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

Feb 5, 2013 Full story: Verde Independent 1,644

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.

Full Story

“The Grim Reaper Is Fictional ”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

But We Will All Meet Him

#1569 Oct 24, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Of course, and we've been emitting CO2 in large levels for a million years, from cultivating forest fires to burning coal and peat; we've always emitted carbon dioxide.
Don't fear, Mother Nature likes it. There's no experimental evidence otherwise.
I got this video off another thread. What effects do you think this has had? Keep in mind this has been done over several thousands of times not to mention the leaks from all the nuclear plants.

Nuclear weapons.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1570 Oct 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a miracle. lol Just joking.
Million to one miracles crop op nine times out of ten

The impossible is more difficult

“Let's X Change!!”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#1571 Oct 24, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, of course not you moron, because THAT IS WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN.
My say so has nothing to do with your weapons grade stupidity.
working both sides of the street, christine?
well....i guess it pays better in your world, huh?

“Let's X Change!!”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#1572 Oct 24, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have a problem with Brian G. Brian G has a problem with Brian G. Me I just provided you with what you requested. She called him a liar, you said prove it, I said no problem.
Job done.
you have a problem with comprehension. i asked christine to prove her post to me.

she failed.

live near a wind turbine?

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1573 Oct 24, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>working both sides of the street, christine?
well....i guess it pays better in your world, huh?
What have you been smoking?

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1574 Oct 24, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>you have a problem with comprehension. i asked christine to prove her post to me.
she failed.
live near a wind turbine?
No I did not fail, I referred you to your very own posts. No ones fault but you own that you seem to ignore that evidence.

“Let's X Change!!”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#1575 Oct 24, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
What have you been smoking?
i don't. Funny how you come to so many wrong conclusions, isn't it?

“Let's X Change!!”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#1576 Oct 24, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
No I did not fail, I referred you to your very own posts. No ones fault but you own that you seem to ignore that evidence.
how can one ignore evidence that you fail to present, son?

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1577 Oct 25, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>i don't. Funny how you come to so many wrong conclusions, isn't it?
Not really, I was simply asking, surely you must have noticed the question mark? Perhaps not… Just interest really, I would not like to draw specious conclusions (as you do) based on the obnoxious and abusive content of your posts, maybe it’s not narcotics that boost you intelligence to that of sewer rat, perhaps it’s just ignorance or worse still deliberate ignorance.
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>how can one ignore evidence that you fail to present, son?
My dear child, the evidence is in EVERY SINGLE POST you address to me in which you attempt to verbally abuse me, my intelligence and my gender. The post listed quoted above is a prime example. You have juts provided the evidence yourself, well done…

Because you are unable to see this is you own problem, perhaps a derivative of the dunning kruger effect – look it up.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#1578 Oct 25, 2013
replaytime wrote:
I got this video off another thread. What effects do you think this has had? Keep in mind this has been done over several thousands of times not to mention the leaks from all the nuclear plants. Nuclear weapons. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =g9A7MDpFgacXX
Atomic weapons have been experimentally tested, climate change mitigation hasn't.

An atmospheric nuclear blast creates a local and temporary cooling under the ash cloud, until it falls out.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#1579 Oct 25, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
Tell me, would you happen to be a corrupt politician or even more corrupt lobbyist?
I make my arguments about the issue, not ad hominem irrationality like Chris's post above.

.
ChristineM wrote:
Such blatant lies are the trademark of such occupations and you are such a liar.
Chris doesn't understand the issue; climate change mitigation has never been experimentally tested. Not, there's never been any experiment on anything, the issue is restricting, taxing, capping CO2 emissions or increasing CO2 sinks, not computer models.

.
ChristineM wrote:
However if you can provide evidence that there is no experimental evidence otherwise then I will of course retract the statement.
Logic states a negative can't be proven; I can't prove you don't have a unicorn in your garage either.

.
ChristineM wrote:
Perhaps some valid evidence that proves the experimental evidence shown below and that that has been provided for your perusal on many occasions does not exist.
Experimental evidence that fuelled articles such as this
http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-sma...
Experiments aren't fuel; coal, oil and gas are fuels. The article above cites no experimental tests of climate change mitigation.

.
ChristineM wrote:
An article called: "Climate myths: Human CO2 emissions are too tiny to matter". Not only don't they matter to climate, there's never been a test of man made greenhouse gas emissions that's caused a change in the Earth's atmosphere; that is, you can't emit a gigaton of CO2 in a lab in Chicago and measure that change in Mauna Loa.

.
ChristineM wrote:
^^^This is about coral, not climate. Also, do a page search for the word "experiment".

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#1580 Oct 25, 2013
.
ChristineM wrote:
Same as before.

.
ChristineM wrote:
^^^No experiment here; Chris is posting spam, not an experimental record of climate change mitigation or any experiment that shows man can change global climate.

.
ChristineM wrote:
and this just happens to be the description, results and summary of an experiment that YOU say did not happen, thus proving without doubt that you are a liar
http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/libr...
See particularly the sentences “In FACE experiments, stimulation of photosynthesis by elevated CO2 in C4 plants is only about one-third of that experienced by C3 species.”
And
“Current evidence suggests that that the concentrations of atmospheric CO2 predicted for the year 2100 will have major implications for plant physiology and growth”
and
^^^This is an experiment on plant growth, not climate. Agricultural technology has been experimentally tested for thousands of years but there's been no experiments on climate change mitigation technology.

.
ChristineM wrote:
Rising CO2 is therefore likely to have complex effects on the growth and composition of natural plant communities.
Oh yes you should also see
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v411/n68...
^^^Here we agree, but again an experiment on plants isn't an experiment on climate.

.
ChristineM wrote:
^^^Not a climate change mitigation experiment either.

.
ChristineM wrote:
and
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/312/5782/19... , entitled Food for Thought: Lower-Than-Expected Crop Yield Stimulation with Rising CO2 Concentrations
^^^Not about climate, about crops. Please try to focus.

.
ChristineM wrote:
You want more, there are approximately 21000 that’s TWENTY ONE THOUSAND such experiments listed in Google scholar that you claim do not exist.
A google search isn't the same as an experimental test either. Please cite one experiment that compels you to believe in man made catastrophic climate change and describe how that experiment proves we must restrict or tax CO2 emissions.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1581 Oct 25, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I make my arguments about the issue, not ad hominem irrationality like Chris's post above.
.
<quoted text>Chris doesn't understand the issue; climate change mitigation has never been experimentally tested. Not, there's never been any experiment on anything, the issue is restricting, taxing, capping CO2 emissions or increasing CO2 sinks, not computer models.
.
<quoted text>Logic states a negative can't be proven; I can't prove you don't have a unicorn in your garage either.
.
<quoted text>Experiments aren't fuel; coal, oil and gas are fuels. The article above cites no experimental tests of climate change mitigation.
.
<quoted text>An article called: "Climate myths: Human CO2 emissions are too tiny to matter". Not only don't they matter to climate, there's never been a test of man made greenhouse gas emissions that's caused a change in the Earth's atmosphere; that is, you can't emit a gigaton of CO2 in a lab in Chicago and measure that change in Mauna Loa.
.
<quoted text>^^^This is about coral, not climate. Also, do a page search for the word "experiment".
Nope, you make your arguments based on ignorance and profit

Chris does understand the issue and climate change mitigation experiments are a red herring. A series of links prove you wrong but you are welcome to lie all you want if that’s what lines your pockets

The point is that I have provided multiple sources of evidence and you have not, logically I win

No because they are irrelevant and not what you stated anyway. What you actually said was “Don't fear, Mother Nature likes it. There's no experimental evidence otherwise.” And that report was one of several that prove you wrong.

The article was called "Climate myths: Human CO2 emissions are too tiny to matter" as you rightly said however you appear to misunderstand (or ignore) the first two words “Climate myths”

However that is not what you asked for, I provided evidence that you lied when you said “Don't fear, Mother Nature likes it. There's no experimental evidence otherwise.” By providing links to SEVERAL such experiments.

This is about Ocean acidification as well as several other related topics but good of you to omit the first report, that just shows how you are grasping at straws and willing to ignore facts.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1582 Oct 25, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
.
<quoted text>Same as before.
.
<quoted text>^^^No experiment here; Chris is posting spam, not an experimental record of climate change mitigation or any experiment that shows man can change global climate.
.
<quoted text>^^^This is an experiment on plant growth, not climate. Agricultural technology has been experimentally tested for thousands of years but there's been no experiments on climate change mitigation technology.
.
<quoted text>^^^Here we agree, but again an experiment on plants isn't an experiment on climate.
.
<quoted text>^^^Not a climate change mitigation experiment either.
.
<quoted text>^^^Not about climate, about crops. Please try to focus.
.
<quoted text>A google search isn't the same as an experimental test either. Please cite one experiment that compels you to believe in man made catastrophic climate change and describe how that experiment proves we must restrict or tax CO2 emissions.
Experiments and reports on experiments, for the latter all you need to do is follow the citation links, or article detail links to find the scientific authority as source for the report.

Plant growth under strictly controlled climatic conditions measuring the effects CO2 levels on plant growth as you said did not exist.

As above

How many times, climate change mitigation is an irrelevant red herring, you cannot experiment on the earth’s biosphere without either damaging it (as is happening) or improving it.

About crops reaction to increased CO2, AS YOU CLAIMED DID NOT EXIST

A google scholar search will provide many citations to experiments that show you to be a liar.

Why are you changing the gopalposts, have you decided your claim that “Don't fear, Mother Nature likes it. There's no experimental evidence otherwise.” has been completely debunked?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#1583 Oct 25, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
Nope, you make your arguments based on ignorance and profit
Chris does understand the issue and climate change mitigation experiments are a red herring. A series of links prove you wrong but you are welcome to lie all you want if that’s what lines your pockets
The point is that I have provided multiple sources of evidence and you have not, logically I win
No because they are irrelevant and not what you stated anyway. What you actually said was “Don't fear, Mother Nature likes it. There's no experimental evidence otherwise.” And that report was one of several that prove you wrong.
The article was called "Climate myths: Human CO2 emissions are too tiny to matter" as you rightly said however you appear to misunderstand (or ignore) the first two words “Climate myths”
However that is not what you asked for, I provided evidence that you lied when you said “Don't fear, Mother Nature likes it. There's no experimental evidence otherwise.” By providing links to SEVERAL such experiments.
This is about Ocean acidification as well as several other related topics but good of you to omit the first report, that just shows how you are grasping at straws and willing to ignore facts.
So, Chris believes this experiment on CO2 and plants show what Mother Nature likes or dislikes?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#1584 Oct 25, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
Experiments and reports on experiments, for the latter all you need to do is follow the citation links, or article detail links to find the scientific authority as source for the report.
Plant growth under strictly controlled climatic conditions measuring the effects CO2 levels on plant growth as you said did not exist.
As above
How many times, climate change mitigation is an irrelevant red herring, you cannot experiment on the earth’s biosphere without either damaging it (as is happening) or improving it.
About crops reaction to increased CO2, AS YOU CLAIMED DID NOT EXIST
A google scholar search will provide many citations to experiments that show you to be a liar.
Why are you changing the gopalposts, have you decided your claim that “Don't fear, Mother Nature likes it. There's no experimental evidence otherwise.” has been completely debunked?
Climate change mitigation isn't "an irrelevant red herring", my claim "Don't fear, Mother Nature likes it" is. Nobody knows what Mother Nature thinks.

There have been many experiments on crops and increased CO2 but none on climate and man made CO2. The only area where we differ is climate change mitigation.

Climate change mitigation is a hoax and man made catastrophic climate change is pseudoscience and the experimental record proves it.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1585 Oct 25, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>So, Chris believes this experiment on CO2 and plants show what Mother Nature likes or dislikes?
Emm, experiments, yes and you don’t?
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Climate change mitigation isn't "an irrelevant red herring", my claim "Don't fear, Mother Nature likes it" is. Nobody knows what Mother Nature thinks.
There have been many experiments on crops and increased CO2 but none on climate and man made CO2. The only area where we differ is climate change mitigation.
Climate change mitigation is a hoax and man made catastrophic climate change is pseudoscience and the experimental record proves it.
That my dear little goalpost mover is NOT WHAT YOU SAID, I quoted twice EXACTLY what you said, there can be no argument, it is wrotten in black on white and to prove it I will give you the post number and link in which you stated it.

#1564
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TVP...

But of course you are free to lie as much as you want in the face of the physical evidence. Entirely your choice but obviously you have no care for any credibility you one believed that you had.

Is there a difference between natural CO2 and man made CO2? Oh that’s brilliant deduction, you need to get onto the scientific comunity across the world and let them know, hey you could be up for a Nobel Prize for such insight.

Climate change mitigation is a BS red herring dreamed up by co2 addicts and profiteers. They have NEVER ONCE specified how such experiment can take place on a worldwide atmospheric scale which is what you are asking. But complain and whinge bitterly when no such data is available.

Yes now you admit it is a hoax and you ask for experimental data knowing that such data cannot ever be obtained. As I said, a red herring.

And man made climate change is now agreed by more than 97% of scientist in the field, even the staunch deniers are on the move.

What’s it feel like to be left standing alone?

“Let's X Change!!”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#1586 Oct 25, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Not really, I was simply asking, surely you must have noticed the question mark? Perhaps not… Just interest really, I would not like to draw specious conclusions (as you do) based on the obnoxious and abusive content of your posts, maybe it’s not narcotics that boost you intelligence to that of sewer rat, perhaps it’s just ignorance or worse still deliberate ignorance.
<quoted text>
My dear child, the evidence is in EVERY SINGLE POST you address to me in which you attempt to verbally abuse me, my intelligence and my gender. The post listed quoted above is a prime example. You have juts provided the evidence yourself, well done…
Because you are unable to see this is you own problem, perhaps a derivative of the dunning kruger effect – look it up.
quite familiar with dunning kruger, son.
It's usually thrown around by leftist like yourself when they've been disarmed or shown incapable of proving their point!
Funny thing is.....you're a prime example of it while pretending to be intellectually superior then referencing it to diminish another poster.
Kind of pot/kettle hypocrisy at its worst.
You feel me?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#1587 Oct 25, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
...Climate change mitigation is a BS red herring dreamed up by co2 addicts and profiteers. They have NEVER ONCE specified how such experiment can take place on a worldwide atmospheric scale which is what you are asking. But complain and whinge bitterly when no such data is available....And man made climate change is now agreed by more than 97% of scientist in the field, even the staunch deniers are on the move. What’s it feel like to be left standing alone?
Why do you believe a climate change mitigation is impossible? Do you agree with me, it's a hoax? Is that why you think it's impossible to find an experiment that either tests manmande catastrophic climate change theory or climate change mitigation; because it's impossible to change the entire global climate?

Consensus doesn't prove scientific theories, experimental tests do that. Consensus is for beauty pageants, not science.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1588 Oct 26, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>quite familiar with dunning kruger, son.
It's usually thrown around by leftist like yourself when they've been disarmed or shown incapable of proving their point!
Funny thing is.....you're a prime example of it while pretending to be intellectually superior then referencing it to diminish another poster.
Kind of pot/kettle hypocrisy at its worst.
You feel me?
Quite familiar – usually known? Go figure… you don’t even know how stupid you are

Point proven several times and you still don’t recognize you own childish BS

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
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 14 min Cheech the Conser... 131,744
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 37 min Brian_G 13,614
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... 45 min The Dude 427
How would creationists explain... 3 hr The Dude 284
Science News (Sep '13) 3 hr positronium 2,939
sea-dwelling dinosaur found alive (Apr '10) 5 hr The Dude 87
Genetic entropy Mon Chimney1 157