Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 281

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

  1. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    So basically you want government to steal more money and waste it on inefficient projects while forcing everyone to have a lower standard of living.

    Just why do you come to this site again?
    Who said I want to the government to steal more money? They are wasting trillions of dollars on the military and other $#@! every year, certainly there is a lot of money that can be diverted to actually useful causes (not inefficient projects like you HAVE to pretend they are because your fundamentalist religion of "small government when it suits me" demands it of you)



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    I think it's obvious that some of the "doomsday" predictions have been overstated. People that have exaggerated such predictions have done a disservice to the greater issue, because it causes people like you, (and me until a few years ago) to completely reject the idea of climate change and pretend it's nothing to worry about, when it certainly is. Those exaggerators are almost as bad as the politicians and "scientists" who get paid millions by oil companies to ensure that people remain ignorant and apathetic about the very real issue
    How would anybody have known that those predictions were "overstated", if the AGW proponents had their way, and had effectively silenced all opposition, criticism and critical analysis?

  4. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    So basically you want government to steal more money and waste it on inefficient projects while forcing everyone to have a lower standard of living.
    I believe I called it in post 53, and that this proves my other earlier assertion that agw cultists can't keep up.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  5. #94
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    Who said I want to the government to steal more money? They are wasting trillions of dollars on the military and other $#@! every year, certainly there is a lot of money that can be diverted to actually useful causes (not inefficient projects like you HAVE to pretend they are because your fundamentalist religion of "small government when it suits me" demands it of you)
    Translation: it's ok to waste trillions, as long as it's wasted on what ***Influenza*** wants to waste it on.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  6. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    Who said I want to the government to steal more money? They are wasting trillions of dollars on the military and other $#@! every year, certainly there is a lot of money that can be diverted to actually useful causes (not inefficient projects like you HAVE to pretend they are because your fundamentalist religion of "small government when it suits me" demands it of you)
    The military budget may be far too large but it is nowhere near as large as the money demanded to fix a nonexistent problem and the projects are inefficient or they wouldn't need the government to force people to invest in them.
    Last edited by Swordsmyth; 01-03-2019 at 01:14 AM.
    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

  7. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    If our 20-year internet argumentation history on this topic is any guide, you're not even going to understand, despite the fact that I am clearly pointing it out to you here and now, that we are simply years ahead of you on this topic.
    You are years ahead... and I'm too dim to understand... hrm, alright. I'll let the pompous attitude slide if I'm to be a grasshopper learning from the master.

    What do you consider sources of valid knowledge? Obviously you don't follow with the peer review scientific method. That removes the IPCC reports, NASA, NOAA, almost all the various scientific organizations in the US and worldwide, the usual multi discipline journals like Nature, Science, let alone all the specialized earth and climate journals. Ok, I shall learn from new founts of wisdom.

    What is the years ahead enlightened methodology of education on a complex topic like worldwide climate? I went through an engineering school if you're worried about my mental ability for comprehension.

    If I'm to truly understand how AGW is a myth, I can't simply parrot every climate change is not real website that lists the same things like natural CO2, sun cycles, models from decades ago didn't get everything perfect, fake temp recordings, and all those others. I want to get to the real science that somehow is overlooked by oh 90% of scientists. This supplicant is after the source of apparently hidden knowledge.

    I'm eager to start my journey, please point me in the right direction.
    “…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



  8. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  9. #97
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Let's assume you are correct.

    What do you suggest be done about it?
    Actually that is the most interesting question and is what will cause the biggest impact on our lives. Regardless of the reason behind climate change, everyone from the pentagon to insurance agencies are preparing for changes. We will have people try to spin this to their agenda and in our pre-dominate crony capitalism system many will try to profit hugely from it at the cost to citizens.

    Most things to do boil down to find a way to stop polluting as much. Very libertarian ideal, none of us want someone else using our personal resources (Clean air, clean water, non polluted ground to grow our food, shared resources like the ocean shouldn't be destroyed, etc). Doing this in a way that doesn't increase government oversight will be hard, we'll have to find the right battles.

    - Move to an increase in Nuclear power. Another thread shows that Bill Gates invested with some MIT grads for a new reactor design but is trying to put them in China. We have so much waste stored around the country we have energy just waiting to be utilized. We have unwarranted fears about nuclear power, new tech can make it even safer. I have 2 plants within 40 miles of me, one is being decommissioned in the next few years. Good time for a new plant.

