Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
5 days ago.
by mythravere
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

mythravere

"First, even though the response rate to our survey was well within the normative range, nearly three quarters of the AMS members invited to participate did not do so. This raises the possibility that our respondents may not accurately represent the views of the broader AMS membership. It is plausible, for example, that AMS members skeptical of global warming may have been less likely than the average member to respond, potentially by virtue of feeling marginalized within their professional society as a result of the views on the issue. Conversely, it is also plausible that skeptical members may have been more likely than the average member to respond, due to a desire to use the opportunity to have their views recognized by AMS leadership and other members."

Posted 186 days ago.

mythravere

Yea it destroys the consensus. LOL!

OK lets look at this.

Out of 7062 AMS members invited to participate 1854 members completed at least some form portion of the survey beyond the consent form.

Posted 186 days ago.

h ttp://w ww.forbes.c om/sites/jamestaylor/2013/11/20/the-latest-meteorologist-survey-destroys-the-global-warming-climate-consensus/

"Barely half of American Meteorological Society meteorologists believe global warming is occurring "

Posted 187 days ago.

h ttp://w ww.forbes.c om/sites/jamestaylor/2014/01/24/michael-manns-global-warming-argument-fuels-denier-skepticism/

" a recent survey of American Meteorological Society (AMS) atmospheric scientists found only 38 percent of AMS scientists believe future warming will be very harmful, and an even smaller 30 percent are very worried about global warming. This is a far cry from Mann’s unsupported assertion that “97 percent agree … we must respond to the dangers of a warming planet.”

Posted 187 days ago.

harryanderson

So, Tiredofit,

Are you interested in reducing the scientific uncertainty, or do you choose to continue making doubt your product?

Posted 187 days ago.

harryanderson

Of the 200 “strongest and most credentialed (climate) researchers, a whopping 97.5% “fully agree…anthropogenic greenhouse gases have been responsible for ‘most’ of the ‘unequivocal’ warming of the Earth’s average global temperature over the second half of the 20th century.”

You have not shown where any grantors gave grants on the condition that the recipients of those grants prove a connection between global climate change and greenhouse gases. No instances=no basis for your claim.

As for the mild term denier, you have complained about it repeatedly. After the first complaint, I said I would no longer use it. I hoped foreswearing the term would allow your fragile self-esteem to heal. Apparently not.

Posted 187 days ago.

Tiredofit

Seems like a reasonable question

Posted 187 days ago.

Kendall78

So was, "HOw can you trust the information if you know it may exaggerated to get attention and funding", tongue in cheek or did you mean it?

Posted 187 days ago.

Kendall78

Youth, like truth..is in the eye of the beholder. You should know this, your eyes see a new truth everyday. Just a pity they rarely see any facts.

Posted 187 days ago.

Tiredofit

Lighten up Kendall, tongue firmly in cheek on that post. You are awful young to be so bitter.

Posted 188 days ago.

Kendall78

"Debunk 97 percent CHECK"

Uncheck...you debunked nothing except allow it to be shown that the 97% were those who actually known something about climate science.

"Demonstrate Results for Funding CHECK,"

Uncheck, you have shown there are those that says it happens. You offer no evidence that it actually has.

"Deny the term DENIER CHECK,"

Uncheck, you have done nothing but denied evidence of man made climate change. You ignore the information of those you have mentioned yourself when it does not suit you. You are the very living embodiment of a denier.

"Well my work is done for a while thanks."

Yep, I think you are done, quite done.

Posted 188 days ago.

Kendall78

"HOw can you trust the information if you know it may exaggerated to get attention and funding"

What information has been exaggerated?

What funding?

From whom?

Do you have any actual evidence specific to any of your claims? All you have given is vague notions without any substance.

Posted 188 days ago.

Tiredofit

Debunk 97 percent CHECK, Demonstrate Results for Funding CHECK, Deny the term DENIER CHECK, Well my work is done for a while thanks.

Posted 188 days ago.

Tiredofit

And what is exaggeration but a controlled lie? Or is it just a plain old lie>

Posted 188 days ago.

Tiredofit

Kendall78

"What's scary is that you don't seem to care,"

Care about what? HOw can you trust the information if you know it may exaggerated to get attention and funding>?

Posted 188 days ago.

mythravere

I mean how many times has Tiredofit used socialism as the reason for climate change being an issue?

Posted 188 days ago.

mythravere

It really in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter what that woman said the climatologists have to supposedly do to get their funding. We know that the world is warming up. We know that nature isn't the absolute reason for this warming. In truth they play off of each other.

Until its found out that the seeking of "funding" is the total reason for what is being said about climate change then you know which camp I am sticking with.

Deniers will deny till they turn blue in the face. Its not a question of facts for them. Its all about resisting the other political faction.

Posted 188 days ago.

mythravere

"It's the fact that she freely admits that climatologists lie to scare people and get funding."

Do they lie or do they hype up what they are saying about climate change.

More to the point how do we know that what she said is the truth?

Do they lie about that stuff?

If so where's the proof that they do?

Posted 188 days ago.

Kendall78

"What's scary is that you don't seem to care,"

Care about what? That people of power and wealth have influence in our world? That was a lesson I learned a long time ago. It's not really that shocking of a revelation.

"the ends must justify the means"

If you would study history, you would see that mentality is found in all types..liberals and conservatives alike.

"It's not whether I believe her or not."

Actually it does because this is an informal debate platform. Otherwise you are just being a lukewarm fence-rider.

Posted 188 days ago.

Tiredofit

What's scary is that you don't seem to care, the ends must justify the means for the lefty, say whatever you have to.

Posted 188 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or