Wow! Shocking.
I had no idea that such wild conspiracy theories were actually believed.
Please tell us you were joking!
Anyone have a Geiger Counter? Radioactive CX-5?
- Thread starter CC58
- Start date
- Status
Wow! Shocking.
I had no idea that such wild conspiracy theories were actually believed.
Please tell us you were joking!
Interesting how so few climate change deniers can use science to dispute that the earth is warming (it is) and why (greenhouse gases caused by human activity). A well known and respected US "climate sceptic", funded partly by a Koch Brothers foundation, set out to show that mainstream climate scientists were all wrong. The result? Professor Richard Muller assembled an impartial scientific panel in the Berkeley Earth Project, and carefully reviewed all the data and calculations. They concluded that 1) The earth is, indeed, warming, and 2) it is primarily due to human activity emitting CO2 and other greenhouse gases. While Berkeley earth quibbled with the way some of the data had been interpreted, they found no significant problems with any of the data nor with the conclusions reached by mainstream climate scientists.
Check out Berkeleyearth.org. Here's an excerpt of their summary.
================
From 2010-2012, Berkeley Earth systematically addressed the five major concerns that global warming skeptics had identified, and did so in a systematic and objective manner. The first four were potential biases from data selection, data adjustment, poor station quality, and the urban heat island effect. Our analysis showed that these issues did not unduly bias the record. The fifth concern related to the over reliance on large and complex global climate models by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the attribution of the recent temperature increase to anthropogenic forcings. We obtained a long and accurate record, spanning 250 years and showed that it could be well-fit with a simple model that included a volcanic term and, as an anthropogenic proxy, CO2 concentration. We concluded that the record could be reproduced by just these two contributions, and that inclusion of direct variations in solar intensity did not contribute to the fit.
====================
It has also recently been conclusively shown that the oil company Exxon Mobile had private studies completed going back to the 1980s which showed that the earth is warming, and that it is due to the use of fossil fuels. For years, Exxon mobile hid this fact and argued the opposite. Now, however, they've joined the chorus of voices calling for a reduction in greenhouse gases.
This is happening, folks. All the ducking, dodging, and obfuscating in the world will not stop it.
If you want to debate it, start on two points. 1. Demonstrate that the earth is not warming. 2. Demonstrate that the warming is due to something other than greenhouse gases.
Check out Berkeleyearth.org. Here's an excerpt of their summary.
================
From 2010-2012, Berkeley Earth systematically addressed the five major concerns that global warming skeptics had identified, and did so in a systematic and objective manner. The first four were potential biases from data selection, data adjustment, poor station quality, and the urban heat island effect. Our analysis showed that these issues did not unduly bias the record. The fifth concern related to the over reliance on large and complex global climate models by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the attribution of the recent temperature increase to anthropogenic forcings. We obtained a long and accurate record, spanning 250 years and showed that it could be well-fit with a simple model that included a volcanic term and, as an anthropogenic proxy, CO2 concentration. We concluded that the record could be reproduced by just these two contributions, and that inclusion of direct variations in solar intensity did not contribute to the fit.
====================
It has also recently been conclusively shown that the oil company Exxon Mobile had private studies completed going back to the 1980s which showed that the earth is warming, and that it is due to the use of fossil fuels. For years, Exxon mobile hid this fact and argued the opposite. Now, however, they've joined the chorus of voices calling for a reduction in greenhouse gases.
This is happening, folks. All the ducking, dodging, and obfuscating in the world will not stop it.
If you want to debate it, start on two points. 1. Demonstrate that the earth is not warming. 2. Demonstrate that the warming is due to something other than greenhouse gases.
Last edited:
Being a denier at this point is ridiculous. I decided in 2006 with IPCC report that it was real, and there has been an avalanche of data since then confirming climate change. You will be on the wrong side of history guaranteed if you continue denying.
No one denied the ozone hole we had due to R12 freon. An international coalition formed and banned R12 worldwide. The ozone hole has since steadily shrunk. The world wide effort succeeded. The same has been done with many things; leaded gas/paint, DDT, asbestos, mercury, ...
Bottom line is climate change isn't inevitable. Study's have shown doing something about it will actually be good for the economy in that new technologies and vehicles will have to be produced. It makes no sense to deny. The huge amount of data is undeniable.
Would you prefer sceptics? I would, but not many of those posting in opposition to the near-unanimous scientific consensus qualify as "sceptics" - "people seeking the truth who have not yet arrived at definite conclusions". Those who oppose without debating "1) is the earth warming, and/or 2) what is causing it" aren't sceptics. They're deniers.
Last edited:
I find it odd that a perfectly descriptive and neutral term like "climate change denier" has now become somehow politically incorrect and we must use more "acceptable" terms like "climate change skeptic" even if it is not as accurate or descriptive. Political correctness has gone entirely too far when we can't even say what we mean using plain language without offending the most sensitive among us.
1
123373
Yup all the record snow in New England last winter is just proving global warming is approaching faster than we expected. Hmm maybe we should see if AL Gore will buy a CX5 so he can chime in!
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/opinion/top-ten-reasons-climate-change-is-a-hoax/
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/opinion/top-ten-reasons-climate-change-is-a-hoax/
I'm amazed that the deniers don't even appear to be self conscious to publicly state their discredited beliefs and affiliate themselves with conspiracy websites like the one above. On the other hand, I notice none of them are posting under their real world name. Internet alias's come in handy in such situations.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
If...the world is in trouble...and I say if...then what could it be? Fossil fuels? No. Thats like saying a man with a massive ongoing MI should be concerned with a small potentially cancerous mole on his leg.
Human Biomass is the issue, and global warming is the mole. If it's "real" and not just cyclic.
Soon we will have exhausted natural resources such as cropland, animal farming land, etc. The earth's population demands WWIII or a mass plague or something, or it will continue until it cannot support itself. Now, the only way it can is because of GMO wizardry. Yet many of these global warming activists probably have several unnecessary kids...because they wanted them. Well guess what? I have things that pollute...because I want them. So get over it. Population/natural resources/economies of scale will all be real issues long before some piddly 7" of sealevel rise in a century or two is, I promise you. In fact, in many parts of the world, it already is a massive, real, right NOW issue.
Long story short? When a childless environment activist attacks my polluting toys...I'll be a bit more keen to not laugh at them. All it is otherwise is someone destroying the environment for the sake of what their heart desires, while pointing their finger at me and telling me I'm selfish for destroying the environment for the sake of what my heart desires. Absurd. You'd get more support from me advocating vasectomy especially and tubal ligation by far.
Human Biomass is the issue, and global warming is the mole. If it's "real" and not just cyclic.
Soon we will have exhausted natural resources such as cropland, animal farming land, etc. The earth's population demands WWIII or a mass plague or something, or it will continue until it cannot support itself. Now, the only way it can is because of GMO wizardry. Yet many of these global warming activists probably have several unnecessary kids...because they wanted them. Well guess what? I have things that pollute...because I want them. So get over it. Population/natural resources/economies of scale will all be real issues long before some piddly 7" of sealevel rise in a century or two is, I promise you. In fact, in many parts of the world, it already is a massive, real, right NOW issue.
Long story short? When a childless environment activist attacks my polluting toys...I'll be a bit more keen to not laugh at them. All it is otherwise is someone destroying the environment for the sake of what their heart desires, while pointing their finger at me and telling me I'm selfish for destroying the environment for the sake of what my heart desires. Absurd. You'd get more support from me advocating vasectomy especially and tubal ligation by far.
Last edited:
It's amazing how the world has changed. In the past, we always knew it was big business and their multi billion dollar profits who were trying to pull the wool over everybody's eyes. But now we know better! It's those pesky scientists who are doing it! Those huge grants, worth tens of thousands of dollars, are what is prompting all this dishonesty and all these hoaxes. Now, the only ones we can trust are the big businesses who stand to make billions if they lie, not the ones who stand to make tens of thousands.
Don't follow the money! Hahahahaha!
Don't follow the money! Hahahahaha!
There is no "if it's real", even Exxon knew it was real in the 1980's. Then they went on a campaign to cover it up (deny it was real). The science is good and the problem is rapidly escalating CO2 levels. This is not difficult to grasp. When big oil money interests discovered what a threat this was to their income/net worth, they even got a hack journalist to confuse the issue by trying to create a global cooling scare. Yes, global warming sounds much more palatable, doesn't it? And deniers are still citing this one bogus article, unsupported by science, created to confuse the issue, to claim scientists don't know what they're talking about.
But that is no reason to throw our hands in the air and give up. The carrying capacity of planet earth is many times what we have now and is highly dependent upon how we use our knowledge to live high quality but low impact lives. And the point remains, the most pressing issue of our day is climate change which has the potential to reduce the carrying capacity of planet earth to below what it is today.
So what? The point is that new technologies can be implemented to reduce the impact of each life by a factor of 10 or more compared to the typical human footprint from 1990.
LOL! We all do and that is the point!
BTW, I'm childless by choice but support everyones right to bear children. We evolved to live on this wonderful planet and have a right to live and reproduce. But, as a society, we have a responsibility to future generations to be good stewards and leave them a habitable planet. And I would argue it should not just be habitable but it should be as wonderful as we are capable of leaving. There simply is no reason to selfishly s*** in the nest when we know better.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
I think food production, etc. Is already a real problem. Have you looked into it? America can't grow our own food even though we have GMO crops producing many times normal yields. Mass is neither created nor destroyed. Ww3 or a plague will fix the co2 problem unless we nuke the world, then many millenia will fix it. Kindof.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
Exactly. However,
I feel that the real contention is...at what point do individual rights cede to community rights and visit versa...and how do we even identify what is best, with so many special interest groups. Examples:
-patriot acts
-gun control
-right to refuse vaccinations
-right to use certain tires on the street.
1
123373
Scientists are never wrong especially when they have to justify the millions of dollars of grant money they take, but since Al Gore is not, it's perfectly fine because he believes scientist are never wrong, just like politicians. (lol2) The environment needs to be a concern through out the world and not just in America. As bad as we are, we are still miles ahead of other nations with pollution controls, especially on our cars. Unfortunately America will probably be nuked long before global warming kills us, since we have become too polically correct to defend our country.
Nice too meet you MikeM, My name is DaveR. Now you can use my name in your future self righteous attacks.
Last edited by a moderator:
When I realized climate change was real in 2006 due to IPCC report and Al Gore's movie, "An Inconvenient Truth", I cut my carbon foot print in half. It was time to buy a new car and so bought a 1.6L Civic. All my life I had driven V8 cars, but I made the sacrifice for the community. I feel bad that I drove a V8 all those years, but have a guilt free conscious knowing I took action when the facts were clear that climate change was real.
I bought the CX-5 for that reason too. Highest efficiency in its class. My CX-5 averages same MPG as the 1.6L Civic. The CX-5 gets better mileage in mountain driving than the 1.6L Civic.
You have to ask yourself, what will you say to your kids in the future when they ask, "Dad, what did you do about global warming?".
Last edited:
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
I just don't think it's a big deal compared to many things, even if it's "as bad as people claim".
- Status
