Author Topic: The Official Climate Change Thread  (Read 30569 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 26887
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #35 on: August 15, 2011, 11:51:01 AM »
I think I missed the thread that preempted this one... But I do believe we have a climate shift. As far as what is the main cause, I have no idea.

True. We have a climate shift. As we have had climate shifts throughout the course of history. We do not know the cause, and we will never know the cause. So, there is nothing we should do about it at all. The whole idea of carbon credits is absurd. Oil supplies are due to run out in a very short period of time anyway, and the problem will take care of itself. If there even IS a problem, which I do not believe at all. Climate changes and changes back. it's natural. Sea levels rise and fall over time. It's perfectly natural. Our job is not to invent explanations that enable some to curtail the freedom of others. Our job is to adapt to the new climate and figure out the new opportunities that will come about. Climate change can be GOOD. Let's embrace it and stop inventing new ways to stop progress and achievement.


Well this is definitely the first time I've seen anyone use the argument that climate change is a good thing and a sign of positive progression.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #36 on: August 15, 2011, 11:54:42 AM »
It's not for me.  It's quite common.

It's one step down from outright denial that the temperature is going up.  "Well, climate change can be good!"  And it will be good (purely in economic terms: crop yields and access to Arctic resources, for example.  But biodiversity would suffer a lot) to some; Canada and Russia especially.

Sure sucks about all those poor people in the third world.  Their fault for not being rich, I guess.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 26887
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #37 on: August 15, 2011, 11:58:04 AM »
It's not for me.  It's quite common.

It's one step down from outright denial that the temperature is going up.  "Well, climate change can be good!"  And it will be good (purely in economic terms: crop yields and access to Arctic resources, for example.  But biodiversity would suffer a lot) to some; Canada and Russia especially.

Sure sucks about all those poor people in the third world.  Their fault for not being rich, I guess.

To be fair, they can easily stop being poor, they just don't want to.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4585
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #38 on: August 15, 2011, 12:04:55 PM »
Climate changes and changes back. it's natural. Sea levels rise and fall over time. It's perfectly natural.

The fact it has happened in the past is not evidence it will happen again. Especially considering the enviroment has been changed significantly since the last cycle ended.

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #39 on: August 15, 2011, 12:35:58 PM »
I think I missed the thread that preempted this one... But I do believe we have a climate shift. As far as what is the main cause, I have no idea.

True. We have a climate shift. As we have had climate shifts throughout the course of history. We do not know the cause, and we will never know the cause. So, there is nothing we should do about it at all. The whole idea of carbon credits is absurd. Oil supplies are due to run out in a very short period of time anyway, and the problem will take care of itself. If there even IS a problem, which I do not believe at all. Climate changes and changes back. it's natural. Sea levels rise and fall over time. It's perfectly natural. Our job is not to invent explanations that enable some to curtail the freedom of others. Our job is to adapt to the new climate and figure out the new opportunities that will come about. Climate change can be GOOD. Let's embrace it and stop inventing new ways to stop progress and achievement.


Well this is definitely the first time I've seen anyone use the argument that climate change is a good thing and a sign of positive progression.

What's shocking to me is that staying on the same energy source we've been using for nearly a century, oil, is conversely considered indicative of progress.
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #40 on: August 15, 2011, 12:54:14 PM »
I think I missed the thread that preempted this one... But I do believe we have a climate shift. As far as what is the main cause, I have no idea.

True. We have a climate shift. As we have had climate shifts throughout the course of history. We do not know the cause, and we will never know the cause. So, there is nothing we should do about it at all. The whole idea of carbon credits is absurd. Oil supplies are due to run out in a very short period of time anyway, and the problem will take care of itself. If there even IS a problem, which I do not believe at all. Climate changes and changes back. it's natural. Sea levels rise and fall over time. It's perfectly natural. Our job is not to invent explanations that enable some to curtail the freedom of others. Our job is to adapt to the new climate and figure out the new opportunities that will come about. Climate change can be GOOD. Let's embrace it and stop inventing new ways to stop progress and achievement.


Life forms have significantly altered the environment in the past. The first photosynthetic life nearly turned the earth into a giant snowball, incapable of sustaining life as we know it. Of course, we today have to be thankful for this... we wouldn't be around otherwise.

