US college professor demands imprisonment for climate-change deniers

[heckler73]

Millions of separate experiments since ACC was discovered, millions of different people over the ages, all confirming the same thing, billions of dollars in technology used to confirm it..

Just a mild bit of hyperbole there, no?
Or are you including Gedanken in those numbers?

 

[Harrekin]

no, evidence would be things like greenland melting, rising oceans, higher CO2 concentrations, changing migratory patterns, and the like.

and the models actually do pan out. are you stupid or something?

The models don't pan out at all, claiming otherwise is completely retarded and showing one graph with such a short sample size shows your scientific illiteracy.

Ice core samples show higher CO2 concentrations at points throughout history that had no industrialisation whatsoever.

But yeah, keep touting the "Koch Brothers, illuminati, fuck the environment" line.

Your argument is so reasoned.

 

[Rob Roy]

nice shock headline, but you're missing the distinction between "voicing one's unpopular opinion" and "strategically organized campaigns to disseminate misinformation".

Oh you mean like the USA's public school system, born from a campaign to indoctrinate just like the Kaiser and his Prussian school system did? Or do you mean word smithing euphemisms like "collateral damage" instead of murder and tax instead of theft?

 

[JohnnySocko]

gheez, I couldn't stomach even reading through this thread...
all I know is some of this climate change whinning hurts the cause more than it helps...
and lefties wonder why some of the crazy "counter balancing" is spewed from the mouths of the Limbaugh koolaid drinkers

I wonder if we can stop the polluters from polluting just on its own merit and logic, and dispense with the warnings of the next Jurassic period

 

[ChesusRice]

gheez, I couldn't stomach even reading through this thread...
all I know is some of this climate change whinning hurts the cause more than it helps...
and lefties wonder why some of the crazy "counter balancing" is spewed from the mouths of the Limbaugh koolaid drinkers

I wonder if we can stop the polluters from polluting just on its own merit and logic, and dispense with the warnings of the next Jurassic period

Apparently the answer is no

 

[spazatak]

Climate denier's need to ask themselves... If climate change isnt happening are there any negative effects for trying to pollute the environment less? as opposed to if climate change is real are there any negative effects if we dont try and change?

 

[JohnnySocko]

Climate denier's need to ask themselves... If climate change isnt happening are there any negative effects for trying to pollute the environment less? as opposed to if climate change is real are there any negative effects if we dont try and change?

Well see that's the thing; IMO this climate thing; real or imagined is absolutely hyperbole from the left....
they can't make a strong enough argument to stop big coal and the rest of the industrialist from dumping carbon into the air so they make up (or over state) the coming of the next Younger Dryas (reversed)

I'm not questioning whether the glaciers are melting per se, I'm questioning the logic behind this direction to stop the polluters and/or if we can even change the climate

 

[jahbrudda]

gheez, I couldn't stomach even reading through this thread...
all I know is some of this climate change whinning hurts the cause more than it helps...
and lefties wonder why some of the crazy "counter balancing" is spewed from the mouths of the Limbaugh koolaid drinkers

I wonder if we can stop the polluters from polluting just on its own merit and logic, and dispense with the warnings of the next Jurassic period

Stopping pollution is a big myth, almost everyone, left or right wants to cut down on pollution and that's the catalyst that keeps the masses in favor of compliance.

If the alarmists get their way, big polluting companies are not going to shutdown.
As long as they pay money to the government in the form of a carbon tax, they will continue to be able to pollute.
Even though co2 is not a pollutant, the more co2 you produce, the more taxes you pay.
it's all about money and growing government.

 

[JohnnySocko]

Stopping pollution is a big myth, almost everyone, left or right wants to cut down on pollution and that's the catalyst that keeps the masses in favor of compliance.

If the alarmists get their way, big polluting companies are not going to shutdown.
As long as they pay money to the government in the form of a carbon tax, they will continue to be able to pollute.
Even though co2 is not a pollutant, the more co2 you produce, the more taxes you pay.
it's all about money and growing government.

Are you trying to say the Dems are scamming for more taxes? (you don't say)

...still, I also believe the trumped up urgency is more counterbalancing to mitigate the usual and expected feet dragging by the Republican industrialist puppets every time some environmental legislation comes down the pike

 

[Wavels]

The USA has largely eliminated the obscene degree of pollution of bygone days due to common sense and heightened awareness of the need to do so.
The Hudson river was not fish-able when I was growing up, thankfully, this is no longer the case.

The Chinese are currently spewing an amazing degree of pollutants into their environment.
Who is going to slow them down? Certainly not the EPA. Good luck promoting imbecilic carbon credits over there!

IMO, renegade pollution and climate change are really two very different issues.

The climate has demonstrated its ability to change with or without mankind's help.

 

[Red1966]

the same people denying scientific proof are the same one who say the bible is proof God exists. just because you dont accept it doesnt mean its not proof... it just means you are either A too stupid to see/understand it or B cant accept youre wrong

Or possibly, your "proof" is just unconvincing?

 

[schuylaar]

Or possibly, your "proof" is just unconvincing?

you sicken me

 

[Red1966]

You've been shown dozens of different articles of evidence, the same evidence that has convinced the vast majority of professionals whose job it is to study the climate, you simply deny it. There's reality again with that liberal bias... Why is it so difficult for you to come up with one single thing that would prove it to you? Because you can't, because there is nothing you would accept. Not science

We aren't the ones seeking proof, you are. Why do you think we are obligated to make your argument for you?

 

[Red1966]

What "models"? What are you talking about? Do you think there's this one set of climate models that say one thing that all the other millions of independent researchers the world over must abide by or get their funding cut? Millions of separate experiments since ACC was discovered, millions of different people over the ages, all confirming the same thing, billions of dollars in technology used to confirm it.. This is why I continuously highlight the fact that there is literally nothing you will accept as proof. If there is nothing you will accept as proof, how can it ever be proved to you? How do you not see this as an enormous gaping hole in your argument?

"Millions of separate experiments since ACC was discovered, millions of different people over the ages, all confirming the same thing,"........... clearly just making up numbers

 

[Red1966]

Also, are you going to address this?

Wow, quoting yourself! What's the matter? Not getting enough attention? I'll address it. What the fuck to AGW and cancer have to do with each other?

 

[spazatak]

Or possibly, your "proof" is just unconvincing?

the fact that you find in unconvincing speaks volumes about you and not the evidence

 

[Red1966]

Oh you mean like the USA's public school system, born from a campaign to indoctrinate just like the Kaiser and his Prussian school system did? Or do you mean word smithing euphemisms like "collateral damage" instead of murder and tax instead of theft?

Is Buck demanding Obama be imprisoned for his "strategically organized campaigns to disseminate misinformation" about Obamacare?.................."You can keep your plan/doctor, period."

 

[Red1966]

Climate denier's need to ask themselves... If climate change isnt happening are there any negative effects for trying to pollute the environment less? as opposed to if climate change is real are there any negative effects if we dont try and change?

You're equating pollution and climate change, two entirely different things. Well let's see. Reducing our use of energy means reducing home heating, transportation, manufacturing, food production, pretty much everything that separates us from the animals and allowed us to dominate the Earth. Sorry, but I like my lifestyle.

 

[Red1966]

you sicken me

You're welcome.

 

[Red1966]

the fact that you find in unconvincing speaks volumes about you and not the evidence

Really? You don't think maybe it's just your "evidence" is lacking?