Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 159

Thread: NBC's Chuck Todd: "We're Not Going To Give TV Time To Climate Deniers"

  1. #1

    NBC's Chuck Todd: "We're Not Going To Give TV Time To Climate Deniers"

    NBC host Chuck Todd kicked off a full hour of discussion about Climate change on Sunday by telling "Meet the Press" viewers that there would be no debate over the topic - as the "science is settled."
    "We’re not going to debate climate change, the existence of it. The Earth is getting hotter. And human activity is a major cause, period," said Todd. "We’re not going to give time to climate deniers. The science is settled, even if political opinion is not."
    Meanwhile, outgoing Democratic California Governor Jerry Brown was on the show to discuss global warming - calling it a serious threat akin to what Americans faced at the beginning of WWII, and that the United States is not doing enough to address the problem.
    "[N]ot even close, and not close in California, and we’re doing more than anybody else, and not close in America or the rest of the world," said Brown, adding "We’ve got to get off this idea, ‘it’s the economy, stupid.’ No, it’s the environment."
    Brown also knocked President Trump over his skepticism regarding climate change.
    "[Trump] is very convinced of his position," said Brown. "And his position is that there’s nothing abnormal about the fires in California or the rising sea level or all the other incidents of climate change."
    Former New York City Mayor and potential 2020 presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg echoed Brown's sentiment, telling Todd "I will be out there demanding that anybody that’s running has a plan. And I want to hear the plan, and I want everybody to look at it and say whether it’s doable," said the billionaire philanthropist.

    More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...limate-deniers
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

  4. #3
    Chuck Todd is a scumbag.
    "Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration is minding my own business."

    Calvin Coolidge

  5. #4
    Nobody watches NBC .
    Do something Danke

  6. #5
    What science?
    #NashvilleStrong

    “I’m a doctor. That’s a baby.”~~~Dr. Manny Sethi

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by euphemia View Post
    What science?
    It's political science.

  8. #7
    Nice to know our rulers will now decide what is and what is not "news".

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by oyarde View Post
    Nobody watches NBC .
    Millions and millions of people watch NBC.

    It is the largest TV network in the nation, with access to 97% of all homes in the US.

    We don't watch NBC.

    But "we" are a tiny, insignificant, minority.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    "We’re not going to debate climate change, the existence of it. The Earth is getting hotter. And human activity is a major cause, period," said Todd. "We’re not going to give time to climate deniers. The science is settled, even if political opinion is not."
    In 1970 the "settled science" said the following:

    7 ENVIRO PREDICTIONS FROM EARTH DAY 1970 THAT WERE JUST DEAD WRONG

    https://dailycaller.com/2016/04/22/7...st-dead-wrong/

    9:36 AM 04/22/2016 | ENERGY
    Andrew Follett | Energy and Science Reporter
    Environmentalists truly believed and predicted during the first Earth Day in 1970 that the planet was doomed unless drastic actions were taken.

    Humanity never quite got around to that drastic action, but environmentalists still recall the first Earth Day fondly and hold many of the predictions in high regard.

    So this Earth Day, The Daily Caller News Foundation takes a look at predictions made by environmentalists around the original Earth Day in 1970 to see how they’ve held up.

    Have any of these dire predictions come true? No, but that hasn’t stopped environmentalists from worrying.

    From predicting the end of civilization to classic worries about peak oil, here are seven environmentalist predictions that were just flat out wrong.

    1: “Civilization Will End Within 15 Or 30 Years”

    Harvard biologist Dr. George Wald warned shortly before the first Earth Day in 1970 that civilization would soon end “unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” Three years before his projection, Wald was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine.

    Wald was a vocal opponent of the Vietnam War and the nuclear arms race. He even flew to Moscow at one point to advise the leader of the Soviet Union on environmental policy.

    Despite his assistance to a communist government, civilization still exists. The percentage of Americans who are concerned about environmental threats has fallen as civilization failed to end by environmental catastrophe.

    2: “100-200 Million People Per Year Will Be Starving To Death During The Next Ten Years”

    Stanford professor Dr. Paul Ehrlich declared in April 1970 that mass starvation was imminent. His dire predictions failed to materialize as the number of people living in poverty has significantly declined and the amount of food per person has steadily increased, despite population growth. The world’s Gross Domestic Product per person has immeasurably grown despite increases in population.

    Ehrlich is largely responsible for this view, having co-published “The Population Bomb” with The Sierra Club in 1968. The book made a number of claims including that millions of humans would starve to death in the 1970s and 1980s, mass famines would sweep England leading to the country’s demise, and that ecological destruction would devastate the planet causing the collapse of civilization.

    3: “Population Will Inevitably And Completely Outstrip Whatever Small Increases In Food Supplies We Make”

    Paul Ehrlich also made the above claim in 1970, shortly before an agricultural revolution that caused the world’s food supply to rapidly increase.

    Ehrlich has consistently failed to revise his predictions when confronted with the fact that they did not occur, stating in 2009 that “perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic about the future.”

    4: “Demographers Agree Almost Unanimously … Thirty Years From Now, The Entire World … Will Be In Famine”

    Environmentalists in 1970 truly believed in a scientific consensus predicting global famine due to population growth in the developing world, especially in India.

    “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions,” Peter Gunter, a professor at North Texas State University, said in a 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness.”By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”

    India, where the famines were supposed to begin, recently became one of the world’s largest exporters of agricultural products and food supply per person in the country has drastically increased in recent years. In fact, the number of people in every country listed by Gunter has risen dramatically since 1970.

    5: “In A Decade, Urban Dwellers Will Have To Wear Gas Masks To Survive Air Pollution”

    Life magazine stated in January 1970 that scientist had “solid experimental and theoretical evidence” to believe that “in a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching Earth by one half.”

    Despite the prediction, air quality has been improving worldwide, according to the World Health Organization. Air pollution has also sharply declined in industrialized countries. Carbon dioxide (CO2), the gas environmentalists are worried about today, is odorless, invisible and harmless to humans in normal amounts.

    6: “Childbearing [Will Be] A Punishable Crime Against Society, Unless The Parents Hold A Government License”

    David Brower, the first executive director of The Sierra Club made the above claim and went on to say that “[a]ll potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.” Brower was also essential in founding Friends of the Earth and the League Of Conservation Voters and much of the modern environmental movement.

    Brower believed that most environmental problems were ultimately attributable to new technology that allowed humans to pass natural limits on population size. He famously stated before his death in 2000 that “all technology should be assumed guilty until proven innocent” and repeatedly advocated for mandatory birth control.

    Today, the only major government to ever get close to his vision has been China, which ended its one-child policy last October.

    7: “By The Year 2000 … There Won’t Be Any More Crude Oil”

    On Earth Day in 1970 ecologist Kenneth Watt famously predicted that the world would run out of oil saying, “You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’”

    Numerous academics like Watt predicted that American oil production peaked in 1970 and would gradually decline, likely causing a global economic meltdown. However, the successful application of massive hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, caused American oil production to come roaring back and there is currently too much oil on the market.

    American oil and natural gas reserves are at their highest levels since 1972 and American oil production in 2014 was 80 percent higher than in 2008 thanks to fracking.

    Furthermore, the U.S. now controls the world’s largest untapped oil reserve, the Green River Formation in Colorado. This formation alone contains up to 3 trillion barrels of untapped oil shale, half of which may be recoverable. That’s five and a half times the proven reserves of Saudi Arabia. This single geologic formation could contain more oil than the rest of the world’s proven reserves combined.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    In 1970 the "settled science" said the following:

    7 ENVIRO PREDICTIONS FROM EARTH DAY 1970 THAT WERE JUST DEAD WRONG

    https://dailycaller.com/2016/04/22/7...st-dead-wrong/

    9:36 AM 04/22/2016 | ENERGY
    Andrew Follett | Energy and Science Reporter
    Environmentalists truly believed and predicted during the first Earth Day in 1970 that the planet was doomed unless drastic actions were taken.

    Humanity never quite got around to that drastic action, but environmentalists still recall the first Earth Day fondly and hold many of the predictions in high regard.

    So this Earth Day, The Daily Caller News Foundation takes a look at predictions made by environmentalists around the original Earth Day in 1970 to see how they’ve held up.

    Have any of these dire predictions come true? No, but that hasn’t stopped environmentalists from worrying.

    From predicting the end of civilization to classic worries about peak oil, here are seven environmentalist predictions that were just flat out wrong.

    1: “Civilization Will End Within 15 Or 30 Years”

    Harvard biologist Dr. George Wald warned shortly before the first Earth Day in 1970 that civilization would soon end “unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” Three years before his projection, Wald was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine.

    Wald was a vocal opponent of the Vietnam War and the nuclear arms race. He even flew to Moscow at one point to advise the leader of the Soviet Union on environmental policy.

    Despite his assistance to a communist government, civilization still exists. The percentage of Americans who are concerned about environmental threats has fallen as civilization failed to end by environmental catastrophe.

    2: “100-200 Million People Per Year Will Be Starving To Death During The Next Ten Years”

    Stanford professor Dr. Paul Ehrlich declared in April 1970 that mass starvation was imminent. His dire predictions failed to materialize as the number of people living in poverty has significantly declined and the amount of food per person has steadily increased, despite population growth. The world’s Gross Domestic Product per person has immeasurably grown despite increases in population.

    Ehrlich is largely responsible for this view, having co-published “The Population Bomb” with The Sierra Club in 1968. The book made a number of claims including that millions of humans would starve to death in the 1970s and 1980s, mass famines would sweep England leading to the country’s demise, and that ecological destruction would devastate the planet causing the collapse of civilization.

    3: “Population Will Inevitably And Completely Outstrip Whatever Small Increases In Food Supplies We Make”

    Paul Ehrlich also made the above claim in 1970, shortly before an agricultural revolution that caused the world’s food supply to rapidly increase.

    Ehrlich has consistently failed to revise his predictions when confronted with the fact that they did not occur, stating in 2009 that “perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic about the future.”

    4: “Demographers Agree Almost Unanimously … Thirty Years From Now, The Entire World … Will Be In Famine”

    Environmentalists in 1970 truly believed in a scientific consensus predicting global famine due to population growth in the developing world, especially in India.

    “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions,” Peter Gunter, a professor at North Texas State University, said in a 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness.”By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”

    India, where the famines were supposed to begin, recently became one of the world’s largest exporters of agricultural products and food supply per person in the country has drastically increased in recent years. In fact, the number of people in every country listed by Gunter has risen dramatically since 1970.

    5: “In A Decade, Urban Dwellers Will Have To Wear Gas Masks To Survive Air Pollution”

    Life magazine stated in January 1970 that scientist had “solid experimental and theoretical evidence” to believe that “in a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching Earth by one half.”

    Despite the prediction, air quality has been improving worldwide, according to the World Health Organization. Air pollution has also sharply declined in industrialized countries. Carbon dioxide (CO2), the gas environmentalists are worried about today, is odorless, invisible and harmless to humans in normal amounts.

    6: “Childbearing [Will Be] A Punishable Crime Against Society, Unless The Parents Hold A Government License”

    David Brower, the first executive director of The Sierra Club made the above claim and went on to say that “[a]ll potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.” Brower was also essential in founding Friends of the Earth and the League Of Conservation Voters and much of the modern environmental movement.

    Brower believed that most environmental problems were ultimately attributable to new technology that allowed humans to pass natural limits on population size. He famously stated before his death in 2000 that “all technology should be assumed guilty until proven innocent” and repeatedly advocated for mandatory birth control.

    Today, the only major government to ever get close to his vision has been China, which ended its one-child policy last October.

    7: “By The Year 2000 … There Won’t Be Any More Crude Oil”

    On Earth Day in 1970 ecologist Kenneth Watt famously predicted that the world would run out of oil saying, “You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’”

    Numerous academics like Watt predicted that American oil production peaked in 1970 and would gradually decline, likely causing a global economic meltdown. However, the successful application of massive hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, caused American oil production to come roaring back and there is currently too much oil on the market.

    American oil and natural gas reserves are at their highest levels since 1972 and American oil production in 2014 was 80 percent higher than in 2008 thanks to fracking.

    Furthermore, the U.S. now controls the world’s largest untapped oil reserve, the Green River Formation in Colorado. This formation alone contains up to 3 trillion barrels of untapped oil shale, half of which may be recoverable. That’s five and a half times the proven reserves of Saudi Arabia. This single geologic formation could contain more oil than the rest of the world’s proven reserves combined.
    "The Patriarch"

  13. #11
    I remember in the 1970s and 1980s hearing ideas such as spreading cinder on the polar ice to prevent the coming ice age due to global cooling from pollution. I also remember in 1981 to 1985 having a few school years where they taught both global cooling and global warming. In fact we joked about the greenhouse effect solving the coming ice age.
    ...

  14. #12
    Shifting goalposts.

    Al Gore in 2006

    Gore said U.S. government and business leaders must follow the lead of other nations that have enacted stricter mileage standards for cars. Utility companies worldwide must adopt cleaner methods of burning fossil fuels
    Alex Cortez in 2018:

    Never was it about being "clean" or more efficient.

    It's about putting you proles cold, hungry and in the dark, where you belong.

    But nobody cares.

    Idiot AmeriKunts want to be abused and enslaved.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by RJB View Post
    I remember in the 1970s and 1980s hearing ideas such as spreading cinder on the polar ice to prevent the coming ice age due to global cooling from pollution. I also remember in 1981 to 1985 having a few school years where they taught both global cooling and global warming. In fact we joked about the greenhouse effect solving the coming ice age.
    No you didn't, that's crimethink.

    2 + 2 has always equaled five, comrade.

  16. #14
    If I'm not mistaken, it was an NBC producer while back who had caused damage to environment by placing explosive devices next to some vehicle's gas tanks to make reporting on risky vehicles more dramatic without disclosing such tactics to the viewers. They have come a long way on fakenews reporting since then.

    BTW, at some point in future, could "climate deniers" be jailed?


    Holocaust denier jailed
    https://www.theguardian.com/guardian...715580,00.html

  17. #15
    Brown also knocked President Trump over his skepticism regarding climate change.

    "[Trump] is very convinced of his position," said Brown. "And his position is that there’s nothing abnormal about the fires in California or the rising sea level or all the other incidents of climate change."
    There were never fires until the man-made global warming! And right here in California, there used to be a neighborhood called “Atlantis” in San Francisco, but it is now submerged under the SF Bay due to the rising ocean. Such a catastrophe. It’s undeniable!
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  18. #16
    NBC's Chuck Todd: "We're Not Going To Give TV Time To Climate Deniers"
    Translation: "We're going to work harder at making ourselves even more irrelevant and unworthy of trust than we already are."

    GOOD.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Millions and millions of people watch NBC.

    It is the largest TV network in the nation, with access to 97% of all homes in the US.

    We don't watch NBC.

    But "we" are a tiny, insignificant, minority.
    Our merry band of refuseniks is indeed dwarfed by all the self-selected ballast out there.

    But even so, I'm still LMAO @ Todd if he really thinks that NBC are the keepers of the gates of establishment sycophancy through which all must pass.

    Last edited by Occam's Banana; 10-31-2021 at 02:16 AM. Reason: removed ellipses



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    They also aren't giving air time to flat earthers. You can't have a scientific discussion with people that dispute the current consensus science.
    “…let us teach them that all who draw breath are of equal worth, and that those who seek to press heel upon the throat of liberty, will fall to the cry of FREEDOM!!!” – Spartacus, War of the Damned

    BTC: 1AFbCLYU3G1dkbsSJnk3spWeEwpqYVC2Pq

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    They also aren't giving air time to flat earthers. You can't have a scientific discussion with people that dispute the current consensus science.
    So people that question whether the "consensus science", which has proved to be spectacularly and utterly wrong in the past, is actually correct, are now on the same scientific footing as flat earthers?

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    They also aren't giving air time to flat earthers. You can't have a scientific discussion with people that dispute the current consensus science.
    They are the flat earthers.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    So people that question whether the "consensus science", which has proved to be spectacularly and utterly wrong in the past, is actually correct, are now on the same scientific footing as flat earthers?
    I can't find any good flat earther numbers. However less than 3% of climate scientists and published scientific articles dispute that mankind is the cause of the warming of the planet. Even the oil companies acknowledge that anthropogenic global warming is real.

    As with any science new theories and modelling can come about, be peer reviewed, and if there is something to it then it could could change the consensus. But that's getting less and less likely with every new paper being reviewed.

    As it stands, Mankind has warmed the planet and it will keep on getting warming. The question then becomes what, if anything, we do about it.
    “…let us teach them that all who draw breath are of equal worth, and that those who seek to press heel upon the throat of liberty, will fall to the cry of FREEDOM!!!” – Spartacus, War of the Damned

    BTC: 1AFbCLYU3G1dkbsSJnk3spWeEwpqYVC2Pq

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    I can't find any good flat earther numbers. However less than 3% of climate scientists and published scientific articles dispute that mankind is the cause of the warming of the planet. Even the oil companies acknowledge that anthropogenic global warming is real.

    As with any science new theories and modelling can come about, be peer reviewed, and if there is something to it then it could could change the consensus. But that's getting less and less likely with every new paper being reviewed.

    As it stands, Mankind has warmed the planet and it will keep on getting warming. The question then becomes what, if anything, we do about it.
    LOL

    The "consensus" has been debunked over and over, it is held together only by wealth and power.
    Science isn't settled by voting, not even by having scientists vote, it is settled by facts and the facts are all against the AGW hoax.
    Once upon a time the flat earth was scientific consensus.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  25. #22
    If science and predictions are so good, how come the flu shot is so ineffective?

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    I can't find any good flat earther numbers. However less than 3% of climate scientists and published scientific articles dispute that mankind is the cause of the warming of the planet. Even the oil companies acknowledge that anthropogenic global warming is real.

    As with any science new theories and modelling can come about, be peer reviewed, and if there is something to it then it could could change the consensus. But that's getting less and less likely with every new paper being reviewed.

    As it stands, Mankind has warmed the planet and it will keep on getting warming. The question then becomes what, if anything, we do about it.
    I would imagine scientists that have a different opinion are scared to speak out against the mob.

  27. #24
    I d lived on or near the ocean for 33 of my 33 years. The sea level isn’t rising. I’ve seen the islands I lived on slowly move and change shapes, but that is what happens over time on low lying barrier islands made of shifting sand. But the actual water level has not changed even a little.
    No - No - No - No
    2016



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    I can't find any good flat earther numbers. However less than 3% of climate scientists and published scientific articles dispute that mankind is the cause of the warming of the planet. Even the oil companies acknowledge that anthropogenic global warming is real.
    Unlike "climate change", it's relatively easy to comprehend - and even prove - that the Earth is not flat, even for the layman.

    However, AGW has a lot going against it. The global climate is an extremely complex system, impacted by almost literally countless inputs... people who've been alive longer than 30 and 40 years can reach back into their memory and recall a much dirtier environment, yet a brow-beaten to just "accept" that things are somehow getting worse... cynics recognize that such "global crises" are used to usher in all manner of regulation, taxation, and law which seemingly has very little to do with "saving the world" and more to do with transferring wealth...

    And on and on and on...

    As with any science new theories and modelling can come about, be peer reviewed, and if there is something to it then it could could change the consensus. But that's getting less and less likely with every new paper being reviewed.
    And - again - the cynic recognizes that there are agendas at play... that doesn't mean that the science isn't right... but it also doesn't mean that it IS.

    As it stands, Mankind has warmed the planet and it will keep on getting warming. The question then becomes what, if anything, we do about it.
    But see, that's not the question though. We're TOLD that what we do about it, and we're to like it. And it seems as though very little of what we're to do should have any impact on "climate change" at all.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    Even the oil companies acknowledge that anthropogenic global warming is real.
    Well, yeah. Why wouldn't oil companies "admit" that? Climate change due to carbon dioxide is a fine way to kill "King Coal", and stealing market share from coal is a thing Big Oil would happily pay a billion dollars to achieve.

    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    As it stands, Mankind has warmed the planet and it will keep on getting warming. The question then becomes what, if anything, we do about it.
    Oh? Gee, I could have sworn the cure for carbon dioxide was well known--flora. Plants absorb the stuff and put off oxygen. Restore a few rain forests and voila!

    Forty years ago warnings of a new ice age were real. And they weren't lying when they said they had data. Then they passed laws limiting particulate emissions which were reflecting sunlight, and voila! Global warming! So don't tell me nobody has a clue how to reverse the alleged temperature change if it were to become an actual emergency.

    Even the oil companies admit it. Yeah buddy. The oil companies engineered it. Now if only we could use manufactured carbon hysteria to stop a war or two.
    Last edited by acptulsa; 12-31-2018 at 08:38 AM.
    "Stupidity got us into this mess. Why can't it get us out?"--Will Rogers

    "All I know is what I read in the newspapers, and that's an alibi for my ignorance."--Will Rogers

  31. #27
    Didn't Al Gore say the polar ice capes would be gone by like 2013?
    "Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration is minding my own business."

