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
7 minutes ago.
by Stillhere
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

Ohwiseone

TOTAL WHACK JOB !!!

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

Tiredofit, you once again demand proof. Yet, according to your definitions, proof of climate change is impossible. You wrote, “Proof is a concept that is really only applicable in mathematics, because math deals with abstract concepts and definitions.” So, to you, if a piece of evidence is real, rather than abstract, that evidence doesn’t count.

You also gave another absurd definition that deals with real, rather than abstract, phenomena. You wrote, “To be proven, something needs to be demonstrable and repeatable.” So, to you, the past temperature record doesn’t count because it isn’t “repeatable.”

Bottom line: Nothing real counts to you. The only thing that matters is what you dream up.

Posted 93 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Ah , the usual from the king of denial ! You make your point and when the know it all cant come up with a LOGICAL reply ,cusses and leaves ! If you're going to leave in a huff why don't you just stay gone !

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

"The case was MAN CAUSES GLOBAL WARMING."

I didn't intend to make that case today at all. Again, you're using the straw man fallacy. You're ascribing a position to me.

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

"Thanks for admitting you CANNOT make the case harry"

Again, this statement is false. If I don't try to swim from Parkersburg to Belpre, it's absurd to say I cannot.

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

"When your case is complete, I will agree or disagree but not until then"

You haven't yet kept this promise.

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

"You have failed to prove man is causing global warming."

That statement isn't accurate, since, in my posts yesterday and today, I wasn't trying to prove man is causing global warming. That would be like saying I failed to swim from Parkersburg to Belpre, when I never tried.

So, do you agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Posted 93 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Typical republican , delay, deny and lie ,lie ,lie !

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

"When your case is complete, I will agree or disagree but not until then"

My case is complete. Now, do you agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas? If not, why not?

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

"Iam not required to agree to any of your statements, lay out your case."

Nope. You're not required to agree. I made the case that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Do you agree that I made my case? Or should I present more evidence.

You mentioned mathematical proof the other day. Then maybe you know that proof builds upon proof, and it's futile to go on to the second step without proving the first step.

So again. Do you believe CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

I don't understand. Is that a yes or a no? Do you believe CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

Okay. So do you accept my first piece of evidence?

Do you believe CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

"You want to make the case that Co2 is a greenhouse gas, man burns fossil fuels, fossil fuels emit Co2, the planet has warmed since the last ice age, therefore man causes global warming. THAT SUM IT UP"

You invited me to "make your case." So stop interrupting while I do so.

My case is that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Do you accept that? If not, why not?

Posted 93 days ago.

mythravere

Scientists make a statement that doesn't jive with you. Oh well must be the funding that made them say that.

Any proof thats the case? Nah you just assume thats the case.

Posted 93 days ago.

mythravere

Yes yes yes. Its all about the funding. But can you prove that money has had an influence on what scientists are saying about mans role in climate change.

You ONLY go with the option that supports your opinion on this issue.

Posted 93 days ago.

Ohwiseone

There's always something ! An endless supply of denial because tiredbrain just cant stand to be wrong ! LOLOLOL!!

Posted 93 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Ole numbnuts wont even acknowledge this independant study because it refutes everything it says ~~~~The dependence on fossil fuel energy sources since the industrial revolution has undoubtedly shaped economic prosperity for the developed world. However, an unfortunate by-product of fossil fuel combustion is the emission of carbon dioxide (CO2), an important greenhouse gas that is known to influence long-term climatic variations through its ability to absorb infra-red radiation.

Human emissions of CO2 have resulted in atmospheric levels higher than any period over the last 20 million years. The continued emission of CO2 will lead to widespread climate change related impacts. ~~Climate Change Research Centre (CCRC) UNSW Australia, Sydney NSW 2052 Australia All I advocate is there IS research that says man has and will have a role in climate change !

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

I googled your post, Tiredofit, and found an article on an obscure website by O R Adams, Jr.

Me. Adams isn't a climate scientist. He appears to be known best for writing a book called "As We Sodomize America."

Again myth and Kendall have been proven correct, Tiredofit--you aren't interested in considering scientic evidence.

The score so far. Six climate scientists say CO 2 is a greenhouse gas. We haven't yet found one who denies it.

Posted 93 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Here we go with the liar and denier !

Posted 93 days ago.

harryanderson

Thanks, ohwiseone.

Dr. Laurie Menziel, the lead researcher at CCRC, has authored or coauthored over a dozen papers.

That's 6-0.

Posted 93 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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