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
4 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

mythravere

Oh yea how about so called voter id laws?

Blacks for the most part voted for Obama...well I guess the best thing to do is to make sure they don't get a chance to do so again right?

Posted 220 days ago.

mythravere

Another good example of conservative marginalizing others is the assigning to the people with whom they do not agree an identifier that equates those people with something that is counter to American values.

You know like calling liberals socialists,marxists etc.

Posted 220 days ago.

mythravere

Kendall and Harry why are you letting Tiredofit s uck you into arguing over what is truthfully not the meat and bones of this argument.

He says climate change isn't caused by man.

OK! Rodger! Got that.

Lets talk about the science.

He seems to WANT to avoid that argument .

Posted 220 days ago.

mythravere

Marginalize you say? You mean like saying if you aint with us you're against us?

Like taking issue with the war that was started in 2003 and equating not supporting that with not supporting the troops up to and including the insinuation that you hated the troops.

Nope no marginalization there.

Posted 220 days ago.

Tiredofit

Public opinion is just that, I don't really give it a lot weight as a general rule. When I do, I just click on the ole TV set back to reality for me.

Posted 220 days ago.

Tiredofit

The left loves to try an marginalize opinion, saying every one agrees with X. Whats wrong with you HATER??? something like that. Just like the 97 percent quote, even OBAMA was tossing it around..I demonstrated clearly that there is a list of qualifiers omissions that NO ONE ever points out, mostly because they just buy into the 97 percent, because everyone else does.

Posted 220 days ago.

Tiredofit

Don't believe public opinion means anything per say but the very title of this thread impies it just s harry attempted to imply that 2 of 3 people bought into AGW. Lets face it Mother Jones AINT FORBES, it a left wing rag.

Posted 220 days ago.

Kendall78

"Of course global warming happens"

No one is arguing with that. The debate is whether it is due to mankind or nature. Many people have given evidence that man has had an effect but no one on here has offered up any evidence that current climate change is due only to nature.

Posted 220 days ago.

Kendall78

"The percentage of Americans who believe global warming is human-caused has also declined,"

Tired, you cannot justify truth with popular opinion. Buddhism or Islam is said to be the fastest growing religions while Christianity is declining. Does that mean they are the true way?

Posted 220 days ago.

Tiredofit

Of course global warming happens or there would be ice bergs across Ohio, DUH

Posted 220 days ago.

Kendall78

Sorry Harry....misunderstood your comment at first.

Posted 220 days ago.

Kendall78

"Maybe in your crowd, but not among nearly 2/3 of Americans."

Though who knows where you get your 2/3 from, who ever said they know what they are talking about. After all, 53% of Americans thought Obama was the way to go in the last election. Does the idea that the majority must be correct apply there?

Posted 220 days ago.

Tiredofit

Once again harry wades in with half truths. FROM THE SAME ARTICLE The percentage of Americans who believe global warming is human-caused has also declined, and now stands at 47 percent, a decrease of 7 percent since 2012.

At the same time, the survey also shows an apparent hardening of attitudes. Back in September 2012, only 43 percent of those who believed that global warming isn't happening said they were either "very sure" or "extremely sure" about their views. By November of last year, that number had increased to 56 percent.

Posted 220 days ago.

harryanderson

Ithink, you write,“ Want to be laughed at? Talk about global warming in a crowd.”

Maybe in your crowd, but not among nearly 2/3 of Americans.

A couple of days ago, Tiredofit trumpeted a Mother Jones article titled “Global-Warming Denial Hits a 6-Year High.” According to that article, 63% of Americans think global warming is happening, while only 23% think it isn’t.

Seems one stands a greater chance of being laughed it if he or she insists global warming is “a liberal fairy tale.”

Posted 220 days ago.

Kendall78

Talk about weather when people are talking about climate and you will be laughed at.

And while one cannot prove a negative, there is something he could do. You could do it as well. Scientifically show why the overall global temperature has went up. It's always easy to say "that's not true" but do you have the will to prove what is true?

Posted 220 days ago.

Evidence of future man made global warming effects is non existent.

Want to be laughed at? Talk about global warming in a crowd. Cold conditions hurt people year after year, and they are sick of the scare tactics of excessive warming. A liberal fairy tale for a nanny state.

Posted 220 days ago.

Kendall78

So from what I've seen, Tired still has not offered up any evidence that man made climate change isn't happening, that there is a connection between politics and the science of climate change and still has not answered if he agrees with Richard Lizden or not.

Posted 220 days ago.

harryanderson

As to probabilities and “proof,” or certainty:

To the Christian, there is no certainty in the natural world. God “upholds” the creation. God makes the rules and God changes the rules at will.

God changed the laws of science when he brought plagues upon Egypt and when he brought the flood in Noah’s time. And God isn’t done changing the laws of science. See Revelation. God promises to change everything.

I just finished my lunch. If I drop my plate, I expect it to fall because there’s a high probability God hasn’t suspended the law of gravity for some reason. I expect it to fall, but I can’t be 100% certain.

To borrow a legal phrase, we can only prove things “beyond a reasonable doubt.” To me, the broad agreement among climate scientists proves beyond a reasonable doubt that man’s activities are warming the earth.

Posted 220 days ago.

harryanderson

And, Tiredofit, I believe you’re confused about who peers are. Peers aren’t buddies.

In law, peers are those of the same legal status. Otherwise, a peer is “a person who is equal to another in abilities, qualifications, age, background, and social status.”

If you really mean it when you say you want to avoid unproven political conspiracies, you’ll stop distorting definitions to imply a conspiracy among scientists. You have provided no evidence of a climate science conspiracy.

Posted 220 days ago.

harryanderson

“I will remind you that number represents 75 people.”

That doesn’t mean only 75 people are convinced by the evidence. I don’t know how you get that number from the Anderegg et. al. study from which I was quoting and which I cited earlier.

Let’s look at the actual figures. The Anderegg study involved 908 people it classified as “climate researchers,” ranking them for expertise and credibility. It divided them into those convinced by the evidence (CE) and unconvinced by the evidence (UE).

Of the entire 908, the CE group numbered 817, or 90%.

Of the top 200 researchers, 97.5% fell in the CE group.

Of the top 100, 97% fell in the CE group.

Of the top 50. 98% fell in the CE group.

And, “In addition to the striking difference in number of expert researchers between CE and UE groups, the distribution of expertise of the UE group is far below that of the CE group.

Posted 220 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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