• 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 talk shifts from curbing CO2 to adapting

Dittohead not! said:
The scientific research hasn't proven that man made global warming really exists to the satisfaction of the anti science bloggers, and never will.

and dismissing modern science because of disproved ideas of past is absurd. Because the "bad air causes gangrene" notion turned out to be false does not mean that every scientific theory is going to be false.
Click to expand...

Even climate experts are saying that the models are wrong. Global warming models could be 'fundamentally wrong' | The Daily Caller
 
Verax said:
We've come a long way since then, apparently you haven't. What would you have us do? Reject science because it isn't perfect? By all means put your beliefs into action and start by turning off your computer.

Thinks this through... should we

a) Do nothing because science isn't perfect and we could be wrong.

b) Do what we can based on the best of our knowledge so far?
Click to expand...

Even though, "what we know so far", is wrong and based on sham research?
 
apdst said:
Even though, "what we know so far", is wrong and based on sham research?
Click to expand...

Its your choice if you want to believe the views of a small minority. Just don't lie and pretend as though that is the official position of the majority of the scientific community.
 
Verax said:
Its your choice if you want to believe the views of a small minority. Just don't lie and pretend as though that is the official position of the majority of the scientific community.
Click to expand...

There was a majority of "scientists" that said Earth is flat, too. Skeptics were killed as heretics by the church.

Progressives really aren't all that, "progressive".
 
mpg said:
No one said it was gonna be easy, but it might be easier than stopping it, and a combination of reduction and adapting might be best.
Click to expand...

If the Russian permafrost melts, we are doomed. There will be no adapting if world temperature increases by 2 more degrees. Humans can adapt to climate disasters but not destruction of the biosphere. If our source of life gets cut off, we can't just go to the bank and take out more biosphere on credit. People think that the environment behaves like our made up human economy. It doesn't. Once the biosphere collapses we are dead, period.

It's a complete fallacy to assume that humans will adapt and survive rapid global climate change and biosphere destruction. There is no evidence to support that. Humans have never been around during the kind of mass extinctions we are seeing today, and in all past versions of what is currently happening, most land species did not survive.

This is not climate change alarmism, it's simple scientific fact. China and the United States need to wake the **** up already and stop pretending that this isn't happening, or that, "Oh well, it's happening, let's just adapt."
 
apdst said:
There was a majority of "scientists" that said Earth is flat, too. Skeptics were killed as heretics by the church.

Progressives really aren't all that, "progressive".
Click to expand...

Everything you say is broken and I probably shouldn't even bother responding to your silliness.
 
Verax said:
Everything you say is broken and I probably shouldn't even bother responding to your silliness.
Click to expand...

Because you have nothing to respond with. "Global warming", has already Purdy much debunked. Why are we spending billions of tax dollars and intruding on private industry when the evidence has already been proven to false and even faked?

Global warming isn't the national crisis that Obama claims it is. Why do persist in supporting a lie?
 
Verax said:
Scientists brought you the internet, your computer, the atomic bomb, a long list of incredible works. Yet when it comes to climate change the scientists are suddenly co-conspirators or fools?

Maybe you should go back to sweeping beer cans out of the back of your truck and stfu.
Click to expand...

Haha....yea right.

Did Liberal Democrats use any of those projects you mentioned to fleece the public of it's personal property ?

Big Difference.

You don't even realize it's the left that's destroyed the renewable energy sciences by politicizing them. You should be pissed at them, not us.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Not one single scientific organization in the world is saying that. Only the silly bloggers are saying that.

Now, which is the "Daily Caller," is it (1) a publication of NASA, NOAA, the National Geographic Society, etc, or is it a blog?
Click to expand...

Did you read the article? I'm thinking you didn't, because everything is laid out in the first paragraph.
 
apdst said:
Did you read the article? I'm thinking you didn't, because everything is laid out in the first paragraph.
Click to expand...

I read the article about the 60 year cycle, or at least the abstract. What does that prove?
 
Verax said:
Scientists brought you the internet, your computer, the atomic bomb, a long list of incredible works. Yet when it comes to climate change the scientists are suddenly co-conspirators or fools?

Maybe you should go back to sweeping beer cans out of the back of your truck and stfu.
Click to expand...

Well, gee thanks for the atomic bomb scientists! Other than that, you're wrong. Scientists/inventors develop/invent a lot of things that never see the light of day. A large part of the reason why that is, is it takes the business folks to bring it to market. The internet would be still just a couple of big iron implementations connected through copper if it hadn't been for the marketing and business folks.
 
apdst said:
It proves that climate scientists are doubting their conclusions.
Click to expand...

You're taking a single issue and saying oh gee this disproves EVERYTHING. This is not how science works. They are constantly doubting their conclusions looking for the ultimate truth. This quibble with lower than expected warming over the last decade or so is simply one part of a large and complex puzzle. There are a number of possible explanations and some of them may support your desire for climate change effects to be minimized. There is also this...

Study: Oceans May Explain Slowdown in Climate Change » The Daily Catch

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/science/earth/what-to-make-of-a-climate-change-plateau.html?_r=1&

Volcanic aerosols, not pollutants, tamped down recent Earth warming, says CU study | University of Colorado Boulder

The scientific process is bumpy and things don't always go expected.
 
Verax said:
You're taking a single issue and saying oh gee this disproves EVERYTHING. This is not how science works. They are constantly doubting their conclusions looking for the ultimate truth. This quibble with lower than expected warming over the last decade or so is simply one part of a large and complex puzzle. There are a number of possible explanations and some of them may support your desire for climate change effects to be minimized. There is also this...

Study: Oceans May Explain Slowdown in Climate Change » The Daily Catch

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/science/earth/what-to-make-of-a-climate-change-plateau.html?_r=1&

Volcanic aerosols, not pollutants, tamped down recent Earth warming, says CU study | University of Colorado Boulder

The scientific process is bumpy and things don't always go expected.
Click to expand...

Oh, so your argument is, the slow down in global warming is a part of global warming?

Can you possibly imagine how your sound?
 
clownboy said:
Well, gee thanks for the atomic bomb scientists! Other than that, you're wrong. Scientists/inventors develop/invent a lot of things that never see the light of day. A large part of the reason why that is, is it takes the business folks to bring it to market. The internet would be still just a couple of big iron implementations connected through copper if it hadn't been for the marketing and business folks.
Click to expand...

So I guess we need to bring in the business people and marketers to sell climate change to you?

I just... I don't get some of you have the strangest arguments. Its like you're so desperate to contradict something you'll come up with the most bizarre "points".
 
apdst said:
Oh, so your argument is, the slow down in global warming is a part of global warming?

Can you possibly imagine how your sound?
Click to expand...

You responded within 3 minutes of my post, you obviously read those links and carefully thought through it, right? :roll:
 
Verax said:
You responded within 3 minutes of my post, you obviously read those links and carefully thought through it, right? :roll:
Click to expand...

You mean, you weren't summarizing what the links say?
 
apdst said:
You mean, you weren't summarizing what the links say?
Click to expand...

What?

Look... the gist is we could be in a warming lull that will transition into a rapid warming trend in the not so distant future.
 
Verax said:
What?

Look... the gist is we could be in a warming lull that will transition into a rapid warming trend in the not so distant future.
Click to expand...

We could just as easily not transition into a rapid warming trend. Are were really to push costly government regulations on the private sector on a maybe?

Climate scientists have their own crystal balls now? They must, because their predictions so far have been all jacked up.
 
apdst said:
We could just as easily not transition into a rapid warming trend. Are were really to push costly government regulations on the private sector on a maybe?

Climate scientists have their own crystal balls now? They must, because their predictions so far have been all jacked up.
Click to expand...

No, no we could not just as easily not transition into a rapid warming trend, the research says otherwise. Its not a maybe, its extremely likely. Yes, their crystal balls are their brains. Like I said its a bumpy road, if its too hard for you to understand you should probably walk away from it.
 