    Calvin Coolidge

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Globalist View Post
    Didn't Al Gore say the polar ice capes would be gone by like 2013?
    Oh, I see. You were never willing to endure the pain and loss of brain cells that comes of listening to Al Gore. But you expected us to suffer and report back to you.
    "Stupidity got us into this mess. Why can't it get us out?"--Will Rogers

    "All I know is what I read in the newspapers, and that's an alibi for my ignorance."--Will Rogers

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    I can't find any good flat earther numbers. However less than 3% of climate scientists and published scientific articles dispute that mankind is the cause of the warming of the planet. Even the oil companies acknowledge that anthropogenic global warming is real.

    As with any science new theories and modelling can come about, be peer reviewed, and if there is something to it then it could could change the consensus. But that's getting less and less likely with every new paper being reviewed.

    As it stands, Mankind has warmed the planet and it will keep on getting warming. The question then becomes what, if anything, we do about it.

    How the hell have you been here this long and are still so uneducated about this topic??

    Of course the big oil companies want you to think climate change is primarily man-made.. Of course the big oil companies want to create legislation and carbon credit systems that will keep them in control of the market..


    '97% Of Climate Scientists Agree' Is 100% Wrong


    Alex Epstein
    Contributor

    Energy & Environment



    If you've ever expressed the least bit of skepticism about environmentalist calls for making the vast majority of fossil fuel use illegal, you've probably heard the smug response: “97% of climate scientists agree with climate change” — which always carries the implication: Who are you to challenge them?

    The answer is: you are a thinking, independent individual--and you don’t go by polls, let alone second-hand accounts of polls; you go by facts, logic and explanation.

    Here are two questions to ask anyone who pulls the 97% trick.

    1. What exactly do the climate scientists agree on?

    Usually, the person will have a very vague answer like "climate change is real."

    Which raises the question: What is that supposed to mean? That climate changes? That we have some impact? That we have a large impact? That we have a catastrophically large impact? That we have such a catastrophic impact that we shouldn't use fossil fuels?

    What you'll find is that people don't want to define what 97% agree on--because there is nothing remotely in the literature saying 97% agree we should ban most fossil fuel use.

    It’s likely that 97% of people making the 97% claim have absolutely no idea where that number comes from.

    If you look at the literature, the specific meaning of the 97% claim is: 97 percent of climate scientists agree that there is a global warming trend and that human beings are the main cause--that is, that we are over 50% responsible. The warming is a whopping 0.8 degrees over the past 150 years, a warming that has tapered off to essentially nothing in the last decade and a half.



    More: https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexeps.../#6c8cbf053f9f


    Everybody agrees the temperatures are getting warmer.. but not everybody agrees that man's CO2 output is the primary cause. Also, they lie about the numbers, the temperatures are not varying as much as they claim.

    Then there is the joke about sea level rise.. the official estimates are that the sea has risen somewhere between 4" and 8" in the last 100 years.. and the official climate science today claims that it is going to rise something like 30" in the next 20 or 30 years.. or more.. It's completely insane.
    Last edited by dannno; 12-31-2018 at 11:16 AM.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    I can't find any good flat earther numbers. However less than 3% of climate scientists and published scientific articles dispute that mankind is the cause of the warming of the planet. Even the oil companies acknowledge that anthropogenic global warming is real
    I think you mean that the science says mankind is accelerating the warming.

    Obviously the planet's climate is not static, and has warmed and cooled thousands of times in thousands of cycles, millions of years before there was any such thing as mankind.

    Where I live, just 100,000 years a ago, a blink in geologic time, the land was cover by a mile thick ice sheet.

    Mankind didn't melt that.

    As with any science new theories and modelling can come about, be peer reviewed, and if there is something to it then it could could change the consensus. But that's getting less and less likely with every new paper being reviewed.
    If it is accepted as a religious dogma, and people that do find conflicting evidence are jailed, persecuted, silenced and shunned, then how could that new info ever get out to change the consensus?

    As it stands, Mankind has warmed the planet and it will keep on getting warming. The question then becomes what, if anything, we do about it.
    Let's assume that it is real.

    What do suggest be done, that would not involve Draconian and extraordinarily heavy handed government measures, seeing as how every single human being is now an emitter of toxic gases?

    Seems to me if the problem is too many people making too much pollution, the solution to that is free markets and cheap energy.

    First world countries that have both, have declining populations.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-08-2017, 03:35 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-30-2013, 06:07 PM
  3. Replies: 52
    Last Post: 10-31-2011, 03:31 PM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-19-2010, 09:41 PM
  5. Climate Deniers Are Like "Fritzl"
    By PatriotG in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-02-2008, 10:09 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •