• 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!

The political, and human costs, of Syria's climate changed induced drought

Funny how these things that AGW has predicted with greater frequency are all dismissed out of hand as 'natural' events, when its pretty clear that increased warming and disruption of weather patterns will cause more of these types of extreme events. Whether THIS even in particular is happening because of AGW is impossible to say, but the deniers pretend that means that NO events can be said to be caused by AGW.

Its like trying to explain statistical chance to a three year old that just wants the red gumball to come out of the machine.
 
I thought it was funny how the things predicted are known natural events to come...
 
Threegoofs said:
Funny how these things that AGW has predicted with greater frequency are all dismissed out of hand as 'natural' events, when its pretty clear that increased warming and disruption of weather patterns will cause more of these types of extreme events. Whether THIS even in particular is happening because of AGW is impossible to say, but the deniers pretend that means that NO events can be said to be caused by AGW.

Its like trying to explain statistical chance to a three year old that just wants the red gumball to come out of the machine.
Click to expand...
Since, as you say, it is impossible to link this event to 'global warming' you wont mind too much if I don't link the two.
 
Fletch said:
Since, as you say, it is impossible to link this event to 'global warming' you wont mind too much if I don't link the two.
Click to expand...

I understand You didnt get the red gumball, so therefore there ARE no such things as red gumballs.
 
Threegoofs said:
Funny but the deniers pretend that means that NO events can be said to be caused by AGW.
ne.
Click to expand...

You sure do talk out your hat a lot huh?


Can you link us to the deniers who have ' pretended' that???
 
Threegoofs said:
Funny how these things that AGW has predicted with greater frequency are all dismissed out of hand as 'natural' events, when its pretty clear that increased warming and disruption of weather patterns will cause more of these types of extreme events. Whether THIS even in particular is happening because of AGW is impossible to say, but the deniers pretend that means that NO events can be said to be caused by AGW.

Its like trying to explain statistical chance to a three year old that just wants the red gumball to come out of the machine.
Click to expand...

Another example of "noble cause" corruption in science.

". . . Just as Martin Luther challenged the corruption he saw in the Roman Catholic church by tacking his 95 theses onto the church door in Wittenberg, Pielke here launches a challenge to climate-change orthodoxy. Pielke is no Luther, of course; but given the religious nature of much of the debate, which is often couched in terms of believers-versus-skeptics and catastrophists-versus-deniers, the comparison is apt.

Pielke refers to this religiosity: “The issue of disasters and climate change,” he writes, “is a canonical example of ‘noble cause’ corruption in science.” And therein lies his key issue: Climate researchers, politicians, and mainstream media outlets often claim that extreme weather events are due to global warming—even though there’s no proof for such a claim. And they do so because the end (saving the earth) justifies telling a stretcher or two. . . . "




Cold Comfort

A scientific approach to the science of climate change
BY ROBERT BRYCE Bookmark this
Among the preachers of climate apocalypse, Roger Pielke Jr. is a heretic. Pielke’s sin: refusing to fall in line and accept the claims that climate chaos is upon us and that the only solution to the pending catastrophe is to implement ...
 
Threegoofs said:
Funny how these things that AGW has predicted with greater frequency are all dismissed out of hand as 'natural' events, when its pretty clear that increased warming and disruption of weather patterns will cause more of these types of extreme events. Whether THIS even in particular is happening because of AGW is impossible to say, but the deniers pretend that means that NO events can be said to be caused by AGW.

Its like trying to explain statistical chance to a three year old that just wants the red gumball to come out of the machine.
Click to expand...

Actually, the data are pretty bleak for the doomsayers' claims. Here's the most recent year I could find comprehensively catalogued.

2013 Was Not A Good Year For Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Climate Warming Change Disruption Weirding Ocean Acidification Extreme Weather, etc. | Watts Up With That?

For anyone keeping track, 2013 has not been a good year for those who propagate the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) Narrative, also known by a litany of increasingly nebulous buzzwords including “Climate Change“, “Climate Disruption”“, “Global Weirding”, “Ocean Acidification”, and “Extreme Weather“. Regardless of efforts to nebulize CAGW to explain all forms of climatic and weather variation, in 2013 every loosely falsifiable prediction of the CAGW narrative seems to have failed. The apparent complete failure of the CAGW narrative in 2013 could make the most fundamentalist agnostic wonder if Mother Nature sometimes takes sides, aka the Gore Effect, but before we praise Gaia, let’s take a look at some CAGW predictions and the associated 2013 data. . . .
 
Threegoofs said:
That would be the evidence, as compiled by the people who tend to know these things.

Your summary rejection reflects poorly on your judgement and character.
Click to expand...

That was no summary rejection. It was simply a statement of fact that nothing therein supports your claim. Meanwhile:

"For anyone keeping track, 2013 has not been a good year for those who propagate the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) Narrative, also known by a litany of increasingly nebulous buzzwords including “Climate Change“, “Climate Disruption”“, “Global Weirding”, “Ocean Acidification”, and “Extreme Weather“. Regardless of efforts to nebulize CAGW to explain all forms of climatic and weather variation, in 2013 every loosely falsifiable prediction of the CAGW narrative seems to have failed. The apparent complete failure of the CAGW narrative in 2013 could make the most fundamentalist agnostic wonder if Mother Nature sometimes takes sides, aka the Gore Effect, but before we praise Gaia, let’s take a look at some CAGW predictions and the associated 2013 data. . . . ."
 
parsa92 said:
A look at how a prolonged drought, thought to have been caused by climate change, helped worsen the economic and political circumstances on the ground in Syria in the run up to the ongoing war there.


https://www.the-newshub.com/environment/on-the-syrian-war-climate-change-theory
Click to expand...


[h=1]Sorry alarmists: New research disputes claims that climate change helped spark the Syrian civil war[/h]From the UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX A new study, published today in the journal Political Geography, shows that there is no sound evidence that global climate change was a factor in causing the Syrian civil war. Claims that a major drought caused by anthropogenic climate change was a key factor in starting the Syrian civil war have…
Continue reading →
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom