• 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!

What kind of skeptic are you?

I believe:


  • Total voters
    34

Threegoofs

Sophisticated man-about-town
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
63,556
Reaction score
28,921
Location
The city Fox News viewers are afraid to travel to
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There are a few new people here, so I just wanted to see if we can sort the deniers (errr 'skeptics') into their appropriate categories. It sometimes gets confusing because there are so many flavors of denial. This might help clarify what approach the science oriented posters have to address your concerns on AGW.

Feel free to choose as many as needed.

Climate change isn't happening
Climate change is always happening
If the world is warming, it's not because of CO2 (ie climate sensitivity to CO2 is zero)
There is no such thing as a greenhouse effect. The world is warmed by magic.
The world is cooling
We're heading for an ice age
The increase in CO2 is not caused by humans (ie burning hydrocarbons doesn't release CO2)
Atmospheric CO2 hasn't increased
 
Sorry ladies and gents, "Climate Change" has always occurred. There is no point in all of evolution of Earth where the planet got to a fixed climate condition and stayed there. Eventually something has always happened either naturally within the planet and/or with some outside influence (like an Asteroids crashing into the Earth) that caused a directional change in the planet's climate condition. In average temperature, condition of polar ice caps, the position of the continents and the life on them, conditions of the soil, in C02 equilibrium, in other atmospheric dynamics, etc. the planet's climate condition is usually in some degree of shift.

That does not mean that humanity has no impact, nor does it alleviate our participation in changing our environment. Just means that the planet has been through far worse than what we have done to it and eventually, as it always has before, it will change course altering the life on this planet in the process. This does not happen over a football season, we are talking about millions of years here where we know (not theorize) that this planet has been through much colder periods and much hotter periods.

Should we change our habits? Absolutely. Should we crash world economies in an asinine haze of government panic-driven alarmist policies? Absolutely not.

Anything else?
 
When the mythology of a cult starts to come apart its die hard zealots simply get more shrill but less numerous

Ergo this is just a flamebait thread :bolt
 
When the mythology of a cult starts to come apart its die hard zealots simply get more shrill but less numerous

Ergo this is just a flamebait thread :bolt

Hmm.

Odd.

You'd think that if it was 'myth'. or 'coming apart' you'd see some evidence of it in the scientific literature, or the position statements of scientific organizations.

As far as anyone here can tell, Climate Change due to anthropogenic causes is endorsed as fact (and a looming problem) by hundreds of scientific organizations, and virtually none have labeled it as a 'myth'. IF you read a scientific journal, virtually all will assume the reader understands AGW is a real issue and is impacting what is being studied in relevant papers, with little explanation, because the educated audience is expected to understand. Examples abound like here, here, and here
 
Without accurate knowledge of the climate sensitivity of CO 2 its all just one big house of cards built on subjective opinion not empirical evidence and observation. :yawn:
 
Flamebait, I agree. But I'll let you in on a little secret: The planet is going to out-survive us. And there's nothing we can do about it.
 
There are a few new people here, so I just wanted to see if we can sort the deniers (errr 'skeptics') into their appropriate categories. It sometimes gets confusing because there are so many flavors of denial. This might help clarify what approach the science oriented posters have to address your concerns on AGW.

Feel free to choose as many as needed.

Climate change isn't happening
Climate change is always happening
If the world is warming, it's not because of CO2 (ie climate sensitivity to CO2 is zero)
There is no such thing as a greenhouse effect. The world is warmed by magic.
The world is cooling
We're heading for an ice age
The increase in CO2 is not caused by humans (ie burning hydrocarbons doesn't release CO2)
Atmospheric CO2 hasn't increased

But I can't say that "Climate change is always happening", because it wasn't before the Industrial Revolution took off.
 
But I can't say that "Climate change is always happening", because it wasn't before the Industrial Revolution took off.

You don't get it... it's a skeptic poll.... not for someone who believes in Global warming...

The Climate change is always happening option.... is that the earths climate has always been changing
 
I'll go with the I'm libertarian, and I think there is no way to stop climate change, unless extreme measures on a global scale are taken... which won't happen...Only way to stop it is to stop human population growth...

I do think Humans are changing the climate... but I don't think all these grandiose predictions can be considered science
 
I went with the "Im a libertarian and there's no solution to AGW."

Do I believe it is occurring? Yes.

Do I think it's going to make the Earth some uninhabitable wasteland? No.

Am I willing to forsake whole industries just to try and delay climate change which I don't think is going to turn the Earth into an uninhabitable wasteland? **** no.
 
When the mythology of a cult starts to come apart its die hard zealots simply get more shrill but less numerous

Ergo this is just a flamebait thread :bolt
Well, thanks for making that point and demonstrating what you say in support as well.

Not that this is any news but it's always good when somebody reaches self-understanding.:lamo:lamo
 
But I can't say that "Climate change is always happening", because it wasn't before the Industrial Revolution took off.
I beg to differ in that there's plenty of (scientific) evidence showing that it happened repeatedly even long before mankind ever came into/onto this earth.

Of course that may not be pertinent to the current controversy of here and now (Industrial revolution onwards), just saying.
 
I beg to differ in that there's plenty of (scientific) evidence showing that it happened repeatedly even long before mankind ever came into/onto this earth.

Of course that may not be pertinent to the current controversy of here and now (Industrial revolution onwards), just saying.

It is true that it happened many times before...but every time before there was an identifiable cause - volcanism, asteroid strike, whatever.
 
You missed a category:

[X] Human activity has probably caused the increase in CO2 and in turn some of the recent warming, but it's not a problem.
 
It's probably happening, it's probably fueled by human released carbon, but we can't stop it without severely damaging quality of life for lots of people, and there are more serious environmental problems I'd like to see addressed before something as vague and nebulous as global warming.
 
When the mythology of a cult starts to come apart its die hard zealots simply get more shrill but less numerous

Ergo this is just a flamebait thread :bolt
And targeting libertarians too!
 
Without accurate knowledge of the climate sensitivity of CO 2 its all just one big house of cards built on subjective opinion not empirical evidence and observation. :yawn:

In my opinion, CO2 likely does warm, but the mix of positive and negative feedback might make it a net zero, or cooling. I see that as real unlikely. I agree with the studies that have the sensitivity of CO2 between 0.5 and 1.0 degrees for total equalized warming.

We need not forget aerosols and land use changes. The easiest to mitigate are the aerosols.
 
But I can't say that "Climate change is always happening", because it wasn't before the Industrial Revolution took off.
How do you know that?

Is that what some pundit told you?
 
I went with the "Im a libertarian and there's no solution to AGW."

Do I believe it is occurring? Yes.

Do I think it's going to make the Earth some uninhabitable wasteland? No.

Am I willing to forsake whole industries just to try and delay climate change which I don't think is going to turn the Earth into an uninhabitable wasteland? **** no.

We can mitigate some of our impact.
 
since i don't have degree in climate science or any related field of study, I believe whatever the people that do study the subject believe. Just like i don't spend anytime wondering if chemotherapy is a good way to cure cancer because i don't have a degree in oncology or any related field of study


if your skeptical of global warming you probably live in an underground bunker
 
since i don't have degree in climate science or any related field of study, I believe whatever the people that do study the subject believe. Just like i don't spend anytime wondering if chemotherapy is a good way to cure cancer because i don't have a degree in oncology or any related field of study


if your skeptical of global warming you probably live in an underground bunker

Even though more than 99% of the grant money is for those looking to show AGW?
 
Back
Top Bottom