by cantleave 90 Replies latest social current
e. they also never explain how the uncrease is arithmetic and not logarithmic.
Around my neck of the woods, we call that 'using 10 dollar words'. Math language is not impressive - I speak geek, and if you want to argue logic, that is one thing, but don't try to legitimize your arguments by pretending that you have academic credentials through use of pseudo-scientific language. It won't get you any 'street' creds here.
talesin
wean both point to scie tists here and there and thats a fair comment. however there comes a time where must also use logic . back on the article on today being the hottest time for 8000 years. how does one explain what caused the rises all that time ago ? weather and climate are never constant, anyone can examine simple graphs and history to verify this. most climate changers always point to observations and reports never discussing why or how much has changed. why is it no one noticed climate change ten to fifteen years ago ? if we have been getting so much hotter since a long time how come this only became obvious a few years ago ? i personally dont remember anything about global warming before 2000.
Well, there you have it. I have been out of the Truth TM since 1976, and I can recall that global warming has been a hot topic since the Carter Adminstration.
As you can see, we have no common point of reference. That's why there is, from my POV, little point in continuing to debate the topic. I suggest we let the facts stand for themselves; we all have Google at our fingertips.
;)
I suggest we let the facts stand for themselves; we all have Google at our fingertips.
Provided that Google has any "facts" to serve this important debate.
Again I ask for a coherent plan on what to effectively do about this without train-wrecking human civilization.
Google is merely a search engine. Google at our fingertips implies that we have the ability to search for information and public record. Google has no facts, but it provides us the ability to search for them. Assuming we actually want facts.
First we must all agree on what the problem is, and then cooperate in finding an answer to it.
First we must all agree on what the problem is
Well said. Perhaps classically well said.
ber
and that is half the problem, climate change beliebers tell you man and carbon cause temp increases but they only ever tell us about ice melting and so on. they never explain cause and affect nor do they dispute why this time its man while other increases even just two hundred years ago were not. they are never consistent.
Forget this global warming stuff (err climate change ) it's all sideshow and a waste of time. I think we'd all be much better off spending our brain power and money getting the space program really going again. We need to get to other habitable planets before a meteor destroys all life on this planet. This will force development of superior technology that will go much farther to providing a real solution rather than a gubermint and UN plans/theft in the name of climate change.
the challenge is can you show climate change is because of man or mans output of carbon.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/10-Indicators-of-a-Human-Fingerprint-on-Climate-Change.html
The above link includes fully referenced peer review literature.
98% of climate scientists agree that we are warming the planet by our actions.
Perhaps you can explain to me why you side with the 2%... oh wait...you already did on Page 1:
Its just another bullshit reason to tax.
As I said earlier, ideology informs your view.
Again I ask for a coherent plan on what to effectively do about this without train-wrecking human civilization.
Either you didn't see or chose to ignore my earlier post with a couple of links to solutions.
