The Truth, Still Inconvenient - Page 3

anitram · 04-12-2011, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by purpleoscar

Most people will want more evidence before they fork over their hard earned money.

I think that you've aptly shown that no amount of evidence will satisfy you. At this point I'd just write you off with that usual belligerent 20% or so of people who unfortunately can't be reached and are going to oppose everything, all the time, so we may as well push with progress without paying any heed to them. And it's sad that it's so but alas.

purpleoscar · 04-12-2011, 08:46 AM

I think it's more than 20%. The scientific debate isn't over but I don't expect you guys to believe that. Most of the arguments thrown at me can be easily repeated back at you including the 20% number. The reality is if it was a smoking gun it would be so explainable and correct that weather predictions would have improved enormously, but it hasn't. We are lower than the IPCC projections.

BVS · 04-12-2011, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by purpleoscar

The reality is if it was a smoking gun it would be so explainable and correct that weather predictions would have improved enormously, but it hasn't.

This shows that you do not understand science. And just like anitram said, you'll probably always be in that group.

Canadiens1131 · 04-12-2011, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by purpleoscar

I think it's more than 20%. The scientific debate isn't over but I don't expect you guys to believe that. Most of the arguments thrown at me can be easily repeated back at you including the 20% number. The reality is if it was a smoking gun it would be so explainable and correct that weather predictions would have improved enormously, but it hasn't. We are lower than the IPCC projections.

The.

Scientific.

Debate.

Is.

Never.

Over.

That's what makes it science - continually reviewing and revising, examining old data with new viewpoints. Science is never static.

PhilsFan · 04-12-2011, 12:15 PM

Unless there's 100% certainty, clearly we should just keep pouring chemicals into the atmosphere.

the iron horse · 04-12-2011, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilsFan

Unless there's 100% certainty, clearly we should just keep pouring chemicals into the atmosphere.

What chemicals have you poured into the atmosphere today?

BVS · 04-12-2011, 06:01 PM

Is that a serious question?

Please tell me it's not a serious question.

the iron horse · 04-12-2011, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVS

Is that a serious question?

Please tell me it's not a serious question.

Yes, a serious question.

Wanna answer?

BoMac · 04-12-2011, 06:18 PM

BVS · 04-12-2011, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the iron horse

Yes, a serious question.

Wanna answer?

Do the cars we drive, the factories we use, or the cigarettes we smoke not emit chemicals and gasses into the atmosphere?

You are aware of this correct?

the iron horse · 04-12-2011, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoMac

Don't worry.

The birds will sing in the morning.

BVS · 04-12-2011, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the iron horse

Don't worry.

The birds will sing in the morning.

Because our free will doesn't have consequences right? So our free will isn't really free will...

That's right, you won't answer that question.

BoMac · 04-12-2011, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the iron horse

Don't worry.

The birds will sing in the morning.

Oh, I'm not worried. You are the personification of a troll. This will be my last time acknowledging a post of yours. From now on I'll just sit back and have a good chuckle at whatever nonsense you post, then go outside to listen to the singsong of lovely birds.

the iron horse · 04-12-2011, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoMac

Oh, I'm not worried. You are the personification of a troll. This will be my last time acknowledging a post of yours. From now on I'll just sit back and have a good chuckle at whatever nonsense you post, then go outside to listen to the singsong of lovely birds.

Thanks.

It's really silly to post anything about birds singing.

BVS · 04-12-2011, 07:54 PM

See iron horse, the simplist question was asked of you and you ignored it.

You are not here to engage.

purpleoscar · 04-12-2011, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilsFan

Unless there's 100% certainty, clearly we should just keep pouring chemicals into the atmosphere.

Without fossil fuels and industrialization most of us wouldn't be alive right now to complain. If a new technology arises that can actually keep our standard of living or (heaven forfend) increase it, most everyone would be on board.

Stagflation is more noxious to humans than CO2.

BVS · 04-12-2011, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by purpleoscar

Without fossil fuels and industrialization most of us wouldn't be alive right now to complain. If a new technology arises that can actually keep our standard of living or (heaven forfend) increase it, most everyone would be on board.

This is stating the obvious, but what does it take to find this innovation?

When you look at the rate of improvements in certain technologies it's obvious(at least to me) that we are lazy in some areas. Transportation energy being one that we have rested on our laurels for far too long.

Irvine511 · 04-13-2011, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the iron horse

Don't worry.

The birds will sing in the morning.

not the birds gargling spilled crude.

i took public transportation to work today.

purpleoscar · 04-13-2011, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVS

This is stating the obvious, but what does it take to find this innovation?

When you look at the rate of improvements in certain technologies it's obvious(at least to me) that we are lazy in some areas. Transportation energy being one that we have rested on our laurels for far too long.

I'd rather we find the money in the budgets we have for research and development (even if we have to trim other programs) than tacking on a carbon tax on top of the current taxes we have. I don't see success in Europe and CO2 is increasing despite these taxes.

the iron horse · 04-14-2011, 06:54 PM

Another opinion:

Global Warming: A Convenient Lie

04-12-2011, 08:46 AM	#42
purpleoscar Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: In right wing paranoia Posts: 7,613 Local Time: 03:54 PM	I think it's more than 20%. The scientific debate isn't over but I don't expect you guys to believe that. Most of the arguments thrown at me can be easily repeated back at you including the 20% number. The reality is if it was a smoking gun it would be so explainable and correct that weather predictions would have improved enormously, but it hasn't. We are lower than the IPCC projections. __________________

04-12-2011, 06:18 PM	#49
BoMac Self-righteous bullshitter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Soviet Canuckistan — Socialist paradise Posts: 16,900 Local Time: 07:54 PM	__________________

04-14-2011, 06:54 PM	#60
the iron horse Rock n' Roll Doggie Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: in a glass of CheerWine Posts: 3,266 Local Time: 06:54 PM	Another opinion: Global Warming: A Convenient Lie __________________

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

04-12-2011, 12:15 PM	#45
PhilsFan Blue Crack Addict Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: South Philadelphia Posts: 19,218 Local Time: 06:54 PM	Unless there's 100% certainty, clearly we should just keep pouring chemicals into the atmosphere.

04-12-2011, 06:01 PM	#47
BVS Blue Crack Supplier Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: between my head and heart Posts: 41,232 Local Time: 05:54 PM	Is that a serious question? Please tell me it's not a serious question.

04-12-2011, 07:54 PM	#55
BVS Blue Crack Supplier Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: between my head and heart Posts: 41,232 Local Time: 05:54 PM	See iron horse, the simplist question was asked of you and you ignored it. You are not here to engage.