"If you do not believe in climate change, you should not be allowed to hold public office"

[Fogdog]

You guys understand how theories work, right? It only takes one instance to disprove it and its done. The whole co2 argument is a waste of time if you really look into it. Its a helluva money maker tho!

You don't know very much about science and what a theory is. Did you know that theories can be useful even if they don't exactly match observable facts? Newton's theory of gravity has been disproven. Yet it still is useful and people use it all the time.

Did you know that science denial pays better than climate science research?

Your posts are embarrassingly barren of an understanding of what you are writing about.

 

[visajoe1]

Enlighten yourself and read a few pages in this thread. You are the one posting "harm the earth" straw man argument. The topic is human caused climate change.

I know the topic dog, and I fundamentally disagree with it. clearly.

Let me ask you this. what if we in fact are doing nothing to the atmosphere (just follow it along) and by thinking we are and changing our behavior in drastic ways creates more of an effect on the environment that what we are doing now? its just a thought to stretch your imagination, not something to actually believe.

Do I believe we are harmless? of course not. people do stupid shit. however, what we do, short of severe nuclear activity doesnt move the needle much despite the "shocking" science that is plastered everywhere. Even scientists speak about how group think is very strong in the climate change world and even going against it is bad for ones career. That doesnt sound scientific to me.

The earth warms and cools. The magnetic poles reverse. And these cycles have happened many times in the past and are currently underway right now. Magnetic north pole moves a measurable distance annually, and the earth is actually in a cooling trend over the last few centuries. This isnt opinion. Its happening right now.

 

[visajoe1]

You don't know very much about science and what a theory is. Did you know that theories can be useful even if they don't exactly match observable facts? Newton's theory of gravity has been disproven. Yet it still is useful and people use it all the time.

Did you know that science denial pays better than climate science research?

Your posts are embarrassingly barren of an understanding of what you are writing about.

Thats a heck of an assumption to make, you know nothing about me. I dig science, and love to learn. Write that down. What is your point with newton? it can be wrong in some instances and be useful? i can agree with that. how much does newtons law cost us? how much newtons law regulations is there? how many billions has been spent under newtons law? catch my drift here?

this is my problem with global warming. now climate change. in 20 years it will be another term. never before has such a debatable theory cost the world as much as this one. that is a fact i think we can all agree on.

save your opinion crap, it takes from your argument.

 

[UncleBuck]

not something to actually believe.

hey, i summed up everything you're saying on the subject by just simplifying your word vomit to its essential meaning.

 

[UncleBuck]

how much newtons law regulations is there?

plenty. go ahead and try to launch a satellite without obeying all the regulations based on newton's law.

 

[Fogdog]

I know the topic dog, and I fundamentally disagree with it. clearly.

Let me ask you this. what if we in fact are doing nothing to the atmosphere (just follow it along) and by thinking we are and changing our behavior in drastic ways creates more of an effect on the environment that what we are doing now? its just a thought to stretch your imagination, not something to actually believe.

Do I believe we are harmless? of course not. people do stupid shit. however, what we do, short of severe nuclear activity doesnt move the needle much despite the "shocking" science that is plastered everywhere. Even scientists speak about how group think is very strong in the climate change world and even going against it is bad for ones career. That doesnt sound scientific to me.

The earth warms and cools. The magnetic poles reverse. And these cycles have happened many times in the past and are currently underway right now. Magnetic north pole moves a measurable distance annually, and the earth is actually in a cooling trend over the last few centuries. This isnt opinion. Its happening right now.

Huh?

The subject is human caused climate change. There are a lot of firm facts to confirm this is happening. Not just temperature readings but other observations such as winters are shorter and not as cold. Current readings of CO2 ppm in the earth's atmosphere is elevated over recent pre-industrial levels and the physics of how that particular change causes surface temperatures to rise is well understood. True what you said, without people dumping massive amounts of carbon dioxide in the air, we would be seen colder surface temperatures.

Your idea that somehow curtailing fossil fuels and switching to green energy production methods would "create more of an effect" is bizarre. Nuff said about that.

