• 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!

US Govt Report on Impact of Climate Change Leaked

Jack Hays said:
Ah yes, the 2008 erasure of the record that ultimately got Connolly banned from Wikipedia.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that doesn't happen more often given the ease with which edits can be made to WIKI.
For me, that kind of makes them a bit suspect.
 
Jack Hays said:
There is no conspiracy, but Connolley's dishonesty got him banned from Wikipedia.
Click to expand...

That's irrelevant. He's the author of a paper referenced there.

But nice denier move- I see you got other deniers to ignore the main point and focus on the 'controversy'.

But it's not a conspiracy- it's just every scientific organization and the data is against you!!
 
VanceMack said:
Whats funny is watching the spin and damage control that they are doing. They could just admit they were wrong. But then..if they were wrong and not just...well...right, from a certain perspective...then that might indicate that a decade of dire climate predictions were similarly 'wrong'.
Click to expand...

I think many of us repeatedly do point out they were wrong on one thing or another. You are right. They cannot acknowledge such mistakes. They have pained themselves into a corner they can't get out of with any grace.
 
bubbabgone said:
I'm surprised that doesn't happen more often given the ease with which edits can be made to WIKI.
For me, that kind of makes them a bit suspect.
Click to expand...

It is known that wiki is not a reliable source because of it's openness to far to many people for editing. Like a blog, a person needs to look at the source material it is written from. Not what any particular wiki page says.
 
Threegoofs said:
That's irrelevant. He's the author of a paper referenced there.

But nice denier move- I see you got other deniers to ignore the main point and focus on the 'controversy'.

But it's not a conspiracy- it's just every scientific organization and the data is against you!!
Click to expand...

No conspiracy. Just one phenomenally dishonest man.
 

[h=1]EPA ends sponsorship of climate leadership program[/h]From Reuters. August 25, 2017 / 3:17 PM / a day ago Valerie Volcovici WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will no longer sponsor an awards program honoring voluntary corporate actions to combat global warming, it announced on Friday, the agency’s latest move to undo Obama-era climate change programs. Since 2012, the…
Continue reading →
 
Jack Hays said:

[h=1]EPA ends sponsorship of climate leadership program[/h]From Reuters. August 25, 2017 / 3:17 PM / a day ago Valerie Volcovici WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will no longer sponsor an awards program honoring voluntary corporate actions to combat global warming, it announced on Friday, the agency’s latest move to undo Obama-era climate change programs. Since 2012, the…
Continue reading →
Click to expand...

Without reading it, I assume it is a corporate subsidy.

If so hell yes. We don't need to subsidize corporations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom