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 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

I mean just look at the Navy's attempt at making bio-jet fuel. Republicans shut it down.

Why?

All this talk of leaving this nation open to terrorists because of the border. Yet the need to have a fuel source for our armed forces that isn't tied directly into where we could be fighting wars in the future..is completely ignored.

Posted 80 days ago.

mythravere

" Yet you are willing to hand the govt complete control of the energy sector and you liberties"

Stop attributing things like that to people when no one has even said that was on their mind or has any possibility of happening.

I dont want that. I am sure everyone else doesn't want that.

What we do want is to see our current energy sources cleaned up and diversified.

And if it be necessary. By all means let the government help out in the development of alternative energy sources that are more stable and less apt to draw us into needless wars.

Posted 80 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Sorry 75 out of 79 ! And those same kind of skeptics were the ones that told Noah that it was just going to rain a little bit !

Posted 80 days ago.

Ohwiseone

No not one but 77 out of 79 !

Posted 80 days ago.

Ohwiseone

76 out of 79 climatologists who "listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change" believe that mean global temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and 75 out of 77 believe that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures.

Posted 80 days ago.

Kendall78

"The Doran paper has been criticised by many sceptics in the past,..."

"Appeal to authority of the best paid people in science but NO PROOF"

So when you copy/paste from wattsupwiththat website that is a cheap little place for your appeal to authority....what does that make you Tired?

Posted 81 days ago.

Kendall78

"no proof at all, morons all."

Would that include you Tired because you offer no proof for your positions. ;)

Posted 81 days ago.

Ohwiseone

WOW what a dingle berry !

Posted 81 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Tired it wouldn't matter if god himself supported the scientific view on climate change , you would call him a moron a liar and fraud ! The indoctrination is complete on this one !

Posted 81 days ago.

Ohwiseone

76 out of 79 climatologists who "listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change" believe that mean global temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and 75 out of 77 believe that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures.

Posted 81 days ago.

mythravere

Or they stupidly prescribe an issue to their political opponents erroneously.

Like has been done with climate change.

Posted 81 days ago.

mythravere

Also he knows full well that if he were to believe it then it would put him outside the boundaries of what is considered "proper" republican thinking.

He's a lemming. He's a conformist. And above all else he's not a freethinker.

Heck. We've all seen how he reacts to you labeling yourself a conservative. He calls you are fraud and acts as if your beliefs aren't legitimate.

Some people get so wrapped up in their "politics" it cripples their critical thinking and they become incapable of considering anything outside the bounds of their chosen political stripe.

Posted 81 days ago.

mythravere

Harry. Seriously. Don't even bother going to any kind of explanation about this issue with Tiredofit.

You and me both know that no matter how good of an explanation it is...he'll just reject it without a single consideration to its veracity.

Tiredofit has fully proven that his opinion on this issue is heavily politicized. And thats the angle he is coming from. Thats the reason why he thinks its all a hoax.

Posted 81 days ago.

mythravere

Oh god lol! Just for giggles. Whose authority told you it was all wrong Tiredofit?

Apparently some authority has appealed to you because something had to inform you in such a way that it caused you to field the opinion that you do.

And that authority is very very well funded.

Posted 81 days ago.

harryanderson

Since most of us don't have the time or inclination to obtain the specialized training required to evaluate climate change, we rely on the testimony of expert witnesses.

Our courts rely heavily on expert testimony in scientific matters. "An intelligent evaluation of facts is often difficult or impossible without the application of some scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge. The most common source of this knowledge is the expert witness..."

ww w.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702

Wise people will follow the example of the courts in weighing evidence. They've refined the art over centuries.

Those who refuse to consider the testimony of 97% of the most-published and most-reviewed climate experts are, in effect, discounting the best, most common source of scientific knowledge available to them.

And that is foolish, my friends.

Posted 81 days ago.

harryanderson

Since most of us don't have the time or inclination to obtain the specialized training required to evaluate climate change, we rely on the testimony of expert witnesses.

Our courts rely heavily on expert testimony in scientific matters. "An intelligent evaluation of facts is often difficult or impossible without the application of some scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge. The most common source of this knowledge is the expert witness..."

ww w.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702

Wise people will follow the example of the courts in weighing evidence. They've refined the art over centuries.

Those who refuse to consider the testimony of 97% of the most-published and most-reviewed climate experts are, in effect, discounting the best, most common source of scientific knowledge available to them.

And that is foolish, my friends.

Posted 81 days ago.

Kendall78

"Give me one provable link showing CO2 causes global warming, is that so hard?"

Nope..that's why we have done it so many time before.

Posted 81 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Another mushroom speaks !

Posted 81 days ago.

ohweirdone, your ignorance is showing.

Posted 81 days ago.

harryanderson

Sure. Don't duck.

Posted 81 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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