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 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

harryanderson

I try to get my information from neutral sources that appeal to reason, not emotion.

Posted 82 days ago.

mythravere

And you are saying Tiredofit that the real..the true science is on your side.

LOL!

But their funding? It leads to no conflict of interest at all? LOL!

Posted 82 days ago.

harryanderson

I like breathing clean air.

Posted 82 days ago.

mythravere

A neutral source is the actual scientists.

But who am I kidding you don't even trust the scientists. Which is funny because if what you say is true and there has been no warming a person would have to rely on scientists to show them that. Which is even funnier because in your case I am guessing that if they stated that you would then somehow look the other way and not question their funding.

LOL!

Posted 82 days ago.

harryanderson

Lowering our use of fossil fuels, which 2/3 of Republican- leaning voters would like to see us do, would lessen our need to buy them from unstable regions like the Mideast.

That' good for our national security.

Posted 82 days ago.

harryanderson

Lowering our use of fossil fuels, which 2/3 of Republican- leaning voters would like to see us do, would lessen our need to buy them from unstable regions like the Mideast.

That' good for our national security.

Posted 82 days ago.

harryanderson

As we lower our use of fossil fuels, we'll breathe in less of the smog and soot they cause.

That's a good thing.

Posted 82 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Why wont you answer ? Are you ashamed ?? Where does Faux get their "research" ?????? Who funds that ????? Who's agenda are they following ????? And most of all Who's agenda are you following ????This is proof by your silence that your full of crap !

Posted 82 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Here is the research you deny exists ! !!! research that is not funded by our government ! ~~~~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

Posted 82 days ago.

harryanderson

The purpose is to shut down rational debate.

Posted 82 days ago.

harryanderson

The purpose is to shut down rational debate.

Posted 82 days ago.

mythravere

Neutral sources will be the only proof that is considered.

You've dumped a heck of a lot of "proof" from rightwing sources on here.

Sorry but thats just not gonna cut it.

And more importantly its easy to ascertain the manner in which you conducted your "research". You just hopped around copy and pasting from whatever you thought had something to say that supports your cause.

Posted 82 days ago.

Kendall78

What would you consider to count as proof Tired?

Posted 82 days ago.

Kendall78

"You asked for research that is meaningful and that was provided"

No, it wasn't provided. This was neither research or meaningful. It was copy/paste from various less than savory source material.

Posted 83 days ago.

Ohwiseone

All one must do is look to the history of one James Taylor and see what type of "contributer" he is ! All the articles he's posted for forbes have been of the right-wing agenda !So why don't you just ask Rush or Sean , it would be the same !

Posted 83 days ago.

Ohwiseone

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

Posted 83 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Yes maybe but that changes nothing ! You asked for research that is meaningful and that was provided !And yet you still deflect and deny and refuse to answer ~~ Where does Faux get their "research" ?????? Who funds that ????? Who's agenda are they following ????? And most of all Who's agenda are you following ????

Posted 83 days ago.

Kendall78

Wow...look at all the copy/paste from Tired. Without much in the way of citations I might add.

Posted 83 days ago.

Ohwiseone

By the way , Where does Faux get their "research" ?????? Who funds that ????? Who's agenda are they following ????? And most of all Who's agenda are you following ???? Are you ashamed ??

Posted 83 days ago.

Ohwiseone

HMMMm looks like the debate IS over.You now have proof

Posted 83 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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