Check mate.
-
Check mate. -
^
Yes that too lolThe American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money. -Alexis de TocquevilleOriginally posted by Fusion
The Desire to Save Humanity is Always a False Front for the Urge to Rule it- H. L. Mencken
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants.
William Pitt-Comment
-
Has anyone read the book "Climate Change Reconsidered" by the NIPCC? I read it about a year and a half ago. A friend recommended it to me because he knew I was interested in this stuff. It was very convincing and after reading it I thought there were many unanswered questions that needed to be resolved. I was also a little angry that climate scientists were "ignoring" some of the skeptics' questions in their research and that more debate was needed. Frustrated, I did some more research and found that there were very good answers and data to counter almost everything in that book. I also found that climate scientists were not ignoring any of the questions brought up by the skeptics. They were answering them in great deal with lots of evidence to back everything up. Then I went one step further and researched the NIPCC and some of the "scientists" who wrote the book. That's when I felt like a sucker. Most of them were hired by political groups or energy companies with the intent to spread disinformation. There are maybe only a handful of climate scientists that were skeptics and not paid by any outside sources. The rest had no more expertise than any of else. And the petition of 30,000 scientists you may have read about ended up being completely bogus with many of the names on their of people admitting they never signed anything. I know many of you skeptics have been fed the bullshit just like I was. It takes faith to continue to believe it. It takes skepticism or just genuine curiosity to keep learning and understanding. I would implore everyone interested in the subject of GW to keep reading and learning and you will find the truth behind the science. For those of you who made up your mind to stay a GW denier regardless of the evidence that is out there and coming in every day, that takes a religious faith.sigpicComment
-
Get dis, the sun also provides light.Ma che cazzo state dicendo? :|Comment
-
Pretty sure I've already seen some of your references, you read information provided by those you agree with regardless of credentials coinciding with the subject at hand. You must have one hell of an edumacation!
And I have done my research, that's why I admit it's not a finished debate. You on the other hand act like a child, poke fun at the opposition and refer to it as a religion. You're a grown man acting like a child, congrats.Comment
-
cale, congrats on having an open mind on the subject, very adult like
and now herbie at least admits, per his unsubstantiated math, that 97% of scientists are pro AGW. so, it isn't a consensus? wat?
you two are the only proof anyone needs as to the religious aspect of the AGW crowd. you ignore non supportive data provided by climate scientists and cling to your biases. congrats. no scientist that provides a non AGW point of view can be believed in your "open" minds. somehow private industry money is dirtier than federal tax money.
what you two don't get is that some of us here have seen this before in different disguise. the sky is falling, its a new ice age, all propogated by the same crowd. big government solutions are the only savior of mankind, its so much bullshit.
and sleeve is spot on with the sponsors of AGW having other motives, none of which have anything to do with AGW and everyhting to do with politics.
and when pointed out you two get a burr under your saddle. lol, its so predictable. when backed into a corner, start calling names.
keep the "faith"Last edited by gwb72tii; 09-19-2011, 07:12 AM.“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston ChurchillComment
-
I DO have an open mind on the subject, I am not under the belief that is GW is nearly as big of a situation as it has been made out to be or that human's are the largest contributing factor. I do however contend to the fact that the overwhelming majority of those who made climate science their field of expertise to do conclude after reveiwing the evidence it to be a direct result of the burning of fossil fuels.
I observe the data from both sides, but in scientific matters the conclusions by those who specialize in a field needs to be taken over that of scientists (although incredibly well educated) whom do not study in the particular field of study. Why is my choice to be more willing to accept the results of professionals close minded? It seems as though anyone who disagree's with you is close minded and ignorant, while you're standing by yourself in the corner so to speak, shouting as loud as you can that everyone else needs to open their eyes.
For the last goddamn time, I'm not a firm believer in GW. You seem think everything is about achieveing some agenda. This is science, and despite your desperate desires to uncover some liberally supported GW propaganda machine it's not nearly as biased as you think.
As for it being a religion...no, just no. Go get a dictionary, because by your understanding every theory in science is a religion. Talk about close minded, holy fuck.
Summary, GW is still a debate yes. I'm not convinced 100% by either side but do accept the findings of those who are professionals in the field as more credible. Stop implying otherwise.Last edited by cale; 09-19-2011, 08:10 AM.Comment
-
ok cale, i'm going to assume you're a reasonable guy
and as a reasonable guy, i'm going to assume you read this entire post/thread before commenting
and as a reasonable guy, i'm assuming you read the links to scientific opinion i posted on why CO2 is not responsible for AGW, and in fact there is no AGW (but humans do have some influence, albeit limited influence on climate). all from climate scientists smarter than anyone posting on the r3v
and as a reasonable guy, i'm going to assume you realize i have in fact commented from the factual side, based in science, of why the pro AGW camp could in fact be wrong. that some of the climate scientists in fact say the pro AGW camp are wrong
and that this post/thread was originated because of herb's belief the science is settled, which he now admits may not be the case
which is all i have been saying
AND THE POINT OF THE WHOLE CONVERSATION
thank you“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston ChurchillComment
-
I get that, but when you start referring to a scientific theory as religion....you're going to turn a few heads from people questioning your ability to evaluate the data and come to a reasonable conclusion. I don't know if you did so to poke fun at those people, context and sarcasm is lost online so all I can see is some loony who tries to belittle theories which he disagrees with.
It's by no means settled science, cannot argue that.Comment
-
^
You have to admit the way the largest proponents of human induced warming push their agenda, share a lot of similarities with what fanatical religious zealots do with their chosen beliefs.The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money. -Alexis de TocquevilleOriginally posted by Fusion
The Desire to Save Humanity is Always a False Front for the Urge to Rule it- H. L. Mencken
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants.
William Pitt-Comment
Comment