Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Global Warming is over.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    A plausible hypothesis why anthropological CO2 is not responsible for global warming and why. And unlike current global warming science, this hypothesis actually follows the scientific method:

    https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/...global-warming
    “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
    Sir Winston Churchill

    Comment


      Don't feed the troll.
      Brake harder. Go faster. No shit.

      massivebrakes.com

      http://www.facebook.com/pages/Massiv...78417442267056





      Comment


        Posts opinion piece written by a lawyer...."it follows the scientific method". You don't even know what the words you use mean.

        Comment


          Originally posted by Massive Lee View Post
          Don't feed the troll.
          This is hysterical given your recent posts.
          Need parts now? Need them cheap? steve@blunttech.com
          Chief Sales Officer, Midwest Division—Blunt Tech Industries

          www.gutenparts.com
          One stop shopping for NEW, USED and EURO PARTS!

          Comment


            Originally posted by cale View Post
            Posts opinion piece written by a lawyer...."it follows the scientific method". You don't even know what the words you use mean.
            So only scientists are able to decide what is legit or not in terms of science? No one else can comment?

            Strange.

            Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
            Si vis pacem, para bellum.

            New Hawtness: 1995 540i/6 Claptrap
            Defunct too: Cirrusblau m30 Project
            Defunct (sold): Alta Vista

            79 Bronco SHTF Build

            Comment


              Originally posted by marshallnoise View Post
              So only scientists are able to decide what is legit or not in terms of science? No one else can comment?

              Strange.

              Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
              'So only people who spent years educating themselves in their scientific field are able to decide what is legit or not in that scientific field? People without any knowledge in that field cant comment?

              Strange.'
              1989 BMW 325is | 2019 Ford Ranger FX4
              willschnitz

              Comment


                Originally posted by Wschnitz View Post
                'So only people who spent years educating themselves in their scientific field are able to decide what is legit or not in that scientific field? People without any knowledge in that field cant comment?

                Strange.'
                Not quite. The same logic though would tell you that you can't comment on the game of football if you weren't a football player, coach, or team owner.

                Ever since Woodrow Wilson, we created the tyranny of the "expert" who should be obeyed no matter what.

                Sorry, I am not willing to believe everything the experts say.

                Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
                Si vis pacem, para bellum.

                New Hawtness: 1995 540i/6 Claptrap
                Defunct too: Cirrusblau m30 Project
                Defunct (sold): Alta Vista

                79 Bronco SHTF Build

                Comment


                  Originally posted by marshallnoise View Post
                  So only scientists are able to decide what is legit or not in terms of science? No one else can comment?

                  Strange.

                  Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
                  Peer review is a vital part of the scientific process. Certainly anybody can comment, but when it comes to actual analysis I think we can grant some authority to the experts who live and breathe it.

                  Sorry, I am not willing to believe everything the experts say.
                  Neither is any scientist worth his salt. Again, science is all about challenging what we think we know about natural phenomena. If a scientist decides he wants to prove global warming exists, then he is already failing at his job. I'd say that the term "expert" is applied to scientists who are not necessarily all knowing in a particular field, but are rigorous in the methods of collecting and analyzing data. So far data is showing that the earth is warming. Hypothesis' are that co2 might have something to do with it.
                  Last edited by E30 Wagen; 07-16-2019, 07:54 AM.
                  My Feedback

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by E30 Wagen View Post
                    Peer review is a vital part of the scientific process. Certainly anybody can comment, but when it comes to actual analysis I think we can grant some authority to the experts who live and breathe it.


                    Neither is any scientist worth his salt. Again, science is all about challenging what we think we know about natural phenomena. If a scientist decides he wants to prove global warming exists, then he is already failing at his job. I'd say that the term "expert" is applied to scientists who are not necessarily all knowing in a particular field, but are rigorous in the methods of collecting and analyzing data. So far data is showing that the earth is warming. Hypothesis' are that co2 might have something to do with it.
                    Fair and reasoned response. The last line is key and in my mind, and in a lot of people too, the science is not settled on that. And a lot of that skepticism is due to the politically motivated remedy.

                    Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
                    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

                    New Hawtness: 1995 540i/6 Claptrap
                    Defunct too: Cirrusblau m30 Project
                    Defunct (sold): Alta Vista

                    79 Bronco SHTF Build

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by z31maniac View Post
                      This is hysterical given your recent posts.
                      You don't like when I comment about your xenophobic, racist, bullying, misogynistic pig president and church guru? ;-)
                      Brake harder. Go faster. No shit.

                      massivebrakes.com

                      http://www.facebook.com/pages/Massiv...78417442267056





                      Comment


                        Originally posted by marshallnoise View Post
                        Fair and reasoned response. The last line is key and in my mind, and in a lot of people too, the science is not settled on that. And a lot of that skepticism is due to the politically motivated remedy.

                        Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
                        Please elaborate on what political remedies have you skeptical. If you're skepticism is fueled by an emotional response to proposed political solutions then you're not being objective and you need to work on your critical thinking skills, something which scientists are very good at.
                        My Feedback

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Massive Lee View Post
                          You don't like when I comment about your xenophobic, racist, bullying, misogynistic pig president and church guru? ;-)
                          More poor trolling attempts. I didn't vote for Orange Man.

                          Please look at the other thread because you don't seem to understand international politics.
                          Need parts now? Need them cheap? steve@blunttech.com
                          Chief Sales Officer, Midwest Division—Blunt Tech Industries

                          www.gutenparts.com
                          One stop shopping for NEW, USED and EURO PARTS!

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by E30 Wagen View Post
                            Please elaborate on what political remedies have you skeptical. If you're skepticism is fueled by an emotional response to proposed political solutions then you're not being objective and you need to work on your critical thinking skills, something which scientists are very good at.
                            Anything that burdens the economy unnecessarily. When the scientists work with political operatives to develop solutions to man-made climate change, they no longer are scientists. Carbon credits are a fucking farce as they do not curb behavior but enrich the ruling political class. Not holding India and China to the same standards but only burdening western civilization and the continent of Africa (the latter is racist on its face).

                            There is nothing funny or good about stripping people's livelihood away from them in the name of something that, in my opinion, will have a minuscule effect at best.

                            Short of wholesale contempt for the environment (dumping in rivers, nuclear war/fallout), there isn't much we can do to destroy the environment. Nature will kill you and not be remorseful about it. Nature is trying to kill you and it doesn't give a fuck about you.

                            The number one way to improve the environment is to bring economic prosperity to every community in the world. Studies show that as soon as people aren't living hand to mouth, they begin to care about where they live.

                            You don't give a shit about litter when you can't feed yourself that day. Nor should you.
                            Si vis pacem, para bellum.

                            New Hawtness: 1995 540i/6 Claptrap
                            Defunct too: Cirrusblau m30 Project
                            Defunct (sold): Alta Vista

                            79 Bronco SHTF Build

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by marshallnoise View Post
                              So only scientists are able to decide what is legit or not in terms of science? No one else can comment?

                              Strange.
                              Comment =/= provide a resource of scientific merit, it hasn't been reviewed and the commenter is providing his opinion, an uneducated one at that.

                              Originally posted by marshallnoise View Post
                              Not quite. The same logic though would tell you that you can't comment on the game of football if you weren't a football player, coach, or team owner.

                              Ever since Woodrow Wilson, we created the tyranny of the "expert" who should be obeyed no matter what.

                              Sorry, I am not willing to believe everything the experts say.
                              An appeal to authority to a singular entity would be foolish, but it's not singular. Your analogy to a subjective event is ridiculous, the study of science which does in fact require a formal education is not the same as the evaluation of sport. Would you trust an opinion from a random fan who saw a tackle to evaluate head trauma in a tackle, or a neurosurgeon?

                              "I'm a skeptic, but I'm more skeptical of the experts than the mouthpieces"

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by marshallnoise View Post
                                Anything that burdens the economy unnecessarily. When the scientists work with political operatives to develop solutions to man-made climate change, they no longer are scientists. Carbon credits are a fucking farce as they do not curb behavior but enrich the ruling political class. Not holding India and China to the same standards but only burdening western civilization and the continent of Africa (the latter is racist on its face).
                                So you agree man is responsible for climate change? Also, "political operative," lol, you sound ridiculous. I don't see why a scientist, along with engineers and economists, who advises politicians on actions to prevent damage to the environment disqualifies them or is unethical. Sharing knowledge with the public is usually part of their job...

                                There is nothing funny or good about stripping people's livelihood away from them in the name of something that, in my opinion, will have a minuscule effect at best.
                                Agreed, but do you have an example we can actually discuss or is this all just hypothetical?

                                Short of wholesale contempt for the environment (dumping in rivers, nuclear war/fallout), there isn't much we can do to destroy the environment. Nature will kill you and not be remorseful about it. Nature is trying to kill you and it doesn't give a fuck about you.
                                I don't really know what your point here is. You admit we can (and we have) destroyed the environment in some cases, but ultimately our impacts are harmless and nature is invincible? I don't even know where to begin with this. And really, nature is consciously trying to kill me? You sound like a paranoid idiot.

                                The number one way to improve the environment is to bring economic prosperity to every community in the world. Studies show that as soon as people aren't living hand to mouth, they begin to care about where they live.

                                You don't give a shit about litter when you can't feed yourself that day. Nor should you.
                                Being poor is an excuse to litter and not care about living in your own shit, got it.
                                My Feedback

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X