Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Questions on climate change?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Questions on climate change? Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Questions on climate change? - 1/23/2014 1:56:03 PM   
Tkman117


Posts: 1353
Joined: 5/21/2012
Status: offline
For those of you who may have questions on climate change, this is a good place to go to to get your answers.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?f=taxonomy

If you still have questions that have not been answered by this page, I'd recommend contacting a local university professor on the subject. Because I'll admit I'm no genius, and while I don't want this thread to become a hot bed of further conflict, I just wanted to point people in a good direction if they actually want answers. If you just want to fight and argue, be my guest, but you can do it without me.

Good day everyone.
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/24/2014 10:54:24 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
Want answers? Based on what exactly?

http://www.principia-scientific.org/breaking-new-climate-data-rigging-scandal-rocks-us-government.html

A newly-uncovered and monumental calculating error in official US government climate data shows beyond doubt that climate scientists unjustifiably added on a whopping one degree of phantom warming to the official "raw" temperature record. Skeptics believe the discovery may trigger the biggest of all “climate con” scandals in Congress and sound the death knell on American climate policy.




_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to Tkman117)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/24/2014 11:14:20 AM   
servantforuse


Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline
TK needs to visit Wisconsin.

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/24/2014 11:20:19 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Certainly not anything the innumerate Steven Goddard has said, he has been debunked and apologized many times for his errors.   LOL, perhaps you can show us peer review, and you might dig up a bio on this fucking moron for us to laugh at.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/24/2014 12:08:40 PM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
I will know that the climate is changing when either coconut palms are growing in The Netherlands, or when polar bears become the dominant carnivore hereabouts.

< Message edited by Rule -- 1/24/2014 12:09:34 PM >


_____________________________

"I tend to pay attention when Rule speaks" - Aswad

"You are sweet, kind, and ever so smart, Rule. You ALWAYS stretch my mind and make me think further than I might have on my own" - Duskypearls

Si vis pacem, para bellum.

(in reply to Tkman117)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/24/2014 2:51:18 PM   
Estafania


Posts: 314
Joined: 8/3/2013
Status: offline
but do you love bunnies?

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/24/2014 3:37:27 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

TK needs to visit Wisconsin.

weather is not climate change...you should wear a hat....

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/24/2014 4:38:09 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
Oh dont be so English Lucy. This morning it was dry and tonight its raining, aint that enough evidence for you ?

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/24/2014 5:00:50 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
Im sure it was meant as sarcasm, or a joke:)

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/24/2014 5:04:47 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
PS I think quoting Principia Scientific is like using quoting rush, or annie, or sarah...
laughable

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/24/2014 6:05:14 PM   
LookieNoNookie


Posts: 12216
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

Want answers? Based on what exactly?

http://www.principia-scientific.org/breaking-new-climate-data-rigging-scandal-rocks-us-government.html

A newly-uncovered and monumental calculating error in official US government climate data shows beyond doubt that climate scientists unjustifiably added on a whopping one degree of phantom warming to the official "raw" temperature record. Skeptics believe the discovery may trigger the biggest of all “climate con” scandals in Congress and sound the death knell on American climate policy.





"“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.”

—Jim Cramer, CNBC"


LOL....love it.


Yachtie...isn't it true that we're contributing to horrific intrusions on the planet?

Why do we need to do that?

My brother (much smarter than I) is convinced that global "change" is not in fact occurring (as to "man made"), but....related to solar occurrences...historical occurrences....it's what's supposed to happen...(much bigger shit's happened before....long before FORD invented the automobile....) "what we do"...what the planet does.

Occasionally...."occasionally" meaning every few hundred thousand years (or less).

Isn't it prudent to not be careless?

I love your prose, I fucking love your arguments....I laugh my ass off when you cut someone to shreds {with facts} (and you do it well), but isn't it prudent to argue...."we shouldn't be fucking things up"?

Yeah?

************

(What the fuck do I know?)

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/25/2014 7:13:08 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

Want answers? Based on what exactly?

http://www.principia-scientific.org/breaking-new-climate-data-rigging-scandal-rocks-us-government.html

A newly-uncovered and monumental calculating error in official US government climate data shows beyond doubt that climate scientists unjustifiably added on a whopping one degree of phantom warming to the official "raw" temperature record. Skeptics believe the discovery may trigger the biggest of all “climate con” scandals in Congress and sound the death knell on American climate policy.





"“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.”

—Jim Cramer, CNBC"


LOL....love it.


Yachtie...isn't it true that we're contributing to horrific intrusions on the planet?

Why do we need to do that?

My brother (much smarter than I) is convinced that global "change" is not in fact occurring (as to "man made"), but....related to solar occurrences...historical occurrences....it's what's supposed to happen...(much bigger shit's happened before....long before FORD invented the automobile....) "what we do"...what the planet does.

Occasionally...."occasionally" meaning every few hundred thousand years (or less).

Isn't it prudent to not be careless?

I love your prose, I fucking love your arguments....I laugh my ass off when you cut someone to shreds {with facts} (and you do it well), but isn't it prudent to argue...."we shouldn't be fucking things up"?

Yeah?

************

(What the fuck do I know?)



"We shouldn't be fucking things up."


We, as in ~the Corporate sense?
We, as in ~Governmental?
We, as in ~We, having our [political / social / ???] agenda?
We, as in ~We who reap a privilege, personal benefit, or social standing?

Or do you mean We, the poor powerless tax-paying schmucks on the street who reap no privilege, personal benefit, or social standing with (or within) those operating with an agenda, either political, social, or some other quasi-corrupt bullshit, receiving some form of governmental largess from Lobbying or Friends in High Places, all tied one way or another to Corporatism and their subsequent benefits?

Who is the We that you refer to? Are they the same ones people clamor for to fix it?













_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to LookieNoNookie)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/25/2014 7:25:28 AM   
Tkman117


Posts: 1353
Joined: 5/21/2012
Status: offline
My OP doesn't so much provide answers to questions as much as it does clarify the lies and misconceptions that fill your head. If you ever want to be proven wrong with actual science, go there. But then again right wingers have no desire to understand the world around them, they just cover their eyes and ears and pretend it doesn't exist while parroting people who are doing the exact same thing to make them look as though they are intelligent.

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/25/2014 8:00:56 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117

My OP doesn't so much provide answers to questions as much as it does clarify the lies and misconceptions that fill your head. If you ever want to be proven wrong with actual science, go there. But then again right wingers have no desire to understand the world around them, they just cover their eyes and ears and pretend it doesn't exist while parroting people who are doing the exact same thing to make them look as though they are intelligent.



"I'll admit I'm no genius, ... I just wanted to point people in a good direction if they actually want answers." - TKman

So why should anyone accept that your "good direction," your pointed to answers, clarifications, are actually that and not based on faulty X or Y? Your foundational assumption is that your head is not the one filed with lies and misconceptions. Yours is a strawman, further drawing cover as you point at right wingers and again making assumption you to be correct.

I will agree on one point. You are no genius.

_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to Tkman117)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/25/2014 8:07:03 AM   
Tkman117


Posts: 1353
Joined: 5/21/2012
Status: offline
quote:


So why should anyone accept that your "good direction," your pointed to answers, clarifications, are actually that and not based on faulty X or Y?



I could honestly ask you so the same question.

Because I'd like to know, what are your issues with climate change? List em off and I bet you I can find the answers on that website no problem.

< Message edited by Tkman117 -- 1/25/2014 8:09:22 AM >

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/25/2014 8:36:26 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117
For those of you who may have questions on climate change, this is a good place to go to to get your answers.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?f=taxonomy

If you still have questions that have not been answered by this page, I'd recommend contacting a local university professor on the subject. Because I'll admit I'm no genius, and while I don't want this thread to become a hot bed of further conflict, I just wanted to point people in a good direction if they actually want answers. If you just want to fight and argue, be my guest, but you can do it without me.

Good day everyone.


Modern day conservatives are like Christian conservatives back in the '80s and '90s. Those conservatives did anything and everything to disprove the Theory of Evolution. Paying scientists to lend their 'credibility' and publish 'research' to show that Creationism was not only correct, but the Theory of Evolution was wrong. Yet, when actual scientist sat down, ran the same experiments, they can up with totally different results. So being scientists, they ran the same experiments over and over again. An each time, obtaining the same results they got the first time. So they asked those Christian conservatives to walk them through the whole experiment from start to finish. The problem was, the Christian conservatives threw out any and all evidence that would contradict the Holy Bible (which to them was 100% factual). That evidence was removed and the remainder was used in the conclusion. Scientists were not sure whether to laugh in the Christian conservative's faces, or give a blistering degree of harsh criticism. In the end, they did both. To this day, Christian Conservative's do not even have 1/1,000,000 the evidence supporting their view on Creationism as what is known on the Theory of Evolution. Still, scientists, unlike Christian conservatives, acknowledge that while Creationism could be true, the evidence supporting it is staggering low and flimsy.

Modern day conservatives view the Theory of Climate Change in much of the same way; that their viewpoint trumps the gigantic mountain of evidence collected so far that states otherwise. Even in the face of the facts and evidence, the Modern day conservative will still, religiously I might add, stick to their viewpoint. To a conservative, science is seen as an evil tool of mankind. Used in ways they can not understand, most because they never sat down in a real science class and taught what science is from a real science teacher/instructor. Nor put through different lab experiments. Whether in an actual lab or field work.

In both cases, both groups of conservatives (some Christian conservatives are also Modern day conservatives) have benefited from the Theory of Evolution. And as time passes, will benefit from the knowledge gain through science on the Theory of Climate Change. Regardless, both groups will be against science, since its easier to be ignorant and a fool, than sit down and learn to be something else.

Further, its the view that either theory is a belief like a religion. Conservatives in both cases, approach science like politics: zero sum. Zero sum means one side has to win and the other lose. Like a football game. Yet, if you asked if I believe in either theory, I would say 'no'. I would however go on to state: "both theories present an indepth understanding into the nature of reality that benefits mankind in the long run. A theory is the highest level of scientific concept, supported by much in the way of evidence collected so far. A theory is stated as the simplest way of understanding all the data so far collected." Long answer, right? Yet, that is the true difference between conservatives and scientists. The first group can only manage simple concepts and answers; the second group is nor fearful of big words, ideas, concepts, or thoughts. It should not be a surprise given that knwledge, why many scientists are also liberal in their political viewpoint.

I wonder what the next scientific theory will be argued by conservatives in the future. I expect, given data and observation of the previous two scientific theories, the new one will have a new crop of conservatives assaulting it with mindless rants and questionable if not discredited 'scientists'. Further, based on what has been observed and studied by scientists, those future conservatives will benefit directly and indirectly from the knowledge learn, yet all the while denying they do.

(in reply to Tkman117)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/25/2014 8:52:17 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117
My OP doesn't so much provide answers to questions as much as it does clarify the lies and misconceptions that fill your head. If you ever want to be proven wrong with actual science, go there. But then again right wingers have no desire to understand the world around them, they just cover their eyes and ears and pretend it doesn't exist while parroting people who are doing the exact same thing to make them look as though they are intelligent.

"I'll admit I'm no genius, ... I just wanted to point people in a good direction if they actually want answers." - TKman

So why should anyone accept that your "good direction," your pointed to answers, clarifications, are actually that and not based on faulty X or Y? Your foundational assumption is that your head is not the one filed with lies and misconceptions. Yours is a strawman, further drawing cover as you point at right wingers and again making assumption you to be correct.

I will agree on one point. You are no genius.


An yet, is more honest in perspective then you are Yachtie. Lets think about this for a few moments. Your 'argument' is that the knowledge gained through the Theory of Climate Change has not been used for your own personal benefit. Yet, it has. Since the theory was developed over time from many different scientific disciplines that also help create the ways of producing energy and creating systems that use it (like the computer you used for your posts for example). Its not a scientist's job to produce objects that make use of the science learn (although they do help out). No, that usually falls into the realm of another technical discipline: Engineers. There are nuclear scientists, and nuclear engineers. Generally speaking both have a good depth of knowledge on the other's discipline. A better understanding of how climate exists and changes given a variety of forces, can help engineers develop tools and equipment. Those sort of 'R&D' projects, while expensive, can sometimes give revolutionary changes to mankind. How important was developing the CPU for computers? Or toilets for large cities? Or battling diseases with better drug formulas?

Your attacking something that you benefit from. Now how honest is that? How intelligent? How wise?

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/25/2014 9:18:10 AM   
Tkman117


Posts: 1353
Joined: 5/21/2012
Status: offline
Thanks Joe,

Anyways, the website listed examines most if not all misconceptions addressed by deniers. And users who hear new denier arguments are able to submit them to be refuted and disproven. So its a good place to go if you have misconceptions about climate change.

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/25/2014 10:34:29 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117
My OP doesn't so much provide answers to questions as much as it does clarify the lies and misconceptions that fill your head. If you ever want to be proven wrong with actual science, go there. But then again right wingers have no desire to understand the world around them, they just cover their eyes and ears and pretend it doesn't exist while parroting people who are doing the exact same thing to make them look as though they are intelligent.

"I'll admit I'm no genius, ... I just wanted to point people in a good direction if they actually want answers." - TKman

So why should anyone accept that your "good direction," your pointed to answers, clarifications, are actually that and not based on faulty X or Y? Your foundational assumption is that your head is not the one filed with lies and misconceptions. Yours is a strawman, further drawing cover as you point at right wingers and again making assumption you to be correct.

I will agree on one point. You are no genius.


An yet, is more honest in perspective then you are Yachtie. Lets think about this for a few moments.

Yes, why don't you?

Your 'argument' is that the knowledge gained through the Theory of Climate Change has not been used for your own personal benefit.

It's not knowledge gained that I referred to in my othet post above. That aside, that you use a computer with Windows shall not get you an audience with, say, Bill Gates, who has "privilege, personal benefit, or social standing with (or within) those operating with an agenda, either political, social, or some other quasi-corrupt bullshit, receiving some form of governmental largess from Lobbying or Friends in High Places, all tied one way or another to Corporatism and their subsequent benefits"

Yet, it has. Since the theory was developed over time from many different scientific disciplines that also help create the ways of producing energy and creating systems that use it (like the computer you used for your posts for example).

And just how do other scientific disciplines directly correlate to within 'the Theory of Climate Change'? Use of a computer may have value but the computer itself is not 'within the theory' itself. Why do you find need to appeal to irrelevancies?

Its not a scientist's job to produce objects that make use of the science learn (although they do help out). No, that usually falls into the realm of another technical discipline: Engineers. There are nuclear scientists, and nuclear engineers. Generally speaking both have a good depth of knowledge on the other's discipline. A better understanding of how climate exists and changes given a variety of forces, can help engineers develop tools and equipment.

Wonderful. Science and associated scientific (or technical if you prefer) disciplines can achieve more development to fix what science and associated disciplines developed in the first place. Such developments being those which have allowed man's fucking it all up. Science and associated disciplines created CFCs, nuclear energy and associated waste disposal problems, engines of all sorts spewing their gasses about the planet, lead based paints, etc. AGW, or ACC if you so choose, is the result of, dare I say, applied science.

You do not make any case 'for' science. Yours is one of damnation.


Those sort of 'R&D' projects, while expensive, can sometimes give revolutionary changes to mankind. How important was developing the CPU for computers? Or toilets for large cities? Or battling diseases with better drug formulas?

Given the hysteria over "climate change," what you cite there, R&D giving "revolutionary changes?" How's your science driven climate change looking now? Revolutionary, isn't it... science worshiper.

Your attacking something that you benefit from. Now how honest is that? How intelligent? How wise?


All in all..... I say to you this.....





< Message edited by Yachtie -- 1/25/2014 11:03:58 AM >


_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Questions on climate change? - 1/25/2014 10:48:43 AM   
LookieNoNookie


Posts: 12216
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

Want answers? Based on what exactly?

http://www.principia-scientific.org/breaking-new-climate-data-rigging-scandal-rocks-us-government.html

A newly-uncovered and monumental calculating error in official US government climate data shows beyond doubt that climate scientists unjustifiably added on a whopping one degree of phantom warming to the official "raw" temperature record. Skeptics believe the discovery may trigger the biggest of all “climate con” scandals in Congress and sound the death knell on American climate policy.





"“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.”

—Jim Cramer, CNBC"


LOL....love it.


Yachtie...isn't it true that we're contributing to horrific intrusions on the planet?

Why do we need to do that?

My brother (much smarter than I) is convinced that global "change" is not in fact occurring (as to "man made"), but....related to solar occurrences...historical occurrences....it's what's supposed to happen...(much bigger shit's happened before....long before FORD invented the automobile....) "what we do"...what the planet does.

Occasionally...."occasionally" meaning every few hundred thousand years (or less).

Isn't it prudent to not be careless?

I love your prose, I fucking love your arguments....I laugh my ass off when you cut someone to shreds {with facts} (and you do it well), but isn't it prudent to argue...."we shouldn't be fucking things up"?

Yeah?

************

(What the fuck do I know?)



"We shouldn't be fucking things up."


We, as in ~the Corporate sense?
We, as in ~Governmental?
We, as in ~We, having our [political / social / ???] agenda?
We, as in ~We who reap a privilege, personal benefit, or social standing?

Or do you mean We, the poor powerless tax-paying schmucks on the street who reap no privilege, personal benefit, or social standing with (or within) those operating with an agenda, either political, social, or some other quasi-corrupt bullshit, receiving some form of governmental largess from Lobbying or Friends in High Places, all tied one way or another to Corporatism and their subsequent benefits?

Who is the We that you refer to? Are they the same ones people clamor for to fix it?














I think I was thinking of the "Royal we" (I just love that hand gesture wave they do)

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Questions on climate change? Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109