|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Climate Change Denier comes in from the cold: SCIENCE!!! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Note you're not supposed to argue by bare links, and a bare video would qualify imho.
That said, your video is worthless. Alex Epstein - Wikipedia(American_writer)
quote: Not a scientist just a word pusher working for the oil industry. Inhofe is a moron that thinks winters counter global change, and that bringing a snowball into congress is an argument. Try again with real science. You're biggest problem seems to be an inability to differentiate between real science and non-science, picking what you want to be true rather than what reality says is true. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : .by our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
I'm reminded of a graph from Percy's Message 4164; That graph covers 10,000 years, and is only a few inches wide, so it's not really possible to accurately pinpoint just what time period those lines on that chart started rocketing up, but it looks to me like early to late 1800's, right on up to today. Just about the time fossil fuels came into being. Now lets look at which years the world achieved an additional billion in population; The projection is sometime between 2024 and 2030, 8 billion. World population milestones - Wikipedia Is it reasonable to say that there's a correlation between the rise in CO2, and the increase in world population? Undoubtedly closely related to the increase in fossil fuel use as the population increased - I'll give you that. And also an increase in per capita fossil fuel use. Both factors increase CO2 immensely and we know that the overall increase in CO2 correlates with human fossil fuel use.
When I asked you if too many Model T's were the reason for the increased CO2 a hundred years ago, you said it was because of "Coal burning industries. Steam locomotives and ships burning coal." Again, that's fine I'll give you that. But what we have to realize is that those coal burning industries weren't luxuries - they became accepted and necessary to provide food and warmth, and primitive lifestyles, by today's standards, to a NEW UPWARD TREND in population growth. So we have a feed-back system that increases CO2 production exponentially.
So therefore, I only see one way to reduce CO2 back to early 1800's levels, and that would be to eliminate 6 billion people from the earth. Since I don't see anyone from the scientific community or the far political left proposing that, I'd like to know what other SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN alteration to today's societies would satisfy today's climate change alarmists. Except that we have means to produce electricity without adding CO2 to the atmosphere, which is why the Green New Deal emphasizes alternate/renewable electrical generation.
As we see from the above figures, world population was about half what it is today when the U.S. EPA was formed in 1970. Since they're experts, they should have known what was going on in 1912, and that they had something to do. They didn't do it, did they? They aren't accountable, are they? As I said before I know someone who was on the National Science Board when Nixon was president, ie when the EPA was formed. The scientists knew what was going on, the politicians balked at doing anything about it. They still do ... because oil/coal industry lobbyists.
My points have never been adamant disagreement with scientific findings, I'm just adamant that there's nothing humans can do about what mere human existence causes. ... Then get out of the way and let those who think we can do something get to work.
The same way you've been taught to blow through people like Tim Ball, for a similar, but a much more dangerous reason. Free market profit margins aren't nearly as threatening as massive government takeovers of human freedoms, with no accountability. Not surprisingly I disagree totally: unchecked capitalism is a slide back to the worst kind of feudalism, as capitalism has no moral or ethical checking system. No accountability? How are international corporations held accountable? How is Walmart held accountable for paying starvation wages with workers on public assistance for housing health and food while they rake in billions?
Maybe I missed it, but I think you missed one. Let's look at it, I'll c/p a few paragraphs from it. The Great Global Warming Hoax | 'Knowledge is Power' – better-management.org reveals invaluable information
quote: [bolded mine] Curiously I'm well aware of the Milankovich cycles as they are one of the validations for the ages measured by the ice cores. In Message 564 I posted a graph:
quote: As you can see, the Milankovich cycles indeed show that we should be entering a new ice age, as your link says, but that it is massively overwhelmed by human CO2 production.
... Can you knock this out in a couple of sentences? I'm sure you can go to google and find thousands of frantic scientists who've condensed it very nicely for you. As you can see I have already dealt with this, as advertised.
I'd also like some references to a scientific paper or two that PROVE that political action will reverse climate change. ROFLOL. Nice joke. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Heres one for the books:
Kids' Climate Case 'Reluctantly' Dismissed By Appeals Court 32 page opinion by judgesChance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ~"We, humans, are engaged in an ongoing war of ideologies. I see it in this microcosm of EvC Forum just as I see it in the governments and attitudes of people throughout the world. Take your pick: Oppression or Seduction . "~Thugpreacha You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith "You may not like it, but the dog bites both ankles."~Tangle
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
As everyone knows, I am a Christian believer who actually thinks that much of the Bible is spot on in regards to predicting future global scenarios of war, human conflict, and underlying "supernatural" influence. If we take away the idea that a global leader will be possessed by the dark side and that Jesus will have to come back to stop mass extinction, what then do we have left? People behaving badly. And what does the evidence show? I continue to read articles about global migration, climate change, and the realistic impacts of this.
The climate crisis, migration, and refugees quote:Knowing human nature as I do, particularly the insidiousness of climate change denial, I see these future challenges as basically insurmountable beyond personal necessity and a trigger for the apologetic predictions of a global conflict between good and evil. Note too that there are no villains and saved crusaders battling in this armageddon conflict. There are merely nations fighting other nations. God and the Demons may as well not even be involved...for the people seem bent on waging war anyway. Thus, adding to the practical list of future challenges, we will be faced with an ambitious human psychological makeover. The only way I know to drive out evil from the country is by the constructive method of filling it with good.lvin Coolidge "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.-RC Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith - You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do. Anne Lamott
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Phat writes: Knowing human nature as I do, particularly the insidiousness of climate change denial, I see these future challenges as basically insurmountable beyond personal necessity and a trigger for the apologetic predictions of a global conflict between good and evil. I am pretty sure you don't have a clue who would be the good or the evil. Remember, fortunately the vast majority of Americans are not CCoI and that is where you will find true evil. As long as the CC0I does not gain full power there is a chance; Thank God!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
The end of the world is nigh! Doom, doom, we're all doomed!
What is it about you fundie nutters? Everything is a bloody sign and you're so damn miserable but don't do anything about it but moan. Put that bloody useless book down and get a life.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
OK, I get your point. We all should focus on action and optimism and throw the ancient made up warnings away, right? But what about the modern scientific ones?
Little Greta said it first: Why is nobody doing anything? Seems to me that human nature is self-destructive. The only way I know to drive out evil from the country is by the constructive method of filling it with good.lvin Coolidge "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.-RC Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith - You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do. Anne Lamott
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Phat writes: Little Greta said it first: Why is nobody doing anything? Seems to me that human nature is self-destructive. Because, particularly in the Untied States of Stupidity and Greed there is a vested interest in continuing what has always been profitable and the vast majority of voters do not want to put in the effort needed to actually be informed voters. It's easier to be unlearned than to learn.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
Phat writes: OK, I get your point. We all should focus on action and optimism We should focus on being realistic and grounded in reality - simple-minded optimism is just as bad as doom, doom, doom.
throw the ancient made up warnings away, right? Certainly, they're obvious garbage.
Little Greta said it first: Why is nobody doing anything? Seems to me that human nature is self-destructive. Lots of people are doing things, millions of people. The world is turning. It's slow in some parts and fast in others. With your turd of a president it's actually trying to go backwards in your part. Whether it's fast enough to prevent a huge amount of future damage is yet to be seen. But this is a man-made problem and it's going to be mankind that fixes it, or doesn't. The world won't care and your god isn't going to help so there's no point you wasting your time wailing and grovelling to him. Your time would be better used campaigning to change things and doing what you can yourself. All this chest beating is just an excuse for doing nothing yourself.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
Note you're not supposed to argue by bare links, and a bare video would qualify imho. That said, your video is worthless. Well, that's where I thought I'd start, to see if you, or anyone else, after a full week, would address ANYTHING in the video. I have my answer, so I'll proceed by referring to it as I further try to address the continued climate change subject. Presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg has plans to combat climate change;
quote: https://www.vox.com/...-change-policy-power-natural-gas-coal and as I've mentioned before in the other thread, Tom Steyer has said that he'll "declare a climate change national emergency on day one of his presidency". Does it look to you like both of these guys are saying they'll "do anything they want"? Percy said in Message 4409;
Percy writes: and there are no serious proposals for the government "to take over most all decisions in how energy will be produced and used." I don't need to be a scientist to see wildly mixed messages in what I see about solutions to climate change. As we know, the "Green New Deal" has "ambitious" proposals, as AOC has expertly said. You know, 100% renewable energy in 12 (now 11) years. We also know that in 11 years, wind is not going to be blowing tractor trailers down the road as they deliver food to food stores. Sunlight power isn't going to completely replace the current fossil fuel burning machinery that produces food. Some progress towards renewable energy could be made in that period, but common sense tells us it won't be much. Now back to the video, at about the 2:10 mark, Wilson referred to the common, yet largely emotional cry by the left to DO SOMETHING about climate change. It's exactly the same cry we hear after a mass shooting, or a bus accident involving death or serious injury to several students. In the case of shootings, it's always a call for one more gun control law, in the case of bus accidents, it's the call for more and more expensive safety equipment on buses. Very small, incremental things, that have no measurable affect on future shootings / bus accidents. The same thing can happen with climate change, no matter how much the government meddles, new technology for renewable energy will be negligible, but the DO SOMETHING call will be satisfied by targeting only small voting blocks. Such as the antique auto industry, or people who heat their residences completely or partially with firewood. Those kinds of small voting blocks have no political power to stop these infringements on liberty. So that's one disagreement I have about the video being "worthless". Here's another; starting at about the 2:35 mark, he starts describing several instances where past scientific predictions have been completely wrong. Was that part incorrect, or was that part just a little less than worthless? Is if fair to dismiss FACTS, just because he's accused of being trained by special interests? I don't automatically dismiss "facts" by the scientific community concerning some of their terrifying findings, I just dismiss that they or anyone has the ability to do the equivalent of making 6 billion human beings stop eating, breathing, or keeping warm in winter.
Try again with real science. You're biggest problem seems to be an inability to differentiate between real science and non-science, picking what you want to be true rather than what reality says is true. The U.S. constitution doesn't give "real science" any more power than anyone else when it comes to making political decisions. Edited by marc9000, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
marc9000 writes: Is it reasonable to say that there's a correlation between the rise in CO2, and the increase in world population? Undoubtedly closely related to the increase in fossil fuel use as the population increased - I'll give you that. And also an increase in per capita fossil fuel use. "Per capita", so this use by "individuals" of fossil fuels is getting increasingly unnecessary, and must be regulated?
So we have a feed-back system that increases CO2 production exponentially. A feed back system? Cars are more efficient with fuel than ever before, thanks to expensive government mandates, we have more wind turbines than ever before. Are only things like people's hobbies, and overindulgence causing this feed back system?
As I said before I know someone who was on the National Science Board when Nixon was president, ie when the EPA was formed. The scientists knew what was going on, the politicians balked at doing anything about it. They still do ... because oil/coal industry lobbyists. And because the politicians know they'd be voted out of office. There's a reason that specific proposals to "do something" about climate change are still a secret.
Then get out of the way and let those who think we can do something get to work. "Get out of the way", and let government gobble up freedoms and money to do something that can't be measured? You're funny.
Not surprisingly I disagree totally: unchecked capitalism is a slide back to the worst kind of feudalism, as capitalism has no moral or ethical checking system. No accountability? How are international corporations held accountable? How is Walmart held accountable for paying starvation wages with workers on public assistance for housing health and food while they rake in billions? Nothing is perfect, but free markets are BY FAR the best way to hold companies, big and small, accountable.
As you can see, the Milankovich cycles indeed show that we should be entering a new ice age, as your link says, but that it is massively overwhelmed by human CO2 production. Overwhelmed by facts, or scientific community projections?
marc9000 writes: I'd also like some references to a scientific paper or two that PROVE that political action will reverse climate change. ROFLOL. Nice joke. Yes it is, there's no way to scientifically document how political action will have any effect on climate change.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Does it look to you like both of these guys are saying they'll "do anything they want"? Well I see it mostly as them saying what they want to do. Neither would get far on their own ... in a pre-Trump world, but with the Senate well on their way to giving the President unlimited unchecked powers, that has changed. That's what the GOP is doing to the constitution.
I don't need to be a scientist to see wildly mixed messages in what I see about solutions to climate change. So that's one disagreement I have about the video being "worthless". From what you have (sort of) quoted I don't see anything of value, mostly regurgitated anti-renewable energy talking points paid for by big oil. Look at the oil companies admitting that they knew about their business being detrimental to the climate but continuing anyway, because profits. You claim there is a lot of money on the renewable energy side, but you're looking in the wrong direction. Yes there are many possible ways to reduce CO2 and Methane emissions. Yes transportation requires a way to get to point B without dependence on recharging batteries for long distance travel and trucking, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't invest in renewable energy at all, or even as much as possible. And a lot of people are doing things on their own. I have solar panels, and I have not paid an electrical bill since august 2015. That means they have already paid for themselves.
Here's another; starting at about the 2:35 mark, he starts describing several instances where past scientific predictions have been completely wrong. Was that part incorrect, or was that part just a little less than worthless? Is if fair to dismiss FACTS, just because he's accused of being trained by special interests? Creationist types love when science is wrong, because they think it makes all science wrong and untrustworthy. However scientists also love when science is wrong, because it is an opportunity to correct their models to make better predictions. The models now accurately model the past data and make stronger predictions about the future as a result of these changes. So yeah, dwelling on past failures and not looking at current success makes the video worthless. It's typical for cherry-picking information and presenting a misleading or false representation of the current science.
I don't automatically dismiss "facts" by the scientific community concerning some of their terrifying findings, I just dismiss that they or anyone has the ability to do the equivalent of making 6 billion human beings stop eating, breathing, or keeping warm in winter. And that is politics, not science, isn't it? So we should welcome the people that are making the public more aware of the situation and the danger of doing nothing. Conversely, the danger of making the world a better, cleaner place to live, if say the climate change science happens to be totally wrong (which is highly unlikely), and making industry more accountable and eco-friendly, is what?
The U.S. constitution doesn't give "real science" any more power than anyone else when it comes to making political decisions. True, it allows absolutely stupid, self centered people an equal vote with informed people. So the issue is to make more people informed. Curiously, I seem to remember that the founding fathers were big on having an educated public that could make cogent decisions. BTW
quote: Note that several of the failed predictions were due to inadequate modeling of the ocean's role. Enjoy by our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
"Per capita", so this use by "individuals" of fossil fuels is getting increasingly unnecessary, and must be regulated? Increasingly dangerous to life on earth in general and human survival in particular. For that reason it needs to be curtailed.
A feed back system? Cars are more efficient with fuel than ever before, thanks to expensive government mandates, we have more wind turbines than ever before. Are only things like people's hobbies, and overindulgence causing this feed back system? Not much more efficient. I had a car in the 70’s that got 40 mpg. What we see now are bigger vehicles that use more energy, their efficiency compared to earlier vehicles of same weight doesn’t mean much when every one is buying bigger heavier vehicles. There are also increased use of energy for more and more appliances etc, and when we consider human population around the world, not just in the US this amounts to higher use of fossil fuels.
And because the politicians know they'd be voted out of office. There's a reason that specific proposals to "do something" about climate change are still a secret. Which is why democrats are running on climate change action ... as you pointed out. Can’t have it both ways.
"Get out of the way", and let government gobble up freedoms and money to do something that can't be measured? You're funny Government doing what most of the population wants to do, democratically.
Nothing is perfect, but free markets are BY FAR the best way to hold companies, big and small, accountable. Except that it has never worked.
Overwhelmed by facts, or scientific community projections? Both. If you look at the chart the data for 1950 is above the Millankovich cycle level, so it is a fact that it has already been overwhelmed. The future projections don’t get any better.
Yes it is, there's no way to scientifically document how political action will have any effect on climate change. Wrong. Levels are being measured constantly, and anything with a positive effect will show up. Btw
quote: Looks like the case keeps getting stronger, and you keep getting wronger. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : .by our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
Thugpreacha writes: Why is nobody doing anything? Seems to me that human nature is self-destructive. Humans are short sighted and selfish, not necessarily self destructive. Fossil fuels are cheap and easy to use, so we use them. It takes a lot of spending and infrastructure to switch, so we don't. We don't see any change in the climate or threat to our way of life in the very short term, so we don't worry about it. The 2008 housing crisis is a perfect example of how this flawed human attitude leads to disaster. There are several documentaries on the whole fiasco, but I can't think of the titles offhand. However, a google search should find them, and I think they are available on a few streaming services. If you want, watch those documentaries and try to understand the human psychology that was in play, and then apply that to climate change. The parallels are quite amazing, IMHO.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
marc9000 writes: A feed back system? Cars are more efficient with fuel than ever before, thanks to expensive government mandates, we have more wind turbines than ever before. Are only things like people's hobbies, and overindulgence causing this feed back system? There are 3rd world nations making the transition to industrialized nations, and their fossil fuel consumption has shot through the roof. As more and more Indians and Chinese get cars when they didn't have them before, guess what happens? Also, there are feedback systems that continue to release CO2 from ocean stores.
"Get out of the way", and let government gobble up freedoms and money to do something that can't be measured? You're funny. It is measurable.
Nothing is perfect, but free markets are BY FAR the best way to hold companies, big and small, accountable. Ummm, no. There is a reason we have labor laws, the FDA, the EPA, anti-trust laws, and banking regulations. It's because free markets can't police themselves, nor have they in the past. We already tried it your way, and it didn't work.
Overwhelmed by facts, or scientific community projections? By actual CO2.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024