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.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#1087 May 3, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Has any AGW advocate stated that CO2 should go to 0ppm, so that life becomes impossible on Earth? Of course not.
Has any AGW advocate stated that CO2 should go back to pre-industrial levels? No.
Has any AGW advocate stated that increasing CO2 should be limited to avoid drastic & other unforeseen climate shocks? Yes.
Indeed,'drink the kkk-aid' is very much like the kkk, who look for reasons to sate their blood-lust.
'drink the kkk-aid' is making up reasons against AGW advocates that will validate its desire to kill.
In a toxicological context, it is the dose that is important. Some CO2 is just right, but more will get an unwanted response and this will vary with how much more. The amount of oxygen in the various rooms we are in as we post on this thread is at a level both desireable and functional. Drop that level and you get one response. Raise it above a certain point and you get another. Neither would be good. I don't think some people understand that simple concept.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#1088 May 4, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
You keep referring to climate change mitigation. I am trying to get a clear understanding of what you mean. Is it that you are talking about man-engineered, intential attempts to alter the climate on any scale (local, regional, global)?
Global, the issue is global climate change. There's never been a published experimental test of climate change mitigation.

.
DanFromSmithville wrote:
If this is what you are talking about, how does this relate to causese?
Good question; if you can't experimentally test a theory you can't measure causality.

.
DanFromSmithville wrote:
There has never been any successful experiment to mitigate gravity, but that doesn't negate the existence or cause of gravity.
There's been experimental tests of gravitational theory since the theory was proposed. Today we have micro-gravity experiments in space, moving away from massive massive objects appears to mitigate the effect of gravity.

The difference between man made global warming theory and gravitational theory is, we've tested gravitational theory in the real world but nobody has ever published a test of man made global warming in the real world.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#1089 May 4, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
'recked car fire' was caught in its recked car fire.
Come out today, it's going to be a high of 75 degrees where you live. Bright and Sunny. But wait a few hours, it's still too cold right now.
litesong

Mountlake Terrace, WA

#1091 May 4, 2013
recked car fire wrote:
Come out today, it's going to be a high of 75 degrees where you live. Bright and Sunny. But wait a few hours, it's still too cold right now.
Over 50degF right now. So pleasant the audubon warblers have pushed on further north & their lovely yellows, whites, blues & whites are enchanting the Canadians, right now. Over 50 degF is too chilled for a Californian. To stay warm,'recked car fire' had to fire its recked car.

Temperatures above the 80th degree parallel average -9degC, so the the far north is warming over well, as AGW warm fronts push Arctic cold to the south.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#1092 May 4, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Over 50degF right now. So pleasant the audubon warblers have pushed on further north & their lovely yellows, whites, blues & whites are enchanting the Canadians, right now. Over 50 degF is too chilled for a Californian. To stay warm,'recked car fire' had to fire its recked car.
Temperatures above the 80th degree parallel average -9degC, so the the far north is warming over well, as AGW warm fronts push Arctic cold to the south.
Come out of your bunker, it's not too warm yet.
litesong

Mountlake Terrace, WA

#1093 May 4, 2013
litesong wrote:
To stay warm,'recked car fire' had to fire its recked car.
//////////
'recked car fire' flopped:
.......it's not too warm yet.
//////////
litesong wrote:
If you'd have filled the gas tank, your recked car fire would have put out enough heat.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#1094 May 4, 2013
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
To stay warm,'recked car fire' had to fire its recked car.
//////////
'recked car fire' flopped:
.......it's not too warm yet.
//////////
litesong wrote:
If you'd have filled the gas tank, your recked car fire would have put out enough heat.
LOL..I rode my bike to keep it cooler today.
litesong

Mountlake Terrace, WA

#1095 May 4, 2013
recked car fire wrote:
I rode my bike to keep it cooler today.
U stil did n't genorate enuf ergs!

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#1096 May 4, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
U stil did n't genorate enuf ergs!
Check all your screens, more then likely they are made in China, it might be you causing the abnormal cold weather.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#1097 May 5, 2013
Check out the lack of ANY experimental test of climate change mitigation. That's how you can tell, it's a hoax.

“BET DAP”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#1098 May 5, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Check out the lack of ANY experimental test of climate change mitigation. That's how you can tell, it's a hoax.
very true. the alarmists want us to accept that co2 (a small part of the equation atmospherically speaking) is the chief cause of climate change. THEN....they want us to believe that reducing, or eliminating, man made co2 will mitigate changes in climate without any tests or substantiation.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#1099 May 6, 2013
Every medicine and medical treatment approved by the FDA has been experimentally tested. Why want a lower status for the health of your entire planet?

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#1101 May 6, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Global, the issue is global climate change. There's never been a published experimental test of climate change mitigation.
.
<quoted text>Good question; if you can't experimentally test a theory you can't measure causality.
.
<quoted text>There's been experimental tests of gravitational theory since the theory was proposed. Today we have micro-gravity experiments in space, moving away from massive massive objects appears to mitigate the effect of gravity.
The difference between man made global warming theory and gravitational theory is, we've tested gravitational theory in the real world but nobody has ever published a test of man made global warming in the real world.
OK, so finally, I think I understand what you are saying. Essentially, there has never been an experiment testing global warming. I wouldn't know how you could do that from a logistical, economical and ethical standpoint. A large body of what we know about climate is based on observational evidence, but I believe models do count as experiments in silicio. The evidence still shows that the earth has warmed over the last 200 years.

So you are saying we know what causes gravity and have been able to demonstrate that experimentally. I hadn't heard this. No one has. Gravity is not mitigated. The gravitational attraction of large bodies would be reduced to the point that they do not interfer with such an experiment due to proximity. Your response doesn't address the context of the point I made.

Very interesting to hear the different sides of this argument.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#1102 May 7, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
OK, so finally, I think I understand what you are saying. Essentially, there has never been an experiment testing global warming.
And there's never been an experiment testing climate change mitigation either.

.
DanFromSmithville wrote:
I wouldn't know how you could do that from a logistical, economical and ethical standpoint.
I don't design experiments for a living, I'm not a scientist.

.
DanFromSmithville wrote:
A large body of what we know about climate is based on observational evidence, but I believe models do count as experiments in silicio.
Why do you believe computer models are experiments? Isn't it true, computers only output what the program and data define? Do you have any evidence that computer models can replace real world tests?

.
DanFromSmithville wrote:
The evidence still shows that the earth has warmed over the last 200 years.
I agree, the Earth always warms, cools or stays about the same.

.
DanFromSmithville wrote:
So you are saying we know what causes gravity and have been able to demonstrate that experimentally. I hadn't heard this. No one has. Gravity is not mitigated. The gravitational attraction of large bodies would be reduced to the point that they do not interfer with such an experiment due to proximity. Your response doesn't address the context of the point I made.
Newton experimentally tested his theories before he published. He found the effect of gravity depends on mass and distance from the center of mass. That's why astronauts far from the Earth are weightless.

What do you mean,'mitigate gravity'?

.
DanFromSmithville wrote:
Very interesting to hear the different sides of this argument.
There's very little consensus on mitigating climate change. Here's a researcher at Scripps Institute who wants to stop the use of biofuel to mitigate climate change from black carbon: http://www.climate.org/topics/climate-change/...

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#1103 May 7, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>And there's never been an experiment testing climate change mitigation either.
.
<quoted text>I don't design experiments for a living, I'm not a scientist.
.
<quoted text>Why do you believe computer models are experiments? Isn't it true, computers only output what the program and data define? Do you have any evidence that computer models can replace real world tests?
.
<quoted text>I agree, the Earth always warms, cools or stays about the same.
.
<quoted text>Newton experimentally tested his theories before he published. He found the effect of gravity depends on mass and distance from the center of mass. That's why astronauts far from the Earth are weightless.
What do you mean,'mitigate gravity'?
.
<quoted text>There's very little consensus on mitigating climate change. Here's a researcher at Scripps Institute who wants to stop the use of biofuel to mitigate climate change from black carbon: http://www.climate.org/topics/climate-change/...
I understand gravity. YOu don't have to be an ass pretending you are explaining it to me. I would reckon a much vaster knowledge of the subject than most. Besides you are being misleading, since your explanations have nothing to do with my original point.

I must concede to your use of the word mitigate. I was erroneously thinking in terms of eliminate while your usage was correct and appropriate to your comment, however your comment did not address my point.

Computer models are experiments. I don't know anymore elementary way to explain it than that. I can only assume that you have some notion of what a computer can do since you are posting here.

So you are a complete denier of the evidence that global temperature has increased over the last 200 years. While I can understand argument over the cause of this warming (natural as opposed to anthropogenic), to deny the evidence that shows the warmer shows a severe level of ignorance of the subject and a questionable honesty.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#1104 May 7, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Every medicine and medical treatment approved by the FDA has been experimentally tested. Why want a lower status for the health of your entire planet?
Ekins, S., J. Mestres & B. Testa. 2007. In silico pharmacology for drug discovery: methods for virtual ligand screening and profiling. British J. Pharmacol. 152(1): 9-20.

Costanzi, Stefano. 2008. On the Applicability of GPCR Homology Models to Computer-Aided Drug Discovery: A Comparison between In Silico and Crystal Structures of the &#946;2-Adrenergic Receptor. J. Med. Chem. 51(10): 2907–2914.

van de Waterbeemd, H. 2002. High-throughput and in silico techniques in drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics. Curr. Opinion Drug Discov. & Develop. 005(1): 33-43.

Shall I go on, or is this enough egg?
LessHypeMoreFact

Etobicoke, Canada

#1105 May 7, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Shall I go on, or is this enough egg?
Do not expect BG to admit defeat. Ever. He isn't that honest about anything. He works more on 'truthiness' than truth. And truthiness is determined by how well it fits his agenda... I suspect that he either works in the fossil fuel industry or has a lot of stock..

“When you treat people as they ”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#1106 May 8, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>NASA has been caught falsifying data. They have been doing it for years, did you just find out? Climate-gate part I occurred in early December when a still-unknown person posted thousands of e-mails and documents on a scientific website. The e-mails showed that scientists at the leading "global warming" research institute in the world, East Anglia University's Climate Research Unit (CRU) had "changed" weather data to prove their climate-warming theories, and squelched dissenting opinions from skeptical scientists to maintain credibility for their fraud.
Climate-gate part II begins now: The scientists with Icecap.us website announced findings late last week that not only was the CRU involved in producing fraudulent weather data, but two United States agencies, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), have also been falsifying climate reports for years. NOAA, the report concludes, is actually "ground-zero" for the fraud of global warming, not the East Anglia Institute.
So you base your cause on illegal activity, fair enough, we know where we stand with you now.

This particular data set from NASA more or less agrees with and confirms the data from every other reputable climate research centre. Data taken by different scientists and researchers employed by different scientific and meteorological establishments in politically differing countries, the data taken from diverse areas of the globe. It’s such a joke that the people decrying the NASA data are then ones with most to loose and have no intention of comparing it with the valid data from other sources and have been proven to stoop to underhanded, often illegal measures in there attempt to discredit.

Case in point, you raised it so you can have no argument to me continuing the conversation. That is your, and the deniers take on the emails at take formed by ignoring the data and investigations post “climate-gate”. Do you not think it’s strange that the hackers wish to remain anonymous? What have they to hide? Is it because the prevailing view of major governments that such cyber hacking is illegal and punishable by long prison sentences? Or is it because they are too sh|t scared of the public outcry to their illegal smear campaign?

I shun your few criminals and raise you thousands of scientist and several governments.

Eight officially convened independent committees including a House of Commons enquiry plus several unofficial enquiries investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct. The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring as a result of human activity remained unchanged by the end of the investigations. Why did the media choose to play the debunking of criminal activity down? It was of course less sensationalist than the original claims.

However you are welcome to big up a theft if that’s all you have.

As to the word of one organisation with an axe to grind, personally I think I’d prefer to take more notice of the prevailing consensus, particularly after repeated attempts (legal or otherwise) to discredit the findings have failed and no doubt several more will also fail. However if you can cite some irrefutable evidence (without criminal intervention) that shows data has been falsified to the extent that the claims of human activity being responsible for the current increased round of climate change is invalid then I will consider it, otherwise they have nada…

“When you treat people as they ”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#1107 May 8, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>The atmosphere; there are no atmospheric test of climate change mitigation.
.
<quoted text>Please cite the most compelling experiment for climate change mitigation you'v found. I'll wait...
.
<quoted text>NASA interprets data to further their goals. Do you find that surprising?
The biggest scientific test of atmospheric pollution was instigated by that famous American Thomas Midgley Jnr who is responsible for more deaths in the world than any other person in history, including such notables as Mao Zedong, Stalin and Hitler. Over 90 years later and every single day thousands of people are dying as a result of his work. That’s atmospheric testing for ya… I am sure you would be one of the first to complain if such “atmospheric” experiments were implimented.

I am not here to do your research for you, you have been provided with links to copious quantities of such experimental reports. Your bone idle attitude to your own education is not my problem.

Nope, but at least they don’t stoop to criminal activity to further their goals, unlike the climate change deniers.

“When you treat people as they ”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#1108 May 8, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Ice melts, it doesn't disappear.
.
<quoted text>We'll adapt to climate change, we always have. There's never been an experimental test of climate change mitigation published in a peer reviewed journal..
.
<quoted text>Schiphol means ship grave in English, the area used to be underwater.
.
<quoted text>There's valuable mineral resources under the melting ice. What's not to love about global warming?
So after it melts the ice still exists??? What school did you go to? Did you go to school?

There is a considerable difference between natural climate change and man made climate change however feel free to ignore the facts if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Yes there has, I believe you have admitted this yourself previously however you claimed they were not “atmospheric” tests so they don’t count in your estimation. Not only do deniers stoop to criminal behaviour they lie and it makes your cause look pathetic.

Actually it means ship hole or ship hell but ship grave is close enough and yes Schiphol was underwater and now it isn’t. But because it was underwater means it’s ok by you for the residents of Amsterdam and much of the Netherlands to return to long waders a boats for daily life? Let me think now, could this selfish attitude of yours be because it will not effect you personally?

Melting or not the mineral resources are still there. And because they are there you are considering the least expensive ways you exploit them? You are giving your greed head over your humanity, a failing of so many climate change deniers.

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
The Human Brain did not Evolve.. 2 min Dogen 347
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 26 min Science 83,201
All humans come from Tennessee 49 min Science 4
What Evidence Does David Jay Jordan Present Aga... 1 hr Science 1
Is David Jay Jordan a scientist? 1 hr Science 1
Science Supporters are anti-conspiracy theorist... 1 hr Science 2
Evolution is boring as Hell 1 hr Science 20
SEX did not EVOLVE 1 hr Simon 163
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr Science 223,039
Bible 'Science' Verses opposing the Evolution R... 1 hr Science 193
More from around the web