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
9 hours ago.
by Kendall78
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

harryanderson

There you go raising the straw man again. What does the age of the earth have to do with political paranoia surrounding climate science?

Posted 467 days ago.

harryanderson

“Quite the contrary, Harry. I have on more than one occasion gave reasons for my skepticism.”

I must confess that your straw men have distracted me, apparently causing me to miss your explanation as to why you fear that thousands of scientists at many different institutions working under various political structures within competing cultures are collaborating in a secret agenda to lie about the laws of physics and in order to achieve a worldwide political goal.

For my convenience, would you care to restate the reasons for your fears?

Posted 467 days ago.

harryanderson

Definition time. Paranoia is BASELESS or excessive suspicions of the motives of others. (emphasis added)

Posted 468 days ago.

harryanderson

Tiredofit,

This discussion has followed a familiar pattern. Whenever you feel challenged to provide evidence for your beliefs, you bring up a straw man to distract attention from your inability to support those beliefs. In this case, the straw man you brought up was the origin of man. Then, when politely asked how the straw man (the origin of man) related to the discussion at hand (fear that climate science is a political conspiracy), you followed your usual desperate pattern—calling names like hypocrite, fraud, and obtuse.

Tiredofit, the only thing for which you “have made a clear and unimpeachable case” is your tendency to use straw men and smears.

Posted 468 days ago.

harryanderson

What does the origin of man have to do with fear of a political conspiracy organized by scientists?

Posted 468 days ago.

harryanderson

I agree with tiredofit: the politics of paranoid fear are a factor in this discussion.

In my opinion, only a fearful, paranoid person could believe without any credible evidence that thousands of scientists at many different institutions working under various political structures within competing cultures are collaborating in a secret agenda to lie about the laws of physics and chemistry in order to achieve a worldwide political goal.

Posted 468 days ago.

Thatsabsurd

HEY IMBECILES all the nonesense you have been spewing for years about Climate change is proven wrong so now your (self-proclaimed) scintestestestes) are changing their theories (lies and lies) once again.

My question is: HOW MANY IMBECILES will still come here and cray and talk about how true its is.

Stupid imbeciles

Posted 468 days ago.

harryanderson

Maybe some who study the science of anthropogenic climate change are playing politics, but I know of none.

The only ones I know who are playing politics are those who aren't seriously considering the scientific and engineering aspects. This includes individuals on both sides of the debate.

Posted 477 days ago.

I wish I could agree with your regarding playing politics Harry.

I'm sorry, I can't.

Posted 477 days ago.

harryanderson

AaronS,

I quite agree with you that we should re-activate our nuclear power program. As you rightly state, it's one of the best options we have available at the present time.

However, I don't agree that "they're doing nothing but playing politics with fossil fuels as a means of taxing it in just another redistribution of wealth scheme."

I know some who are studying the effects of anthropogenic carbon on climate, and they are definitely not "playing politics" or in any way involved in a "distribution of wealth scheme." These whom I know, like me, see it as an engineering rather than a political problem.

Posted 477 days ago.

RANDOM21

There's a new kid in town, or at least Herman has a new name. He also just discovered copy and paste.

Posted 479 days ago.

The Thorium Fuel Cycle has been around since the early 60's so research is nothing new. It's another area of nuclear energy in which the left will allow research but if full scale production is proposed, they go ballistic and start filing lawsuits. That's the reason there have been no new nuclear power plants placed in commission since the 60's. Until the left gets serious about replacing fossil fuels with something that is actually viable, I'll stand by my assessment that they're doing nothing but playing politics with fossil fuels as a means of taxing it in just another redistribution of wealth scheme.

As for the safety record, of the 99 listed nuclear accidents on file, Chernobyl is the only one that has associated loss of life. The others were contained. Given the scrutiny of nuclear energy, it is as safe as they come, at least in my humble opinion.

Posted 482 days ago.

I've never said climate change doesn't exist. Clearly the climate is changing and has been since the dawn of time. I don't even deny that man is contributing to it. The mere act of any mammal passing myth affects the climate. I don’t even deny that burning fossil fuels has an effect.

What I don’t believe though is the way to combat it is by passing a tax to consumers or wasting the tax dollars of hard working Americans on unproven technologies that do not have the capability to supplement our energy needs. When the left starts pushing for the only true viable replacement to fossil fuels, nuclear, then I’ll think you’re serious. Until then, like everything else, you’re playing politics.

As for being termed an a55hole, I have no problem with that. Anyone that knows me knows where I stand and what I’m thinking. For me, I’d rather be a true a55hole then a whining b!+ch afraid of my own core convictions.

Posted 483 days ago.

"Harry you must realize and come to terms with the fact that those with whom you converse with on here are incapable of dealing with a nuanced opinion. They only see things in black or white,on or off."

Pot, meet kettle.

Posted 483 days ago.

RANDOM21

Got to be careful Harry, this is WV. When you said you had a niece sister and girlfriend it could be construed as one woman. (Couldn't help myself). And if you happen to be a woman also, there's nothing wrong with that, either.

Posted 484 days ago.

harryanderson

Maybe the world needs people who don’t pay a lot of attention to nuance. Maybe such people act more forcefully and decisively in emergencies.

Maybe the world also needs people who pay a lot of attention to nuance. Maybe such people help keep the other kind from acting impulsively.

Maybe we all have our strengths.

Just maybe.

Posted 484 days ago.

harryanderson

"I tossed out the N word which is not one I use. You would assign certain character flaws to me for using the language of racists."

No I wouldn't assign any character flaws to you. I'd conclude that you have done an unwise thing, and you probably agree with that assessment. We all do unwise things from time to time.

There's a big difference between attributing fundamental characteristics to people and describing their behavior.

Posted 484 days ago.

harryanderson

"the socialist redistribution drum."

To be clear. I have proposed no such program. Go back and re-read my comments about problem-solving.

Personally, I lament that some have loudly predicted dire consequences unless we take drastic action, and that others have loudly predicted dire consequences if we take any action.

Posted 484 days ago.

harryanderson

"Don't be obtuse, you know that the phrase anti science campaign is a pejorative. The left likes to frame folk like me as nNeanderthals that are flat earthers if we don't march to the socialist redistribution drum."

Again, I don't intend to frame anybody. I characterized an argument, not a person. Go back and read my comments about Cuccinelli, who is a visible actor in the campaign to which I referred.

Nowhere did I call you a neanderthal or flat-earthed.

Besides, I am not am representative of any left. I represent myself.

Posted 484 days ago.

harryanderson

"If you would consider your Sunday sermon an anti science campaign, I would cede that."

Sure. Why not? The Bible contradicts many things that scientists believe.

Posted 484 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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