• 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 denalism has been a willful lie from day one

longview said:
Tell about the math that allows the level of CO2 to increase from the current 410 ppm to 1370 ppm in 81 years.
The current rate of growth of CO2 emissions is less than 3 ppm per year, which would place CO2 levels at 81*3 +410= 653 ppm about 2100.
ESRL Global Monitoring Division - Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network
Even doubling the rate of emission to 6 ppm per year would only produce a level of 896 ppm by 2100.
To get to 1370 ppm by year 2100, would require a massive new infrastructure to find, extract and burn hydrocarbon fuels.
I suspect that long before that happens, the limited supplies would force the price of fuels from hydrocarbons higher than
the cost to make our own fuels from scratch.
Click to expand...

They don't understand such critical thinking skills. To them, their masters and priests say it will happen, so it will.
 
Jetboogieman said:
We call you deniers because it's exactly what you are.
Click to expand...
Reddit banned Climate Deniers.

But for a long time, that type of discussion — at least surrounding climate change — has been hindered by trolling of the most “rude and uninformed” kind, according to Nathan Allen, a a PhD chemist and /r/science moderator. Which is why the subreddit has since prohibited posts and comments by people who deny the realities of man-made climate change.

“There is a de facto ban of climate denial in /r/science, yes,” Allen told ThinkProgress on Tuesday. “We require submissions to /r/science to be related to recent publications in reputable peer-reviewed journals which effectively excludes any climate denial.”

Why Reddit’s Science Forum Banned Climate Deniers – ThinkProgress
 
Media_Truth said:
Reddit banned Climate Deniers.

But for a long time, that type of discussion — at least surrounding climate change — has been hindered by trolling of the most “rude and uninformed” kind, according to Nathan Allen, a a PhD chemist and /r/science moderator. Which is why the subreddit has since prohibited posts and comments by people who deny the realities of man-made climate change.

“There is a de facto ban of climate denial in /r/science, yes,” Allen told ThinkProgress on Tuesday. “We require submissions to /r/science to be related to recent publications in reputable peer-reviewed journals which effectively excludes any climate denial.”

Why Reddit’s Science Forum Banned Climate Deniers – ThinkProgress
Click to expand...

And which great scientific achievements resulted from the suppression of free speech and inquiry?
 
Jack Hays said:
And which great scientific achievements resulted from the suppression of free speech and inquiry?
Click to expand...

Paid trollers and instigators are not a form of inquiry, and certainly doesn't qualify as FREE speech. PAID does not equal FREE.
 
Media_Truth said:
Paid trollers and instigators are not a form of inquiry, and certainly doesn't qualify as FREE speech. PAID does not equal FREE.
Click to expand...

When someone like that shows up, you let me know. Until then it's just a way to justify suppression of speech.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Pretty good video, Republicans and big oil companies created denialism to protect their industry and today it has a life of its own with right wing American believing it and spreading the propaganda all by themselves with the help of what have to be paid posters and we all know who they are.



Climate change denialism is a lie, it always has been.
Click to expand...


Of course
 
Jack Hays said:
When someone like that shows up, you let me know. Until then it's just a way to justify suppression of speech.
Click to expand...

It is obvious that those of us on the Skeptic side are not funded. Nobody has ever offered me such funding and I have been doing it for a while. Nobody has ever come out with such evidence, it would be impossible to recruit such people without it being public in some way.

The other side however could possibly be so funded. The club nature of the Green movement would allow people to be approached off the internet etc. But I would expect some to come out and shout about it.

So that leaves the only reason that somebody would accuse another of being that as an admission of loosing the argument.
 
Jack Hays said:
When someone like that shows up, you let me know. Until then it's just a way to justify suppression of speech.
Click to expand...

Makes you wonder, when hacks get on these forums EVERY DAY! You don't see that from the Climate Change side. The AGW folks are not funding hacks. Of course, I wouldn't be pointing any fingers at specific individuals. Suffice to say, it is probably the lowest form of occupation that a person could participate in...

