Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Environmentalism and Global Warming Thread

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by bill shack View Post
    It is very funny that the majority of americans view climate change as real and that it is caused by human, and yet the conservative republicans view it as a hoax, go figure .
    I believe neuroscientists are close to revealing the processes in the brain that cause otherwise intelligent people to
    hold less than rational beliefs. By close I'm thinking a decade or so, maybe sooner.

    Comment




    • Comment


      • Originally posted by Massena View Post
        And the new one issued by the US government you believe is of that type?
        Duh !!!

        Who's paying the bill and for what agenda ???
        TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

        Comment


        • Incredible. The report is from the Trump administration.

          You just don't get it at all.
          We are not now that strength which in old days
          Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
          Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
          To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Massena View Post
            Incredible. The report is from the Trump administration.

            You just don't get it at all.
            No, the report was put out during the Trump administration. That doesn't mean it reflects the views of Trump, or his administration however. Most of the report's writers are "true believers" in Gorebal Warming.

            Comment


            • I can't think of any other scientific research project where the predictions were so far off but continues to be treated with the same credibility as the IPCC. 20 years ago it was rational to give the modelers the benefit of doubt but that is becoming increasingly difficult. As co2 levels rise the effects will proportionately diminish. It is clear that the positive feedback in the models has failed to materialize. Based on the history of exaggerated warming it is reasonable to assume that the consequences have also been exaggerated.

              None of the above is proof that we should not be concerned about global warming only that the research being conducted needs to be opened up to public scrutiny. All models and related correspondence between researchers working with tax payer funding needs to be made public. It isn't science unless it is falsifiable. That means that the criteria for falsification has to be clearly stated and in this case it is a question not of if but how much. It isn't a question of if co2 will cause warming because that was established more than a hundred years ago.

              The language alone shows how dishonest the discussion has been. Alarmist and denier are terms more suited to propaganda than scientific inquiry. That said these kinds of debates are not unusual in the scientific community, what is unusual is the politicization of science. History shows that one of the consequences of luxury is nihilism and dissolution of core values. At present there is an almost pathological lack of appreciation for the role fossil fuels played in creating the luxury that affords people the time and energy to be activist.

              We hunt the hunters

              Comment


              • Of course the consequences have been exaggerated. For instance, the report claims 75% of corn production in the mid-West would be eliminated by unchecked Gorebal Warming. Well, nearly a third of all corn is used to make ethanol for additives to fuel. About another third is exported. Even if their dire predictions did come true, it really wouldn't hurt the food market in the US. But, this prediction is nothing but a SWAGPOOYA anyway, so it can be safely ignored anyway...

                Comment


                • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                  No, the report was put out during the Trump administration. That doesn't mean it reflects the views of Trump, or his administration however. Most of the report's writers are "true believers" in Gorebal Warming.
                  At least 11 government agencies, including NASA, contributed to the report. And, yes, it is from the Trump administration which has been in power for two years.
                  We are not now that strength which in old days
                  Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                  Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                  To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Massena View Post

                    At least 11 government agencies, including NASA, contributed to the report. And, yes, it is from the Trump administration which has been in power for two years.
                    So? Another logical fallacy, particularly when applied to science: Appeal to popularity or quantity. The people that wrote it have been in government for years, often for decades. Others are government contractors from the private sector.

                    That doesn't give the report a scintilla of credibility by the way. Science is based on facts and data presented in an impassionate way so it can be reviewed by anyone and everyone. Science isn't a popularity contest, nor does it's credibility lie with people touting their credentials as proof they're correct.

                    Comment


                    • What the left wants to do is turn the whole country into Detroit. Of course the leadership has no intentions of suffering the consequences of their actions.
                      We hunt the hunters

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
                        What the left wants to do is turn the whole country into Detroit. Of course the leadership has no intentions of suffering the consequences of their actions.
                        What the Left wants in theory:



                        What the Left gets in practice:





                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                          So? Another logical fallacy, particularly when applied to science: Appeal to popularity or quantity. The people that wrote it have been in government for years, often for decades. Others are government contractors from the private sector.

                          That doesn't give the report a scintilla of credibility by the way. Science is based on facts and data presented in an impassionate way so it can be reviewed by anyone and everyone. Science isn't a popularity contest, nor does it's credibility lie with people touting their credentials as proof they're correct.
                          And what 'logical fallacy' is that? This isn't an 'appearl to popularity or quantity' but a scientific study that makes an excellent case for climate change and the possible problems that may arise from it.

                          And the report, being a scientific one, most certainly is credible. Disagreeing with it is fine, but knocking something because you just don't agree with the concept is ridiculous and unscientific as well as illogical.
                          We are not now that strength which in old days
                          Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                          Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                          To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Massena View Post

                            And what 'logical fallacy' is that? This isn't an 'appearl to popularity or quantity' but a scientific study that makes an excellent case for climate change and the possible problems that may arise from it.

                            And the report, being a scientific one, most certainly is credible. Disagreeing with it is fine, but knocking something because you just don't agree with the concept is ridiculous and unscientific as well as illogical.
                            You stated:
                            At least 11 government agencies, including NASA, contributed to the report. And, yes, it is from the Trump administration which has been in power for two years.
                            That is a series of irrelevant appeals.

                            Appeal to authority.



                            Appeal to popularity / quantity



                            What's ridiculous and unscientific is your claim that just because a bunch of government agencies put out this report it should be believed as true and accurate.

                            Comment


                            • The problem with the "Global Warming Authorities" is that no government program every shrinks of it's own accord. Most of the people working on Global Warming should be fired and replaced by people that understand that the tax payer is not a bottomless well. If they want to keep working they can open a go fund me. I'm tired of their pompus asses.
                              We hunt the hunters

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                                You stated:


                                That is a series of irrelevant appeals.

                                Appeal to authority.



                                Appeal to popularity / quantity



                                What's ridiculous and unscientific is your claim that just because a bunch of government agencies put out this report it should be believed as true and accurate.
                                It's not an 'appeal' It's fact.
                                We are not now that strength which in old days
                                Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                                Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                                To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X