Verax said:
So I guess we need to bring in the business people and marketers to sell climate change to you?

I just... I don't get some of you have the strangest arguments. Its like you're so desperate to contradict something you'll come up with the most bizarre "points".
Click to expand...

First, I've never argued against "climate change". We live on a geologically active planet within a radiologically active and varied solar system orbitting through an even more active galaxy. That's where we live, get used to it. In fact we are in a part of our stellar rotation that our species has never experienced before (a cosmic year is over 200 million years).

The reason I rebutted your silly claim about scientists is that they are not the paragons of accuracy and knowledge you've built them up to be. The current state of climate science is nowhere close to being able to make the predictions and claims their MARKETING arm makes now. And make no mistake, AGW is being actively marketted to us now - and for political/monetary reasons.

If you need the security blanket of having some patriarchal presense in your life, instead of choosing climate scientists, at least gain half an ounce of credibility and choose to blindly believe the geologists instead. Geologists will tell you they just don't know enough about the system to make these determinations yet.
 
Last edited:
Verax said:
No, no we could not just as easily not transition into a rapid warming trend, the research says otherwise. Its not a maybe, its extremely likely. Yes, their crystal balls are their brains. Like I said its a bumpy road, if its too hard for you to understand you should probably walk away from it.
Click to expand...

Then you don't seem to understand the basic fact that we are presently in a TEMPORARY warming period of an ice age. Just ONE supervolcanic eruption could spell the end to that warming period. Of the 6 known supervolcanoes at least three are "overdue" for eruption historically.
 
Verax said:
No, no we could not just as easily not transition into a rapid warming trend, the research says otherwise. Its not a maybe, its extremely likely. Yes, their crystal balls are their brains. Like I said its a bumpy road, if its too hard for you to understand you should probably walk away from it.
Click to expand...


I'm sure the citizens would like to do something/anything to mitigate Global Warming but the power structure of money and politicians profits handsomely from the status quo. Big money, Big politics, and Big energy, Big finance, and Big corporate all thrive by not changing. It will require a revolution to initiate the changes necessary just to slow down the ongoing debacle. It ain't complicated. If you don't turn down the heat in your domicile, it will get hotter.
 
clownboy said:
First, I've never argued against "climate change". We live on a geologically active planet within a radiologically active and varied solar system orbitting through an even more active galaxy. That's where we live, get used to it. In fact we are in a part of our stellar rotation that our species has never experienced before (a cosmic year is over 200 million years).

The reason I rebutted your silly claim about scientists is that they are not the paragons of accuracy and knowledge you've built them up to be. The current state of climate science is nowhere close to being able to make the predictions and claims their MARKETING arm makes now. And make no mistake, AGW isd being actively marketted to us now - and for political/monetary reasons.

If you need the security blanket of having some patriarchal presense in your life, instead of choosing climate scientists, at least gain half an ounce of credibility and choose to blindly believe the geologists instead. Geologists will tell you they just don't know enough about the system to ake these determinations yet.
Click to expand...

You don't fool me with your pseudo intellectual bs, save it for another. The fact that you sling a bunch of disjointed terms out there to prove your science "creds" then turn around and **** all over scientists is hilarious.

Scientists are the closest thing we have to paragons of accuracy and knowledge... do you disagree? The very definition of a real scientist is somebody who searches for knowledge, for the truth.

But this is inconvenient to your agenda, so you have to ad hominem scientists, especially climate scientists... pathetic. Oooh but you say geologists know, they know the truth, and the truth is that we don't know enough. You go back and forth so many times its ridiculous. Can we trust scientists or not?

This all leads up to your last ad hominem that I'm just a weakling that needs scientists as my god to blindly follow.

This is all rehashed crap you've assembled and slinged at me. I'm done arguing with you silly folks about this. If you want to have a real discussion, I suggest you take an introductory course in integrated science.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom