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
96 days ago.
by slinky
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

That reading comprehension still giving you problems eh? Don't cherry pick the quote. Read the whole quote and the research if you are capable.

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

That reading comprehension still giving you problems eh? Don't cherry pick the quote. Read the whole quote and the research if you are capable.

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

What problem do you have with the scientific method? Scientists are trying to get the best data they can to make an assessment of the situation.

Why are you against logic, science and rational thought?

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

I call my faith Christian. And I call science... Science.

Try it out sometime, you might like it.

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

You have issues with reading comprehension don't you?

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

"Our new analysis suggests that the apparent hiatus may have been largely the result of limitations in past datasets, and that the rate of warming over the first 15 years of this century has, in fact, been as fast or faster than that seen over the last half of the 20th century." (Thomas R. Karl, L.H.D., Director, NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information)

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

w w w.sciencemag.o rg/content/early/2015/06/05/science.aaa5632.full

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

"Hmmm so you neatly lump everyone who isnt sold on your religion a denier huh?"

I have no religion. I have a faith and that is in Christianity.

If one denies something is happening and doesn't give a logical and scientific alternative....yep, denier fits them pretty well.

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

"Skepticism is no agenda"

Never said it was your agenda. Try not to guess.

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

The deniers complained about readings being taken rooftops and near asphalt, while ignoring all the other measurements.

In the case of the buoys, they want ships to also confirm the readings.

So you see, you are in error. They are not wanting to take one over another but to come to a consensus.

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

You have an agenda and try to tell (not show) us how things are.

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

In which way? Climate change deniers say the data gathered is wrong to suit their misguided beliefs.

In this case, the readings from hundreds of ships where commercial and military sailors are being trusted over buoys with no oversight.

Which do you trust....machines with no direct on site checks or hundreds of independent readings made by people?

Posted 390 days ago.

Kendall78

If it turns out that the scientific equipment is in error, it will change quite a few assumptions about climate change.

Posted 391 days ago.

Kendall78

Was listening to a report on NPR and it may turn out that measuring buoys in the oceans have been wrong for a long time and been giving lower temps than what the actual temps are. If true, then the supposed 20 year "no rise" would be false.

Posted 391 days ago.

harryanderson

Earlier, I referenced a Fox News article about major oil companies calling for a carbon tax.

That same article explained why they're doing so. It said, "While that involves a cost for fossil-fuel companies, they said 'carbon pricing policy frameworks' will help provide a roadmap for energy companies and investors."

The oil companies know there's a problem, and that the longer we refuse to address the problem, the more disruption it will cause.

Disruption is their worst enemy, so they're seeking a roadmap, or stability. They figure they can live with a carbon tax easier than they can live with the consequences of inaction.

Action is inevtable. These oil companies, being rational actors like the Dept. of Defense, call for action that doesn't destroy their investments in infrastructure and natural resources.

Posted 392 days ago.

harryanderson

The counter global warming movement's propaganda campaign has effectively confused many Americans.

It hasn't however, confused the climate scientists,

nor the Pentagon that is charged with keeping us secure,

nor four former Republican EPA Chiefs,

nor the major oil companies who have the most "skin in the game."

Posted 392 days ago.

harryanderson

I’ve posted before that even the oil companies who formerly funded the contrary position, including Shell, Exxon-Mobile, and BP, now acknowledge that greenhouse gases are causing global warming.

Not only that, the American Petroleum Institute, an industry group, lists global warming as one of the biggest threats to “America’s future prosperity.”

Now big oil companies are proposing a solution to our CO2 problem. Fox News reports:

“Six European oil and gas companies have called for a global price on carbon as a way to curb climate-warming emissions from the burning of fossil fuels.

“The chief executives of Royal Dutch Shell, BP, Eni, Total, Statoil and the BG Group made the appeal ahead of a new round of U.N. climate talks Monday in Bonn, Germany.”

htt p://w ww.foxnews.c om/world/2015/06/01/european-oil-and-gas-majors-urge-governments-to-introduce-carbon-pricing/

Posted 393 days ago.

Kunectdots

I wonder what "Australian Research Center" divined the idea that the citizens there would be safer with very strict gun control?

I'm so envious of that spot-on accuracy of the Australian intelligencia. I bet we should listen to them about forces effecting the weather to our detriment...too. (NOT!)

"AUSTRALIA: MORE VIOLENT CRIME DESPITE GUN BAN"

h ttp://w ww.ncpa.o rg/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847

Posted 393 days ago.

Kunectdots

"big" long term ? Hmmmmmm? A struggle for world domination, commencing @ 1600 years ago and continues today in the guise of ISIS. I think that should be considered as a little more than a flash in the pan.

So you think ISIS or a manifestation there of "will be gone" in fifty years? You might run that past ISIS and see what they think of it.

Chapter Fifteen Islam and the Goal of World Domination

h ttp://w ww.answering-islam.o rg/Authors/JR/Future/ch15_islam_and_the_goal.htm

Posted 395 days ago.

Kendall78

I think a lot of it has to do with the "big" long term vs the "smaller" short term. Fifty years from now, the odds are that Isis will be gone while the effects of Global Warming will still be with us and possibly getting worse.

Posted 395 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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