climate denier in charge of EPA transition

[Nebuchadnezzar]

There is nothing wrong with doing your part to help the environment and in the long run will save you money.

Throw some solar panels on your roof and get one of those cheap windmills that I read an article on a little while ago and save some money...what's it going to hurt?

Eat your leftovers, bottle your own water, use paper instead of plastic or buy yourself some canvas bags for grocery shopping is even better.

And what's wrong with industry doing there part to keep the air clean?

Is man the cause of "Climate Change"? I don't know, some say yes, some say no. Let's be cautious and do our part.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-11-2016, 02:14 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Sorry , too much whiskey. USMC Bday

You're kinda funny when you're drunk.  And you earned the right to get lit every 10th of Nov.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(11-11-2016, 02:14 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Sorry , too much whiskey. USMC Bday

Hey, you can get a pass Jimmybob. Got USMC Bday followed by Veteran's Day.

Don't celebrate the former, but I will sure be having a drink today for the latter.

[Rotobeast]

(11-11-2016, 09:49 AM)michaelsean Wrote: You're kinda funny when you're drunk.  And you earned the right to get lit every 10th of Nov.

Amen !

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[*wildcats forever*]

(11-11-2016, 03:28 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: There is nothing wrong with doing your part to help the environment and in the long run will save you money.

Throw some solar panels on your roof and get one of those cheap windmills that I read an article on a little while ago and save some money...what's it going to hurt?

Eat your leftovers, bottle your own water, use paper instead of plastic or buy yourself some canvas bags for grocery shopping is even better.

And what's wrong with industry doing there part to keep the air clean?

Is man the cause of "Climate Change"? I don't know, some say yes, some say no. Let's be cautious and do our part.

Indeed. What is being overlooked here is that the EPA exists primarily to provide clean air and water for our healthy existence, not as a solution for the climate change political football alone. The prevention of man-made toxins from entering our water systems, and from being released into our breathing level atmosphere is the main thrust. Keeping that focus should always be at the forefront of anyone taxed with the responsibility of ensuring that function is fully in tact.

All of us need to be vigilant regarding politics and greed displacing our need to eat, drink, and breathe as healthily as our natural environment intends to provide.

[Millhouse]

I do disagree with the anti-environmentalists in general. Regulations are a good thing for things like preventing rivers to catch fire, or dead fish floating, things like that. So regulations to a point are needed to help prevent needless pollution.

But even if global warming isnt caused or influenced by humans, humanity needs to ween itself off of fossil fuels and figure out a better sustainable energy source. Otherwise if we dont, at some point down road whether its decades or a century or two, oil will be depleted to the point society will implode on itself. This to me should be the main reason for discovering and using other sources of energy.

[Beaker]

(11-10-2016, 08:25 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Science is always infallible and people who think otherwise are idiots... until it isn't and they aren't. That's why they call them THEORIES. Climate Change isn't a law. I'm willing to believe there may be some truth to it, but don't you think it'd odd that you're not willing to even consider they are wrong?


Questioning things is the very basis of science. Questioning things where ridiculously huge sums of money are involved is the very basis of common sense.

First,that's not at all why they are called theories. Theories are well tested over many years, and often many different branches of science. So if you're trying to imply that theories are guesses, then you're on the wrong foot to begin with. 

Secondly, questioning is indeed the basis of science....that's why you nearly never have 100% consensus by all scientists. That's why deniers try to claim that only 97% of scientists agree that human impact is contributing to climate change.

Thirdly, I could care less about the money, besides the overwhelming evidence supporting human contribution to climate change, there is the common sense aspect. There is no way with the amount of greenhouse gases we produce, and the emerging huge populations like India and China becoming ever more industrialized that we can NOT be having an impact.

[Beaker]

(11-11-2016, 03:28 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Is man the cause of "Climate Change"? I don't know, some say yes, some say no. Let's be cautious and do our part.

I don't think man is the cause, I think humans are contributing and exacerbating the situation. But by all means, yes, everyone should conssider that the Earth is not simply a resource to be plundered. We need more of a sustainable outlook than an "I'm too comfortable doing what I'm doing so screw it" outlook.

[Dill]

(11-10-2016, 08:25 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Oh, if you look like a certain animal, then you must also contain it's personality traits. That's Physiognomy.
And everyone knows the Sun rotates around the Earth, and if you sail too far East or West, you'll fall off.
Also 100% of doctors agree that you need to balance the good humors and bad humors in your body through bloodletting.
It's okay if you have a mental health issue, just hook yourself up to these here wires and in a couple short shock therapy sessions, you'll be cured!
Who needs to clean your tools, it's not like there's microscopic things living on them that'll cause your wounds to get infected or anything.
Birth defects are caused by the mother having negative feelings during pregnancy. Maternal Impression.
Everyone is born with a blank slate personality-wise, there's no built-in traits.
The universe is a static size, it doesn't shrink or expand. (That one was Einstein.)
- - - - - - - - - - -
Science is always infallible and people who think otherwise are idiots... until it isn't and they aren't. That's why they call them THEORIES. Climate Change isn't a law. I'm willing to believe there may be some truth to it, but don't you think it'd odd that you're not willing to even consider they are wrong?
Questioning things is the very basis of science. Questioning things where ridiculously huge sums of money are involved is the very basis of common sense.

Questioning things where ridiculously huge sums of money are involved is the very basis of Climate Change denial, that's for sure. As Upton Sinclair said, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

You list examples of beliefs, many of which were never "scientific", as examples of what--disproved science? Wait long enough and someday what you want to believe will be "science"? The fact those beliefs were disproved hardly establishes science as simply a history of fads and changing opinions with no special claim to authority. Quite the opposite.

It is a truism among scientists that science isn't "infallible," but they do distinguish between scientific and non-scientific methods for assessing "fallible" scientific truth, and that distinction is crux of the climate science debate.

It was Exxon and other extraction industry corporations that funded the current generation of deniers--this after their own research established climate change was anthropogenic--but at this point even they publicly recognize the danger. 

Now the major players in the debate are the overwhelming majority of the world's climate scientists, on the one side, and free-market ideologues (mostly in Anglo countries) and fossil fuel economies like Russia and Saudi Arabia on the other. They address a public largely science illiterate, and easily confused by claims that "scientists disagree", the climate has always been changing," and "something is wrong with the models."

[Dill]

(11-10-2016, 07:23 PM)TheLeonardLea Wrote: People treat theories as scientific fact far too often. Remember, it was "scientifically proven" in the 30s that smoking was good for you, in the 70s that we were heading into an ice age, in the 90s that the planet would run out of oil, in 2000 that technology would universally fail, etc etc.

No, I do not remember that it was scientifically proven in the 30s that smoking was good for anyone, or that in the 70s the consensus of climate scientists was that we were heading into an ice age.  The planet CERTAINLY WILL run out of oil if people consume it at the present rate.  etc etc etc.

What do you suppose is the difference between a "scientific theory" and a "scientific fact"?  What scientific facts can you explain separately from scientific theory?

[THE Bigzoman]

We probably should've went nuclear, honestly.

It's kind of ironic that environmentalists shamed people into doubling down on fossil fuels decades ago. The braying and neighing of the hippies and environmentalists of the past have done a significant amount of harm long term by forcing/shaming nations to rely on fossil fuels for power this whole time. Global climate change might not have been the issue that it is today.

[fredtoast]

(11-12-2016, 06:39 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: The braying and neighing of the hippies and environmentalists of the past have done a significant amount of harm long term by forcing/shaming nations to rely on fossil fuels for power this whole time.

The petroleum industry was also opposed to nuclear energy.  And they had a lot more money for propaganda than "hippies".

[djam]

I used to be an environmental activist, seriously when I was younger and in college. I studied the sciences for a good while. I have phd's in earth sciences in my family as well and grew up watching stars from a telescope as big as most peoples cars. Do I believe global warming? No way. Its not even warming anyway, its cooling now, and some of them know this so they changed it to climate change. Besides global warming got old with people.

I do sometimes wish I would've stayed in it, but not to fix global warming because its not real. Most of my friends who got really involved in the global warming push made themselves very wealthy people, for doing little, and most of them know its a hoax. It's a frigging trillion dollar industry, and the folks behind it will do whatever they can to keep it going. It is definitely the biggest single scam pulled on mankind. Which is why when Obama gave billions to all those green energy companies, they all went out of business like really fast lol. Just more cronyism. But anyway, having people scared to death about something they cannot possibly understand is a GREAT way to extort money and impose pretty much whatever 'regulations' -if you can call it that --that you want. Or I should say impose regulations your donors want? Thats more like it. They have people living in such fear, it should be criminal. Its like mind control or something. We have plenty of things to do to take care of our planet, but this whole idea that we are causing global warming and its going to kill us all is childish. So what if the world raises a degree? Are we all going to die then? Get real. More people would actually survive lol.

Is the climate changing? Always has, always will. Can people destroy the planet? Did the astroids which have pounded this planet for thousands of years destroy it? Nope its alive and well. I think its safe from our cars and cow farts lol.

[fredtoast]

(11-16-2016, 02:11 AM)djam Wrote: Do I believe global warming? No way. Its not even warming anyway, its cooling now,

Link?

(11-16-2016, 02:11 AM)djam Wrote:  Most of my friends who got really involved in the global warming push made themselves very wealthy people, for doing little, and most of them know its a hoax.

How did they get rich?

[fredtoast]

(11-16-2016, 02:11 AM)djam Wrote:  Which is why when Obama gave billions to all those green energy companies, they all went out of business like really fast lol.

You know absolutely nothing about the issue of global warming other than the completely false propagande that the right wing pours down your throat and you swallow without question.

http://www.takepart.com/article/2014/11/17/us-has-invested-34-billion-renewable-energy--and-making-profit

The U.S. Government Has Invested $34 Billion in Renewable Energy—and It’s Making a Profit
A report shows that the Department of Energy has far fewer failures than a typical venture capital firm.


(Photo: Yuriko Nakao/Reuters)

•  
• [/url]
  

Is the United States government a savvier investor in green technology than Silicon Valley’s masters of the universe?

RELATED

Were Your Solar Panels Made With Conflict Minerals?

It sure looks like it, judging from the U.S. Department of Energy’s new [url=http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/11/f19/DOE-LPO-MiniReport_Final%2011%2013%2014_0.pdf]report on the performance of its $34.3 billion portfolio of investments in solar power plants, wind farms, and other renewable energy projects. The Obama administration in 2009 charged the DOE’s Loan Programs Office with jump-starting cutting-edge green technology ventures deemed too risky and expensive to attract cash from private investors.
ADVERTISEMENT


As of September, that portfolio had a loss rate of 2.28 percent and has made a profit of $30 million.
The typical loss rate for a venture capital firm’s portfolio? As many as 40 percent of those companies fail, according to a 2012 Harvard Business School study.
There are now 20 projects funded by DOE up and running.

(U.S. Department of Energy)


“These projects currently produce enough clean energy to power more than 1 million American homes (roughly the size of Chicago), have supported the manufacturing of more than 8 million fuel-efficient vehicles, and have avoided carbon pollution equivalent to taking more than 3 million cars off the road,” states the report, which notes that the program has created or saved 55,000 jobs.
The DOE has so far disbursed $21.7 billion and collected $3.5 billion in repayments and $810 million in interest. Losses have totaled $780 million.

[fredtoast]

It always cracks me up when global warming deniers say "follow the money" to find the truth behind the issue.

The truth is that the fossil fuel,industry has a MUCH greater financial incentive to promote false information about global warming than any government anywhere. Government actions to curtail fossil fuel consumption will almost surely HURT the economy of any country that imposes strict rules. No politician ever gained anything by hurting the economy of the nation he was in charge of.

Fossil fuel producers have a lot more money to gain by lying than any government.

[djam]

(11-16-2016, 04:23 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It always cracks me up when global warming deniers say "follow the money" to find the truth behind the issue.

The truth is that the fossil fuel,industry has a MUCH greater financial incentive to promote false information about global warming than any government anywhere.  Government actions to curtail fossil fuel consumption will almost surely HURT the economy of any country that imposes strict rules.  No politician ever gained anything by hurting the economy of the nation he was in charge of.

Fossil fuel producers have a lot more money to gain by lying than any government.

Honsetly Fred just the fact that you disagree with me makes me feel good. You are one of the most ignorant people I've ever encountered online and I've thought that for many years, not just now --way before we ever talked politics. You are one person I feel very good when you say I'm wrong. Its like confirmation to me. Thank you. 

[Beaker]

(11-16-2016, 02:11 AM)djam Wrote: I used to be an environmental activist, seriously when I was younger and in college. I studied the sciences for a good while. I have phd's in earth sciences in my family as well and grew up watching stars from a telescope as big as most peoples cars. Do I believe global warming? No way. Its not even warming anyway, its cooling now, and some of them know this so they changed it to climate change. Besides global warming got old with people.

I do sometimes wish I would've stayed in it, but not to fix global warming because its not real. Most of my friends who got really involved in the global warming push made themselves very wealthy people, for doing little, and most of them know its a hoax. It's a frigging trillion dollar industry, and the folks behind it will do whatever they can to keep it going. It is definitely the biggest single scam pulled on mankind. Which is why when Obama gave billions to all those green energy companies, they all went out of business like really fast lol. Just more cronyism. But anyway, having people scared to death about something they cannot possibly understand is a GREAT way to extort money and impose pretty much whatever 'regulations'  -if you can call it that --that you want. Or I should say impose regulations your donors want? Thats more like it. They have people living in such fear, it should be criminal. Its like mind control or something. We have plenty of things to do to take care of our planet, but this whole idea that we are causing global warming and its going to kill us all is childish. So what if the world raises a degree? Are we all going to die then? Get real. More people would actually survive lol.

Is the climate changing? Always has, always will. Can people destroy the planet? Did the astroids which have pounded this planet for thousands of years destroy it? Nope its alive and well. I think its safe from our cars and cow farts lol.

So. Much. Ignorance.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-10-2016, 06:56 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Good, the entire climate change notion is the biggest load of crap ever to be used to extort money from people.  Back in the '70s, scientists were claiming the next ice age was coming.  Then, it was "Global Warming", now that the warming trend has been in recession, they changed it to the all encompassing "Climate Change".  Well, you know what?  It's all cyclical, has very little to do with human behavior.  Hell, one volcanic explosion emits a colossal amount of greenhouse gasses, much more than the sum total of Global output, many times over.  It's been debunked that the hole in the ozone is actually the planet's "thermostat", it fluctuates to keep things in balance.  The bit about the Earth flooding if the polar caps should melt, that one is really rich.  To those that believe that, I have a small experiment for you.  Fill a large glass with ice, next fill all of the remaining space with water, allow all of the ice to melt completely.  Did the glass flood?

RACIST.... wait, GEOPHOBE... nope? Shoot... Uhm....
Anthropogenicphobe? bit long and not very catchy.

[djam]

(11-16-2016, 07:48 PM)Beaker Wrote: So. Much. Ignorance.

Says the guy named after a muppet lol. Keep on living in fear homie. I'll be smiling