As for the skepticism if your argument, I agree. However, I think your position is wrong. I think it's fair to say that we as humans don't know what kind of effect we are having on the environment, in absolute terms. There are many factors involved, and we're starting to learn about all of them. However, the greenhouse effect is a very well proved theory regarding certain gases, and we know very well that we emit a lot of greenhouse gases because of our industry. Green energy is better in every way, and it's inevitable anyways. You have problems with carbon credits, but why not support direct investment in green technology? Use tax dollars for people to get solar panels, geothermal energy units, for more innovative wind farms, storage technologies (flywheels). As far as transportation, hydrogen is just around the corner, and if public transportation and government fleets move to those systems quickly, it helsp provide infrastructure for the free-market to kick into motion. The continued extraction of oil and natural gas can only happen at the cost of our environment, a cost which increases as these resources become harder and harder to extract.

You talk about progress and about thinking about the future... and I agree with you on that. If climate change is happening, regardless of why, we need to start preparing ourselves to move, abandon cities, and adapt to the new environment. Though, since I don't see any rational reason why green technology and innovations shouldn't be a huge part of this future. Why stall the future of technology because of the theories behind climate change/"global warming"?

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4717
  • Shopping Cart Apologist
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #41 on: August 15, 2011, 01:07:24 PM »
As for the skepticism if your argument, I agree. However, I think your position is wrong. I think it's fair to say that we as humans don't know what kind of effect we are having on the environment, in absolute terms. There are many factors involved, and we're starting to learn about all of them. However, the greenhouse effect is a very well proved theory regarding certain gases, and we know very well that we emit a lot of greenhouse gases because of our industry. Green energy is better in every way, and it's inevitable anyways. You have problems with carbon credits, but why not support direct investment in green technology? Use tax dollars for people to get solar panels, geothermal energy units, for more innovative wind farms, storage technologies (flywheels). As far as transportation, hydrogen is just around the corner, and if public transportation and government fleets move to those systems quickly, it helsp provide infrastructure for the free-market to kick into motion. The continued extraction of oil and natural gas can only happen at the cost of our environment, a cost which increases as these resources become harder and harder to extract.

You talk about progress and about thinking about the future... and I agree with you on that. If climate change is happening, regardless of why, we need to start preparing ourselves to move, abandon cities, and adapt to the new environment. Though, since I don't see any rational reason why green technology and innovations shouldn't be a huge part of this future. Why stall the future of technology because of the theories behind climate change/"global warming"?

Good points, Scheavo. 
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #42 on: August 15, 2011, 01:31:48 PM »
Quote

Life forms have significantly altered the environment in the past. The first photosynthetic life nearly turned the earth into a giant snowball, incapable of sustaining life as we know it. Of course, we today have to be thankful for this... we wouldn't be around otherwise.

As for the skepticism if your argument, I agree. However, I think your position is wrong. I think it's fair to say that we as humans don't know what kind of effect we are having on the environment, in absolute terms. There are many factors involved, and we're starting to learn about all of them. However, the greenhouse effect is a very well proved theory regarding certain gases, and we know very well that we emit a lot of greenhouse gases because of our industry. Green energy is better in every way, and it's inevitable anyways. You have problems with carbon credits, but why not support direct investment in green technology? Use tax dollars for people to get solar panels, geothermal energy units, for more innovative wind farms, storage technologies (flywheels). As far as transportation, hydrogen is just around the corner, and if public transportation and government fleets move to those systems quickly, it helsp provide infrastructure for the free-market to kick into motion. The continued extraction of oil and natural gas can only happen at the cost of our environment, a cost which increases as these resources become harder and harder to extract.

You talk about progress and about thinking about the future... and I agree with you on that. If climate change is happening, regardless of why, we need to start preparing ourselves to move, abandon cities, and adapt to the new environment. Though, since I don't see any rational reason why green technology and innovations shouldn't be a huge part of this future. Why stall the future of technology because of the theories behind climate change/"global warming"?

