13 government agencies release report on Climate Change

Go fuck yourself. There's all types of scientific research and companies I support. Most of the money made in the past 20 years are the result of REAL scientific and technological achievements put in the hands of average people around the world. Global Warming? Scam. Ethanol? Scam. Smart phones, telcom and other innovations? Great investments. Originally Posted by gnadfly

It's a scam because the GOP has made this issue part of their campaign strategy. They know how to pander to their audience. That's why this issue is attacked the way it is.

If they decided tomorrow to get behind climate change then all of a sudden every science denier out there would have a different opinion on this.

so you implicitly believe everything the government says? Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

So you implicitly believe everything Trump and Fox News tells you?

With Obamacare, that's the least of their worries. Originally Posted by gnadfly

It appears living is the least of their worries.

With Obamacare, that's the least of their worries.

Go fuck yourself. There's all types of scientific research and companies I support. Most of the money made in the past 20 years are the result of REAL scientific and technological achievements put in the hands of average people around the world. Global Warming? Scam. Ethanol? Scam. Smart phones, telcom and other innovations? Great investments.


He couldn't pour water out of boot if the instructions were written on the heel. Originally Posted by gnadfly

how much water? or fake rain is needed air force (any side effect?) or can it be control

What the fuck does that have to do with anything? How many libs would refuse cancer treatment because they found out their doctor didn't buy into the climate change hoax? Or how many libs would refuse treatment from a doctor that thinks obamacare sucks ass? Originally Posted by Budman

It has to do with science. And the point clearly eludes you. I was referring specifically to the people in this discussion who are denying science. How much would they deny if their lives were directly affected? You're welcome to answer that question. Or not.

It has to do with science. And the point clearly eludes you. I was referring specifically to the people in this discussion who are denying science. How much would they deny if their lives were directly affected? You're welcome to answer that question. Or not. Originally Posted by Vivienne Rey

Ok, I'll answer. Just because something "has to do with science" doesn't mean we are dealing with a binary true/false paradigm. We are studying degrees of correlation, not absolute truth. There is room for a range of opinions on the strength of the correlation between carbon emissions and weather variables.

Oh, and it doesn't help the climate-change crusaders when they adopt someone like Al Gore - a guy who received a "D" in natural sciences at Harvard - as their public spokesman.

It's a scam because the GOP has made this issue part of their campaign strategy. They know how to pander to their audience. That's why this issue is attacked the way it is.

If they decided tomorrow to get behind climate change then all of a sudden every science denier out there would have a different opinion on this.

nope. some scientists don't let their grant money determine their findings. follow the money. the climate change people have an agenda and it ain't got shit to do with saving mother GAIA


So you implicitly believe everything Trump and Fox News tells you?

Originally Posted by JCM800

i don't watch fox news. or any news much for that matter. call it odd or not but i have Yahoo has my home page and that's it. no MSNBC, FOX, nothing else.

Yahoo can slant liberal mostly but they source most of their articles from other sites. so i get a spread of things on the front page.

as for what Trump says, half of it is bluster the other half he might actually believe.

as for what i believe .. i believe Clinton isn't President and i'll have another scotch.

It has to do with science. And the point clearly eludes you. I was referring specifically to the people in this discussion who are denying science. How much would they deny if their lives were directly affected? You're welcome to answer that question. Or not. Originally Posted by Vivienne Rey

well sweetpea, you make a good point. it is about science, and the science is anything but clear. care to deny that?

or are you gonna just stick with the 97% thing? your choice.

It has to do with science. And the point clearly eludes you. I was referring specifically to the people in this discussion who are denying science. How much would they deny if their lives were directly affected? You're welcome to answer that question. Or not. Originally Posted by Vivienne Rey

Your original question doesn't have any correlation to this discussion. So would you refuse treatment from a doctor that believes global warming is a hoax? We all go to the doctor because we have faith in them to provide the best treatment for whatever ailment we have. Do they make mistakes? Fuck yes they do.

The global warming issue is not settled in regards to what causes it and what can be done to reverse it. I believe that most people will agree that the climate changes. It's the cause that is in question. You have swallowed the entire Al Gore load of shit hook line and sinker. I think it is mostly a money grab by people who stand to gain by selling their bullshit. I'll reconsider my position when the cocksuckers leading this religion start following their own advice about how we should live. They are the typical liberal in that they want to tell all the peons how they should live but exempt themselves from any of the hardships it imposes. Do you see Al Gore flying coach? How about Matt Damon? Fuck no. They all fly private jets. I'm curious what exactly you do to stop global warming? Do you drive an electric car? Do you take the bus or ride a bike wherever you go? Have you decided to keep your AC turned up to 78 during the heat wave of August? I bet you don't do jack fucking shit but come on a hooker board with the holier than thou attitude of every other POS liberal.

A scientist who

1) has an opinion about global warming,
2) publishes that opinion under the term "scientist" by participating in a poll about he validity of political opinions on global warming,
3) MOST IMPORTANTLY, hasn't studied the facts and basis for those political opinions.

is guilty of malpractice, and ought to be subject to civil lawsuits.

I have never met a "scientist" with strong opinions on this subject who has studied the underlying data. I have.

I have never met a "scientist" who has worked through the underlying assumptions used to model the data. I have.

I know a couple of "climate" scientists who have contributed to the surveys being discussed, and are "human influence warmist". They don't know anything about the underlying data, are grant funded, and subject to losing their grants if they do not tow the party line.

Science is not executed by taking surveys. People who think so are equivelant to flat earthers. After all, the earth was deemed flat because a group of priests(old time scientist) said it was so. Priests would be excommunicated(de-granted) if they disagreed. They achieved consensus. SOUND FAMILIAR?

A scientist who

1) has an opinion about global warming,
2) publishes that opinion under the term "scientist" by participating in a poll about he validity of political opinions on global warming,
3) MOST IMPORTANTLY, hasn't studied the facts and basis for those political opinions.

is guilty of malpractice, and ought to be subject to civil lawsuits.

I have never met a "scientist" with strong opinions on this subject who has studied the underlying data. I have.

I have never met a "scientist" who has worked through the underlying assumptions used to model the data. I have.

I know a couple of "climate" scientists who have contributed to the surveys being discussed, and are "human influence warmist". They don't know anything about the underlying data, are grant funded, and subject to losing their grants if they do not tow the party line.

Science is not executed by taking surveys. People who think so are equivelant to flat earthers. After all, the earth was deemed flat because a group of priests(old time scientist) said it was so. Priests would be excommunicated(de-granted) if they disagreed. They achieved consensus. SOUND FAMILIAR? Originally Posted by kehaar

I essentially agree with much of what you say but would like to clarify one point: It was the ancients -- not the Catholic Church -- that determined that the earth was flat and that the cosmos was geocentric. Chief among those who believed the earth was flat was the Greek Philosopher/Astronomer Anaximander (6th Century BCE). Anaximander, Aristotle and Plato all three believed and taught that the universe revolved around earth. The churchmen of the Catholic Church of later ages, such as St. Augustine studied these old, scientific philosophers and incorporated their understanding of the cosmos into Church teachings centuries later.

As for science being immutably inviolable, one need only remember that scientists once declared that Pluto was a planet ... and scientist also said that a Brontosaurus was a dinosaur that roamed the earth ... until it wasn't ... until it was again. So much for scientific "certainty".

It's a scam because the GOP has made this issue part of their campaign strategy. They know how to pander to their audience. That's why this issue is attacked the way it is.

If they decided tomorrow to get behind climate change then all of a sudden every science denier out there would have a different opinion on this.




So you implicitly believe everything Trump and Fox News tells you?

Originally Posted by JCM800

You know Obama tried to pass climate change legislation during his first term when he had a supermajority but couldn't because the blue dog democrats wouldn't support it? Then he resorted to all types of EOs.

You know Nixon was generally recognized as the force behind getting the EPA going? And the Republicans the force behind ending acid rain?

Probably not. Because you're an idiot.

It appears living is the least of their worries. Originally Posted by Vivienne Rey

I believe the point is eluding you. Just because a doctor told you you had cancer, would you seek a second opinion? Or would that be science denying?

You're a silly motherfucker.

I believe the point is eluding you. Just because a doctor told you you had cancer, would you seek a second opinion? Or would that be science denying? Originally Posted by gnadfly

No she wouldn't look for a second opinion she would just ask him what his political views were. If they aligned with hers she would be ready for her first round of Chemo, lol.

Jim

You're a silly motherfucker. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

you're motherfucking silly