Changing opinion on Global Warming

see4

see4

Well-Known Member
Bugeye said:
The perpetuation of nonsense is 90% of what I see here in the Politics section.

AC complaining that a post is politically biased in the Politics section? Uh, what am I missing here? I shouldn't be allowed to post a political opinion piece on AGW in the Politics section? I would say tough cookies, but don't want to come off as rude.
Click to expand...
Heh. You're not getting it man.

Yes, this is the political section; and yes you can, and should post political related things here. In fact, it's encouraged.
BUT -- If you post something that is biased and opinionated and unsupported by fact, prepare for a backlash. And definitely be prepared to defend your sentiments. If you aren't, what's the point in posting? Only to spread propaganda nonsense?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
There's a big difference between the bullshit you do - "only read the things you agree with" - and actually reading what's objective and verifiably true
Click to expand...
THIS. It's impossible to discuss any real issue rationally with people who refuse to even educate themselves as to the facts on the ground. Once they've substituted 'values' for reason, they're easily fooled, easily led and easily fleeced.

Maybe I should simply shrug and become a 'republican' and laugh at the party full of people voting against their own best interests... except that I'd have to live with myself.
 
bravedave

bravedave

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
There's a big difference between the bullshit you do - "only read the things you agree with" - and actually reading what's objective and verifiably true
Click to expand...
Wow, profound. You should write that down.
You mean like Michael Mann's contributions? Or yours.
 
bravedave

bravedave

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
THIS. It's impossible to discuss any real issue rationally with people who refuse to even educate themselves as to the facts on the ground. Once they've substituted 'values' for reason, they're easily fooled, easily led and easily fleeced.

Maybe I should simply shrug and become a 'republican' and laugh at the party full of people voting against their own best interests... except that I'd have to live with myself.
Click to expand...
Yes, stick with ignorance and sheep kibble. Look around. Who is getting in the way of discussion here? Blind, ignorant, projectionist. Do you think Bugeye started this hoping for intelligent banter or what you and your fellow back-patters provide?
 
Last edited:
bravedave

bravedave

Well-Known Member
see4 said:
I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. I will remember how sensitive you are next time I make a comment about the silly things you write.
Click to expand...
Funny. So that's all you got? I see its enough to get the sheep patting you on the back. After you admitted that just seeing the word Breitbart caused you to wet your pants, I just tried giving you a less scary place.
 
Harrekin

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
Despite your views on Climate Change, should the Govt give massive incentives towards personal use of solar/wind?

I believe they should, a country who's citizens are even somewhat energy independent is a country on the road to peace and success.
 
bravedave

bravedave

Well-Known Member
Harrekin said:
Despite your views on Climate Change, should the Govt give massive incentives towards personal use of solar/wind?

I believe they should, a country who's citizens are even somewhat energy independent is a country on the road to peace and success.
Click to expand...
Subsidizing research? Yes!
Subsidizing companies that cannot compete or exist without gov. $? No!!! Think Solyndra.
 
Bugeye

Bugeye

Well-Known Member
see4 said:
Heh. You're not getting it man.

Yes, this is the political section; and yes you can, and should post political related things here. In fact, it's encouraged.
BUT -- If you post something that is biased and opinionated and unsupported by fact, prepare for a backlash. And definitely be prepared to defend your sentiments. If you aren't, what's the point in posting? Only to spread propaganda nonsense?
Click to expand...
I do appreciate your polite responses see4.

I thought the author supported his arguments with plenty of data, with more links to peer reviewed data then I typically see in an opinion piece. If a political piece is provocative, that is all the reason someone should need to post it. You know there are some professional provocateurs here, no? So maybe you and I disagree on the requirements for starting a thread.

I was in the "alarmist" camp 20 years ago and now I'm not. As soon as I heard "the science is settled, the debate is over" I knew the propaganda was in full swing (it runs both ways, just like confirmation bias). You cannot read IPCC assessment reports (not talking the abstract) and conclude the science is settled when they are identifying tons of areas where further research is needed, especially in the area of feedback. I never hear of climate researchers saying, we don't need more money for research, we are done, put that money to use on solutions.

I read a good bit on this topic and I really never ever ever ever have heard someone say that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas or that man is not contributing to increased CO2. The unsettled business is really about the climate feedback drivers and the magnitude of warming. There is a perpetual propaganda battle to make the unsettled science about whether AGW is real or not. This is pure straw man. Agree? Disagree?
 
