worth rebutting but there may be some weak minded readers with limited reasoning skills that might think it has substance so I have shown the errors in it.
Another biggie is that these deniers without science attack climate science as if it is from another planet. A foreign science.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#751
Apr 7, 2013
 
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>I'm guessing he meant all the overstated climate models that have recently been debunked. Temperatures have not risen nearly as much as almost all of the climate models predicted and evidence that CO2 is not nearly as strong a climate driver as the IPCC has been assuming.
Temperatures are within the range of the model predictions.

Which means that the slow rise in temperature could be just natural variation.

Which means that in the next decade we could see temperatures at the upper end of model predictions.

If the temperatures are outside the range of model predictions next decade, then you'll have a case.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#752
Apr 7, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>LOL. You did all this name calling just because I called you Ricardo.
No. What name calling? I called you an Alarmist. That is what you are. You sure are sensitive after posting your insult. Why so much passion? Is the sky falling soon?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#753
Apr 7, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>LOL.
You probably don't remember our history but you are talking about Al Gore, long-time member of Congress, The Vice President of USA, presidential candidate, author of books, Nobel Laurate, journalist, etc. Jealous, aren't you?
What does Al Gore have to do with Science? He flunked science, he might be dumber then you.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#754
Apr 7, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Temperatures are within the range of the model predictions.
Which means that the slow rise in temperature could be just natural variation.
Which means that in the next decade we could see temperatures at the upper end of model predictions.
If the temperatures are outside the range of model predictions next decade, then you'll have a case.
No they are not within range. They have been way overstated. NOT even close. We can't predict weather, have you ever watched the news? LOL...
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#755
Apr 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver wrote:
In real science.......
In real science, people spend lots of time, money & effort, training & learning to be scientists. "brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver" has no science or mathematics degrees. "brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver" didn't even have upper class science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra or pre-calc in its poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa. "brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver" read the 8th grade science book, first page. After that, the science book was all Greek to "brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver" that it couldn't unnerstan'........ Greek (letter variables) in the equations.

"brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver" does have math errors of 1 million TIMES, 1000 TIMES, 3000 TIMES, & 73 million TIMES..... which it is proud of. Oh, no. "brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver" is proud of its poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#756
Apr 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>No they are not within range.
Yes they are.

http://www.realclimate.org/images/model122.jp...
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#757
Apr 8, 2013
 
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>No they are not within range. They have been way overstated. NOT even close.
Please provide evidence from a respectable science journal.

Of course, you cannot because no serious scientist has made this claim.

Busted again.
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text> We can't predict weather, have you ever watched the news? LOL...
We cannot predict the weather as WELL as we predict climate. But the issue is NOT predicting climate but predicting the temperature of the surface in balance.

A simpler system with a fixed and well monitored influx (insolation from the sun) and a fairly well understood barrier to outflow from aerosols and GHGs.

Of course, by showing that you don't see a difference between climate and weather prediction, you pretty well establish yourself as anti-science and ignorant so I won't bother debating it with you.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#758
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Our noses and eyes have evolved to ignore CO2 so carbon dioxide is odorless and invisible.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#761
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Global climate models may be overstating the warming properties of black carbon particles, according to new research led by the University of California, Davis. The study will be published online Aug. 31 in the journal Science.

Why do the Alarmist have to lie so much?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#762
Apr 8, 2013
 
The draft of a U.N. climate change report due to be published in 2014 has been leaked, and it shows that the four temperature models the U.N. used from 1990 to 2012 vastly overestimated the warming of the earth during that time.http://www.breitbart.com/ Big-Peace/2013/01/28/U-N-Repor t-Says-Global-Warming-Predicti ons-Overstated-The-Problem

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#763
Apr 8, 2013
 
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Please provide evidence from a respectable science journal.
Of course, you cannot because no serious scientist has made this claim.
You are busted. "Journal Science"

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

•••