Climate change legit after all! Who woulda thunk it?

[HoughMade]

The only constant is change. It is a truism that the climate is, will and always has changed. Thinking that we know how the varied activities of man affect this in any predictable manner given the myriad of natural variables....a fool's errand with current technology.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Congress: Obama Fired Scientist to Advance ?Climate? Agenda

 

[Lex Concord]

I don't see anyone being attacked.
I just see disagreement.

Maybe he was having a hard time resisting the urge to bust into an ad hominem

Maybe he predicted future behavior in the thread by using the same algorithms used to predict [STRIKE]global warming[/STRIKE] climate change

 

[oldpink]

All this changing terminology for the specific phenomenon of this "settled science" looks quite a lot like moving the goalposts.
Anyone who has even a basic knowledge of paleontological/geological history knows that the story of Earth's climate fits an old ironic aphorism: "The more things change, the more they remain the same."

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Because he is the supposed leading expert on climate change. If he doesn't see the need to stop wasting energy on a personal level, he must not really think that climate change is man-made. You don't see many oncologists who smoke.

Buy carbon credits. Then you can be as wasteful as you want!

 

[LPMan59]

Key word: detectable.

Again, humans are producing 700 times as much as the volcanoes. It's difficult to blame the volcanoes for any ill effects. If I were to drink four thermometers, I don't think Hoosierdoc would be able to detect the mercury poisoning from the salmon I have for dinner every few months. He'd find the mercury poisoning, and he'd blame the biggest source of mercury in my body rather than the one that barely contributes.

The point is made later in the paragraph you quoted.

so what you're saying is that to curb the co2, we should kill the poor? The Dead Kennedys win again!

 

[Robert Richardson]

Ever hear of the " Ice Age " ? The earth has been warming for millions of years.

 

[hoosierdoc]

Key word: detectable.

Again, humans are producing 700 times as much as the volcanoes. It's difficult to blame the volcanoes for any ill effects. If I were to drink four thermometers, I don't think Hoosierdoc would be able to detect the mercury poisoning from the salmon I have for dinner every few months. He'd find the mercury poisoning, and he'd blame the biggest source of mercury in my body rather than the one that barely contributes.

The point is made later in the paragraph you quoted.

Drinking elemental Mercury is the safest thing to do with it. Just don't inhale it. (I don't recommend eating it). It's not absorbed at all.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1175560-overview#a3

 

[printcraft]

Well, this has all been good and fun, but I can see now where many of the members of this community want to take the thread. And as I already said above:

Memes, political cartoons, and comedians FTW!

I will say, though, that many here should examine themselves in light of this conversation. The INGO community frequently complains that the political left doesn't actually use facts but rather feelings and ad hominem attacks as their M.O. This thread is quickly turning that direction, and I have no expectation that it can be salvaged.

Out of respect for the moderators and the INGO community, I'm going to bow out of this one. I'm sure that some will try to goad me into reentering, but I will not. So do not take my silence on the topic as an admission of defeat. Instead, it's just and admission that the conversation won't be productive.

I'll see everyone later in some firearm-related thread.

[video=youtube;fSYmb_IkHU0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSYmb_IkHU0[/video]

A contrary point of view is not an attack....... to most reasonable people.......

 

[miguel]

All stores should turn off their lights (including signage) when they are not open.

That will save more in a day than my LED bulbs will save in a year.

 

[HoughMade]

All stores should turn off their lights (including signage) when they are not open.

That will save more in a day than my LED bulbs will save in a year.

Energy yes- lost stock...no.

 

[actaeon277]

Energy yes- lost stock...no.

Which would cost more energy to make new stock, and ship it.

 

[oldpink]

Energy yes- lost stock...no.

Maybe we could agree that many of the interior lights could be turned off and leave it to a proper security system to monitor the inside and leave it to outdoor lighting to discourage attacks on the perimeter.

 

[AtTheMurph]

Climate change is real. Global average temperatures are rising.

Facts aren't political.

Actually global average temperatures are not rising. They aren't falling either. At least according to the best measurement devices we have to measure such things - satellites.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Would you prefer people not use facts?

I'd prefer to see agreement based on raw data and genuine peer review, not fudged data and manipulated peer reviews. "Climate Scientists" have been caught modifying data, conspiring to freeze out unfavorable peer reviewers of their data, and conspiring to cover all of that up. Now we hear that original raw historical data has been destroyed and all we have is doctored data. So upon what "facts" do you think we might be able to agree?

And, since NONE of the predicted catastrophic effects of "Global Warming" (or "Global Cooling circa 1975) have eventuated in the projected timeframes and all such future catastrophic effects are now projected well into the future, why should any serious person put any credence into them? "Science" is supposed to be based on data - repeatable experimential or observable data - and theories are supposed to be derived from observations and/or experimentation. Theories are NOT supposed to be formulated, then backed up with cherry-picked or fudged data.

 

[oldpink]

I'd prefer to see agreement based on raw data and genuine peer review, not fudged data and manipulated peer reviews. "Climate Scientists" have been caught modifying data, conspiring to freeze out unfavorable peer reviewers of their data, and conspiring to cover all of that up. Now we hear that original raw historical data has been destroyed and all we have is doctored data. So upon what "facts" do you think we might be able to agree?

And, since NONE of the predicted catastrophic effects of "Global Warming" (or "Global Cooling circa 1975) have eventuated in the projected timeframes and all such future catastrophic effects are now projected well into the future, why should any serious person put any credence into them? "Science" is supposed to be based on data - repeatable experimential or observable data - and theories are supposed to be derived from observations and/or experimentation. Theories are NOT supposed to be formulated, then backed up with cherry-picked or fudged data.

East Anglia University's "Climategate" was but one example of naked duplicity exposed, and then only because of hackers having exposed it.
HRC voters, take note.
The next time anyone tells you something is "settled science" because a "consensus" has been reached, alarm bells should ring, especially on something so complex and fraught with invested interests that motivate deliberate distortions of what data there is.

 

[Mgderf]

[video]https://youtu.be/h60KFYocdcQ[/video]
Oh Al Gore...

But, he's SUPER cereal!
EXCELSIOR!

 

[zippy23]

Climate change is real. Global average temperatures are rising.

Facts aren't political.

1 out of 3 of what you posted is correct. Even NASA admits no warming for 17 years. Facts arent political of course, so the left will use lies to promote their agenda. When your thermometers are in parking lots and airport runways, you dont have "facts", you have a statistic used for an agenda. When the principal agency says their computer models are wrong and must rework their CO2 models, then you have a complete meltdown of the entire notion of global "whatever you want to call it this decade" and can either admit you actually dont know and are wrong, and continue your garbage to get your funding. East Anglia fraud????? The FACTS are that global cooling, global warming, and climate change are based on computer models from political "scientists" who tolerate zero criticism or anyone coming in and proving them wrong. LITERALLY EVERY PREDICTION over the past 20 years is wrong......yet magically climate change is still real??? Seal levels, sea ice, hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, the list goes on forever on how wrong every single on of these climate scientists have been. Yet its gospel to the left and the uneducated. My final point is the greatest(at least to me). What is the solution to climate change?? INCREASE TAXES. That alone is the single greatest red flag to the hoax that global warming, sorry climate change, is. If the solution is to tax americans more, and let every other country(who pollutes far more than we do) do whatever they want, then you KNOW its a hoax. Sorry, but driving an electric car is a disaster. They tell you zero emissions right??? NOPE, and the batteries cant be recycled, they sit in landfills and contaminate them. Another FACT that screws the entire premise of man made global warming. When you actually look at the facts, you cant actually believe in it.

 

[HubertGummer]

^^^that's why they stopped calling it global warming in favor of climate change.

The earth has been here for how many billions of billions of years and we have weather data from the past 150 or so years. Then the "experts" try to tell us what is happening now isn't normal. We don't know what's normal. We don't have enough data to say for sure what is a normal warming/cooling cycle for this earth.

 

[rhino]

My IGNORE list continues to grow! Woo-hoo!

The gauge indicates 154 units and rising.