Research sho there is no scientific debate about climate change

[Beaker]

(04-16-2016, 06:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So when are the icecaps going to melt?

Exactly what I'm talking about. Why not look up some of the research yourself instead of hearing it second hand?

[*bfine32*]

(04-16-2016, 07:01 PM)Beaker Wrote: Exactly what I'm talking about. Why not look up some of the research yourself instead of hearing it second hand?

You do realize that anything you read on the internet is second hand don't you? All one has to do is type GLOBAL WARMING into their address bar and they can read all they want. Do you really want me to share links that shows Global Warming is over-stated by many?

I thought JustWinBaby did a fine job of refuting your OP. Global warming is just one more thing that Chicken Little can scream about the sky falling. We should most likely focus on real issues

[fredtoast]

(04-16-2016, 06:38 PM)bfine32 Wrote: If you can convince the gullible that your opponent is going to "kill the world' and cause worldwide terrorism you might pick up a vote or 2.

 

That does not answer they question about why they continue to push changes after they are elected.

[*bfine32*]

(04-16-2016, 07:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: That does not answer they question about why they continue to push changes after they are elected.

Re-election or to pave the way for others that share their views on other matters.

[fredtoast]

(04-16-2016, 07:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I thought JustWinBaby did a fine job of refuting your OP. Global warming is just one more thing that Chicken Little can scream about the sky falling. We should most likely focus on real issues

He refuted nothing.

He did not post a single shred of evidence against man contributing to global warming.

How can you see that as a refutation of anything?

"Well maybe less than 97% agree.  That definitely proves it is all just made up.  Derp."

[fredtoast]

(04-16-2016, 07:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Re-election or to pave the way for others that share their views on other matters.

Hurting the economy does not get you re-elected.

This argument makes not sense.

[*bfine32*]

(04-16-2016, 07:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: He refuted nothing.

He did not post a single shred of evidence against man contributing to global warming.

How can you see that as a refutation of anything?

"Well maybe less than 97% agree.  That definitely proves it is all just made up.  Derp."

I'll ask the question you accidentally cut out on the quote: Do you want me to post studies refuting the effects of global warming? I just gave a fellow board member credit for bringing something to the table. I supose you could call him stupid. 

[*bfine32*]

(04-16-2016, 07:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Hurting the economy does not get you re-elected.

This argument makes not sense.

Making rubes think you are trying to save the world does. I understand why that makes no sense to you. 

[fredtoast]

(04-16-2016, 07:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Making rubes think you are trying to save the world does. I understand why that makes no sense to you. 

But if they were just going to make something up why make up something that will hurt our economy.  Why not make up something that won't hurt the economy to accomplish?

And how did they get the rest of the world to go along with it?

[fredtoast]

(04-16-2016, 07:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  Do you want me to post studies refuting the effects of global warming? 

Actually post some evidence to back up your opinion?  Why in the world would you ever do that?  You already have people telling you what to believe.  No need to do any research on your own.  Instead just blindly believe what you are told.

[Beaker]

(04-16-2016, 07:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: We should most likely focus on real issues

So do you think human burning of fossil fuels is having no effect on the levels of CO2 present in the earth's atmosphere?

[*bfine32*]

(04-16-2016, 08:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But if they were just going to make something up why make up something that will hurt our economy.  Why not make up something that won't hurt the economy to accomplish?

And how did they get the rest of the world to go along with it?

Because you can accomplish no bigger feat than saving the world from folks trying to kill it.  

Folks from other countries want to be heroes too and the US deos not have a monopoly on gullible folk.

[GMDino]

(04-16-2016, 03:01 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Fred, you're not stupid so stop pretending to be.  You know exactly what bfines point is. Either address it or don't, but please stop making yourself look less than intelligent by pretending that bfine is not making a salient point.

Why are you answering for Larry? 

[GMDino]

(04-16-2016, 05:09 PM)Benton Wrote: Well that's not too far off. If you have an agrarian society that's already dry and hot for long periods, then you make it drier and hotter, then your ability to grow depends entirely on local infrastructure. When that's bombed to shit on a weekly basis, or controlled by a different faction every month, you're pretty much sol. People get desperate when they can't feed their family.

Global warming doesn't cause terrorism, but it adds to people suffering. And the more discord and anguish you've got, the easier it is for recruiters .

But that is nuanced and thought involved.  It's easier to make it a sound bite that makes fun of the guy saying it.  Duh.

[*Nately120*]

I invite anyone who doubts humans and their rampant deregulation of environmental protection affect the earth to go to Bejing and take a deep breath/

I don't care if we destroy the earth, but to act like what is happening is a total mystery is naive. Like super naive. Like "Gee, I had no idea smoking was bad for me because there wasn't a warning label on the package of cigarettes!" naive.

[*bfine32*]

(04-16-2016, 11:20 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I invite anyone who doubts humans and their rampant deregulation of environmental protection affect the earth to go to Bejing and take a deep breath/

I don't care if we destroy the earth, but to act like what is happening is a total mystery is naive.  Like super naive.  Like "Gee, I had no idea smoking was bad for me because there wasn't a warning label on the package of cigarettes!" naive.

Do you think there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe?

[GMDino]

(04-17-2016, 12:03 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Do you think there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe?

[Bengalzona]

(04-16-2016, 01:22 PM)Beaker Wrote: An overwhelming 97.1 percent of scientists think humans are heavily contributing to climate change:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/04/15/research-shows-yet-again-that-theres-no-scientific-debate-about-climate-change/

I think it is sort of a shame that they even had to research this. 

[*bfine32*]

(04-17-2016, 12:09 AM)GMDino Wrote:

Clarifying?

[Beaker]

(04-17-2016, 12:09 AM)GMDino Wrote:

And ignoring my question that had everything to do with the topic.