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
3 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

Kendall78

And Tired, if one looks at your pasts posts, you do give support to the notion that global warming is happening.

I'm sorry that upsets you but when you leave out specifics in your vague claims, then you invite people to fill in the gaps. Those gaps tend to shoot your position out of the water.

You say that there haven't been any significant increase in temps on land for 17 years. That invites people to see how the oceanic temps are doing. They have been going up and cover more of the surface of the Earth than land.

By metioning 17 years (which is outdated so update your copy/paste), you invite people to compare these last 17 years with the previous 17. And of course the last 17 were hotter on average than the previous 17 and continues to show that the problem is still very real.

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

After all the blather from Tired and he still has not proven his point yet.

Tired, is the average temp of the Earth higher or lower than 100 years ago?

If higher, what is causing it?

If lower, what is causing it?

Lastly, can you prove it or at least offer up citation to support your position?

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

Lesson of the day Tired....use quotation marks. Otherwise you seem a bit erratic.

"You are so deluded you thing I am.."

Also I would recommend you pause and take your time in writing. Otherwise you kind of sound like a caveman.

Posted 92 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Hers some facts from nasa ~~~~Earth-orbiting satellites and other technological advances have enabled scientists to see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate on a global scale. Studying these climate data collected over many years reveal the signals of a changing climate.

Posted 92 days ago.

Ohwiseone

OMG tiredbrain ! Lets say you get stung , well it might have been a bee , maybe not ! But the FACT IS YOU GOT STUNG !!!!Denial is not a viable option !

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

You keep blabbering about not having proof. I find this odd since there has been alot of evidence sufficient to establish it to be true. Even from your own ramblings.

You have shown that the past 17 years have been hotter than the previous 17. Thank you for that.

You have shown that land temps have not changed dramatically and thanks to you being so specific in saying land temps, you have shown us that oceanic temps have risen. Thanks again.

You say CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas but then blatantly refuse to show it to be an inert gas incapable of being a greenhouse gas. Therefor the obvious conclusion is to go with existing data and agree that yes...it is a greenhouse gas. Thanks again.

Being a denier that offers no information just strenghtens the very position you want to tear down. Don't you get that?

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

"I GUESS YOU DONT UNDERSTAND POKER EITHER."

Actually I understand it quite well. I am playing the game while you are just a heckler in the stands who wished they had the capital to play the game.

You see Tired, to play this game you have to be willing to offer information and citation. You don't do this and think you prove something by telling others they are wrong with no good reason.

Many logical questions are asked of you and you refuse to asnwer them. I don't know why. Maybe you are afraid. Maybe you don't know. But since you do not offer anything to back up your assertions, you are not playing the game...you are just a heckler.

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

"because you have nothing and cannot admit it."

Are you saying that I never cited any of my information before? You should try to make your lies more opaque.

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

"Cannot prove a negative."

I agree, that's why I never asked you to prove one.

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

I never said once that the govt needs more power.

Why do you lie so much?

Time for dinner...have fun with those citations you are going to post. :D

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

I will tell you what....I will again cite my information when you do.

That seems fair right?

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

Actually you have shown nothing, that's your problem. And you seem to have a short term memory issue too.

Look back through the many many pages and you will see where I cite information many many time.

You will also see where you never cite information many many timesbut still make claims.

Remember, calling a bluff implies you have a better hand or more chips. You have neither. ;)

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

"show me the data"

Why? You won't accept it. You already have said that many times in many different ways.

Is that why you don't give proof because even you don't believe it?

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

"NO more proof than any other warming or cooling cycle were man made"

Except that this warming trend does not fall into the historical norms. The only different factor is the industrialization of society brought by mankind.

Again, if you have another provable possibility...show us your proof and we will consider it. Otherwise, why are you wasting your time?

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

"I don't have to prove they are not, cannot prove a negative"

I have never once EVER asked you to prove a negative. I have many times to prove your unsaid assertion that something else is causing the current climate change. You have not done that.

I also asked you to show that CO2 doesn't have the properties of a "greenhouse gas" but that it has the properties of a safe gas. You have not. I don't think you can.

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

"That's why you are losing the argument."

What argument am I losing? I back up my assertions with research and cite that information.

You....don't.

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

"but that IS NOT PROOF"

So the rise in temperatures during the last 100 years is not proof?

Curious, what would you consider proof? Don't deflect...answer the question because I think everyone would be interested in knowing what you consider to be proof.

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

"SO KENDALL IS MORE..."

Ignoring the childish screaming, I never once said I was more intelligent than her. But facts have very little to do with her comment now doesn't it?

No where in her comment does she state that she can prove that scientists exgaggerate. Also, in no way does her comments show that mankind does not effect climate change.

So Tired, you are still left without any evidence supporting your position. Back to square 1 with you.

Posted 92 days ago.

Kendall78

"So, yes, climate scientists might exaggerate"

See that word "might". Some similiar words are: perhaps or imaginably.

So just because they "might" does not mean they do. You have to prove that they (the entire global warming community) exaggerate. Good luck.

Posted 92 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Must be awfully comfortable having your head up your keister , you seem to stay in that position a lot !

Posted 92 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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