• 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!

Confirmed: Mainstream Media Outlets Working Together To Set Climate Agenda

ataraxia said:
Sure. Science always changes. You always have to try to keep up. This is the latest science.
Click to expand...

The latest science could be wrong just the same as it was over and over again in the past. The fact is that all previous climate history has little bearing on the future climate. All the parameters have changed and are currently changing. Man is a part of the natural history and future of this planets climate along with billions of other factors most of which we have yet to discover. To say that man is the primary cause is beyond stupid. All the energy produced by man over our existence does not amount to anything when compared to the energy this planet receives from the sun every year.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
The latest science could be wrong just the same as it was over and over again in the past. The fact is that all previous climate history has little bearing on the future climate. All the parameters have changed and are currently changing. Man is a part of the natural history and future of this planets climate along with billions of other factors most of which we have yet to discover. To say that man is the primary cause is beyond stupid. All the energy produced by man over our existence does not amount to anything when compared to the energy this planet receives from the sun every year.
Click to expand...

Do you really think that it is claimed that AGW is caused by the amount of energy produced by man? Have you understood nothing? Seriously, go away and do some reading on the topic. Until you do, there is simply no point in you discussing this issue because you clearly don't have the faintest idea what it's about.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
The latest science could be wrong just the same as it was over and over again in the past.
Click to expand...

Sure. But I don't see you recommending that we ignore all the latest science- only this one. What is different about this?


The fact is that all previous climate history has little bearing on the future climate. All the parameters have changed and are currently changing.
Click to expand...

We know enough to predict the weather pretty reasonably for the next week or so. We know enough to predict the path of a hurricane. So what's different about this?

Man is a part of the natural history and future of this planets climate along with billions of other factors most of which we have yet to discover. To say that man is the primary cause is beyond stupid. All the energy produced by man over our existence does not amount to anything when compared to the energy this planet receives from the sun every year.
Click to expand...

It is if the energy is getting trapped more. I assure you all of that has been taken into consideration. You have never read a textbook on this subject, have you?
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
The latest science could be wrong just the same as it was over and over again in the past. The fact is that all previous climate history has little bearing on the future climate. All the parameters have changed and are currently changing. Man is a part of the natural history and future of this planets climate along with billions of other factors most of which we have yet to discover. To say that man is the primary cause is beyond stupid. All the energy produced by man over our existence does not amount to anything when compared to the energy this planet receives from the sun every year.
Click to expand...

I really get the feeling that your strong feelings on this are not based on conclusions after an objective and thorough study of the subject. You just dont WANT it to be true.

Why? Is it because you are just afraid it's going to mean big government and taxes? If you knew for sure it wouldn't necessarily mean more government and taxes, would the science seem more credible to you?
 
Jack Hays said:
Meeting evidence with (unsuccessful) ad hominem.
Click to expand...

Meeting overwhelming scientific evidence with (apparently very successful, so far) bullheaded and willful blindness.
 
Surface Detail said:
Do you really think that it is claimed that AGW is caused by the amount of energy produced by man? Have you understood nothing? Seriously, go away and do some reading on the topic. Until you do, there is simply no point in you discussing this issue because you clearly don't have the faintest idea what it's about.
Click to expand...

I have read enough books over the past 50 years to know that they keep coming up with different stories. Now they claim that the co2 levels during the age of the dinosaurs was 5 times that today. But the world did not end. It was man that emerged and the dinosaurs that lost. Why was there no run away greenhouse event back then turning the earth into another Venus. I know. Man caused the ice ages and now we are causing the next warm period like we did when the dinosaurs walked the earth. This planet has been warming up and freezing again for billions of years and will continue to do so with or without our help.
 
ataraxia said:
It is if the energy is getting trapped more. I assure you all of that has been taken into consideration. You have never read a textbook on this subject, have you?
Click to expand...

No other factors are involved. Dream on.
 
ataraxia said:
I really get the feeling that your strong feelings on this are not based on conclusions after an objective and thorough study of the subject. You just dont WANT it to be true.

Why? Is it because you are just afraid it's going to mean big government and taxes? If you knew for sure it wouldn't necessarily mean more government and taxes, would the science seem more credible to you?
Click to expand...

No. But it is you using global warming to show a need for an over bloated government that is most of the cause of our problems. Just the same as the actors who have the carbon foot print of thousands of average citizens who act as though it us that are the problem not them.
 
ataraxia said:
Sure. But I don't see you recommending that we ignore all the latest science- only this one. What is different about this?




We know enough to predict the weather pretty reasonably for the next week or so. We know enough to predict the path of a hurricane. So what's different about this?



It is if the energy is getting trapped more. I assure you all of that has been taken into consideration. You have never read a textbook on this subject, have you?
Click to expand...

this is different because of the lack of track record.

Same with weather, it used to be a joke, but now, the weather is much much more accurate than it was 30 years ago.

Unfortunately, men do not live long enough to see multiple multi decade accurate forcastss from climate models.

If I lived in He year 2300, I could have much more idea of how accurate climate modeling is. Right now there is close to zer track record, but what record there is, does not inspire great confidence. It’s not bad, but then again calling heads 7 times out of the first 10 looks impressive as well.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
No. But it is you using global warming to show a need for an over bloated government that is most of the cause of our problems.
Click to expand...

I did? When did I do that? Or is there just so much paranoia that you are hearing voices?
 
ataraxia said:
I did? When did I do that? Or is there just so much paranoia that you are hearing voices?
Click to expand...

The fact remains that the scientific community that claims to know the future climate of this planet cannot even agree on what caused the climate change in the past. In the past they do not have to deal with unknow events because they already happened. But not a single one of the climate experts can say with any certainty when the next super volcano will erupt or the next climate changing asteroid or comet will hit this planet. They cannot say with any certainty when the ocean currents will change course or even what man will do in the next couple of hundred years. So with no facts they are going to claim they no what the climate will do in the future. I have a crystal ball that is just as accurate.
 
PoS said:
Yeah, right. AOC says the world has 12 years left and Greta Thunberg says she can see CO2 in the air. When it comes to kooks, your side has a monopoly on it.
Click to expand...

So what does the science say?
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
The fact remains that the scientific community that claims to know the future climate of this planet cannot even agree on what caused the climate change in the past. In the past they do not have to deal with unknow events because they already happened. But not a single one of the climate experts can say with any certainty when the next super volcano will erupt or the next climate changing asteroid or comet will hit this planet. They cannot say with any certainty when the ocean currents will change course or even what man will do in the next couple of hundred years. So with no facts they are going to claim they no what the climate will do in the future. I have a crystal ball that is just as accurate.
Click to expand...

They cannot say when the next hurricane is going to happen either. But does that mean you want to tell people to ignore their predictions of its path when it does?
 
PoS said:
Covering Climate Now signs on over 170 news outlets - Columbia Journalism Review



So we're looking at an obvious agenda here- to brainwash the uninformed public based on an unproven hypothesis and hyperbolic apocalyptic predictions that the world is somehow going to end if the average temperature goes up by less than 2 degrees. And of course the lemmings are going to lap this up.
Click to expand...


That’s what the denial industry has been feeding its all too willing audience for years!
 
ataraxia said:
They cannot say when the next hurricane is going to happen either. But does that mean you want to tell people to ignore their predictions of its path when it does?
Click to expand...

I have no problem with attempting to predict the future climate of this planet. I have a problem when I am lied to that we are the primary cause when climate change has been happening for billions of years before man ever existed and I know we are only 1 factor of millions of other factors.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
I have no problem with attempting to predict the future climate of this planet. I have a problem when I am lied to that we are the primary cause when climate change has been happening for billions of years before man ever existed and I know we are only 1 factor of millions of other factors.
Click to expand...

Sometimes some factors are more important than others.

If earthquakes that occurred millions of years ago had certain reasons for doing so, does that mean that underground nuclear explosions now are not really capable of creating them?
 
ataraxia said:
They cannot say when the next hurricane is going to happen either. But does that mean you want to tell people to ignore their predictions of its path when it does?
Click to expand...

Wasn't there a guy who correlated the strong hurricanes with solar storms?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom