• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says[W:46]

Threegoofs said:
Did you ever notice the people who you 'destroy' over the issue generally dont have much to say after you start talking and then end the conversation politely and roll their eyes as they try to quickly get away?

Get clue. You arent really 'destroying' them.

Did you ever notice them talking and then stop abruptly when you walk into the room? Bet that happens a lot.
Click to expand...

No I see them get extremely upset then revert into a 10-year-old who can't have a candy bar... Then they go into the "why does he think this way mode" then after that they get angry and question my "patriotism" and loyalty to the government and wonder why I don't just accept what I'm told - and these are scientists and professors that teach at some prestigious colleges..

No one has ever rolled their eyes at me....

Sooner or later they end up agreeing with me, however that still doesn't change their position - because they're loyal to the progressive party and their candyass issues.

Facebook with my family is a ****ing hoot - holidays are even better.
 
JohnWOlin said:
That's a dumb argument. That's like saying "Hell why should I wear a seatbelt I'm gonna die of cancer anyways." Mankind always will find away to fight for the future. Just like X-Files.
Click to expand...

It's nothing like that at all because I can choose to wear a seatbelt but you cant stop a super volcano, major 9.0 earthquake or stop a meteor or comet from smashing into earth (at least if you cant see the meteor or comet in advance).

There is nothing you can do about it...

One of these days, one of these 10-15 known super volcanoes will erupt and that will destroy civilization as we know it...

Hell, a ****ing Carrington Event (solar storm) could EMP and destroy our entire electrical infrastructure - and that is way more likely than any of the aforementioned catastrophes....
 
These climate change denial threads are like a weird hybrid of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and trying to teach the rainbow room high school science.
 
Mr.Nick said:
No I see them get extremely upset then revert into a 10-year-old who can't have a candy bar... Then they go into the "why does he think this way mode" then after that they get angry and question my "patriotism" and loyalty to the government and wonder why I don't just accept what I'm told - and these are scientists and professors that teach at some prestigious colleges..

No one has ever rolled their eyes at me....

Sooner or later they end up agreeing with me, however that still doesn't change their position - because they're loyal to the progressive party and their candyass issues.

Facebook with my family is a ****ing hoot - holidays are even better.
Click to expand...

Somehow I have a feeling they don't really look forward to it.
 
Boo Radley said:
No, that's simply not true. And yes, you will likely get a lecture about how badly you're reading it.
Click to expand...

No one lectures me because I'm definitive when I articulate.

I give the lectures - then all the progs go on their way then it's "party time" - we laugh and make "Glug" with their snooty wine.

Then of course get into philosophical discussions which weren't programmed into our heads by the Universities - you know concepts that only free men/woman can think about...

Either way it's fun not having progressives around...

Of course us idiots enjoy talking about how the Earth is flat and how the Earth is the center of the universe while we make fun of Pythagoras.
 
Threegoofs said:
Somehow I have a feeling they don't really look forward to it.
Click to expand...

Well you'd be right about that, but I'm hardly the only one who challenges their brainwashed ideas.

I mean I only had to argue with an alleged physicist that gravity is the strongest force in the universe as we presently know it.

And this guy teaches physics...
 
Verax said:
These climate change denial threads are like a weird hybrid of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and trying to teach the rainbow room high school science.
Click to expand...

Thanks for proving my ****ing point...

Is it AGW you're arguing or is it "climate change" - make up your ****ing mind.

This is why intelligent people don't like progressives.
 
Mr.Nick said:
No one lectures me because I'm definitive when I articulate.

I give the lectures - then all the progs go on their way then it's "party time" - we laugh and make "Glug" with their snooty wine.

Then of course get into philosophical discussions which weren't programmed into our heads by the Universities - you know concepts that only free men/woman can think about...

Either way it's fun not having progressives around...

Of course us idiots enjoy talking about how the Earth is flat and how the Earth is the center of the universe while we make fun of Pythagoras.
Click to expand...

I don't have any issues.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Thanks for proving my ****ing point...

Is it AGW you're arguing or is it "climate change" - make up your ****ing mind.

This is why intelligent people don't like progressives.
Click to expand...

Global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When one talks about global warming they are generally speaking about the global warming caused by man that is affecting climate change. When one talks about climate change they are generally speaking about the climate changing from man made global warming. I use the terms interchangeably.

When Rush mocks the differences in names he is simply eliciting ignorance of the issue as though it were a legitimate gripe about the underlying science. I notice he is now adding "climate disruption" to his vocabulary to try and get a few more yucks out of his stupid shtick.
 
Threegoofs said:
Nice pivot.

I was dismantling your BS point about how the temperature 'paused'. I guess you attribute the increase to your outbursts of hot air over the years.
Click to expand...

If anyone should set the example and cease all CO2 emissions, it's you. ;)
 
Threegoofs said:
Nice pivot.

I was dismantling your BS point about how the temperature 'paused'. I guess you attribute the increase to your outbursts of hot air over the years.
Click to expand...

Here's the difference ; I don't claim to know where things will go after the pause, though you claim to know based off co2.

But wait, if I don't mention it again, you will have successfully avoided discussion of the flaws of your "fat fingers" graph.

Btw, I'm not talking about temperatures in absolutes, therefore your graph is presented is more or less meaningless beyond saying that each decade has been warmer by the last, the difference from each decade being fractions of 1 degree... Which, given the numbers of measurements, until recently could have been considered margin for error, satellites measuring temperatures are going to be more accurate, but there's no real way to compare the apples to oranges.
 
Verax said:
Global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When one talks about global warming they are generally speaking about the global warming caused by man that is affecting climate change. When one talks about climate change they are generally speaking about the climate changing from man made global warming. I use the terms interchangeably.

When Rush mocks the differences in names he is simply eliciting ignorance of the issue as though it were a legitimate gripe about the underlying science. I notice he is now adding "climate disruption" to his vocabulary to try and get a few more yucks out of his stupid shtick.
Click to expand...
Horse****. Its the AGW crowd that abandoned the phrase "Global Warming" and began their new retort of "Climate Change". You know the AGW science isnt adding up (hell we have seen the 'scientists' getting frustrated because darn it...the data just isnt showing what it is 'supposed' to show) and cant keep making the claim.

The 'climate' changes. Always has...always will. Thats undeniable. Mankinds involvement in that process? Thats as hard to prove as AGW, isnt it.
 
Verax said:
Global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When one talks about global warming they are generally speaking about the global warming caused by man that is affecting climate change. When one talks about climate change they are generally speaking about the climate changing from man made global warming. I use the terms interchangeably.

When Rush mocks the differences in names he is simply eliciting ignorance of the issue as though it were a legitimate gripe about the underlying science. I notice he is now adding "climate disruption" to his vocabulary to try and get a few more yucks out of his stupid shtick.
Click to expand...

It's to confuse the issue with semantics... The data does not support agw as intended so the shift is to climate change, that falls flat so they try climate disruption, that makes no sense, so they go back to climate change....

If I could make one wish, it would be to separate myself from society and just watch you people tear apart society, the hell hole you would create... But since I cannot distance myself from society and I will also suffer under your collective foolishness, I gotta fight this in every little way I can until common sense prevails.
 
BmanMcfly said:
No, WAS. The acceleration has been towards cooling, for approaching 20 years.

Meanwhile co2 is increasing at the same rate.
Click to expand...

I guess NASA is in on the conspiracy too...Again you are a FOOL if you don't understand that global average temperatures have been rising.
 
Mr.Nick said:
You don't have any facts - what you have are a bunch of bull**** models simulated by computers programed with data - data which exists only to show one hypothesis.

This snake oil salesmen aren't "scientists" they're alarmists paid for via grant by the federal government to scare people into forking over more money, then allowing the government to regulate the **** out of all business and industry.....

It seems like a good plan for a communist or communist sympathizers -- tell everyone they're going to die unless we allow government to regulate everything and tax the **** out of people.......

Besides, just out of curiosity how the hell does regulating the **** out of every industry and taxing the **** out of people help "climate change?"

Furthermore in what universe do you actually believe you can control climate anyways???? what are you going to do stop volcanoes, tornadoes, hurricanes???? - NO you're not and you can't and quite frankly you - and you people - are doing more damage to the environment by hindering the Earths natural process than man has since the industrial revolution.

Oh and I have evidence -- go take a look at all these AGW alarmists predictions from the 70's and 80's - that pretty much sums up how full of **** and political they actually are.. Also, why you're at it why don't you go investigate who these "scientists" actually are and what organizations they belong to. They're partisan treehuggers rejected by green peace for being too ****ing radical.

Oh and if you want more evidence - we're not living in ****ing water world like all these asshat pseudo-scientists predicted in the 80's.

The only reason why you fall for this **** is because it is part of your political party culture - the idea that humanity is evil.
Click to expand...

The proof I am referring to has nothing to do with computer models or exrapolated data into future predictions. The proof I am talking about is current observable proof. The oceans are rising and their rising is accelerating. Global average temperatures are rising and their rising is accelerating. The ice caps are melting and their melting is accelerating. The ocean is turning more and more acidic and this process is accelerating. Plants and trees are blooming earlier and earlier and this process is accelerating. Perma frost is disappearing at an alarming rate and this process is accelerating. The observable facts are in and are not deniable.
 
VanceMack said:
Horse****. Its the AGW crowd that abandoned the phrase "Global Warming" and began their new retort of "Climate Change". You know the AGW science isnt adding up (hell we have seen the 'scientists' getting frustrated because darn it...the data just isnt showing what it is 'supposed' to show) and cant keep making the claim.

The 'climate' changes. Always has...always will. Thats undeniable. Mankinds involvement in that process? Thats as hard to prove as AGW, isnt it.
Click to expand...

BmanMcfly said:
It's to confuse the issue with semantics... The data does not support agw as intended so the shift is to climate change, that falls flat so they try climate disruption, that makes no sense, so they go back to climate change....

If I could make one wish, it would be to separate myself from society and just watch you people tear apart society, the hell hole you would create... But since I cannot distance myself from society and I will also suffer under your collective foolishness, I gotta fight this in every little way I can until common sense prevails.
Click to expand...

:lamo You guys are killing me. You're so caught up in your elaborate imagination, taking to heart what you hear from right-wing propaganda, you've taken the bait hook, line, and sinker.

Ignorance and the inability to think critically is the root evil that is corrupting America.
 
smb said:
I guess NASA is in on the conspiracy too...Again you are a FOOL if you don't understand that global average temperatures have been rising.
Click to expand...

Yes... The ****ing data is conspiring against the climatologists? Is that what you are trying to tell me?

I never said I denied that temperatures were warming overall... What's not lining up is that increases in co2 are the CAUSE of the warming, a slight influence, yes... But not a primary driver, as EVIDENCED BY THE RAW DATA.
 
Verax said:
:lamo You guys are killing me. You're so caught up in your elaborate imagination, taking to heart what you hear from right-wing propaganda, you've taken the bait hook, line, and sinker.

Ignorance and the inability to think critically is the root evil that is corrupting America.
Click to expand...

And that's why you hear "consensus" and you fall in line like the rest of the lemmings, right?
 
BmanMcfly said:
Yes... The ****ing data is conspiring against the climatologists? Is that what you are trying to tell me?

I never said I denied that temperatures were warming overall... What's not lining up is that increases in co2 are the CAUSE of the warming, a slight influence, yes... But not a primary driver, as EVIDENCED BY THE RAW DATA.
Click to expand...

But I thought you said the raw data is all manipulated.
 
Threegoofs said:
But I thought you said the raw data is all manipulated.
Click to expand...

No, those stupid graphs you keep coming up with are demonstrably manipulated.

Up until the satellites were the primary means of recording the data, there were problems there also, but I'm willing to leave that part out of the debate because even then the data does not support the cars, the "fixed" data is fixed and therefore untrustworthy unless the algorithms are included.
 
BmanMcfly said:
Yes... The ****ing data is conspiring against the climatologists? Is that what you are trying to tell me?

I never said I denied that temperatures were warming overall... What's not lining up is that increases in co2 are the CAUSE of the warming, a slight influence, yes... But not a primary driver, as EVIDENCED BY THE RAW DATA.
Click to expand...

You can lead a horse to water but....


Again I believe the primary motive behind denying climate change is that the deniers don't like the politics of some of the people who are its most ardent supporters. That is just plain stupid in my opinion but hey to each his own. I am through arguing whether or not climate change or AGW or whatever you want to parse it out this week is not happening. The facts are obvious. They are facts whether or not you choose to accept them. You are being foolish not to accept the facts and it makes you look more and more foolish each day.
 
BmanMcfly said:
And that's why you hear "consensus" and you fall in line like the rest of the lemmings, right?
Click to expand...

Critical thinking skills. The scientists that refute AGW are almost always cranks, there are a few true skeptics milling about but even they are often kind of nutty although they tend to stay true to good science when they do lay it out. The websites that support these people are always typical propaganda crap. The sites uses unprofessional inflammatory language "alarmist catastrophists", they always have a plea for a donation, they are always getting caught exaggerating, lying, misrepresenting, implying falsehoods, over and over and over.

Now when I read from reputable sources, they contain none of those things. There is no ridiculous language, they aren't asking for money, there aren't links to "click here to save yourself from the government". Rather they contain well researched, supported evidence with a nice reference list at the end. If you research everything they claim you will find exactly what they said. Contrast this with the "denier" sites, if you research their claims you will almost always find horrible trouble, sometimes its complete bull****, sometimes its a gross misrepresentation, rarely is it accurate.

These are basic research skills you learn in college. Stuff like trusting peer reviewed journals over poorly referenced blogs is not rocket science.
 
smb said:
You can lead a horse to water but....


Again I believe the primary motive behind denying climate change is that the deniers don't like the politics of some of the people who are its most ardent supporters. That is just plain stupid in my opinion but hey to each his own. I am through arguing whether or not climate change or AGW or whatever you want to parse it out this week is not happening. The facts are obvious. They are facts whether or not you choose to accept them. You are being foolish not to accept the facts and it makes you look more and more foolish each day.
Click to expand...

Stop with your pseudo-psycho babble... You're not qualified to make that kind of determination.

But, maybe you are right, it's stupid to look at the raw data to determine if it validates or violates the running hypothesis.

How is it that I am the one not accepting facts when I'm looking at the data, and you tell me I'm wrong based on dogma?

Oh, almost missed how it's ME that changes the terms whenever the previous terms stop getting people to buy into the scam?
 
Verax said:
Critical thinking skills. The scientists that refute AGW are almost always cranks, there are a few true skeptics milling about but even they are often kind of nutty although they tend to stay true to good science when they do lay it out. The websites that support these people are always typical propaganda crap. The sites uses unprofessional inflammatory language "alarmist catastrophists", they always have a plea for a donation, they are always getting caught exaggerating, lying, misrepresenting, implying falsehoods, over and over and over.

Now when I read from reputable sources, they contain none of those things. There is no ridiculous language, they aren't asking for money, there aren't links to "click here to save yourself from the government". Rather they contain well researched, supported evidence with a nice reference list at the end. If you research everything they claim you will find exactly what they said. Contrast this with the "denier" sites, if you research their claims you will almost always find horrible trouble, sometimes its complete bull****, sometimes its a gross misrepresentation, rarely is it accurate.

These are basic research skills you learn in college. Stuff like trusting peer reviewed journals over poorly referenced blogs is not rocket science.
Click to expand...

I'm USING THE RAW DATA COLLECTED, NOT THE GRAPHS THAT ARE BASED ON THE RAW DATA AND MANIPULATED TO PROVE A POINT, NOT ANY SKEPTIC SITES, NOT ANY WEBSITES, THE RAW ****ing DATA.

Then let's look at the papers, are you even aware of just how many of those papers are based on manipulated data, contrived and impossible hypotheticals, or just outright fraud?

Do you care? I don't think you do, but I'm willing to take your word for it... I'll give just one example; the big carbonic acid study on crustaceans that had to use 2000+ ppm of co2 before they saw any reaction that wasn't negligible... Forget the fact that at current rates it would take somewhere around 250 years to get to that level, and what's best, the crustaceans adapted.
 
BmanMcfly said:
I'm USING THE RAW DATA COLLECTED, NOT THE GRAPHS THAT ARE BASED ON THE RAW DATA AND MANIPULATED TO PROVE A POINT, NOT ANY SKEPTIC SITES, NOT ANY WEBSITES, THE RAW ****ing DATA.

Then let's look at the papers, are you even aware of just how many of those papers are based on manipulated data, contrived and impossible hypotheticals, or just outright fraud?

Do you care? I don't think you do, but I'm willing to take your word for it... I'll give just one example; the big carbonic acid study on crustaceans that had to use 2000+ ppm of co2 before they saw any reaction that wasn't negligible... Forget the fact that at current rates it would take somewhere around 250 years to get to that level, and what's best, the crustaceans adapted.
Click to expand...

So let me get this right. The scientists are all part of a conspiracy to falsify data? You also don't listen to the right-wing propaganda sites because they are no good too? You however, have the data, the calculations, you've got it all figured out that it is all a big lie. Ohhhkay, :thumbs:

Why don't you build a website and showcase all this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom