Harmony Central Forums
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is 'climate change' still a thing?

Collapse



X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by LARRY L View Post
    The climate has always changed, the real question is how much is caused by man. I heard sum huge amount of $ so needed, that would stifle industry, and the economic welfare we have and would only bring the temp down 1/2 degree in a hundred years, or something like that. No link it was on Fox a while back. Perhaps the research in alt energy is a good thing regardless if it does not put more and more controlling demands and cost on the people like so many are fear. Listen to Elizabeth Warren, her agenda would really clamp down on the American people and raise the cost of living through the roof.

    Yeah. The anti-climate change crowd has moved the goalposts. Used to be they denied it was happening. Now that it is undeniable, they stick to "but how much is caused by man"? Next will be what you alluded to--- "well, what can we REALLY do about it anyway?"

    But of course you've heard the economic impact would be stifling. These are the same people who brought you "cigarettes don't cause cancer", "leaded gasoline is harmless", and "environmental regulations on cars will cripple the industry and make your cars unaffordable". They sow seeds of doubt and fear in the public in order to benefit their own short-term agenda.

    It's sad, in your case, because Christians used to be (some still are, but it's a ever-shrinking group it seems) on the forefront of environmental concerns. This IS God's planet we are charged to care for, after all. But it seems American Christians have become so politicized and aligned with business interests that have put all that Good Work aside.



    ______________

    Comment


    • arcadesonfire
      arcadesonfire commented
      Editing a comment
      And the Lord said to Adam, "go forth and do whatever you want to the Earth. It'll only be here for 7000 years anyway. You can't do that much damage."

    • RobRoy
      RobRoy commented
      Editing a comment
      Straw man.

  • #32
    Originally posted by LARRY L View Post
    The climate has always changed, the real question is how much is caused by man. I heard sum huge amount of $ so needed, that would stifle industry, and the economic welfare we have and would only bring the temp down 1/2 degree in a hundred years, or something like that. No link it was on Fox a while back. Perhaps the research in alt energy is a good thing regardless if it does not put more and more controlling demands and cost on the people like so many are fear. Listen to Elizabeth Warren, her agenda would really clamp down on the American people and raise the cost of living through the roof.
    You have persuasively articulated the complaint of industry that they resent having to assume the burdens of their activities which taxpayers have to this point been assuming in regard to the impact of their various businesses on global climate. Industries that pollute the air and water feel similarly when asked to pay for the impact of their corporate behavior. This corporate tendency to look after their own short term financial interests over the greater public good is understandable.
    __________________________________________________

    Is This Thing On?

    https://soundcloud.com/tom-hicks888

    Comment


    • RogueGnome
      RogueGnome commented
      Editing a comment
      Precisely, Tom.
      And their best defense is to create doubt. It is a very effective tool and they have used it successfully for decades.

    • RobRoy
      RobRoy commented
      Editing a comment
      Straw man

  • #33
    Originally posted by RobRoy View Post
    Link?
    You got it!

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Clarence_Williams_III_Mod_Squad_1971.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	235.1 KB
ID:	32064861
    Last edited by Fred Fartboski : Today at...

    Comment


    • #34
      Originally posted by Fred Fartboski View Post

      You got it!

      [ATTACH=CONFIG]n32064861[/ATTACH]

      'The debate is over'.

      Comment


      • #35
        I've stated my opinion frequently. We know climate is changing. I've stated already it has gone thru hot and cold spells since the earth has existed. Are we the sole cause? I don't know. Are we exacerbating it? I think there's little doubt we are. Should we try to minimize our impact? Definitely. Those who think we shouldn't are absolute fools.
        Last edited by Belva; 09-20-2017, 08:47 PM.

        Comment


        • #36
          Originally posted by Belva View Post
          I've stated my opinion frequently. We know climate is changing. I've stated already it has gone thru hot and cold spells since the earth has existed. Are we the sole cause? I don't know. Are we exacerbating it? I think there's little doubt we are. Should we try to minimize our impact? Definitely. Those who think we shouldn't are absolute fools.

          You approach the crux of the biscuit but the laws of the interwebs prohibit further discussion.

          Comment


          • #37
            Originally posted by RobRoy View Post
            For me, it's not much of an issue now that those that were pushing for real government policy changes (and taxation and wealth redistribution) lost their case and got caught cheating. But I do like to post articles from time to time.

            Like this one:

            http://www.commonsenseevaluation.com....LJ9uPZWn.dpbs

            And this is a really fun read:
            https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4503006/global-warming-sums-experts-bullies-james-delingpole-opinion/"]How scientists got their global warming sums wrong — and created a £1TRILLION-a-year green industry that bullied experts who dared to question the figures[/URL]
            Hey RobRoy! You never answered me. Why do you agree with the methods, analyses, and conclusions in this paleoclimatology paper, https://www.clim-past.net/8/1213/201...1213-2012.html , but then disagree with with the thousands of papers using the same climatology methods that conclude that humans have increased CO2 levels and that the greenhouse effect is now causing climate change??

            I just now realized that at work the other day, I could see the whole paper, cuz I work in academics and we've got subscriptions to all the science journals. You boast about having more sources than us. Do you have full access to all the science journals? Can you articulate why exactly you suggested I read that paper even though you distrust much of the climatology community's conclusions?

            EDIT!!! Actually, I think anyone can read the paper by clicking on the PDF symbol on the right side. That's what I did to see the data, equations, graphs, methods, and conclusions. You told me you read the paper, in addition to the comments on the Wattsupwiththat comments. So I assume you found the PDF too and were able to access it, whether or not you have a subscription to Climate of the Past. So you read this, right? https://www.clim-past.net/8/1213/201...-1213-2012.pdf
            Last edited by arcadesonfire; 09-21-2017, 09:27 AM.
            My band!:
            www.steelphantoms.com/
            my stage stuff:
            fender jimmie vaughan strat, korg dt-10, ts-9, keeley rat, thoroughly modded big muff, 4ms tremulus lune, eventide timefactor running stereo to a traynor bassmaster (w hotplate) and a fender HRD. Everything ('cept the TimeFactor and dt-10) is modded, with much help from folks at Harmony Central. Thanks everybody!

            Comment


            • #38
              Originally posted by arcadesonfire View Post
              You boast about having more sources than us. Do you have full access to all the science journals?
              After only two weeks of study, Rob became the "go to" guy in his 1973 high school chemistry class.

              I think Rob is trying to tell us he has better understanding of these things than anyone else.
              Last edited by Fred Fartboski; 09-21-2017, 07:04 AM.
              Last edited by Fred Fartboski : Today at...

              Comment


              • panhandler
                panhandler commented
                Editing a comment
                We are but mere mortals.

              • RobRoy
                RobRoy commented
                Editing a comment
                That is because we ALL were at the two week mark. I was rising swiftly to the top. Duh.

                When I was in 8th grade, I was in a 9th grade science class. After every test, our seating was rearranged based on our score in the last test. I was always in either the first or second seat. There was this one girl...

            • #39
              Unintelligent people love conspiracy theories because it gives them a sense of feeling justified. Alas ice core samples going back millions of years show how co2 was basically unchanged then spiked during the industrial revolution.
              Last edited by SexWithRobots; 09-21-2017, 06:57 AM.
              😉

              Comment


              • #40
                Originally posted by RobRoy View Post
                For me, it's not much of an issue now that those that were pushing for real government policy changes (and taxation and wealth redistribution) lost their case and got caught cheating. But I do like to post articles from time to time.

                Like this one:

                http://www.commonsenseevaluation.com....LJ9uPZWn.dpbs

                And this is a really fun read:
                How scientists got their global warming sums wrong — and created a £1TRILLION-a-year green industry that bullied experts who dared to question the figures
                Making the font size bigger does NOT make this garbage suddenly become true.

                Comment


                • arcadesonfire
                  arcadesonfire commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Right. You have to put a hashtag in front of it.
                  Last edited by arcadesonfire; 09-21-2017, 10:12 AM.

              • #41
                Originally posted by SexWithRobots View Post
                Unintelligent people love conspiracy theories because it gives them a sense of feeling justified. Alas ice core samples going back millions of years show how co2 was basically unchanged then spiked during the industrial revolution.
                And therein lies the problem. There are just too many concurring reports from too many sources for it to be a buncha scientists getting together and scamming the world. SOMEONE would squawk. It ain't rocket surgety

                Comment


                • #42
                  Originally posted by Belva View Post

                  Making the font size bigger does NOT make this garbage suddenly become true.
                  I cut and pasted the text. That was the result.
                  All text I enter is my opinion. If I feel it necessary to prove it, I'll back it up with links.

                  Comment


                  • Belva
                    Belva commented
                    Editing a comment
                    Doesn't matter who did it. Larger font still doesn't make garbage anything but that, just as repeating a lie over and over doesn't make it true

                • #43
                  Originally posted by arcadesonfire View Post
                  Hey RobRoy! You never answered me. Why do you agree with the methods, analyses, and conclusions in this paleoclimatology paper, https://www.clim-past.net/8/1213/201...1213-2012.html , but then disagree with with the thousands of papers using the same climatology methods that conclude that humans have increased CO2 levels and that the greenhouse effect is now causing climate change??

                  I just now realized that at work the other day, I could see the whole paper, cuz I work in academics and we've got subscriptions to all the science journals. You boast about having more sources than us. Do you have full access to all the science journals? Can you articulate why exactly you suggested I read that paper even though you distrust much of the climatology community's conclusions?

                  EDIT!!! Actually, I think anyone can read the paper by clicking on the PDF symbol on the right side. That's what I did to see the data, equations, graphs, methods, and conclusions. You told me you read the paper, in addition to the comments on the Wattsupwiththat comments. So I assume you found the PDF too and were able to access it, whether or not you have a subscription to Climate of the Past. So you read this, right? https://www.clim-past.net/8/1213/201...-1213-2012.pdf
                  It's not that I agree or disagree. Rather, I assume they are sharing accurate information the best that they can until I find proof of messing with data, like the "hockey stick".

                  But it is not the facts. but the conclusions I take issue with - IF someone wants me to alter my lifestyle in any significant way because there "might" be a problem. This is exacerbated by the creation of climate models, based on their conclusions formed from their interpretation of the data, that given time, prove to be wildly inaccurate. i.e. they proved with their own models that they are wrong.

                  As I read such articles, I'm reminded of the line from The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway: They're trying to find themselves an audience. Their deductions need applause.

                  BTW, a nugget from the conclusion, which summarizes nicely:
                  "Further progress in understanding these mechanisms requires more work at the interface between palaeoclimate observation and Earth system modeling; in particular, modeling efforts to more tightly constrain the potential timescales of bipolar-seesaw induced changes in CO2 ventilation are needed."

                  Both taken at face value, and as "evidence" they need another grant, I find that sentence rather revealing.

                  What they are saying is that they are not really sure and will need to do more work. Please send money.
                  All text I enter is my opinion. If I feel it necessary to prove it, I'll back it up with links.

                  Comment


                  • #44
                    Originally posted by Fred Fartboski View Post
                    Some believe climate change is all a big hoax. Discussion over. Case closed. They believe the issue long ago received, if you will, it's "final stake to the heart".
                    I'm not seeing any of those people on this site. There are some of us that see the AGW scare as a big hoax though. The climate is always changing. It's what it does.
                    All text I enter is my opinion. If I feel it necessary to prove it, I'll back it up with links.

                    Comment


                    • #45
                      Originally posted by guido61 View Post


                      Yeah. The anti-climate change crowd has moved the goalposts. Used to be they denied it was happening. Now that it is undeniable, they stick to "but how much is caused by man"? Next will be what you alluded to--- "well, what can we REALLY do about it anyway?"

                      But of course you've heard the economic impact would be stifling. These are the same people who brought you "cigarettes don't cause cancer", "leaded gasoline is harmless", and "environmental regulations on cars will cripple the industry and make your cars unaffordable". They sow seeds of doubt and fear in the public in order to benefit their own short-term agenda.

                      It's sad, in your case, because Christians used to be (some still are, but it's a ever-shrinking group it seems) on the forefront of environmental concerns. This IS God's planet we are charged to care for, after all. But it seems American Christians have become so politicized and aligned with business interests that have put all that Good Work aside.


                      Actually, the side that moved the goalposts is the one that changed it from "global warming" to "climate change". But left the "A" in front of both.

                      Us deniers were ALWAYS about the "A". (Anthropogenic)
                      All text I enter is my opinion. If I feel it necessary to prove it, I'll back it up with links.

                      Comment













                      Working...
                      X