|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Climate Change Denier comes in from the cold: SCIENCE!!! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Well I guess the fact that it is called the wave model of light might clue you in to the fact that it deals with light as a wave. The fact that it is the waves that propagate - like the radiation - might be a further clue. So should the fact that the radiation behaves like a wave. Faraday proposed the idea, Maxwell developed it and Herz confirmed it experimentally. To be perfectly honest, don't you think you might be doing the paper a disservice by trying to defend it without understanding it? I might also ask, what makes you think that the electromagnetic field, and the disturbances in it, cannot exist in empty space? Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Have you even read the abstracts of the papers. Referring, for instance, to experimental refutations of Lu's claims, for instance, would seem to be a substantive point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Are you actually sure that an increase of only 0.045% of solar radiation directly reaching the surface rather than being caught in the upper atmosphere is sufficient ?
Even assuming that the figures are correct, surely some of that energy caught by the ozone layer would have radiated downwards as heat. And you will pardon me questioning the accuracy of figures when you use units of watts per second, which is rather obviously wrong. Perhaps, if you quote the correct figures - with the correct units, a comparison could be made
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Bringing attention to a very real danger is important. Going hysterical just because it contradicts the ideology of the American far-right is hardly sensible or productive.
quote: So people who dare to contract the falsehoods of your ideology should be labelled insane and locked up. Your Stalinist tendencies are showing again.
quote: The Left is not responsible for your actions. If you destroy freedom of the press because newspapers tell truths you want suppressed that is you doing it, it the Left. If you destroy the Constitution because the Left dare to point out what it says and even go to Court to try and enforce it, that is you doing it, not the Left. And if you take action against these young people for drawing attention to reality that will be you doing it, too.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Then stop telling such evil lies. I make no apologies for the truth.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
You expect me to stop telling the truth because you’ll lie about me?
Don’t be silly. Lying isn’t the answer to everything. You should have learned that by now.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3
|
quote: 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Yes, you were foolishly wrong to think they were related.
quote: It’s your claim, so the motives for making it would be yours.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3
|
quote: I didn’t imply any such thing. I pointed that the restrictions on wood-burning stoves were about particulate emissions. After you ignorantly rambled about heat emissions and complained that other people didn’t care about the science. I didn’t mention global warming at all. Obviously you thought that the restrictions on wood burning stoves were supposedly about global warming. And you were ignorant and wrong.
quote: And what has that to do with your scientific ignorance?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3
|
quote: Again we see your totalitarian impulses. The Tenth Amendment, unfortunately for you, is about the rights of the States and limits on the Federal Government. It does not empower the Federal Government to dictate what scientists study, nor the conclusions they reach. (Message 667)
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people quote: By which you mean that science finds truths you want suppressed. Totalitarian for sure. Edited by PaulK, : Added reference to the message where Marc claims that the 10th Amendment enables political control of science
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3
|
Surprise, surprise when I look at the link, Marc is quote mining again.
quote: Marc doesn’t say that the first method is utterly rejected, as to the second - the real point of the Amendment is to protect against the tyranny of the majority:
By what means is this object attainable? Evidently by one of two only. Either the existence of the same passion or interest in a majority at the same time must be prevented, or the majority, having such coexistent passion or interest, must be rendered, by their number and local situation, unable to concert and carry into effect schemes of oppression Political control of science would be a scheme of oppression, exactly what Federalist Paper 10 is against.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: So? It doesn’t change the fact that you hadn’t bothered to find out the relevant science - and accused others of not caring about the science based on your own ignorance.
quote: Your ignorance isn’t anybody else’s fault. Inventing ridiculous conspiracy theories is hardly going to help cover up your hypocrisy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: That your assertion was completely wrong? That’s fortunate for you?
quote: It doesn’t forbid the scientific community from finding out truths you want suppressed, which is the real point. In fact it doesn’t forbid the scientific community from doing anything, because they aren’t the Federal Government.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Let us correct the silly misrepresentation. So the government is MORE LIMITED if we don’t rewrite the Constitution to let the Federal Government take political control of any faction it likes. Controlling everything they say or do. Which is where you were going with your dishonest quote-mine of Federalist Papers 10 Scientists, of course do not make the decisions on policy. That is a political role and always has been. So you don’t have anything to complain about there, or is there any by-passing of the Constitution. As for loss of freedom, the totalitarian control you propose is a massive loss of freedom and a massive increase in Government power. Obviously you don’t object to either. What you do object to is people having freedoms you don’t like. Like the freedom to find out that your creationist beliefs are false and say so.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Climate Change may Wreck Economy (Ars Technica)
A report from the Commodities Future Trading Commission indicates the climate change is already affecting markets.
Regulators "must recognize that climate change poses serious emerging risks to the US financial system, and they should move urgently and decisively to measure, understand, and address these risks." The report, called "Managing Climate Risk in the US Financial System," was written by a group of 35 advisors from major banks such as Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan Chase, environmental groups such as The Nature Conservancy and Ceres, energy firms such as BP and ConocoPhillips, several investment firms, and experts from several universities. They conclude that the markets are failing to take climate change into account, even though the effects are already causing problems. They argue that it will take international action to control the problem and urge that the US rejoin the Paris Agreement. With the Trump administration taking the opposite tack, will the voices of sanity speak up? Or will the Republicans continue their slavish devotion to Trump?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024