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
22 minutes ago.
by Ohwiseone
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

“So to be clear, science is NOT the basis for ALL your beliefs, is that correct?”

Of course not. I’ve tried to honest and sincere about that. I’ve tried to make it clear that the Bible greatly influences my beliefs. Furthermore, the other bases I listed before—culture, training, physical evidence, and group identification—all influence my beliefs to some extent.

I doubt that any sane person living in a free society is influenced only by science, or religion, or culture, or any other single basis. Most humans are much too complex for that.

Posted 488 days ago.

harryanderson

I refer you to my previous statement, which you may have overlooked, in which I said that beliefs may have other bases besides physical evidence.

Furthermore, science isn't the only sound basis for a belief. None of us is a perfectly rational creature.

So, what is the basis for your belief that climate science is a political conspiracy?

Posted 488 days ago.

harryanderson

Any reasonable person should agree that beliefs aren't always based on science. Beliefs may have origins such as religion, cultural preference, training, group identification, and so on.

With that in mind, are you now willing to restate the basis for your apparent belief that climate science is a political conspiracy we should fear?

Posted 488 days ago.

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 488 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 488 days ago.

harryanderson

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

Posted 489 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 489 days ago.

harryanderson

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

Posted 489 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 489 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 489 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 498 days ago.

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

I'm sorry, I can't.

Posted 498 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 498 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 500 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 503 days ago.

mythravere

One last thing. The opinions I have on here are in no way reflective of how I am in person. If we couldn't get along face to face it wouldn't be my fault.

Thats the kind of person I am. I keep to myself and my own business. I like peace and quiet at home except when I am blasting my favorite metal bands and watch mostly the History Channels and Documentaries etc. With war history and technological history being my favorite subjects. I have probably literally a ton of books with every single issue of National Geographic from January 1980 to December 1989 with lots in between.

I am sorry I called you a name but I can get a little fiery at times. But I think that is better than being one of the thousands who dont have any opinion at all and know more about pop stars than their very own country.

Just saying.

Posted 504 days ago.

mythravere

To that you can add their willingness to allow a corporation to walk right over a person and get away with it.

I've also never forgiven them for their warmongering ways. The Iraq war was for oil and oil alone. To bad that failed. China is reaping the rewards of that war.

It all comes down to this. Speak to me but dont dictate to me. Make me your enemy and I'll be your enemy.

Posted 504 days ago.

mythravere

As for being afraid of my own convictions. Not sure if that was being directed at me but I aint afraid of mine.

I agree with quite a bit the right has to say in regards to the issues we face. But its the attitude that turns me away. And there is a lot of distortion of the facts and outright lying going on. Both sides do this. But its the right who actually concerns me the most. There are some things they bring to the table that I can not support. Most of that surrounds foreign policy and issues of belief.

Posted 504 days ago.

mythravere

Hey I agree with you. I believe in nuclear energy. Its problems are technical in nature and surmountable. Especially promising is a thorium fuel reactor. Look it up. But some people are rightfully afraid of nuclear energy.

Who's to blame for that. The people that let disasters happen!

Posted 504 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 504 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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