MuyLocoNC

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
The MMGW crowd feel they did really well in this thread. They called people idiots, told them how conversations will be conducted (despite no one giving a fuck about their opinion), repeatedly asked for rebuttal studies that must be peer reviewed by the very people perpetuating the hoax (cut their own cash cow's throat) and repeating shit they read on liberal blogs and passing it off as if they are climate experts.

Eco-loons gotta loon.

Meanwhile, concern over global warming is dropping to all time lows. You're winning the battles in your head, while losing the war in reality.

Look at the bright side. Maybe Obama will come back with a feelgood, non-legally binding agreement that no one will care about, let alone honor. You can put it up there with the other lone major victory of a couple million spent to investigate a program to maybe train solar repairman. You're doing so well, the condescension you exhibit is really, really justified...lol.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Disagree. Not only has the existence of global warming been conclusively proven, but ALL of the predicted effects are indeed demonstrably in the process of happening; CO² levels are already at record highs- for the entire span of human civilization, not just the last year or ten, sea levels ARE and have been rising for years, global weather has been getting more extreme, levels of other climate active pollutants like methane are also at all-time highs. Then there's other even more, scary estrogen reactive pollutants that mess with the very foundation of our bodies, radioactivity, heavy metal contamination...

It takes someone really well versed in self delusion not to see what's going on.

Corporations don't care about the environment or the needs of stupid humans because it isn't profitable to do so. This is why we need laws, so everyone plays on a level playing field and those who are being exploited can sue for redress of grievances. Unless that's available to EVERYONE, we don't have freedom or democracy in our country. What we have instead is dollar driven fascism.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Disagree. Not only has the existence of global warming been conclusively proven, but ALL of the predicted effects are indeed demonstrably in the process of happening; CO² levels are already at record highs- for the entire span of human civilization, not just the last year or ten, sea levels ARE and have been rising for years, global weather has been getting more extreme, levels of other climate active pollutants like methane are also at all-time highs. Then there's other even more, scary estrogen reactive pollutants that mess with the very foundation of our bodies, radioactivity, heavy metal contamination...

It takes someone really well versed in self delusion not to see what's going on.

Corporations don't care about the environment or the needs of stupid humans because it isn't profitable to do so. This is why we need laws, so everyone plays on a level playing field and those who are being exploited can sue for redress of grievances. Unless that's available to EVERYONE, we don't have freedom or democracy in our country. What we have instead is dollar driven fascism.
Click to expand...

Freedom AND democracy are usually opposing concepts. Just saying.
 
see4

see4

Well-Known Member
Bugeye said:
I do appreciate your polite responses see4.

I thought the author supported his arguments with plenty of data, with more links to peer reviewed data then I typically see in an opinion piece. If a political piece is provocative, that is all the reason someone should need to post it. You know there are some professional provocateurs here, no? So maybe you and I disagree on the requirements for starting a thread.

I was in the "alarmist" camp 20 years ago and now I'm not. As soon as I heard "the science is settled, the debate is over" I knew the propaganda was in full swing (it runs both ways, just like confirmation bias). You cannot read IPCC assessment reports (not talking the abstract) and conclude the science is settled when they are identifying tons of areas where further research is needed, especially in the area of feedback. I never hear of climate researchers saying, we don't need more money for research, we are done, put that money to use on solutions.

I read a good bit on this topic and I really never ever ever ever have heard someone say that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas or that man is not contributing to increased CO2. The unsettled business is really about the climate feedback drivers and the magnitude of warming. There is a perpetual propaganda battle to make the unsettled science about whether AGW is real or not. This is pure straw man. Agree? Disagree?
Click to expand...
I didn't know that global warming was an alarmist issue in 1995. To be honest I never heard of it at all until about 2000, 2001 or so. But I get it, you were nervous that humans were the cause of global warming and we were in immanent danger, and now you think we are not. In fact it sounds like you don't think we are in any danger at all, is that right?

I'm not sure what you are asking to agree or disagree with, is it that the AGW argument is straw man?

My personal opinion on the matter is -- if we are in danger (which I believe we are), we need to act quickly before changes are irreversible, but if we aren't in danger, what's the harm in supporting and getting involved in renewable energy and self-sustainability?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top