I am not willing to allow disruption of the free market on the off chance that climate change caused by man "might" be happening. First of all I would need conclusive proof that it is in fact happening. We do not have that. At all. Second, I would need conclusive proof that once it is happening and is caused by the activities of man, that it is provably and imminently destructive to human life on the planet. Not in 100 or 1000 years. Next year.

I simply do not accept the cataclysmic predictions of the environmental movement. Meteorology and climatology are in their infancy, and climate scientists honestly don't really know their asses from a hole in the ground. That becomes obvious every time they miss a simple 5-day weather forecast, a more complex seasonal hurricane prediction, and everything in between. In other words, the environmental movement is willing to impose and curtail and blockade economic activity without solid proof of anything. That something "might" happen is good enough for them. It is not good enough for me. And it should not be good enough for any policy maker with a lick of common sense.




Offline MasterShakezula

  • Posts: 3733
  • Owes H $10
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #43 on: August 15, 2011, 01:36:39 PM »
Radical climate change isn't something that happens over a 5-day period.  Nor 100 or 1000 years.  The major shifts over the course of the Earth's history happened over the course of millions.  However, even the small differences that can be found in a 100 year period can have major effects upon humans and the environment around them.  And regardless of what the weather's like next year, we ought to make efforts to reduce our impact upon the climate and adjust our ways to natural long-term changes in climate.  If we do not, who's to say there will be a next year for humans 100 or 1000 years from now.  

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #44 on: August 15, 2011, 01:39:34 PM »
Quote

Life forms have significantly altered the environment in the past. The first photosynthetic life nearly turned the earth into a giant snowball, incapable of sustaining life as we know it. Of course, we today have to be thankful for this... we wouldn't be around otherwise.

As for the skepticism if your argument, I agree. However, I think your position is wrong. I think it's fair to say that we as humans don't know what kind of effect we are having on the environment, in absolute terms. There are many factors involved, and we're starting to learn about all of them. However, the greenhouse effect is a very well proved theory regarding certain gases, and we know very well that we emit a lot of greenhouse gases because of our industry. Green energy is better in every way, and it's inevitable anyways. You have problems with carbon credits, but why not support direct investment in green technology? Use tax dollars for people to get solar panels, geothermal energy units, for more innovative wind farms, storage technologies (flywheels). As far as transportation, hydrogen is just around the corner, and if public transportation and government fleets move to those systems quickly, it helsp provide infrastructure for the free-market to kick into motion. The continued extraction of oil and natural gas can only happen at the cost of our environment, a cost which increases as these resources become harder and harder to extract.

You talk about progress and about thinking about the future... and I agree with you on that. If climate change is happening, regardless of why, we need to start preparing ourselves to move, abandon cities, and adapt to the new environment. Though, since I don't see any rational reason why green technology and innovations shouldn't be a huge part of this future. Why stall the future of technology because of the theories behind climate change/"global warming"?

I am not willing to allow disruption of the free market on the off chance that climate change caused by man "might" be happening. First of all I would need conclusive proof that it is in fact happening. We do not have that. At all. Second, I would need conclusive proof that once it is happening and is caused by the activities of man, that it is provably and imminently destructive to human life on the planet. Not in 100 or 1000 years. Next year.

I simply do not accept the cataclysmic predictions of the environmental movement. Meteorology and climatology are in their infancy, and climate scientists honestly don't really know their asses from a hole in the ground. That becomes obvious every time they miss a simple 5-day weather forecast, a more complex seasonal hurricane prediction, and everything in between. In other words, the environmental movement is willing to impose and curtail and blockade economic activity without solid proof of anything. That something "might" happen is good enough for them. It is not good enough for me. And it should not be good enough for any policy maker with a lick of common sense.



You completely ignored my argument.

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #45 on: August 15, 2011, 01:41:14 PM »
Quote

Life forms have significantly altered the environment in the past. The first photosynthetic life nearly turned the earth into a giant snowball, incapable of sustaining life as we know it. Of course, we today have to be thankful for this... we wouldn't be around otherwise.

As for the skepticism if your argument, I agree. However, I think your position is wrong. I think it's fair to say that we as humans don't know what kind of effect we are having on the environment, in absolute terms. There are many factors involved, and we're starting to learn about all of them. However, the greenhouse effect is a very well proved theory regarding certain gases, and we know very well that we emit a lot of greenhouse gases because of our industry. Green energy is better in every way, and it's inevitable anyways. You have problems with carbon credits, but why not support direct investment in green technology? Use tax dollars for people to get solar panels, geothermal energy units, for more innovative wind farms, storage technologies (flywheels). As far as transportation, hydrogen is just around the corner, and if public transportation and government fleets move to those systems quickly, it helsp provide infrastructure for the free-market to kick into motion. The continued extraction of oil and natural gas can only happen at the cost of our environment, a cost which increases as these resources become harder and harder to extract.

You talk about progress and about thinking about the future... and I agree with you on that. If climate change is happening, regardless of why, we need to start preparing ourselves to move, abandon cities, and adapt to the new environment. Though, since I don't see any rational reason why green technology and innovations shouldn't be a huge part of this future. Why stall the future of technology because of the theories behind climate change/"global warming"?

I am not willing to allow disruption of the free market on the off chance that climate change caused by man "might" be happening. First of all I would need conclusive proof that it is in fact happening. We do not have that. At all. Second, I would need conclusive proof that once it is happening and is caused by the activities of man, that it is provably and imminently destructive to human life on the planet. Not in 100 or 1000 years. Next year.

I simply do not accept the cataclysmic predictions of the environmental movement. Meteorology and climatology are in their infancy, and climate scientists honestly don't really know their asses from a hole in the ground. That becomes obvious every time they miss a simple 5-day weather forecast, a more complex seasonal hurricane prediction, and everything in between. In other words, the environmental movement is willing to impose and curtail and blockade economic activity without solid proof of anything. That something "might" happen is good enough for them. It is not good enough for me. And it should not be good enough for any policy maker with a lick of common sense.

On the "off chance?"  Is it like 50/50 that we're vastly increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere?  Or is it 3:1 odds that the greenhouse effect actually is a phenomenon?

I'm studying for the LSATs right now, and the logical fallacies in your arguments are pretty massive.

Like, "if phenomenon 'X' can have natural causes, it cannot have anthropogenic causes."  Or making baseless conclusions like "If scientific discipline 'Z' is younger than scientific discipline 'Q,' than the conclusions of the scientists working in discipline 'Z' are invalid."

Also, you compared predicting a five-day forecast to predicting climatic trends.  Because that's obviously the same.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #46 on: August 15, 2011, 02:16:57 PM »
Quote
On the "off chance?"  Is it like 50/50 that we're vastly increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere?  Or is it 3:1 odds that the greenhouse effect actually is a phenomenon?

I'm studying for the LSATs right now, and the logical fallacies in your arguments are pretty massive.

Like, "if phenomenon 'X' can have natural causes, it cannot have anthropogenic causes."  Or making baseless conclusions like "If scientific discipline 'Z' is younger than scientific discipline 'Q,' than the conclusions of the scientists working in discipline 'Z' are invalid."

Also, you compared predicting a five-day forecast to predicting climatic trends.  Because that's obviously the same.

There are thousands of arguments and counterarguments to the theory of climate change. The bottom line is many smart scientists believe arguments both for and against. Therefore, using logic, it would be illogical do curtail freedom and liberty until certainty is achieved.

The entire climate change movement is summarized in uncertainties: This might be happening. And since there is a good chance that it is happening, it may also be caused by the activities of man. If it is, which we are not sure of, but certainly for which there is a good probability, then this could result, after which disaster would certainly be a high probability. Therefore, since we are not sure, it is best to err on the side of caution and curtail, blockade, and cap. Just in case.

Do you see why this is bullshit?

And while it is attractive and even necessary to divorce the dismal track record of meterological prediction from that of climatological prediction, the two are intertwined, and both make extensive use of computer modelling that observe and predict similar phenomena. As we all know, climate is simply weather over time. And if you insist on divorcing meterological prediction from climate prediction, because one often fails and necessarily must discredit the other, let's go there. Man has NOT been successful at predicting climate, at all, in any way shape or form. When man is able to start showing a track record of accurate climate prediction, THEN we can start talking. But even then, the change has to be proven to be adverse to human life. There is a good chance that if global warming is one day proven to exist, it may be a good thing that we want more of.

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #47 on: August 15, 2011, 02:21:43 PM »
The entire climate change movement is summarized in uncertainties: This might be happening. And since there is a good chance that it is happening, it may also be caused by the activities of man. If it is, which we are not sure of, but certainly for which there is a good probability, then this could result, after which disaster would certainly be a high probability. Therefore, since we are not sure, it is best to err on the side of caution and curtail, blockade, and cap. Just in case.

Our entire system of physics is based upon fundamentally uncertain forces; yet we're able to write laws of motions and energy which apply and are usuable.

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #48 on: August 15, 2011, 02:41:57 PM »
Quote
On the "off chance?"  Is it like 50/50 that we're vastly increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere?  Or is it 3:1 odds that the greenhouse effect actually is a phenomenon?

I'm studying for the LSATs right now, and the logical fallacies in your arguments are pretty massive.

Like, "if phenomenon 'X' can have natural causes, it cannot have anthropogenic causes."  Or making baseless conclusions like "If scientific discipline 'Z' is younger than scientific discipline 'Q,' than the conclusions of the scientists working in discipline 'Z' are invalid."

Also, you compared predicting a five-day forecast to predicting climatic trends.  Because that's obviously the same.

There are thousands of arguments and counterarguments to the theory of climate change. The bottom line is many smart scientists believe arguments both for and against. Therefore, using logic, it would be illogical do curtail freedom and liberty until certainty is achieved.

The entire climate change movement is summarized in uncertainties: This might be happening. And since there is a good chance that it is happening, it may also be caused by the activities of man. If it is, which we are not sure of, but certainly for which there is a good probability, then this could result, after which disaster would certainly be a high probability. Therefore, since we are not sure, it is best to err on the side of caution and curtail, blockade, and cap. Just in case.

Do you see why this is bullshit?

And while it is attractive and even necessary to divorce the dismal track record of meterological prediction from that of climatological prediction, the two are intertwined, and both make extensive use of computer modelling that observe and predict similar phenomena. As we all know, climate is simply weather over time. And if you insist on divorcing meterological prediction from climate prediction, because one often fails and necessarily must discredit the other, let's go there. Man has NOT been successful at predicting climate, at all, in any way shape or form. When man is able to start showing a track record of accurate climate prediction, THEN we can start talking. But even then, the change has to be proven to be adverse to human life. There is a good chance that if global warming is one day proven to exist, it may be a good thing that we want more of.

Well, there's not thousands of arguments and counterarguments, but I won't go into that because I don't want to talk about the nature of research and evidence.

All science is bounded by uncertainties.  That doesn't prevent you from accepting gravity, or evolution.  That some smart scientists don't believe that global warming is primarily due to anthropogenic causes, and therefore one should reject taking any action based on concluding one way or the other is again, poor logical reasoning.  There are some smart people (and scientists) who think the Earth is less than 10,000 years old.  That doesn't make holding a neutral ground on that issue intelligent, because the overwhelming majority of the scientific community thinks that the Earth is around four and a half billion years old.

Lol.  Of course it's necessary to remove meteorology from climatology, because they don't concern themselves with the same things.  Short-term variability that plagues weather forecasts is something that does not affect climatology at all.  Predicting the average temperature of 2012 can be done with accuracy.  Predicting the temperature of August 15, 2012, cannot be done with any accuracy.  Confusing the two just displays your ignorance.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline El JoNNo

  • Posts: 1778
  • Gender: Male
  • EMOTRUCCI
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #49 on: August 15, 2011, 02:54:28 PM »
Here is the problem...

Climate change do to man is true and we do nothing: The earth is bombarded by natural disasters so frequent it will devastate our species. Civilization as we know it will be destroyed.

Climate change do to man is true and we do something: The earth is safe for however long. Sure economically it may be difficult for a while. But we now have renewable resources and civilization is still thriving, evolving and expanding.

Climate change do to man is false and we do nothing: We carry on usual..

Climate change do to man is false and we do something: The economy may collapse for a short while but we have renewable resources and are no longer polluting the environment.

When there is an overwhelming bank of evidence that supports climate change for the worst by man. Even if it is or isn't man that is causing it, we need to do something about it. If there is another ice age we need to learn to combat it and if the earth is going to join it's sister planet Venus we need to combat it. This whole we shouldn't do it because it isn't certain is a bullshit argument.   

 

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3054
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #50 on: August 15, 2011, 03:28:09 PM »
Do =/= Due

How does working towards renewable resources cause economic issues? It creates jobs and promotes the private sector. I would think that anything that works towards new ideas is a good thing.

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #51 on: August 15, 2011, 05:04:31 PM »
Do =/= Due

How does working towards renewable resources cause economic issues? It creates jobs and promotes the private sector. I would think that anything that works towards new ideas is a good thing.

As long as private companies and individuals want to develop solutions, using their own money and expertise, I'm good with it. However I do not want tax dollars being diverted to these, or any other companies.

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 26887
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #52 on: August 15, 2011, 05:06:13 PM »
Do =/= Due

How does working towards renewable resources cause economic issues? It creates jobs and promotes the private sector. I would think that anything that works towards new ideas is a good thing.

As long as private companies and individuals want to develop solutions, using their own money and expertise, I'm good with it. However I do not want tax dollars being diverted to these, or any other companies.

Do you mean if your tax dollars go to help drill for oil?
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #53 on: August 15, 2011, 05:22:22 PM »
Quote

All science is bounded by uncertainties.  That doesn't prevent you from accepting gravity, or evolution.  That some smart scientists don't believe that global warming is primarily due to anthropogenic causes, and therefore one should reject taking any action based on concluding one way or the other is again, poor logical reasoning.  There are some smart people (and scientists) who think the Earth is less than 10,000 years old.  That doesn't make holding a neutral ground on that issue intelligent, because the overwhelming majority of the scientific community thinks that the Earth is around four and a half billion years old.

Lol.  Of course it's necessary to remove meteorology from climatology, because they don't concern themselves with the same things.  Short-term variability that plagues weather forecasts is something that does not affect climatology at all.  Predicting the average temperature of 2012 can be done with accuracy.  Predicting the temperature of August 15, 2012, cannot be done with any accuracy.  Confusing the two just displays your ignorance.

Gravity is certainty, not the result of an agenda-driven junk science campaign. Evolution is certainty, not the result of an agenda-driven junk science campaign. Global warming is completely theoretical, with no data whatsoever to back it up. It's based on hypotheticals, suppositions, random assumptions, wishful thinking, politically driven emotionalism, and fundamental hatred of achievement, not to mention that  most unholy economic manifestation of human achievement: Capitalism.

The dirty secret of climate change is that no proof of global warming exists, and none is offered. The reason for that is the proponents of this nonsense are after a political agenda, and really could care less if global warming ever turns out to be true. As long as they get to exercise power and score lucrative government grants, and in the process stop the advance of civilization, all is good.

So, no. I do not want tax dollars wasted on this nonsense. I prefer that we do nothing with respect to global warming. I prefer that fossil fuels just run out in the next 200 years, as they inevitably must, and then cleaner alternatives will naturally take their place. However, I want this all to take place in a free market, with no coercion on the part of the agenda driven environmental movement which always seem to favor a collectivist-statist solution.

In the final analysis, if we are to live under the yoke of the Green movement and all of its compulsion and enslavement, the planet is better off overheating and self-destructing. Better Dead then Green. (Get it?).






Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #54 on: August 15, 2011, 05:28:00 PM »
Quote
Do you mean if your tax dollars go to help drill for oil?

No tax dollars should ever be utilized for oil drilling. That is a job for private companies. The important thing is removing government involvement in preventing oil drilling. We need more oil, more gas, more drilling, more fracking, and more high-tech methods of extraction.

Offline MasterShakezula

  • Posts: 3733
  • Owes H $10
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #55 on: August 15, 2011, 05:29:19 PM »
There are a number of far greater threats to our well-being than the Green Movement.

Big oil, for example.  

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4585
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #56 on: August 15, 2011, 05:42:24 PM »
There's no evidence for freedom existing.

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #57 on: August 15, 2011, 06:31:28 PM »
I don't know why I bother.  Once someone has decided that they, one of the bold, intelligent few, has accumulated enough hours of perusing various right-wing blogs and therefore has greater insight than those of the scientific community, all hope is lost.

Though, I suppose WW came around on some things.


Gravity is certainty, not the result of an agenda-driven junk science campaign.

Our current explanation of gravity does not cover all the bases.  It's definitely not certain.

Quote
Evolution is certainty, not the result of an agenda-driven junk science campaign.


Well, creationists would disagree with you on the latter point, and most would disagree with you on the former.
 
Quote
Global warming is completely theoretical, with no data whatsoever to back it up.

Huh.  I could've sworn that temperatures were going up.  Like 0.8 degrees over the last century or so.  No, you're probably right.

Quote
It's based on hypotheticals, suppositions, random assumptions, wishful thinking, politically driven emotionalism, and fundamental hatred of achievement, not to mention that  most unholy economic manifestation of human achievement: Capitalism.

Partly yes, partly yes, no, no (why would anyone want it to be happening?  And doesn't this contradict your statement previously that climate change is good?), no, no (what a bizarre statement.  I'm sure a bunch of climatologists in 1988 were all like "Boy, do we hate America.  What's the best way to destroy it and it's achievements?").

Quote
The dirty secret of climate change is that no proof of global warming exists, and none is offered. The reason for that is the proponents of this nonsense are after a political agenda, and really could care less if global warming ever turns out to be true. As long as they get to exercise power and score lucrative government grants, and in the process stop the advance of civilization, all is good.

Wait.  Are you sure global temperatures aren't rising?  I heard all these wacky claims that 2010 was the warmest year on record.

And yes, I'm sure the larger scientific community are all politically motivated, and that's why they're obviously making up all this stuff to control the world.  The Jews are probably involved somehow, too... 

You, on the other hand, have not allowed your political ideology to influence your opinion at all.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 26887
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #58 on: August 15, 2011, 06:44:15 PM »
On behalf of all jews, I can confirm that Global Warming is indeed a conspiracy, but we're not behind this one. This one is headed by those pesky lizard people.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #59 on: August 15, 2011, 06:48:17 PM »
You guys got the invite though, right?
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 26887
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #60 on: August 15, 2011, 06:50:53 PM »
You guys got the invite though, right?

We're not really .......in cahoots, we nod to each other on our way in and out of the world government building in Brazil, but it's usually kind of cold between us.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4717
  • Shopping Cart Apologist
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #61 on: August 15, 2011, 06:57:35 PM »
Major Thirteenth, while I applaud you for your rock-solid convictions (even though I may disagree with many of them), you need to quit the inflammatory, trolling language.  You are not furthering discussion by dismissing arguments simply by attaching the label "junk science," or by dismissing what you would consider weak evidence by instead saying there is no evidence.  If you can't have a civil discussion in a mature way by acknowledging other viewpoints besides your own and addressing them in a respectful manner, they you aren't participating properly in what a "discussion forum" is all about, and you will not be allowed to continue posting here.

To a lesser degree, others on the opposite side of the debate have been guilty of the same thing.  That needs to stop.

(And, no, I'm not talking about the joke tangent in the last few posts.  That literally made me lol and was nothing short of amazing)
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline MasterShakezula

  • Posts: 3733
  • Owes H $10
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #62 on: August 15, 2011, 07:02:45 PM »
About those lizards, why is it that when irate and uninformed people create highly improbable stories to explain issues that bother them but are not easily explained in one sweeping statement, they blame it on lizards, of all things?

What is so threatening about small, easily-scared reptiles?

Or Jews, for that matter?  The Jews, on average, are very smart and hard-working people who do much good in society, much moreso than the average person, probably. 

I mean, really, I thought everyone would realize by now that global warming was created as a source of fuel for the US gov.'s hurricane machine.  

But seriously, when it comes to conspiracy theories, why is it always something pinned on something totally random, like The Green Movement?

And on topic, I think what the Green Movement needs is more huge companies backing it.  The only reason big oil is so powerful is because it has the money to pay off Washington to make policies promoting its growth.  If the Green Movement is able to gain more that amount of money to give to Washington, through giant companies participating, the gov would be Green in a flash, I bet. 

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4717
  • Shopping Cart Apologist
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #63 on: August 15, 2011, 07:10:50 PM »
About those lizards, why is it that when irate and uninformed people create highly improbable stories to explain issues that bother them but are not easily explained in one sweeping statement, they blame it on lizards, of all things?

Because the only other option is to blame the Jews, and some of them have guns.  Besides, just look at them:

:V:

You just know they're up to something.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline MasterShakezula

  • Posts: 3733
  • Owes H $10
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #64 on: August 15, 2011, 07:34:59 PM »
Well, those 3 white pixels that appear next to his arm in one of the frames of that animation are quite questionable.

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #65 on: August 15, 2011, 07:52:28 PM »
I don't know why I bother.  Once someone has decided that they, one of the bold, intelligent few, has accumulated enough hours of perusing various right-wing blogs and therefore has greater insight than those of the scientific community, all hope is lost.

Though, I suppose WW came around on some things.


Gravity is certainty, not the result of an agenda-driven junk science campaign.

Our current explanation of gravity does not cover all the bases.  It's definitely not certain.

Quote
Evolution is certainty, not the result of an agenda-driven junk science campaign.


Well, creationists would disagree with you on the latter point, and most would disagree with you on the former.
 
Quote
Global warming is completely theoretical, with no data whatsoever to back it up.

Huh.  I could've sworn that temperatures were going up.  Like 0.8 degrees over the last century or so.  No, you're probably right.

Quote
It's based on hypotheticals, suppositions, random assumptions, wishful thinking, politically driven emotionalism, and fundamental hatred of achievement, not to mention that  most unholy economic manifestation of human achievement: Capitalism.

Partly yes, partly yes, no, no (why would anyone want it to be happening?  And doesn't this contradict your statement previously that climate change is good?), no, no (what a bizarre statement.  I'm sure a bunch of climatologists in 1988 were all like "Boy, do we hate America.  What's the best way to destroy it and it's achievements?").

Quote
The dirty secret of climate change is that no proof of global warming exists, and none is offered. The reason for that is the proponents of this nonsense are after a political agenda, and really could care less if global warming ever turns out to be true. As long as they get to exercise power and score lucrative government grants, and in the process stop the advance of civilization, all is good.

Wait.  Are you sure global temperatures aren't rising?  I heard all these wacky claims that 2010 was the warmest year on record.

And yes, I'm sure the larger scientific community are all politically motivated, and that's why they're obviously making up all this stuff to control the world.  The Jews are probably involved somehow, too... 

You, on the other hand, have not allowed your political ideology to influence your opinion at all.


GP, I applaud you.  A very effective rebuttal.
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 26887
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #66 on: August 15, 2011, 08:01:51 PM »
Well, it was a very good rebuttal, but something tells me it won't be all that effective.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #67 on: August 15, 2011, 08:12:47 PM »
Honestly I think you nailed your own point very well, although admittedly I'm more inclined to believe that skeptics are outright deniers. :P
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #68 on: August 15, 2011, 08:34:33 PM »
Well, it would be easier if Major Thirteenth better articulated what he believed.  Because I'm confused about what he means part of the time.  When he says "there's no proof for global warming," for example, I don't know whether he means that temperatures aren't actually rising, that there's nothing to suggest that the the experienced warming is caused by humans (like if the greenhouse effect isn't actually a phenomenon), or whether the evidence presented is fabricated.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #69 on: August 15, 2011, 08:44:04 PM »
I don't know why I bother.  Once someone has decided that they, one of the bold, intelligent few, has accumulated enough hours of perusing various right-wing blogs and therefore has greater insight than those of the scientific community, all hope is lost.

Are you aware that the scientific community is not in agreement that global warming exists?

Over 30,000 scientists, including over 9,000 Ph.D’s, have now signed the “Oregon Petition”. The petition says this:

“We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.”

So, I believe we should take a step back and just observe the planet for another 40 or 50 years and see what happens, if anything. Than we would have more data, which would be a good thing, no?