|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1404 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Climate Change Denier comes in from the cold: SCIENCE!!! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
Most grants are from the government, such as the National Science Foundation, EPA, NOAA, and so forth. All taxpayer money.
These agencies are interested in knowing what the climate is doing, be it warming or cooling. They have no financial or political interest in the answer, only the accuracy of the answer. They don't have a financial interest in receiving those grants?
No, it isn't. It is a factual subject. The direction the climate is taking and what is causing it are questions of science and fact, not politics. Yes, the direction it's taking and what is causing it are science and fact. But that's only a very small part of the discussion, the biggest part of the discussion is the uneven placing of the blame on only some humans, and what a few humans in government can do about it. That's all politics, and the proof is how stark the political divide is on it. As I pointed out earlier, the population of the earth has gone from 1 billion to 8 billion in only a little over 200 years. It only makes sense that fossil fuel use has gone up significantly because the human race in general had found that fossil fuels have done the most efficient job of keeping that many new people fed and clothed. So why all the finger pointing by climate change alarmists? Why is the phrase "how dare you" the thing that causes climate change alarmists to idolize a foreign child?
If the other political party didn't try to cover up and ignore the facts then it wouldn't be politically charged. Since when did following the evidence become a partisan issue? There's no evidence that it's some humans fault more than others, and there's no evidence that ANYTHING humans can do will reverse it one iota.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
People in Denmark and Sweden seem pretty happy. Where do you get your information from? Page not found | The Fund for American Studies
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
It’s pretty clear that you are only interested in objecting to the ban and not at all in the science. The heat is not the issue, it’s the particulates in the wood smoke. And particulates in wood smoke have what to do with climate change? Let me guess, absolutely nothing? That's just a useful little side claim to justify less freedom and more government?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
The greenhouse effect isn't made up. It's been a part of science for 150 years. Svante Arrhenius did the first calculations for the impact of carbon dioxide on global temps clear back in the 1890's. This is driven by science, not political gain. But some people today demand political action against a neighbor or company that's "polluting", but they have to do more than cite science and calculations - they need to show evidence of pollution that is specifically provable as measured by the five human senses. If they can't, then there are political problems.
Wood burning bans in my area kick in based on air quality, especially during winter inversions. I think you are getting your wires crossed. What they are "based" on isn't set in stone and unchangeable, new political power can get them increased to invasive levels.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
marc9000 writes: I have a problem with the ABRUPT extension into politics, which says that an increase in the size and scope of government can fix it. That's a flat out lie. You are trying to spread doubt about the existence of human caused climate change. Where did I use the word "existence"? It's actually a flat out lie that there's one scintilla of evidence that says government action can reverse climate change.
People in the deeply socialist countries of Denmark and Sweden are some of the freest people on the planet. There's your flat out lie. Sweden isn't socialist. Just a moment...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
Here's a partial list of products made from fossil fuels;
quote: Michael Bloomberg has 11 residences, and quite a fleet of private jets and helicopters - one of his helicopters burns 72 gallons of fuel per hour. Yet he points fingers at all us peasants and is planning to tell us what we're going to cut back on to combat climate change.
Phat writes: I am beginning to think that this whole global warming thing is even more serious than previously thought and will lead to competition and even conflict in the world. The only thing serious about it is the way it's been made into a political weapon against liberty. We're safe for now, Bloomberg and Sanders are nowhere near the presidency. But as more and more nave young people vote based on emotion rather than history and human nature, there could be more conflict than the political left is bargaining for, and it will be 100% their own fault.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
are you really so stupid as to think pollution isn't important until it is at levels detectable by human senses? I never said it wasn't "important", I'm saying that it can't be politically acted upon only on the word of a "faction"; Federalist Papers No. 10 (1787) - Bill of Rights Institute
quote: The scientific community's effects are constitutionally required to be controlled by a political process. The scientific community is very mischievous these days, considering it's largely controlled by atheism and one political party.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
marc9000 writes: And particulates in wood smoke have what to do with climate change? Let me guess, absolutely nothing? Yes, you were foolishly wrong to think they were related. I just pointed out that they were not related, after you implied that they were. I do love this place, TDR (Trump Derangement Syndrome) is getting more contagious here than coronavirus in Washington state.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
marc9000 writes: But some people today demand political action against a neighbor or company that's "polluting" Yes, of course. People have always done that. Yes and you chopped my sentence in half. Lets look at the entire sentence, you know, the one that caused others here to fly into a rage;
marc9000 writes: But some people today demand political action against a neighbor or company that's "polluting", but they have to do more than cite science and calculations - they need to show evidence of pollution that is specifically provable as measured by the five human senses. If they can't, then there are political problems. Now lets try again;
Yes, of course. People have always done that. But they haven't done it by claiming that the pollution is completely invisible and undetectable by any human senses, that they only know it because a faction's precision instruments tell them that. They have seldom, if ever done that in the past, but there are new political pushes by today's far political left that seeks to circumvent the constitution by allowing the scientific community faction make political demands.
Carbon emissions are crap we've been throwing into the atmosphere for generations, but only recently realized the consequences of doing it. It's the same as other garbage. We have to deal with it: Flush it, take it to the curb or dump, hire a collection service, and easiest of all - not make so much of it. Because we haven't disposed of CO2 properly, it's making problems for the entire planet; ourselves and our neighbors included. That is the claim of a faction, and, so far, a minority of the population. Other percentages of the population suspect that problems, much more serious than CO2 disposal, (such as economic crashes, including mass starvation and widespread humans freezing to death) could occur if we allow a faction and a minority to destroy human rights, some of them unalienable rights.
Yes, it infringes on our neighbor's liberty if we demand he use a toilet instead of our yards. I suppose it's kind of fun to relieve yourself outdoors and it saves a little on the water bill. But even if his yard is downwind, would you defend his "liberty" from "political action"? If the "downwind" part is detectable by human senses, then no, not necessarily. But if you'll refer to the list in Message 650, down at about the 75th item, yup, there it is, toilet seats!!!!! Looks like people in Rhode Island won't have much choice but to use their yard in 2030, when their governors command takes effect. An unanticipated problem that only Republicans can foresee?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
marc9000 writes: Yes, the direction it's taking and what is causing it are science and fact. But that's only a very small part of the discussion, the biggest part of the discussion is the uneven placing of the blame on only some humans, and what a few humans in government can do about it. That's flat out false. You are pushing propaganda that tries to argue it isn't happening at all. The straw man you built is false, but what I said is not. Questioning the placing of blame, and what humans can do to control the weather and ocean levels, is different than claiming something isn't happening.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
Great. Then let's take those Swedish policies and enact them in the US. I think a better idea would be to let those who love Swedish policies to move there, and leave the U.S. system like it is. You've said that Swedish people are happy, but there are a lot of happy people in the U.S. too.
Narry a conservative should have a problem with it since they aren't socialist policies, right? No, not if they aren't constitutional. Sweden and the U.S. both have some socialist tendencies, each has some more than the other. Sweden doesn't have many government programs that the U.S. has, and like many other countries around the world, Sweden benefits from the protection of the U.S. military, without having to pay a dime for it, unlike U.S. taxpayers. Comparing the U.S. to other countries is often an apples to oranges comparison.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
marc9000 writes: Here's a partial list of products made from fossil fuels; And which of them cannot be made from other sources that are not fossil fuels? None. From raw materials to consumers hands, there is nothing on that list that isn't completely dependent on fossil fuels in multiple ways. There is always hydraulics involved in digging in the ground, in making steel, in paving roads and making tires. Everything there will at some point be transported by truck. A lot of steps involved in making those things involves air travel, there is currently nothing on the horizon to power air travel other than fossil fuels. I see nothing in the news that says we're on the brink of being able to dig without hydraulics, to make tires for electric cars and trucks without fossil fuels, as only two examples. But I'm always willing to learn, can you describe, or link me to, examples of how this will be done, whether economically feasible or not, by 2030? Or is the "Green New Deal" nothing but hot air intended only to appeal to people who have little idea of how the real world actually works?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
when one "faction" is science what is the other "faction"? What other faction? I never claimed there was one. If you're referring to the opposition to the scientific faction, that's not a faction, that's a free people, armed with constitutional rights, and unalienable rights.
which part of the constitution governs science? The 10th amendment. Science isn't specifically referred to in the constitution, so it's subject to the political process, just like everything else that isn't referred to in the constitution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
I remember when I first started hearing that Americans critical of their own country should leave the country and live in another. The problem is BORDERS ARE NOT OPEN. But from a human rights and wants point of view, it would make sense to allow the cards in the deck to reshuffle. That is people should be able to move freely so everybody can be comfortable and live harmoniously. There are processes that allow Americans to move to other countries, many countries welcome Americans because Americans often contribute positively to countries that they move to. (as one example, it's a lot easier to travel FROM the U.S. TO Canada, than to come from Canada to the U.S.) Those processes do have to be complex and stringent however, the coronavirus should make that obvious.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
if you're going to claim that science is a faction it only makes sense that those that oppose it are a faction of their own. It does? So if you oppose president Trump, you HAVE to be a president too?
as the saying goes your right to swing your arm ends at the tip of my nose. Yes it's a liberal saying, one not found in the constitution. Just where the tip of one's nose is can be too broadly defined. You can claim that the tip of your nose is where my free speech is. It is not.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024