You're not that interested, but surely you know what the tenets of the 'Climate Delusion' are, else you risk buying into it inadvertently. Sounds as if you're the right person to ask, then--what does this 'Climate Delusion' consist of, that I may at least be aware of its errors.
Global Climate Change Science News
- L'Emmerdeur
- Posts: 5712
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
- About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
- Contact:
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
- Hermit
- Posts: 25806
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
- About me: Cantankerous grump
- Location: Ignore lithpt
- Contact:
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
It's how the sources our member from Yellowknife consults pronounce the fellow's name, so the spelling's got to be right.Seabass wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:20 amCunt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 4:54 amLooks like I should ignore anything you say, since you seem to think scientists are in agreement about...something.
Did you make it to Italy for the climate conference? Or are you just another old man posting his thoughts about the big issues on a message board?
The facts about climate change are not agreed-upon, as is shown by Dr. Bell winning his recent case. But you wouldn't like to hear it, because you know that all 'real' scientists agree (even though they don't agree on much of anything)Proposed actions are by definition politicised, the facts about climate change itself are not. I've already made it clear that there is a lot of room for debate on exactly how humanity should proceed, but any plan must be grounded in the clear and unequivocal scientific consensus.Cunt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 4:55 amDid you investigate Dr. Bell's work? Or dismiss it because it doesn't agree with your firmly held beliefs?pErvinalia wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 4:32 am
The science of atmospheric physics. The science that backs the IPCC reports.
As for Dr. Tim Ball winning the libel case brought against him, the judge threw it out on the grounds that Ball's article lacked “a sufficient air of credibility to make them believable and therefore potentially defamatory.” The case had no bearing on climate research as such.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
As to some references to denialists above. I think without fully understanding the science you can fully understand this -
In over 30 years the science hasn't changed. At its most basic - CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) absorbs and re-emits infrared photons, thus trapping them for longer in the atmosphere helping to keep it warm. More CO2 traps more heat. Humans are pumping an unprecedented amount of CO2 into the atmosphere.
This is what I was taught in school, it is still what's taught.
On the other hand those who are trying to claim it's not happening haven't been able to get their story straight.
The planet's not warming, it's a global conspiracy theory. It is warming but it's not caused by humans (it's the Sun, volcanoes, radiation from far off supernovae, it's God). The planet is warming but it will only warm a little (global luke-warming) (one group of fossil funded scientists said the planets not designed to get much hotter - designed by who?). The planet's warming but there's nothing we can do about it. CO2 is good for the environment as more trees and plants will grow!
So to me, if I didn't have much of an understanding of the science, I would look at which side has a consistent story and which side doesn't seem to be able to get their story straight and deduce that way.
You can also do this with any science vs pseudoscience topic. Do proponents of evolution have a straighter story than those who are against? Do physicists trip over themselves to describe a spherical planet or is it flat-earthers who contradict themselves and each other?
For myself I would choose germ-theory as a subject I know little about, due to lack of interest, but can use the simple red flags of inconsistency to know that humour imbalances, Satanic influences, homeopathy, chi, and other mutually inexclusive forms of study on disease (even among practitioners in the same supposed field) are unlikely, most notably because they raise more questions than they answer.
So who to believe? Those who get their facts straight? Or those who can't decide among themselves what causes climate change or if it's even real, but can only agree that 'Green is the new Red'*?
*making shit of the idea it's the ones who accept the science as those who are politicising it
In over 30 years the science hasn't changed. At its most basic - CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) absorbs and re-emits infrared photons, thus trapping them for longer in the atmosphere helping to keep it warm. More CO2 traps more heat. Humans are pumping an unprecedented amount of CO2 into the atmosphere.
This is what I was taught in school, it is still what's taught.
On the other hand those who are trying to claim it's not happening haven't been able to get their story straight.
The planet's not warming, it's a global conspiracy theory. It is warming but it's not caused by humans (it's the Sun, volcanoes, radiation from far off supernovae, it's God). The planet is warming but it will only warm a little (global luke-warming) (one group of fossil funded scientists said the planets not designed to get much hotter - designed by who?). The planet's warming but there's nothing we can do about it. CO2 is good for the environment as more trees and plants will grow!
So to me, if I didn't have much of an understanding of the science, I would look at which side has a consistent story and which side doesn't seem to be able to get their story straight and deduce that way.
You can also do this with any science vs pseudoscience topic. Do proponents of evolution have a straighter story than those who are against? Do physicists trip over themselves to describe a spherical planet or is it flat-earthers who contradict themselves and each other?
For myself I would choose germ-theory as a subject I know little about, due to lack of interest, but can use the simple red flags of inconsistency to know that humour imbalances, Satanic influences, homeopathy, chi, and other mutually inexclusive forms of study on disease (even among practitioners in the same supposed field) are unlikely, most notably because they raise more questions than they answer.
So who to believe? Those who get their facts straight? Or those who can't decide among themselves what causes climate change or if it's even real, but can only agree that 'Green is the new Red'*?
*making shit of the idea it's the ones who accept the science as those who are politicising it
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
- Rum
- Absent Minded Processor
- Posts: 37285
- Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm
- Location: South of the border..though not down Mexico way..
- Contact:
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
Very articulate if I may say, but with the exception of only one or two members here you are preaching to the converted.
What we need is a forum where people come with an open rational mind to listen to actual reason and evidence and might be willing to change their minds.
The interwebz by its nature seems to have driven those out.
What we need is a forum where people come with an open rational mind to listen to actual reason and evidence and might be willing to change their minds.
The interwebz by its nature seems to have driven those out.
- Scot Dutchy
- Posts: 19000
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:07 pm
- About me: Dijkbeschermer
- Location: 's-Gravenhage, Nederland
- Contact:
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
Whistling down the wind Rum I am afraid. Those times will never return.
"Wat is het een gezellig boel hier".
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
I'm guessing maybe none of those Canadians play ice-hockey or race Huskies and witnessed their once frozen ponds not freeze enough to hold a skater any more, or parts of their race tracks melt away and have to be artificially filled in.pErvinalia wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:48 amWhat's worse is that he shows no desire to even begin to learn it. He's wilfully ignorant. I maintain that, like a few Canadians I've come across, he doesn't think climate change is a bad thing because Canada is so damn cold.
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
- Woodbutcher
- Stray Cat
- Posts: 8183
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:54 pm
- About me: Still crazy after all these years.
- Location: Northern Muskeg, The Great White North
- Contact:
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
Principia Scientific International also holds that CO2 is actually a coolant, childhood vaccines are a crime against humanity, and that wind turbines cause diseases. As far as I can tell they do no research, just opinions, just like the Heartland Institute and The Vatican.
If women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.-Red Green
"Yo". Rocky
"Never been worried about what other people see when they look at me". Gawdzilla
"No friends currently defined." Friends & Foes.
"Yo". Rocky
"Never been worried about what other people see when they look at me". Gawdzilla
"No friends currently defined." Friends & Foes.
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
Bell's science wasn't brought into question in that case, but it shows how the establishment responds to criticism.
Lash out, attack and smear.
VERY convincing! Your 'science' is as objective as CNN or MSNBC.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists
-various artists
The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.
Update: I've been offered one!
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
I keep being told I should read the liturgies, and chant along. Even demands that I 'admit that anthropomorphic furries are changing the climate' or some such hogwash.Rum wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:49 amVery articulate if I may say, but with the exception of only one or two members here you are preaching to the converted.
What we need is a forum where people come with an open rational mind to listen to actual reason and evidence and might be willing to change their minds.
The interwebz by its nature seems to have driven those out.
No-one has bothered with any news in this thread. No-one is suggesting rational action, just agree, chant along, and (presumably) vote correctly.
I'm unconvinced that it is worth my attention. Seems like a lot of wealthy people taking jets and superyachts to exotic locations to laugh at how many people are agreeable to this 'Chicken Little' story.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists
-various artists
The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.
Update: I've been offered one!
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
- Rum
- Absent Minded Processor
- Posts: 37285
- Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm
- Location: South of the border..though not down Mexico way..
- Contact:
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
Nobody gives a fuck whether you are convinced and it deserves your, no doubt, valuable attention. Your problem either way.
Meantime anyone with a rational take in the world can see it is smouldering.
Meantime anyone with a rational take in the world can see it is smouldering.
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
lol
Maybe you should take on that contract, Rum. Give you something to do while you are bored.
Event ID: 0000003520
Event Name: Community Drainage Training in a Changing Climate
Event Description: Procurement Shared Services on behalf of the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs is requesting proposals from qualified proponents for the provision of Community Drainage Training in a Changing Climate.
I mean, you could just insist you MEAN to do something about it, or insist that it IS important, but the quote above is a bit more real climate change news. There are lives to be improved, people to help.
Still fine to pass up the opportunity. There are honestly MILLIONS of things neither of us will do to save the earth.
Like using our votes as a tithe to the Climate Change Church.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists
-various artists
The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.
Update: I've been offered one!
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
- Hermit
- Posts: 25806
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
- About me: Cantankerous grump
- Location: Ignore lithpt
- Contact:
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
The court case was not about science, and the judge threw the defamation case brought against Dr. Tim Ball out because the claims made in Ball's article lacked “a sufficient air of credibility to make them believable and therefore potentially defamatory.”
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
Seraph, I almost answered you here, but then remembered who you were.
Carry on.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists
-various artists
The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.
Update: I've been offered one!
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
- Hermit
- Posts: 25806
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
- About me: Cantankerous grump
- Location: Ignore lithpt
- Contact:
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
Oh. That's the site infested with articles opposing vaccinations, right?Cunt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 3:51 amReading more about this climate change, and those skeptical of it.
https://principia-scientific.org/breaki ... rt-battle/
From this year's crop:
Measles, Masterminds & Million Published on May 13, 2019
Censorship Is the Last Tool of Tyrants Published on May 30, 2019
Censored Facts on Measles and the Measles Vaccine Published on July 18, 2019
Japan has no vaccine mandate yet has world’s healthiest children Published on August 1, 2019
Argued on purely scientific grounds of course, to be sure. Based on reproducible evidence and lacking any conspirational prejudice. The calibre of the reportage leaves me in no doubt that all missives published by Principia Scientific International on any other subject - such as global warming - are of equal trustworthiness. Possibly better, even than the stuff that can be found in sites like Breitbart, Infowars, Above Top Secret and such.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
Re: Global Climate Change Science News
This would be VERY convincing, if I didn't know which way so many people lean. I don't know when it happened, but the left became the party of 'trust the government' and 'do what you are told' and 'free speech if it isn't too coarse'.Hermit wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 3:49 pmOh. That's the site infested with articles opposing vaccinations, right?Cunt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 3:51 amReading more about this climate change, and those skeptical of it.
https://principia-scientific.org/breaki ... rt-battle/
From this year's crop:
Measles, Masterminds & Million Published on May 13, 2019
Censorship Is the Last Tool of Tyrants Published on May 30, 2019
Censored Facts on Measles and the Measles Vaccine Published on July 18, 2019
Japan has no vaccine mandate yet has world’s healthiest children Published on August 1, 2019
Argued on purely scientific grounds of course, to be sure. Based on reproducible evidence and lacking any conspirational prejudice. The calibre of the reportage leaves me in no doubt that all missives published by Principia Scientific International on any other subject - such as global warming - are of equal trustworthiness. Possibly better, even than the stuff that can be found in sites like Breitbart, Infowars, Above Top Secret and such.
As it is, Seraph, it isn't convincing of much at all, except that you missed my point again.
It's about how the 'scientists' respond to difference. I don't have to understand chiropractic, to do a quick review of the British Chiropractic Association and Singh. I can see from their handling of his criticism that they are buffoons...that's without even knowing Singhs criticisms or credentials.
Our Alberta premier a few years ago, in a fit of green responsibility, cancelled a water-bomber contract just days before the wildfire season started. Look at how she and her heavies responded to criticism of the decision, from a journalist called Sheila.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists
-various artists
The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.
Update: I've been offered one!
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests