The Truth, Still Inconvenient - Page 28 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-24-2013, 12:56 PM   #406
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,290
Local Time: 09:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse View Post

That's ok, I will continue to enjoy hearing the birds sing
and working in my garden.
Because that would be rendered impossible if you behaved logically with respect to climate change?

You hear something new every day.
__________________

__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2013, 05:50 PM   #407
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 09:30 PM
this may be helpful:

Quote:
Global Warming Firehose
By Phil Plait | Posted Friday, May 24, 2013, at 9:33 AM

A lot of news has bubbled up about global warming over the past few days, and devoting a post to each one would be a) carpal tunnel syndrome-inducing, and 2) depressing as hell. So in the manner of ripping off a Band-aid quickly, here is a torrent of global warming info, and as usual it’s about reality and the foes thereof.

1) Consensus

First up: A clarification. I recently posted that 97% of global warming papers that take a stance on its cause say it’s human-induced. This has generated the usual amount of hot air (ha! haha!) from the deniers, including the gem that consensus doesn’t equal reality. “Scientists once thought the Earth was flat!” they cry.

That’s actually not quite true; ancient Greek scientists knew the Earth was round, and even how big it was. And who do you think replaces older, less accurate information with better understanding? Scientists!

Anyway, we on the side of reality know that consensus is not proof of global warming—the scientific evidence of global warming is overwhelming and obvious, as well as very easy to find. The actual point of discussing the consensus is that due to the relentless effort of deniers, the public thinks this is a real controversy. It isn’t. The consensus shows that the vast majority of actual climate scientists agree that global warming is real, and we’re to blame.

Which brings me to this head-desking bit of denial:

2) Lamar Smith’s Embarrassing Editorial

Representative Lamar Smith (R-Tex) is head of the House Science Committee, and also a major global warming denier. He wrote an OpEd in the Washington Post recently that is a atrocious bit of nonsense typical of the genre.

Smith’s false claims are ably dismantled at Climate Science Watch, which has links and references. Smith is an interesting case: he’s also trying mightily to politicize the National Science Foundation, but at the same time is a strong advocate for NASA and space exploration, and other fields of science as well. This makes him less of a caricature than, say, Georgia Representative Paul “Evolution is a lie from the pit of Hell” Broun, but serves as a good example that ideological compartmentalization affects all of us, and we all suffer from cognitive biases. We need to be aware of them, and we especially need to be aware of them—and call them out—when our duly elected representatives display them.

Speaking of which…

3) Why Deny?

It’s not clear to me why some people deny the fact of global warming. It may be ideological, or it may be due to funding sources (like huge amounts of cash dumped into denial by fossil fuel companies and the Koch brothers).

Or it may be both. On MSNBC, Chris Hayes has a pretty scathing expose on this, saying we need to follow the money, and also trace the religious belief used to bolster denialism. That last part is no joke; a recent study showed that a chunk of people really believe in Biblical end times, and this colors their attitude about such things as climate change. Remember, in 2009, Representative John Shimkus (R-Ill.) quoted the Bible in Congress—specifically commenting on climate change—saying that only God can declare the time when the Earth ends, and that “man will not destroy this Earth.” And he still sits on the Committee for Energy and Commerce.


4) Big Picture Science

I did an interview with my friend and astronomer Seth Shostak on the SETI radio show Big Picture Science, talking about the awesomely terrible claim that more carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is great for plants. That whole show is about global warming, and it’s well worth your time to hear.

5) What Say Ye?

So what do you do when confronted by a denier, who says CO2 is good for us, or that ice is increasing, or that the Sun is the cause of warming?

What you do is refer to this fantastic list of 99 one-liners rebutting denier claims. It’s one-stop shopping for quick retorts to these talking points. It’s lengthy, but good, and has links to more detailed rebuttals and science as well.

Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says

And you should always have Skeptical Science on your bookmarks. It’s one of the first places I go when I see some new climate antiscience that pops up in the deniosphere.

Global warming: News items about climate change.

__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2013, 06:34 PM   #408
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 08:30 PM
I think the reason for denying varies; in here we see examples of people who just think it will be too expensive so they throw any shit to the wall and see if it sticks, then you also see those that feel like a rebel in doing so and they never really respected science in the first place, and then there are those that will just tow the party line till death. But they all have one common denominator: laziness.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2013, 09:15 PM   #409
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,251
Local Time: 09:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
It's kind of hard to disagree with science.

Tell me, *why* do you disagree? Be specific.

A science fact, yes. I don't disagree.
But opinion trying to present itself as scientific fact?

I'm a skeptic.
Especially when the opinion is being driven by a political agenda.

Here's a site worth spending some time reading:
ICECAP
__________________
the iron horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2013, 09:25 PM   #410
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 09:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse View Post

A science fact, yes. I don't disagree.
But opinion trying to present itself as scientific fact?

I'm a skeptic.
Especially when the opinion is being driven by a political agenda.

Here's a site worth spending some time reading:
ICECAP


What about climate change is "opinion"?



Ps - you weren't specific.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2013, 12:24 AM   #411
Blue Crack Supplier
 
IWasBored's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 36,504
Local Time: 10:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitize View Post
There have been few times when I wanted to apply the term "radical atheist" to myself more than the time when I heard the argument that "global warning isn't happening because there's no way that God would let it happen". I think it was from James Inhofe, which wouldn't be surprising, but I may be mistaken.
Wait, didn't that same god flood the planet because he thought people were fucking shit up?
__________________
IWasBored is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2013, 12:43 AM   #412
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:30 PM
That icecap website looks like it was designed by a crazy person. What am I supposed to be looking at there?
__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2013, 01:05 AM   #413
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 08:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse View Post

Here's a site worth spending some time reading:
ICECAP
Explain to me your true reason for denying. Be honest, because I'm confused, this site contradicts some of the other junk science that you've tried to post as your reason for not believing in climate change.

Deny all you want, just be honest about why; is it because you think Jesus wouldn't allow it, or is it because you believe in contrary science? You're not being honest with us.

Just don't be one of those trolls that throws shit against the wall and hopes it sticks. We already have one of those.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2013, 07:57 PM   #414
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,251
Local Time: 09:30 PM
U.S. Weather Records & Climate Extremes
__________________
the iron horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2013, 09:34 PM   #415
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
What about climate change is "opinion"?
How about IF it is occuring and IF it is occuring because of the activities of man that it is something that MUST be feared? That seems like opinion to me.

What is the "normal" temp above which is warming? What is the "optimal" temp above or below which has a negative impact on human life?

And even if it's all true and potentially dangerous when can it be mentioned that the political and scientific "remedies" may have a more negative impact on humans (less individual freedom in the form of lower energy use, restrictions on travel, higher taxes -- relinquished national sovereignty -- and less economic wealth to deal with dislocation, famine, medicine, future technologies) than climate change itself?
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2013, 09:46 PM   #416
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,237
Local Time: 08:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post

How about IF it is occuring
There is no question about whether it is occurring or not. Actually, let me rephrase: for those who acknowledge the unbiased, apolitical truth, there is no question about whether it's occurring or not.

Quote:
when can it be mentioned that the political and scientific "remedies" may have a more negative impact on humans (lower energy use, less individual freedom or national sovereignty, restrictions on travel, less economic wealth to deal with dislocation, famine, medicine, future technologies) than climate change itself?
Yeah, screw the rest of the living creatures on this earth.
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2013, 10:10 PM   #417
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 09:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post

How about IF it is occuring and IF it is occuring because of the activities of man that it is something that MUST be feared? That seems like opinion to me.

What is the "normal" temp above which is warming? What is the "optimal" temp above or below which has a negative impact on human life?

And even if it's all true and potentially dangerous when can it be mentioned that the political and scientific "remedies" may have a more negative impact on humans (less individual freedom in the form of lower energy use, restrictions on travel, higher taxes -- relinquished national sovereignty -- and less economic wealth to deal with dislocation, famine, medicine, future technologies) than climate change itself?


And suddenly, on this issue, relativism is a virtue.

Where's your moral clarity?
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2013, 10:14 PM   #418
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 08:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse View Post
Two well known frauds. Harris studied insurance law and Mann was a weather man(one who never even actually got a degree in meteorology). Their chart is so full of holes it's not even worth touching. Please don't pretend to respect "science" only when it's shaped to fit your agenda.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2013, 10:17 PM   #419
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
There is no question about whether it is occurring or not. Actually, let me rephrase: for those who acknowledge the unbiased, apolitical truth, there is no question about whether it's occurring or not.



Yeah, screw the rest of the living creatures on this earth.
You miss the point so clearly one could almost suspect you of doing it intentionally.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2013, 10:35 PM   #420
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,237
Local Time: 08:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post

You miss the point so clearly one could almost suspect you of doing it intentionally.
Oh, aren't you precious.
__________________

__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com