|
|
11-17-2018, 09:02 PM
|
#241
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5,414
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyfox
What do you mean by "reverse climate change?"
It seems to me, the climate is never fixed, never has been, never will be. It is always changing.
In a sense, climate = change.
The problem with the Climate Change cultists is, if its hot that's due to climate change.
If its cold that's due to climate change.
If it rains that's climate change.
If a drought comes that's climate change.
The Climate Change Umbrella covers everything, everywhere, every day.
So what does reversing climate change mean?
It's been reversing back and forth since I was born (and millions of years before that too.)
|
no no no, change=weather.
|
|
|
11-17-2018, 10:27 PM
|
#242
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 14,483
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap
Holy shit, are you guys out of it. I doubt aliens on eath and you guys flip out
I said this to Tom. For you as well...
[/B]
|
The burden is all yours to take on your journey, no one here is not going to mind not reading this crap. Waste your time with it as you feel like, just do not expect to change one persons opinion.
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 12:08 AM
|
#243
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Denver
Posts: 4,163
|
I'll tell you Hcap, you can try all day and night, but you're not going to convince people who are not equipped to debate the issue with scientific evidence. For the most part it comes down to them equating a gut feeling with hordes of scientific study.
Of course, everybody knows that horizontal velocity has no effect on the force of gravity. This means that if you shot a bullet from a gun held precisely parallel to the ground and dropped another bullet at the exact time the first bullet leaves it's barrel, both bullets will hit the ground simultaneously. But from experience I can tell you that not that many people can absorb that fact.
You can show all the charts and graphs you want. You can point out that warmer oceans mean bigger storms, or that glaciers that are thousands of years old are melting at unprecedented rates. You might want to go to Montana soon before the national park is renamed as the Park Formerly Known as Glacier.
If I remember I think I might have mentioned to you that arguing with boxcar was a losing proposition, not because he was right, but because he's already cemented in his beliefs. You're up against the same sort of situation, and you have a dozen people willing to reinforce each other.
Here's the point. You're right about climate change. Simple things like thermometers or atmospheric chemistry are totally convincing to the open mind, and foma to the grandfalloons on PA. Be happy you're right. Stop insisting that convincing boxcar that science makes religion harder to accept in all cases, and stop insisting that all the people who don't get climate change were just waiting for you to come along and give them the salvation of science.
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 01:20 AM
|
#244
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 18,962
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing
I'll tell you Hcap, you can try all day and night, but you're not going to convince people who are not equipped to debate the issue with scientific evidence. For the most part it comes down to them equating a gut feeling with hordes of scientific study.
|
We get climate change, or at least what it's fanatics rave about.
We don't always drink the Kool-Aid.
The earth's climate has been changing forever.
Where I live used to be under 3/4 of a mile of ice.
Someday it will likely be under ice again.
We know that the science on climate change is not settled.
When we argue otherwise, we're accused of being heretics, as if to question it is some form of blasphemy.
Climate Change is a Religion among true believers.
There is little use debating with them.
So...no ...I won't debate climate change when I see reputable scientists also doubting it.
I might be more convinced by their arguments in a decade or so.
But in the meanwhile, for me the jury is out.
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 02:10 AM
|
#245
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyfox
What do you mean by "reverse climate change?"
It seems to me, the climate is never fixed, never has been, never will be. It is always changing.
|
It is. But the specific discussion refutes Pirate's debunked article about a coming "ice age"
WHEN HE CLAIMED ERRONEOUSLY IT IS ALL ABOUT THE SUN
POST #224
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...&postcount=224
Last edited by hcap; 11-18-2018 at 02:15 AM.
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 02:20 AM
|
#246
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fast4522
The burden is all yours to take on your journey, no one here is not going to mind not reading this crap. Waste your time with it as you feel like, just do not expect to change one persons opinion.
|
The burden of proof to support AGW, is met by science. Aliens on earth are not.
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 02:29 AM
|
#247
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyfox
We get climate change, or at least what it's fanatics rave about.
We don't always drink the Kool-Aid.
The earth's climate has been changing forever.
Where I live used to be under 3/4 of a mile of ice.
Someday it will likely be under ice again.
We know that the science on climate change is not settled.
When we argue otherwise, we're accused of being heretics, as if to question it is some form of blasphemy.
Climate Change is a Religion among true believers.
There is little use debating with them.
So...no ...I won't debate climate change when I see reputable scientists also doubting it.
I might be more convinced by their arguments in a decade or so.
But in the meanwhile, for me the jury is out.
https://youtu.be/fA5sGtj7QKQ
|
You are using one climate denier to refute the consensus of 97% of climatologists
Quote:
A review of claims made by the Cato Institute's Patrick Michaels over the last quarter century shows that he has repeatedly been proven wrong over time. Michaels is one of a few contrarian climate scientists who is often featured in the media without disclosure of his funding from the fossil fuel industry.
|
The fanatics are mostly the scientifically illiterate.
