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
PHD

Overton, TX

#167 Feb 14, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Seriously, what where were you born? Clearly English is not your primary language.
Seriously what were you when you were hatched? Clearly reading is not your primary subject.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#168 Feb 14, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Excuses? What irrelevant excuses did you see? What I wrote about was the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere and how that concentration changes depending on location.
What type of constructive suggestion would be appropriate for a discussion of atmospheric CO2 concentration dependent on location?
You also wrote that CO2 was WELL distributed, but apparently not well distributed at the ice caps because that does not suit your denial.

I produced links to scientific findings and consensus, I produced links to NASA research, for what ever reason you think best suites your life style they obviously were not up to your exacting standard. Ask me if I care?

The consensus has been reached, I can’t be bothered arguing with you on whether that consensus suites you or not. The research is there to see.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#169 Feb 14, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>That's a wonderful idea. What's wrong with students examining what dissident scientists are saying?
Since when has a CONCENSUS been dissident?

What you actually mean is “What's wrong with students examining what scientists who don’t think like you do are saying?
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> everythingimportant.org/climategate contains the opinions of many peer reviewed scientists. The agenda, resisted by you, is to get people to understand what dissident scientists are saying about the holy oracles of mainstream climate scientists.
Nope it lists no peer reviewed articles but voices a one sided opinion without the option for peer review. It is exactly what we have come to expect from your sources.

There are very few dissident scientists but there are a vast majority who you will not agree with. Look up the definition of dissident I think in this case you will find that it applies to you

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#170 Feb 14, 2013
FYMO wrote:
<quoted text>And at one point the consensus of the scientific community was that Eugenics was going tosave mankind.
No, not really, however you are welcome to believe whatever you think is right in your own tiny mind
Fun Facts

Las Cruces, NM

#171 Feb 14, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
You also wrote that CO2 was WELL distributed, but apparently not well distributed at the ice caps because that does not suit your denial.
I produced links to scientific findings and consensus, I produced links to NASA research, for what ever reason you think best suites your life style they obviously were not up to your exacting standard. Ask me if I care?
The consensus has been reached, I can’t be bothered arguing with you on whether that consensus suites you or not. The research is there to see.
http://microdevices.jpl.nasa.gov/images/capab...
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#172 Feb 14, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>to ff
You also wrote that CO2 was WELL distributed, but apparently not well distributed at the ice caps because that does not suit your denial.
I produced links to scientific findings and consensus, I produced links to NASA research, for what ever reason you think best suites your life style they obviously were not up to your exacting standard. Ask me if I care?
The consensus has been reached, I can’t be bothered arguing with you on whether that consensus suites you or not. The research is there to see.
ff claimed that the New Mexico legislators listened to his craft. He is not benign.
PHD

Overton, TX

#173 Feb 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>ff claimed that the New Mexico legislators listened to his craft. He is not benign.
Can you fathom standing alone making a fool of your---self? No for many years you solicit the help of "pinheadlitesout" to make a bigger fool of your---self.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#174 Feb 14, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
Look up the definition of dissident I think in this case you will find that it applies to you
World English Dictionary
dissident
— n
a person who disagrees, esp one who disagrees with the government.

Yes, that's me, as demonstrated here: http://everythingimportant.org
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#175 Feb 14, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>World English Dictionary
dissident
— n
a person who disagrees, esp one who disagrees with the government.
Yes, that's me, as demonstrated here
Yeah, any old chance to spam linkys to your own website.

Nobody cares.

You had about 5 people at the most writing on your forums.

And that was years ago.

Now it's just you.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#176 Feb 14, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you haven't.
With a user name like "PHD" you should know how scientific arguments work.
I think the P stands for Penny. HD can stand for her ititials. Else for something like Penny Hates Democracy.
Obviously I don't think Penny has any degree, maybe not even a high school one.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#177 Feb 14, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
Nope it lists no peer reviewed articles but voices a one sided opinion without the option for peer review.
So you dismiss Freeman Dyson's opinion just because there's no journal courageous enough to give him a platform for his opinion?

I really don't believe that Galileo was wrong just because he was a dissident.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#178 Feb 14, 2013
Dyson is speaking from ideology not science, it is just coming from the Far Left, not the Far Right.
"[Public spending on global warming] take(s) away money and attention from other problems that are much more urgent and important. Poverty, infectious diseases, public education and public health. Not to mention the preservation of living creatures on land and in the oceans. "

Here he is talking frankly about this, comparing himself to James Hansen who has actually studied climatology.

<< He [Hansen] has all the credentials. I have none. I don't have a Ph.D. He's published hundreds of papers on climate. I haven't. By the public standard he's qualified to talk and I'm not.***

But I do because I think I' m right. I think I have a broad view of the subject, which Hansen does not. I think it's true my career doesn't depend on it, whereas his does. I never claim to be an expert on climate. I think it's more a matter of judgement than knowledge.">>

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/magazine/29... ;

Per Wikipedia quoting Dyson:

* " My objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much, but it's rather against the way those people behave and the kind of intolerance to criticism that a lot of them have.[13]

* " I'm not saying the warming doesn't cause problems, obviously it does. Obviously we should be trying to understand it. I'm saying that the problems are being grossly exaggerated. They take away money and attention from other problems that are much more urgent and important. Poverty, infectious diseases, public education and public health. Not to mention the preservation of living creatures on land and in the oceans."

This is foolishness. This is just anti-science from the Far Left.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#179 Feb 15, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
Yes and?

So if the same applies for the southern ice cap (NOT SHOWN) as for the northern ice cap then we can assume that CO2 levels are consistently lower in those areas. And yet ice core measurements from those areas are contestant with the global increase in CO2 levels.

Just imagine how high the levels were at those mid latitude hotspots at the time of this data scan

Please note the caption on the image link you posted - Quote –…CO2, a gas known to influence climate change…– end quote

I also notice how you have chosen an image from department unrelated to climate change but more concerned with the stability and testing of semiconductors & lasers

http://microdevices.jpl.nasa.gov/
Index of /images/capabilities/semicondu ctor-lasers

Perhaps you could have gone for http://cce.nasa.gov/ascends/index.htm for which the Aqua satellite was destined to do some work. And then noted that the 3 aims of the mission are

1. Quantify global spatial distributions of atmospheric CO2 on scales of weather models in the 2010-2020 era;
2. Quantify current global spatial distribution of terrestrial and oceanic sources and sinks of CO2 on 1° x 1° grids at weekly resolution; and
3. Provide a scientific basis for future projections of CO2 sources and sinks through data-driven enhancements of Earth system process modeling.

I.E. one photograph from a 10 year project targeting CO2 sources and sinks is irrelevant
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#180 Feb 15, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes and?
So if the same applies for the southern ice cap (NOT SHOWN) as for the northern ice cap then we can assume that CO2 levels are consistently lower in those areas. And yet ice core measurements from those areas are contestant with the global increase in CO2 levels.
Just imagine how high the levels were at those mid latitude hotspots at the time of this data scan
Please note the caption on the image link you posted - Quote –…CO2, a gas known to influence climate change…– end quote
I also notice how you have chosen an image from department unrelated to climate change but more concerned with the stability and testing of semiconductors & lasers
http://microdevices.jpl.nasa.gov/
Index of /images/capabilities/semicondu ctor-lasers
Perhaps you could have gone for http://cce.nasa.gov/ascends/index.htm for which the Aqua satellite was destined to do some work. And then noted that the 3 aims of the mission are
1. Quantify global spatial distributions of atmospheric CO2 on scales of weather models in the 2010-2020 era;
2. Quantify current global spatial distribution of terrestrial and oceanic sources and sinks of CO2 on 1° x 1° grids at weekly resolution; and
3. Provide a scientific basis for future projections of CO2 sources and sinks through data-driven enhancements of Earth system process modeling.
I.E. one photograph from a 10 year project targeting CO2 sources and sinks is irrelevant
CO2 levels are higher where there's industry or vegetation?

Well known.

Far less vegetation in the southern hemisphere (and no industry in the ice core record).

What exactly is fun farts trying to claim the image shows?

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#181 Feb 15, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>ff claimed that the New Mexico legislators listened to his craft. He is not benign.
Yes and governments, the military, national (and US state) utilities companies etc in several countries, employ my craft, that makes no difference to the fact of the scientific consensus which he is rejecting with outdated and irrelevant data

If he us using his craft to influence legislators then he need to consider more up to date data with less reliance on commercial interest.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#182 Feb 15, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>World English Dictionary
dissident
— n
a person who disagrees, esp one who disagrees with the government.
Yes, that's me, as demonstrated here: http://everythingimportant.org
Yes that’s you, we all realise this. It is not the scientists who advise the governments who you are painting as dissident but the disodent himspef, kettle – pot – black comes to mind here

Or put another way, just another fundy hypocrite

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#183 Feb 15, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>So you dismiss Freeman Dyson's opinion just because there's no journal courageous enough to give him a platform for his opinion?
I really don't believe that Galileo was wrong just because he was a dissident.
Nope I don’t dismiss it, I have no need to, the consensus of journalistic and scientific opinion dismisses it for me. The man himself admits that he knows very little about the science of climate change.

Galileo lived at the beginning of scientific advancement, a long time before peer review and the church punished him for his forward thinking discoveries. But juts look how the consensus of both scientific opinion and the majority of church opinion turned out for him.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#184 Feb 15, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
CO2 levels are higher where there's industry or vegetation?
Well known.
Far less vegetation in the southern hemisphere (and no industry in the ice core record).
What exactly is fun farts trying to claim the image shows?
Given than if FF’s own words CO2 is well distributed is no surprise that the southern ice core shows a marked increase in CO2 since industrialisation

It seems FF has misunderstood the image, it looks good for sure but is actually irrelevant to the discussion

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#185 Feb 15, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
Far less vegetation in the southern hemisphere
Brazil. All of Southern Africa.

There is PLENTY of vegetation in the Southern Hemisphere
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#186 Feb 15, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Brazil. All of Southern Africa.
There is PLENTY of vegetation in the Southern Hemisphere
Sure, just a lot less than the northern, as it's mostly ocean.

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) 5 min Dogen 132,694
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... 8 min Dogen 543
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 19 min Brian_G 13,622
How would creationists explain... 1 hr Chimney1 343
Creationism coming to Ohio classrooms? Not with... 17 hr nobody 7
24 hour dental emergency (Nov '13) Fri Zach 4
Science News (Sep '13) Fri Ricky F 2,936
More from around the web