    - The US stopped their own research into fusion and joined ITER. We're over a decade away, at least, with ITER. China and Lockheed Martin is supposedly working on it. If we could crack fusion, clean power would solve a lot of pollution issues. However I'm not sure that any government funded big science ends up helping any more than it hurts. That could be an worthy discussion there, if big science could help, and how to fund it besides tax payer money.

    - Plan better for handling issues that a warming climate brings. Plan for once a century floods as they turn into once a decade. This should be local and state issues mostly. We are bad as a county for any long term goals, can't hurt to start now.

    I'm sure there are a lot more. The worse thing we can do is nothing and the Dems and Reps put climate change as a party plank with lobbyists telling them what to do.
    “…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

  10. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    You are years ahead... and I'm too dim to understand... hrm, alright. I'll let the pompous attitude slide if I'm to be a grasshopper learning from the master.

    What do you consider sources of valid knowledge? Obviously you don't follow with the peer review scientific method. That removes the IPCC reports, NASA, NOAA, almost all the various scientific organizations in the US and worldwide, the usual multi discipline journals like Nature, Science, let alone all the specialized earth and climate journals. Ok, I shall learn from new founts of wisdom.

    What is the years ahead enlightened methodology of education on a complex topic like worldwide climate? I went through an engineering school if you're worried about my mental ability for comprehension.

    If I'm to truly understand how AGW is a myth, I can't simply parrot every climate change is not real website that lists the same things like natural CO2, sun cycles, models from decades ago didn't get everything perfect, fake temp recordings, and all those others. I want to get to the real science that somehow is overlooked by oh 90% of scientists. This supplicant is after the source of apparently hidden knowledge.

    I'm eager to start my journey, please point me in the right direction.
    Where did you get your 90% of scientists figure? Seems like you are back-peddling, you know your 97% figure was thoroughly debunked.. doesn't that make you weary of their other figures if they are willing to fudge on something like that? I mean, they really pushed that 97% consensus hard.. and it's totally bunk.
    Last edited by dannno; 01-03-2019 at 01:09 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."

  11. #99
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    Actually that is the most interesting question and is what will cause the biggest impact on our lives. Regardless of the reason behind climate change, everyone from the pentagon to insurance agencies are preparing for changes. We will have people try to spin this to their agenda and in our pre-dominate crony capitalism system many will try to profit hugely from it at the cost to citizens.

    Most things to do boil down to find a way to stop polluting as much. Very libertarian ideal, none of us want someone else using our personal resources (Clean air, clean water, non polluted ground to grow our food, shared resources like the ocean shouldn't be destroyed, etc). Doing this in a way that doesn't increase government oversight will be hard, we'll have to find the right battles.

    - Move to an increase in Nuclear power. Another thread shows that Bill Gates invested with some MIT grads for a new reactor design but is trying to put them in China. We have so much waste stored around the country we have energy just waiting to be utilized. We have unwarranted fears about nuclear power, new tech can make it even safer. I have 2 plants within 40 miles of me, one is being decommissioned in the next few years. Good time for a new plant.

    - The US stopped their own research into fusion and joined ITER. We're over a decade away, at least, with ITER. China and Lockheed Martin is supposedly working on it. If we could crack fusion, clean power would solve a lot of pollution issues. However I'm not sure that any government funded big science ends up helping any more than it hurts. That could be an worthy discussion there, if big science could help, and how to fund it besides tax payer money.

    - Plan better for handling issues that a warming climate brings. Plan for once a century floods as they turn into once a decade. This should be local and state issues mostly. We are bad as a county for any long term goals, can't hurt to start now.

    I'm sure there are a lot more. The worse thing we can do is nothing and the Dems and Reps put climate change as a party plank with lobbyists telling them what to do.
    Not a bad post - pollutants are bad..

    Here's the problem.

    You and most enviros presume CO2 is a pollutant.

    Let's say you have two project plans:

    A) More harmful pollutants, less CO2

    B) Less harmful pollutants, more CO2

    Which option do you choose? Based on your post I would hope you would choose B.. but with the legislation and the environmental movement going the way it is, option A will be chosen.

    How does that further your goals?

    Brian has been trying to make this point several times throughout the thread.
    "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."

  12. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Where did you get your 90% of scientists figure? Seems like you are back-peddling, you know your 97% figure was thoroughly debunked.. doesn't that make you weary of their other figures if they are willing to fudge on something like that? I mean, they really pushed that 97% consensus hard.. and it's totally bunk.
    There are a number of meta analysis of support for AGW, they range from 90-100, most are in the high 90s. In this case I went with the lowest number, I figure if there is other information out there then perhaps that explains how the worse meta analysis was 90%
    “…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

  13. #101
    Banned


    Blog Entries
    1
    Posts
    7,273
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    There are a number of meta analysis of support for AGW, they range from 90-100, most are in the high 90s. In this case I went with the lowest number, I figure if there is other information out there then perhaps that explains how the worse meta analysis was 90%
    Yeah yeah yeah, global warming is going to kill us all.
    And Hell is real.

    And the believers TALK about the danger, and reality of their illusions with emphatic belief, as if it is the most important thing facing humanity.

    And yet they continue to LIVE as if it is all just fantasy.

    And $#@! your science by consensus.
    Metadata is not science.
    Metadata is metadata.
    and worse, one bad strain in metadata can corrupt it all.

    Oh yeah, and Al Gore said New Yorkers would be ankle deep in water by now. And that was if carbon production slowed. Carbon production has accelerated worldwide, and yet there are still no dolphins in the subways.

    I guess he figured time would stop before 20 years passed, so nobody would remember or call out his global warming, err. Climate change, bull$#@!.

    But I remembered. I remembered back then all the idiots yelling about the end of the world, and how in 20 years they would have to eat their $#@!.
    And I'll remember 20 years from now, when still not a god damned thing has drastically changed.

    But this time, I'll know: the idiots have no shame or memory, so they'll still be bleating about how we only have 20 years left, 20 years from now.
    Last edited by UWDude; 01-03-2019 at 02:18 AM.

  14. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Let's assume you are correct.

    What do you suggest be done about it?
    Attend one of @oyarde's Going Green courses.

    Pfizer Macht Frei!

    Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.


    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!

    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  15. #103
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    What is important is that the levels are limited so that the temperature does not deviate too much from the range in which humans have thrived. So if there is something that can be done to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere, (there is) then it should be done.
    Funny, I'd wager that if you polled people that believe in man-made global warming and whether they believe that the world is over populated/mandating population control; I'd wager you would find a high correlation between the 2.

  16. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    Actually that is the most interesting question and is what will cause the biggest impact on our lives. Regardless of the reason behind climate change, everyone from the pentagon to insurance agencies are preparing for changes. We will have people try to spin this to their agenda and in our pre-dominate crony capitalism system many will try to profit hugely from it at the cost to citizens.

    Most things to do boil down to find a way to stop polluting as much. Very libertarian ideal, none of us want someone else using our personal resources (Clean air, clean water, non polluted ground to grow our food, shared resources like the ocean shouldn't be destroyed, etc). Doing this in a way that doesn't increase government oversight will be hard, we'll have to find the right battles.

    - Move to an increase in Nuclear power. Another thread shows that Bill Gates invested with some MIT grads for a new reactor design but is trying to put them in China. We have so much waste stored around the country we have energy just waiting to be utilized. We have unwarranted fears about nuclear power, new tech can make it even safer. I have 2 plants within 40 miles of me, one is being decommissioned in the next few years. Good time for a new plant.

    - The US stopped their own research into fusion and joined ITER. We're over a decade away, at least, with ITER. China and Lockheed Martin is supposedly working on it. If we could crack fusion, clean power would solve a lot of pollution issues. However I'm not sure that any government funded big science ends up helping any more than it hurts. That could be an worthy discussion there, if big science could help, and how to fund it besides tax payer money.

    - Plan better for handling issues that a warming climate brings. Plan for once a century floods as they turn into once a decade. This should be local and state issues mostly. We are bad as a county for any long term goals, can't hurt to start now.

    I'm sure there are a lot more. The worse thing we can do is nothing and the Dems and Reps put climate change as a party plank with lobbyists telling them what to do.


    If there were an ounce of truth to AGW Al Gore et all would
    have been out planting massive forests 20 years ago,
    however SOLUTIONS is the enemy to the NWO heretics,
    the High Priests of AGW, they are holding on for the Trillions
    in taxes to aid the acceleration of the roll out of Globalism ,
    sadly for them there is a global shift back towards the
    preservation of sovereignty, culture, and freedom.
    Cherry pick data, lie , and pay out a few million to sympathetic
    and opportunistic scientists to secure Trillions , hells' yea' !!
    -
    Look out the window, California is under 22'' of water, seals and polar bears
    are extinct, coral reefs have vanished, and Al Gore's CO2 foot print is no longer
    bigger than the Maui.