When people did that during the big tobacco years, they were actually accomplices to promoting ideas that were killing people. Not much difference. This may be worse...
 
Media_Truth said:
Makes you wonder, when hacks get on these forums EVERY DAY! You don't see that from the Climate Change side. The AGW folks are not funding hacks. Of course, I wouldn't be pointing any fingers at specific individuals. Suffice to say, it is probably the lowest form of occupation that a person could participate in...

When people did that during the big tobacco years, they were actually accomplices to promoting ideas that were killing people. Not much difference. This may be worse...
Click to expand...

The problem is imaginary.
 
Jack Hays said:
The problem is imaginary.
Click to expand...
AGW is a real problem, in that it has the possibility of causing harm to how people accept Scientific results.
Making false or misleading claims about Scientific results in the climate sciences, could cause people to question
the results in other fields of Science.
I feel that modern Science has been boon to all Humanity, and anything that damages it's creditable,
is worthy of our ridicule and criticism.
 
longview said:
AGW is a real problem, in that it has the possibility of causing harm to how people accept Scientific results.
Making false or misleading claims about Scientific results in the climate sciences, could cause people to question
the results in other fields of Science.
I feel that modern Science has been boon to all Humanity, and anything that damages it's creditable,
is worthy of our ridicule and criticism.
Click to expand...

Back to the idea of making lying and calling it science a criminal offense.
 
Surface Detail said:
You want the veracity of science to be determined by a court? That would take us right back to the dark ages.
Click to expand...

The veracity of science would not the thing. Only if the court could be satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that the person knew the claim was false would it kick in.

Already courts make such judgements as to forensic evidence. If you present a false forensic report to the court you suffer the consequences.

I don't see an issue that would effect any reasonable scientist who was not out and out lying.
 
longview said:
AGW is a real problem, in that it has the possibility of causing harm to how people accept Scientific results.
Making false or misleading claims about Scientific results in the climate sciences, could cause people to question
the results in other fields of Science.
I feel that modern Science has been boon to all Humanity, and anything that damages it's creditable,
is worthy of our ridicule and criticism.
Click to expand...

The problem to which I referred as "imaginary" was M-T's insinuation that skeptics in this forum are paid hacks.
 
Jack Hays said:
The problem to which I referred as "imaginary" was M-T's insinuation that skeptics in this forum are paid hacks.
Click to expand...

I see the same names on these forums, whether it be Climate Change, Government Spending, Gun Control or other issues. In the above 3 topics, as soon as a post of the non-Conservative political viewpoint is entered, there are individuals who immediately respond. In other words, they appear to be full-time shills. How do you explain that?
 
Tim the plumber said:
The veracity of science would not the thing. Only if the court could be satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that the person knew the claim was false would it kick in.

Already courts make such judgements as to forensic evidence. If you present a false forensic report to the court you suffer the consequences.

I don't see an issue that would effect any reasonable scientist who was not out and out lying.
Click to expand...

A good candidate for prosecution would be Willie Soon. He seems to have profited handsomely from lying about climate change.
 
Surface Detail said:
A good candidate for prosecution would be Willie Soon. He seems to have profited handsomely from lying about climate change.
Click to expand...

Well I think it is fairly plain that NASA is lying about Greenland's ice mass change. How would you show, with equal obviousness, that this man is lying?

You would have to show that he knows that he is wrong.
 
Media_Truth said:
I see the same names on these forums, whether it be Climate Change, Government Spending, Gun Control or other issues. In the above 3 topics, as soon as a post of the non-Conservative political viewpoint is entered, there are individuals who immediately respond. In other words, they appear to be full-time shills. How do you explain that?
Click to expand...

6,887 posts in 2 years 4 months. Is this your full time job?
 
Media_Truth said:
I see the same names on these forums, whether it be Climate Change, Government Spending, Gun Control or other issues. In the above 3 topics, as soon as a post of the non-Conservative political viewpoint is entered, there are individuals who immediately respond. In other words, they appear to be full-time shills. How do you explain that?
Click to expand...

It's a debate forum, frequented by people who enjoy debates. There are regular liberal posters as well. Seems like a good thing to me.
 
Surface Detail said:
You want the veracity of science to be determined by a court? That would take us right back to the dark ages.
Click to expand...

The deniers seem to be more and more extreme. That you have posters like Jack Hayes that link to sources that claim that people demonstrating for action on climate change are proposing dictatorship.

Also that Tim the plumber and Longview seem to believe that it should be a crime to report about climate change.

While thanfully the numbers of denires are becoming a smaller and smaller minority.

Americans’ climate change concerns surge to record levels, poll shows | Environment | The Guardian

While the evidence of manmade global warming is so overwhelming that even the American Intelligence Community under Donald Trump acknowledge the threat from climate change.

“Global environmental and ecological degradation, as well as climate change, are likely to fuel competition for resources, economic distress, and social discontent through 2019 and beyond. Climate hazards such as extreme weather, higher temperatures, droughts, floods, wildfires, storms, sea level rise, soil degradation, and acidifying oceans are intensifying, threatening infrastructure, health, and water and food security. Irreversible damage to ecosystems and habitats will undermine the economic benefits they provide, worsened by air, soil, water, and marine pollution.”

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/2019-ATA-SFR---SSCI.pdf
 
Surface Detail said:
A good candidate for prosecution would be Willie Soon. He seems to have profited handsomely from lying about climate change.
Click to expand...

The only lie here was your own.

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]Greenpeace enlists Justin Gillis & John Schwartz of the NY Times in Journalistic Terrorist Attack on Willie Soon – Miss Target, Hit Smithsonian Instead[/h][FONT=&quot]Guest Essay by Kip Hansen I cannot bring myself to quote from this unconscionable piece of journalistic malfeasance: Deeper Ties to Corporate Cash for Doubtful Climate Researcher By JUSTIN GILLIS and JOHN SCHWARTZ FEB. 21, 2015 Instead, I simply let my title and the following excerpts from the so-called “supporting” documents offered by Greenpeace speak…
[/FONT]
February 23, 2015 in Climate ugliness, media.
 
Bergslagstroll said:
The deniers seem to be more and more extreme. That you have posters like Jack Hayes that link to sources that claim that people demonstrating for action on climate change are proposing dictatorship.

Also that Tim the plumber and Longview seem to believe that it should be a crime to report about climate change.

While thanfully the numbers of denires are becoming a smaller and smaller minority.

Americans’ climate change concerns surge to record levels, poll shows | Environment | The Guardian

While the evidence of manmade global warming is so overwhelming that even the American Intelligence Community under Donald Trump acknowledge the threat from climate change.

“Global environmental and ecological degradation, as well as climate change, are likely to fuel competition for resources, economic distress, and social discontent through 2019 and beyond. Climate hazards such as extreme weather, higher temperatures, droughts, floods, wildfires, storms, sea level rise, soil degradation, and acidifying oceans are intensifying, threatening infrastructure, health, and water and food security. Irreversible damage to ecosystems and habitats will undermine the economic benefits they provide, worsened by air, soil, water, and marine pollution.”

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/2019-ATA-SFR---SSCI.pdf
Click to expand...

If you were confident that this CAGW was real why would you consider a law that made lying and calling it science illegal?
 
Tim the plumber said:
6,887 posts in 2 years 4 months. Is this your full time job?
Click to expand...

I'm semi-retired, so I should have a lot of time to visit forums. Even with that, my number is extremely modest compared to the regular Conservative shills on this forum. Don't take my word. Look at the numbers.
 
Media_Truth said:
I'm semi-retired, so I should have a lot of time to visit forums. Even with that, my number is extremely modest compared to the regular Conservative shills on this forum. Don't take my word. Look at the numbers.
Click to expand...

I believe the man you are complaining about is retired.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom