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.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#835 Apr 9, 2013
southern alien wrote:
<quoted text>
Who cares. The emails were benign information that stupid people misunderstood as a conspiracy. The only point of contention was them talking about a 'trick' to do something. It wasn't to trick the public, but something to bypass somethin in computers.
How do you know the intent?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#836 Apr 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>How do you know the intent?
The intent is science.

Scientists are people too. They are free to use even cute terms informally but no hanky panky.

Remember they are not charged with any wrong-doing.

However, your posts are awful lies from the denier list. We have seen them again and again here. You are not even reading and learning from the replies.

You'll drop out soon, too with your ugly posts left for the record.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#837 Apr 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
Didn't you get the memo: it's not called global warming anymore, they changed it to "Climate Change".
Did you just wake up in the denier den?

Remember my posts: There's no free AGW/CC. We pay now, we pay more later.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#838 Apr 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>The intent is science.
Scientists are people too. They are free to use even cute terms informally but no hanky panky.
Remember they are not charged with any wrong-doing.
However, your posts are awful lies from the denier list. We have seen them again and again here. You are not even reading and learning from the replies.
You'll drop out soon, too with your ugly posts left for the record.
Like I asked, how did you know the intent of the emails that proved it was a hoax? Did you send them?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#839 Apr 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Did you just wake up in the denier den?
Remember my posts: There's no free AGW/CC. We pay now, we pay more later.
crawl out of your bunker, it's safe outside. The sky is not falling. Gore is flying back soon from the south.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#840 Apr 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
Sixteen prominent scientists recently signed an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal expressing their belief that the theory of global warming is not supported by science.
Funny to see creationist arguments used against global warming in a thread obviously inspired by a creationist argument.

-Evolution will soon be widely rejected.
-Many current scientists reject evolution.
-Over 300 scientists express skepticism of Darwinism (global warming skeptics and creationists have habits of drawing up lists of scientists)
-Many scientists find problems with evolution.****check***
-Evolution is only a theory
-Evolution has not been proved
-Evolution can not be falsified
-Evolution can not be replicated
-Scientists find what they expect to find
-Scientists are pressured not to challenge established dogma
-Mims was fired because he was a creationist
-Creationists are prevented from publishing in science journals
-Evolution is atheistic (the global warming skeptic variant is that global warming is communism or world socialism)
-Evolution is a religion
-Evolution leaves lots of things unexplained
-World War II airplanes are now beneath thousands of "annual" ice layers
-The second law of thermodynamics prohibits evolution

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#841 Apr 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
Sixteen prominent scientists recently signed an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal expressing their belief that the theory of global warming is not supported by science. This has not been getting the attention it deserves because politicians (looking at you Al Gore) are frankly embarrassed to admit that they are wrong about the phenomenon known as global warming. Not only has our planet stopped warming, but we may be headed toward a vast cooling period.
New data shows that in fact the Earth has not warmed at all over the last 15 years. In fact, the Daily Mail reports that the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit, after taking data from nearly 30,000 stations around the world, have found that the earth stopped warming in 1997. The report suggests we are headed toward a new solar cycle, Cycle 25, which NASA scientists have predicted will be significantly cooler than Cycle 24 which we are in now. This data largely contradicts the accepted theory among the public that carbon dioxide pollution is causing global warming and even proposes that we are actually heading toward global cooling.
Just because they are scientists it does not mean that their criticism is valid. Would you trust a structural engineers position on evolution more than you would a biologist?

And I believe that Gore is a base opportunist too. That does not mean that global warming is bullshit. You have to judge the message on its merits not the messenger.

Ask yourself these questions:

Is CO2 a greenhouse gas? If you say no then you are a denier. Without the greenhouse effect the Earth would be too cold for the life we now have.

Will doubling the amount of CO2 have a measurable effect on temperature?

Again if you say no you are a denier.

Could the experts be right about various effects working together?

In other words would the temperature increase from more CO2 release force more AGW gases into the atmosphere?

So far the Earth has been following the middle to low middle prediction range of the IPCC scientists. How far are you willing to let that go before you advocate some sort of action be taken?
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#842 Apr 9, 2013
riccardofire flameout wrote:
Sixteen prominent scientists recently signed an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal........
Wall Street Journal ain't a science journal. The 16 names are the long-time, long-in-the-tooth, & lazy exxon & energy paid mouthpieces spouting toxic AGW denial Pee-R propaganda. Several of the names have been corrected about their propaganda papers & one has been corrected several times. In essence, they lie to force-fit their data to an anti-AGW pathway.

"riccardofire" is a flameout.

Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#843 Apr 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
Sixteen prominent scientists recently signed an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal expressing their belief that the theory of global warming is not supported by science.
Prominent scientists is stretching it a bit. Their arguments are long-debunked too.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/examining-the...
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#844 Apr 9, 2013
riccardofire flameout wrote:
Like I asked, how did you know the intent of the emails that proved it was a hoax? Did you send them?
That "riccardofire flameout" doesn't know that toxic topix AGW deniers are hoaxes, proves its lack of science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra & pre-calc in its poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa(do you have a DEE-plooomaa?). Of course, you have no science or mathematics degrees. Don't follow in the steps of 'lyin' brian' with its attempts at math, ending in errors of 1 million TIMES, 1000 TIMES, 3000 TIMES, & 73 million TIMES.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#845 Apr 9, 2013
riccardofire flameout wrote:
....how did you know the intent of the emails.....
"riccardofire flameout"....... We know the toxic topix AGW denier ways, which do not believe court systems, do not believe science, do not know science, do not take science or mathematics classes, but are lazy, believing exxon, energy, re-pubic-lick-un, political, boardroom Pee-R propaganda.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#846 Apr 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
New data shows that in fact the Earth has not warmed at all over the last 15 years.
Should be data show, and no, they don't.

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from...
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#847 Apr 9, 2013
Ricardo is all about stretch and glue.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#848 Apr 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Like I asked, how did you know the intent of the emails that proved it was a hoax? Did you send them?
Silly. You are confused.

Here's the truth:

On November 17, 2009, Mann awoke to find out that private correspondence he and other scientists had sent to the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit in the United Kingdom had been hacked and individual phrases disseminated in a way that implied they had falsified their findings. Climate contrarians focused on the words “trick” and “hide the decline”—which some said indicated that Mann had erased data that had shown a decline in twentieth-century temperatures. This was the smoking gun proving climate change was a hoax, critics asserted. The media, for their part, lapped it up.

The reality is different. The e-mail with the words “trick” and “hide the decline” was sent by Phil Jones, head of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. It read,“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e. 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

The “trick” Jones was referring to was Mann’s decision to show two kinds of data on the same chart—data from temperature proxies (like the tree rings) and actual temperature data (from thermometers). This was a trick in the sense of a clever move, not a deception: all the data were labeled, so readers could see where the proxy data end and the temperature records begin.

As for “hide the decline,” Jones wasn’t referring to declines in temperature; he was referring to a drop seen in certain types of tree-ring data after 1960. And he wasn’t referring to Mann’s work—but to that of another scientist, Keith Briffa of the University of East Anglia. Pre-1960, Briffa’s tree-ring density records track the temperature records. Post-1960, there is a decline in the response of certain trees to temperature (possibly due to pollution): the actual recorded temperatures are consistently higher than what the tree-ring data would predict. The temperature records are the more important and reliable data, so Briffa had to discard the tree-ring “decline” records. But the decline wasn’t hidden. It was clearly discussed and labeled in Briffa’s paper. And Mann’s paper didn’t rely on any of those data.

Since then, a half dozen independent inquiries in the United States and United Kingdom have cleared the climatologists involved of scientific wrongdoing.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#849 Apr 9, 2013
“The Earth has a fever,” we were told.“The science is settled and the debate is over. Scientists are unanimous - 97% of them agree: climate change is real, and is happening now, and we’ve got to act quickly.”

Over more than two decades we were told again and again that everywhere was warming faster than everywhere else – especially winters were warming up quickly. Snow was becoming a thing of the past and children soon weren’t going to know what it is.“The warm winters that we are seeing are just a harbinger of what’s to come,” the media declared just a couple of years ago. The scientists were cock-sure.

Today we are finding that precisely the exact opposite is happening. Winters in Europe have turned colder and more severe. Central Europe has seen its 5th consecutive colder than normal winter in a row – a record since measurements began in the 19th century.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#850 Apr 9, 2013
“More heat waves, no snow in the winter“…“Climate models… over 20 times more precise than the UN IPCC global models. In no other country do we have more precise calculations of climate consequences. They should form the basis for political planning.… Temperatures in the wintertime will rise the most … there will be less cold air coming to Central Europe from the east.…In the Alps winters will be 2°C warmer already between 2021 and 2050.”
Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, 2 Sept 2008.

LOL

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#851 Apr 9, 2013
“The new Germany will be characterized by dry-hot summers and warm-wet winters.“
Wilhelm Gerstengarbe and Peter Werner, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), 2 March 2007

LOL

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#852 Apr 9, 2013
“Clear climate trends are seen from the computer simulations. Foremost the winter months will be warmer all over Germany. Depending of CO2 emissions, temperatures will rise by up to 4°C, in the Alps by up to 5°C.”Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, 7 Dec 2009.

LOL

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#853 Apr 9, 2013
“Winters with strong frost and lots of snow like we had 20 years ago will cease to exist at our latitudes.”
Mojib Latif, Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, 1 April 2000

LOL

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#854 Apr 9, 2013
We’ve seen some pretty incredible things blamed on Global Warming over the years, ranging from hurricanes, tornadoes and blizzards to earthquakes and plunging penguin populations. But for your Sunday morning entertainment, one anchor at CNN may have finally set the bar higher than anyone else shall ever manage. Deb Feyerick was caught by the folks at Newsbusters chatting with Bill Nye,“the science guy” and suggesting that an entirely different phenomenon might be pinned on the changing climate.

CNN anchor Deb Feyerick asked Saturday afternoon if an approaching asteroid, which will pass by Earth on February 15,“is an example of, perhaps, global warming?”

Moments earlier, before an ad break, she segued from the Northeast blizzard to a segment with Bill Nye “the science guy,” by pointing to global warming:“Every time we see a storm like this lately, the first question to pop into a lot of people’s minds is whether or not global warming is to blame? I’ll talk to Bill Nye,‘the science guy,’ about devastating storms and climate change.”

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.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 17 min Parrot Slayer 58,583
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 38 min Dexter 27,463
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 6 hr Dogen 159,375
News Intelligent Design Education Day 11 hr Subduction Zone 8
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 11 hr Dogen 2,044
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 16 hr Regolith Based Li... 219,629
Are Asians/whites more evolved? (Sep '07) Feb 23 Sentinel 1,758
More from around the web