  17. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  18. #105
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    How would anybody have known that those predictions were "overstated", if the AGW proponents had their way, and had effectively silenced all opposition, criticism and critical analysis?
    Personally I have been for decades in the camp that even if there was climate change it is the natural course . Nothing yet has ever changed my mind . People lack wisdom and nothing will be done to correct that so it is better if they have no access to the peoples money or tax revenues for projects of evil.
    Last edited by oyarde; 01-03-2019 at 09:02 AM.
    Do something Danke

  19. #106
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    Attend one of @oyarde's Going Green courses.

    Pretty sweet huh ? Most of you probably got your first blowjob in a toyota .
    Do something Danke

  20. #107
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    Who said I want to the government to steal more money? They are wasting trillions of dollars on the military and other $#@! every year, certainly there is a lot of money that can be diverted to actually useful causes (not inefficient projects like you HAVE to pretend they are because your fundamentalist religion of "small government when it suits me" demands it of you)
    The only way for the government to divert money to useful causes is by not spending any at all and letting the people who earned that money decide how to allocate it.

    Also, inefficiency isn't one of the downsides of government spending. It's one of the upsides. Thank heavens we don't get all the government we pay for.

  21. #108
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    There are a number of meta analysis of support for AGW, they range from 90-100, most are in the high 90s. In this case I went with the lowest number, I figure if there is other information out there then perhaps that explains how the worse meta analysis was 90%
    So your actual sources don't actually even make any claims about what 90% (or any other percent) of scientists believe.

  22. #109
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    There are a number of meta analysis of support for AGW, they range from 90-100, most are in the high 90s. In this case I went with the lowest number, I figure if there is other information out there then perhaps that explains how the worse meta analysis was 90%
    Sort of like the meta analysis of 97% that you posted earlier which turned out to be like 67% in reality?

    Why do you keep dodging the fact that they are using wrong data at every turn and you are falling for it?
    "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."

  23. #110
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfluous Man View Post
    So your actual sources don't actually even make any claims about what 90% (or any other percent) of scientists believe.
    There is no documentation that I have found showing the roster of this' so called unanimous 97% + -
    of scientists that claim 'irrefutable' data proving the case for AGW, it's all secret, invisible, unverifiable,
    unless you factor in the 'mirrors' and puppeteering' behind the 'curtain' .

  24. #111
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Sort of like the meta analysis of 97% that you posted earlier which turned out to be like 67% 32.6% in reality?
    Fixed - 66.7% of the abstracts expressed no position on AGW at all (66.4%) or explicitly expressed uncertainty (0.3%).

    It was the "meta-analyzed" 32.6% that explicitly accepted AGW that got "meta-meta-analyzed" into 97% ...
    Last edited by Occam's Banana; 01-03-2019 at 03:49 PM.

  25. #112
    And I'll just point out (again) that you don't see physicists invoking "consensus" in order to defend quantum mechanics. You also don't see them doing "meta-analyses" of physics journal articles in order to claim that such-and-such a percentage of physicists agree with quantum mechanics - and that therefore quantum mechanics must be accepted as undeniably correct.

    They don't have to do those things because quantum mechanics is a model that makes consistently correct predictions, time after time after time after time.

    If "climate change" alarmists had a model that produced consistently correct predictions, they wouldn't need to go on about "consensus" or "meta-analysis" either. They could just point to their consistently correct predictive model and say, "Deny this, bitchez!" But they can't say it because they don't have one - all they have been able to do is concoct excuses for why their models have not made consistently correct predictions while demanding that everyone consider the matter to be "settled" because they have a "consensus" (and the dodgy "meta-analyses" to "prove" it).
    Last edited by Occam's Banana; 10-31-2021 at 02:18 AM. Reason: removed ellipses



  26. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  27. #113
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    And I'll just point out (again) that you don't see physicists invoking "consensus" in order to defend quantum mechanics. You also don't see them doing "meta-analyses" of physics journal articles in order to claim that such-and-such a percentage of physicists agree with quantum mechanics - and that therefore quantum mechanics must be accepted as undeniably correct.

    They don't have to do those things because quantum mechanics is a model that makes consistently correct predictions, time after time after time after time ...

    If climate change alarmists had a consistently correct predictive model, they wouldn't need to go on about "consensus" or "meta-analysis" either. They could just point to their consistently correct predictive model and say, "Deny this, bitchez!" But they can't say it because they don't have one - all they have been able to do is concoct excuses for why their models have not made consistently correct predictions while demanding that everyone consider the matter to be "settled" because "meta-analysis" supposedly shows that they have a "consensus" ...