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 02:43 AM
|
#248
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing
Here's the point. You're right about climate change. Simple things like thermometers or atmospheric chemistry are totally convincing to the open mind, and foma to the grandfalloons on PA. Be happy you're right. Stop insisting that convincing boxcar that science makes religion harder to accept in all cases, and stop insisting that all the people who don't get climate change were just waiting for you to come along and give them the salvation of science.
|
Sometimes I feel obligated to clarify the advantages of the last 500-600 years of the scientific method. I know it is useless, but got stuck doing this when I first started posting on this site 15 years ago. For some reason I keep hoping their paranoia of the "educated elite" of liberals will cease.
It remains as strong as ever even after dozens of threads on climate change. Used to think boxcar was the worst, now ever since Trump hypnotized everyone here, it looks like there are many more equally obtuse
My health is getting worse. Now debating is a mostly pleasant diversion until I won't bed able to post again.
Last edited by hcap; 11-18-2018 at 02:44 AM.
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 08:00 AM
|
#249
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 18,962
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap
My health is getting worse. Now debating is a mostly pleasant diversion until I won't bed able to post again.
|
I'm truly sorry to read that hcap.
Much as we disagree, I respect and enjoy your contributions to the various threads on this site.
I sincerely hope that your health improves.
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 10:46 AM
|
#250
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyfox
I'm truly sorry to read that hcap.
Much as we disagree, I respect and enjoy your contributions to the various threads on this site.
I sincerely hope that your health improves.
|
Thanks
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 11:27 AM
|
#251
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,650
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap
Sometimes I feel obligated to clarify the advantages of the last 500-600 years of the scientific method. I know it is useless, but got stuck doing this when I first started posting on this site 15 years ago. For some reason I keep hoping their paranoia of the "educated elite" of liberals will cease.
It remains as strong as ever even after dozens of threads on climate change. Used to think boxcar was the worst, now ever since Trump hypnotized everyone here, it looks like there are many more equally obtuse
My health is getting worse. Now debating is a mostly pleasant diversion until I won't bed able to post again.
|
the reason the most climate models and predictions are not very good, is because they took their baseline from the early 1900's ... when the carbon dioxide contribution from humans was not near as high as now.
although scientific method has improved, so has picking which data to use to help with your 'point' ... which suggests the study was started with a specific outcome wanted or expected instead of to determine what would happen
please show me 'proof' or evidence that the weather and climate drift we have been seeing during our lives is 100% caused by humans
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 11:44 AM
|
#252
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,871
|
Quote:
I might be more convinced by their arguments in a decade or so. But in the meanwhile, for me the jury is out.
|
We are not trying to convince you. I could not care less what you or anyone else thinks. I am mocking hcp - and endless troll on the subject.
Not only is the jury still out, the charges have not been made yet.
What we do know for certain about GW is many are making huge money off from it and Al Gore is the biggest FRAUD out there.
Representatives of nations so concerned about it fly to conferences in air-killing jets!
I want me leaders to live the lives they are trying to sell to us.
Until then, I refuse to thing GW is even bad.
So what if we lose coastlines?
Continents move. We lost some gained some.
Live on Earth at +5 degrees might be a better place.
But the idea that we can pick a spot in the normal progression of the planet and call it ideal and think we can freeze it there (no pun intended) is ridiculous.
One thing is for sure - we are NOT going to stop it.
The jury is back on that, voted, and moved inland.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 11:47 AM
|
#253
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by davew
the reason the most climate models and predictions are not very good, is because they took their baseline from the early 1900's ... when the carbon dioxide contribution from humans was not near as high as now.
|
Climate science was in it's infancy or non-existent in the early 1900's. Not sure of what you are saying
Quote:
although scientific method has improved, so has picking which data to use to help with your 'point' ... which suggests the study was started with a specific outcome wanted or expected instead of to determine what would happen
please show me 'proof' or evidence that the weather and climate drift we have been seeing during our lives is 100% caused by humans
|
The "proof" or at least strong evidence supporting the concept of AGW is apparent in the debate between climate deniers and climatologists, is the so-called "pause". A global warming hiatus, also sometimes referred to as a global warming pause. Deniers claimed that WARMING WOULD NOT continue. Based on an erroneous understanding and interpretation of the data by deniers predicting the period following 2013, only to be proven wrong.
With deliberately cherry picking appropriate time periods, here 1998-2012, a "pause" can be created, even when there is an ongoing warming trend.
Last edited by hcap; 11-18-2018 at 11:50 AM.
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 11:54 AM
|
#254
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,871
|
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
11-18-2018, 12:07 PM
|
#255
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom
|
You ca't argue with anything scientific. You are unable to understand the most basic concepts.
Misinterpreting data is however one of your strong points.
Pronouncing fact free proclamations a second strong point.
Practicing proctology without a license, a third
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|