Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-23-2017, 08:38 PM
 
12,638 posts, read 8,975,596 times
Reputation: 7458

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason3000 View Post
It seems pretty clear that you've never researched this topic outside of your echo chamber. Google up the articles from the IPCC scientists who quit because of the politiciaztion of climate science. They say very plainly that the science has become a sad joke. That only the most alarming findings make into the important academic papers & get funding. What we see then is a competition among scientists all vying for the same academic grants & notoriety, where the only chance to advance is to have the most alarming findings. Moderates & skeptics are left in the dust or run out of the field.

The IPCC report for policy makers was an especially good example of this politization. Scientists would draft a chapter and have to submit it to various bureaucrats with no scientific background who had "edit" power over the results. They could not re-write the science, but anything they didn't like they simply had edited out of the papers. Why? because the UN was giving away money to the various countries most damaged by climate change, which incentivized them to push the most alarming scenarios possible, to get the most money. The scientists said the various chapters of were a shell of what was originally written, but this is what passes as climate science. This mind you, is from the IPCC, the generally accepted ultimate word on climate change that all others take their lead from.
It's hopeless, really. Such people are so addicted to hate and paranoia that reason and logic simply cannot penetrate the fears, hatreds and prejudices that define their reality. It's like we've been thrown back into the Middle Ages.

 
Old 10-23-2017, 08:42 PM
 
3,457 posts, read 1,459,942 times
Reputation: 1755
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Democrat climate change policy: "Redistribute wealth!"
Yep, and the U.S. has been doing way more than its fair share. Good for China, they're loaded. They can pay for all the life-saving climate change for the next four years. We've been paying almost triple what other countries have been paying for that thing.
 
Old 10-23-2017, 08:44 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,574 posts, read 37,202,082 times
Reputation: 14027
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveToRow View Post
Are you aware of how much CO2 is put into the atmosphere when there is a volcanic eruption? Do you know how that compares to the CO2 emissions of automobiles? I do. You don't have any clue about a thing you're talking about. You are here to post links to left wing propaganda and push an agenda. You know nothing about science.
No you don't know, but I'm no longer surprised.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide. Despite the arguments to the contrary, the facts speak for themselves: Greenhouse gas emissions from volcanoes comprise less than one percent of those generated by today’s human endeavors.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...oes-or-humans/
 
Old 10-23-2017, 08:46 PM
 
8,169 posts, read 3,715,626 times
Reputation: 2745
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveToRow View Post
Yawn, I think I saw the same propaganda in 1980 when I was in 2nd grade. Did you see that in school this year?
So after 2nd grade did you continue school or had to quit due to the "propaganda"?

Just wondering based on your posts
 
Old 10-23-2017, 08:46 PM
 
12,638 posts, read 8,975,596 times
Reputation: 7458
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
You cannot even understand a site aimed at grammar school kids, so you call it propaganda....I'm surprised you didn't use the usual GOP response "Fake news"....
Answer the question, did you see that in school this week?
 
Old 10-23-2017, 08:46 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,574 posts, read 37,202,082 times
Reputation: 14027
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveToRow View Post
It's hopeless, really. Such people are so addicted to hate and paranoia that reason and logic simply cannot penetrate the fears, hatreds and prejudices that define their reality. It's like we've been thrown back into the Middle Ages.
Judging by your posts your knowledge of science does indeed belong in the middle ages, or perhaps earlier.
 
Old 10-23-2017, 08:50 PM
 
12,638 posts, read 8,975,596 times
Reputation: 7458
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
No you don't know, but I'm no longer surprised.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide. Despite the arguments to the contrary, the facts speak for themselves: Greenhouse gas emissions from volcanoes comprise less than one percent of those generated by today’s human endeavors.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...oes-or-humans/
Not a credible source and the issue is greenhouse gas emissions, of which CO2 is a portion.
 
Old 10-23-2017, 08:55 PM
Status: "Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge." (set 17 days ago)
 
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,609,611 times
Reputation: 5697
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveToRow View Post
When you can tell the difference between a lie and a fact, we can have a discussion about growing up. FACT: The rain forests are still here, contrary to what people like you shrieked 30 years ago.

Maybe sometime in the last 30 years, Brazil's government started taking steps to preserve the forest, and hence why there are still rainforests.

One extreme prediction being false does not prove the entire set of ideas likely false. That's like saying because Charleston SC had one bad earthquake in 1886 and none since then proves that the region is not affected by fault lines.
 
Old 10-23-2017, 08:55 PM
 
2,818 posts, read 1,558,033 times
Reputation: 3608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason3000 View Post
It seems pretty clear that you've never researched this topic outside of your echo chamber. Google up the articles from the IPCC scientists who quit because of the politiciaztion of climate science. They say very plainly that the science has become a sad joke. That only the most alarming findings make into the important academic papers & get funding. What we see then is a competition among scientists all vying for the same academic grants & notoriety, where the only chance to advance is to have the most alarming findings. Moderates & skeptics are left in the dust or run out of the field.

The IPCC report for policy makers was an especially good example of this politization. Scientists would draft a chapter and have to submit it to various bureaucrats with no scientific background who had "edit" power over the results. They could not re-write the science, but anything they didn't like they simply had edited out of the papers. Why? because the UN was giving away money to the various countries most damaged by climate change, which incentivized them to push the most alarming scenarios possible, to get the most money. The scientists said the various chapters of were a shell of what was originally written, but this is what passes as climate science. This mind you, is from the IPCC, the generally accepted ultimate word on climate change that all others take their lead from.
All of what you said about the so-called politicization or corruption of the IPCC scientists has been debunked. Get a clue.
 
Old 10-23-2017, 08:58 PM
 
10,920 posts, read 6,926,884 times
Reputation: 4942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason3000 View Post
Look up the grants from the Rockefeller Foundation (for one) to fund climate change.
I'd appreciate a citation from you, please. You're making this outrageous claim - please back it up.


This does not back up what you're saying:

https://phys.org/news/2013-12-koch-b...s-climate.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...denial-effort/

Global Warming Skeptic Organizations | Union of Concerned Scientists
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top