    That couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that climate science is so massively politicized whereas quantum physics is not, could it? Just askin' is all.
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  28. #114
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post
    That couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that climate science is so massively politicized whereas quantum physics is not, could it? Just askin' is all.
    Hmmmmm. Could be, could be ...

    And this highlights the need for another important distinction to be made: the difference between science and policy.

    Unlike policy, science is not normative. It does not tell us whether something should be done about anything (let alone what that something ought to be).

    Even if some issue of policy did hinge on quantum physics, there still wouldn't be any controversy over the authoritativeness of quantum mechanics itself. The authoritative power of quantum mechanics derives from the consistently correct predictions produced by the model, and any sensible policy contingent upon quantum physics would have to respect that fact.

    But having no such models, "climate change" alarmism cannot claim such authority - and thus, alarmists must resort to fig leaves such as (meta-analyzed) "consensus" as substitutes for authoritativeness (and note the significance of the fact that "consensus" is properly a term of policy, not of science).
    Last edited by Occam's Banana; 10-31-2021 at 02:19 AM. Reason: removed ellipses

  29. #115
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post
    That couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that climate science is so massively politicized whereas quantum physics is not, could it? Just askin' is all.
    I personally find CERN quite troubling. It may not be politicized to the degree AGW is but particle physics certainly could be politicized pretty much overnight.

    Cosmology is certainly another area where predictive models spectacularly fail pretty much monthly.

    This isn't even getting into soft sciences like sociology or economics... I mean hell, if anyone reading this doesn't think economics isn't a politicized study then you should probably just GTFO right now.

    The point is, the politicization of science isn't just not hard to find, you just need to open your eyes for a second and see it.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  30. #116

  31. #117
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    Funny, I'd wager that if you polled people that believe in man-made global warming and whether they believe that the world is over populated/mandating population control; I'd wager you would find a high correlation between the 2.
    There are interesting cross-issue comparisons to be made. I am not aware of any statistics on coinciding opinions on AGW and population control, but it certainly sounds plausible.

    More to the point, how many AGW zealots are also pro-US immigration zealots? If AGW is such an urgent issue, why take people from a village in Guatemala, where their carbon footprint is relatively tiny, and move them to the US, where they will have one of the largest carbon footprints? Seems to be a glaring contradiction.
    "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.

  32. #118
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    I personally find CERN quite troubling. It may not be politicized to the degree AGW is but particle physics certainly could be politicized pretty much overnight.

    Cosmology is certainly another area where predictive models spectacularly fail pretty much monthly.

    This isn't even getting into soft sciences like sociology or economics... I mean hell, if anyone reading this doesn't think economics isn't a politicized study then you should probably just GTFO right now.

    The point is, the politicization of science isn't just not hard to find, you just need to open your eyes for a second and see it.
    When an issue can be translated into a Wall Street carbon credit exchange, with carbon credits distributed by the government to their favorite cronies (and donors), then it will become highly politicized.
    "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.

  33. #119
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ce1139460fb72dcde6f4a6902643f06975ecf5920a3500964d10e3396aa3576f.jpg 
Views:	0 
Size:	22.0 KB 
ID:	6298
    Pfizer Macht Frei!

    Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.


    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!

    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  34. #120
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    And I'll just point out (again) that you don't see physicists invoking "consensus" in order to defend quantum mechanics. You also don't see them doing "meta-analyses" of physics journal articles in order to claim that such-and-such a percentage of physicists agree with quantum mechanics - and that therefore quantum mechanics must be accepted as undeniably correct.

    They don't have to do those things because quantum mechanics is a model that makes consistently correct predictions, time after time after time after time ...

    If "climate change" alarmists had a model that produced consistently correct predictions, they wouldn't need to go on about "consensus" or "meta-analysis" either. They could just point to their consistently correct predictive model and say, "Deny this, bitchez!" But they can't say it because they don't have one - all they have been able to do is concoct excuses for why their models have not made consistently correct predictions while demanding that everyone consider the matter to be "settled" because they have a "consensus" (and the dodgy "meta-analyses" to "prove" it ...).
    Didn’t you know? Science is based on voting in a democracy. And a plurality will do if it serves the proper agenda.
    "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.



  35. Remove this section of ads by registering.
Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 53
    Last Post: 11-05-2022, 10:31 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-08-2017, 03:35 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-30-2013, 06:07 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

Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

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