Same with that bit about magnetic poles, natural cycles, group think and earth actually cooling. The earth is not cooling, it is heating up. The rapid rise in temperature is not a natural cycle, it is a departure outside of temperature trends over ten thousand years. It is an anomaly, not natural variation.

But I agree that magnetic poles moving about the earth is interesting. I don't know what that has to do with AGW but it's cool.

 

[visajoe1]

dog, you just prove my point. you're dismissing things that are true without even looking first. i'm trying to provide you context, that the earth is much larger and complex than the pre-industrial measures or whatever else you want to reference that is only a measurement of a microcosm of time in earths life. this is my only point! i said, a few pages ago now, i dont have a dog in this fight, climate change or not. i'm on earths side. she will win, always.

if it was up to me, i would focus on things that we can have measurable and visible results. global scale water and land garbage cleanup. i think more of the population would get behind that as opposed to the invisible climate change monster. food for thought

if you dont challenge your thoughts or theories at all, kinda boring isnt it? i think a good argument or theory looks good when its flipped around and still works. try it

 

[Fogdog]

Thats a heck of an assumption to make, you know nothing about me. I dig science, and love to learn. Write that down. What is your point with newton? it can be wrong in some instances and be useful? i can agree with that. how much does newtons law cost us? how much newtons law regulations is there? how many billions has been spent under newtons law? catch my drift here?

LOL You are the idiot who said all theories must be discarded if they can be shown wrong only once. Did it hurt your feelings when I pointed out to you that you had the whole concept wrong? I said you know nothing about the subject of human caused global warming and you've done everything possible to prove me right.

You "dig" science? Understanding something about the subject would be better.

to wit:

this is my problem with global warming. now climate change. in 20 years it will be another term. never before has such a debatable theory cost the world as much as this one. that is a fact i think we can all agree on.

There is no debate that the climate is warmer and that humans caused it by burning fossil fuels. The longer it takes to address this, the worse the effect will be.

Bogus and costly theories that cost more than funding for climate science research:
Nazi theory of the supremacy of the German peoples;
The theory that banks will act in their own best interest and so they don't need to be regulated
Creation theory

save your opinion crap, it takes from your argument.

What do you mean by opinion crap?

 

[Grandpapy]

Thats a heck of an assumption to make, you know nothing about me. I dig science, and love to learn. Write that down. What is your point with newton? it can be wrong in some instances and be useful? i can agree with that. how much does newtons law cost us? how much newtons law regulations is there? how many billions has been spent under newtons law? catch my drift here?

this is my problem with global warming. now climate change. in 20 years it will be another term. never before has such a debatable theory cost the world as much as this one. that is a fact i think we can all agree on.

save your opinion crap, it takes from your argument.

This is my problem, Exxon's Navy. https://www.uscg.mil/seniorleadership/docs/cg_arctic_strategy.pdf
Powered by my Social Security for the benefit of commerce. (see trickle down)

and children that grew up without experiencing/nourishing a terrarium.

 

[ArcticGranite]

Jeff Foxworthy

If you believe:
Carbon Dioxide is pollution.
You should not be allowed to hold public office!

If you believe:
Earths atmospheric Carbon Dioxide can be controlled by man.
You should not be allowed to hold public office!

If you believe:
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide is a primary driver of Earths mean temperature and can be controlled worldwide.
You should not be allowed to hold public office!

 

[Grandpapy]

https://www.google.com/search?q=gas+flares+over+ND&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjEwMONtYrSAhWowlQKHSDVAAkQ_AUICigD&biw=1168&bih=628#imgrc=xvm5PtfJUtX72M:

I love this photo (sorry, lens makes earth appear round) It shows gas flares in ND. They have been burning 24/7 since the 1950's (which are dwarfed by middle east oil fields) Pock the earth with a couple dozen of them.....

 

[ttystikk]

I know the topic dog, and I fundamentally disagree with it. clearly.

Let me ask you this. what if we in fact are doing nothing to the atmosphere (just follow it along) and by thinking we are and changing our behavior in drastic ways creates more of an effect on the environment that what we are doing now? its just a thought to stretch your imagination, not something to actually believe.

Do I believe we are harmless? of course not. people do stupid shit. however, what we do, short of severe nuclear activity doesnt move the needle much despite the "shocking" science that is plastered everywhere. Even scientists speak about how group think is very strong in the climate change world and even going against it is bad for ones career. That doesnt sound scientific to me.

The earth warms and cools. The magnetic poles reverse. And these cycles have happened many times in the past and are currently underway right now. Magnetic north pole moves a measurable distance annually, and the earth is actually in a cooling trend over the last few centuries. This isnt opinion. Its happening right now.

The difference between the rest of the scientific world and what you just posted is that when scientists do it, they point to supporting evidence and describe the mechanisms involved.

You've provided exactly none for your assertion that 'it didn't move the needle much'- yeah? Where's your evidence? There's plenty on the other side of the debate, where's yours?

Even less for why flipping magnetic poles has anything at all to do with CO2 in the atmosphere or climate change.

Either your grasp of what science is and how it works is weak or you've committed a basic error; deciding you know what the 'right' answer is before examining the facts. Or both.

The difference between science and belief- and religions are also belief systems- is that science still works whether you believe in it or not. The idea that you can 'win' a debate about it matters not one bit.

2017 will be the hottest year ever recorded, just like the last three years have been. It will happen in spite of your denials or your unsupported assertions or your weak grasp of the principles of operation of the physical world.

'Wishing harder' just condemns us to the same fate as Easter Island.

 

[visajoe1]

ok. im wrong, your're right. feel better? how big of a check should we each write annually? lord knows it will cost more money than is on the earth. maybe.

again, i have some great end of the world insurance to sell you guys.

 

[visajoe1]

I just fundamentally disagree with you most of you it seems in how we should live and how government is involved, and not involved. Which, as much you disagree with, you should protect. The same as I want to protect your choice to believe what you want, despite me not agreeing. Your thought is no more valuable than mine and vice versa. Fairness. Equality. Right?

On one hand, we complain about the government not allowing us to grow a plant we like to smoke. A plant!

Now, you're arguing this government should control our ability to operate in certain ways, limit our choices as a consumer, and levy hefty taxes. Which the consumer pays for. This is the answer? Seems like the only real winners is the gov and who gets the cash (see Al Gore).

 

[Justin-case]

ok. im wrong, your're right. feel better? how big of a check should we each write annually? lord knows it will cost more money than is on the earth. maybe.

again, i have some great end of the world insurance to sell you guys.

Who's sock are you again, I get you cucks mixed up sometimes

 

[visajoe1]

BUT we're saving the world!! you say.

ok. lets go with that. if we do X (replace 1M gas cars with electric) how much less "global warming" is there?

if one, or 20, coal plant is shut down, how much less will the ocean temp rise?

These are the things you guys want, right? yet, no one knows what the result will be, which is likely nothing. we are only one country in this world, so how much of an effect do you think YOU can have?

 

[visajoe1]

Who's sock are you again, I get you cucks mixed up sometimes

look guys, deep thought on display. if you look close enough, you can see the fear in his eyes as he thinks the world is out to get him. except no one knows or cares he exists

 

[Justin-case]

look guys, deep thought on display. if you look close enough, you can see the fear in his eyes as he thinks the world is out to get him. except no one knows or cares he exists

It's a simple question that can not be avoided around here. Sensitive little cuck, lol

 

[visajoe1]

It's a simple question that can not be avoided around here. Sensitive little cuck, lol

classic. insert an adjective (sensitive) that beefs up your ego. I'm cracking up laughing over here at your guys sad take on the world. Far from sensitive. or is that you, maybe? who knows.

 

[Justin-case]

classic. insert an adjective (sensitive) that beefs up your ego. I'm cracking up laughing over here at your guys sad take on the world. Far from sensitive. or is that you, maybe? who knows.

You're officially on notice, little man.