Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant
Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant
And one published paper repudiating 'man made' climate change is also insignificant against all the ones supporting it.
Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant
It's not the only, but it is the latest to replace the GI/GO computer modeling that gets passed off as science.
Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant
This website offers some more views/information:
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php
From the Home Page:
"Scientific skepticism is healthy. Scientists should always challenge themselves to improve their understanding. Yet this isn't what happens with climate change denial. Skeptics vigorously criticise any evidence that supports man-made global warming and yet embrace any argument, op-ed, blog or study that purports to refute global warming. This website gets skeptical about global warming skepticism. Do their arguments have any scientific basis? What does the peer reviewed scientific literature say?"
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php
From the Home Page:
"Scientific skepticism is healthy. Scientists should always challenge themselves to improve their understanding. Yet this isn't what happens with climate change denial. Skeptics vigorously criticise any evidence that supports man-made global warming and yet embrace any argument, op-ed, blog or study that purports to refute global warming. This website gets skeptical about global warming skepticism. Do their arguments have any scientific basis? What does the peer reviewed scientific literature say?"
Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant
The article doesn't deny that climate changes.
It says that mans' effect on climate is insignificant.
You might want to work on those reading comprehension skills.
It says that mans' effect on climate is insignificant.
You might want to work on those reading comprehension skills.
Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant
The article doesn't deny that climate changes.
It says that mans' effect on climate is insignificant.
You might want to work on those reading comprehension skills.
It says that mans' effect on climate is insignificant.
You might want to work on those reading comprehension skills.
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Walker
A fella with the net-moniker Eratosthenes wrote...
They think “journalists” actually do journalism, and “climate scientists” actually do climate science. This is why the divide exists, is so wide & deep, and is getting worse. You can explain to them until you’re blue in the face, your own personal story of how you came to suspect “climate change” might have more to do with politics than science (or how "journalism" might have more to do with politics than reporting). And you won’t get through, not because they’re disagreeing with you, but because they cannot understand how something might possibly be different from what it represents itself to be.
...he's right on the money.
Debate on this subject, and many others, is pointless. And: when it all comes to a head, nobody is gonna be talkin' anyway.
They think “journalists” actually do journalism, and “climate scientists” actually do climate science. This is why the divide exists, is so wide & deep, and is getting worse. You can explain to them until you’re blue in the face, your own personal story of how you came to suspect “climate change” might have more to do with politics than science (or how "journalism" might have more to do with politics than reporting). And you won’t get through, not because they’re disagreeing with you, but because they cannot understand how something might possibly be different from what it represents itself to be.
...he's right on the money.
Debate on this subject, and many others, is pointless. And: when it all comes to a head, nobody is gonna be talkin' anyway.
Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant
I didn't read your link because anyone who seriously uses the term, "climate change denial," is a moron.
Do you actually know of anyone who denies that climate changes?
See if you can answer that simple question.
Last edited by Walker on Tue Jul 16, 2019 12:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Walker
Global warming morons with unconstitutional regulatory authority do affect everyone's pocketbook.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:50 pm A fella with the net-moniker Eratosthenes wrote...
They think “journalists” actually do journalism, and “climate scientists” actually do climate science. This is why the divide exists, is so wide & deep, and is getting worse. You can explain to them until you’re blue in the face, your own personal story of how you came to suspect “climate change” might have more to do with politics than science (or how "journalism" might have more to do with politics than reporting). And you won’t get through, not because they’re disagreeing with you, but because they cannot understand how something might possibly be different from what it represents itself to be.
...he's right on the money.
Debate on this subject, and many others, is pointless. And: when it all comes to a head, nobody is gonna be talkin' anyway.
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
"Global warming morons with unconstitutional regulatory authority do affect everyone's pocketbook."
Yeah, I know. Might be time to take that 'authority' away, yeah?
Re: "Global warming morons with unconstitutional regulatory authority do affect everyone's pocketbook."
On the one hand, the country is too big for civil war, the vested interests at the trough are too deep, and those interests have protected themselves well since Lincoln took office and raised hell with the office workers.henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 12:31 am Yeah, I know. Might be time to take that 'authority' away, yeah?
Wikki, 1860 census.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1860_United_States_Census
On the other hand, it happened before and history repeats, but at what real cost to huge swaths of the population, and would any kind of survival be possible for the victors?
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Walker
"the country is too big for civil war"
Sez who?
#
"the vested interests at the trough are too deep"
They'e the opposition: let's git 'em.
#
"those interests have protected themselves well since Lincoln took office and raised hell with the office workers."
They gotta eat, same as anyone...hard to do that when the food producers, haulers, sellers are pointin' guns at you.
#
"what real cost to huge swaths of the population"
Same as always: death, misery.
#
"would any kind of survival be possible for the victors?"
Depends on which sides wins, yeah?
Sez who?
#
"the vested interests at the trough are too deep"
They'e the opposition: let's git 'em.
#
"those interests have protected themselves well since Lincoln took office and raised hell with the office workers."
They gotta eat, same as anyone...hard to do that when the food producers, haulers, sellers are pointin' guns at you.
#
"what real cost to huge swaths of the population"
Same as always: death, misery.
#
"would any kind of survival be possible for the victors?"
Depends on which sides wins, yeah?
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Re: Walker
"the country is too big for civil war"
Sez who?
#
"the vested interests at the trough are too deep"
They're the opposition: let's git 'em.
#
"those interests have protected themselves well since Lincoln took office and raised hell with the office workers."
They gotta eat, same as anyone...hard to do that when the food producers, haulers, sellers are pointin' guns at you.
#
"what real cost to huge swaths of the population"
Same as always: death, misery.
#
"would any kind of survival be possible for the victors?"
Depends on which sides wins, yeah?
Sez who?
#
"the vested interests at the trough are too deep"
They're the opposition: let's git 'em.
#
"those interests have protected themselves well since Lincoln took office and raised hell with the office workers."
They gotta eat, same as anyone...hard to do that when the food producers, haulers, sellers are pointin' guns at you.
#
"what real cost to huge swaths of the population"
Same as always: death, misery.
#
"would any kind of survival be possible for the victors?"
Depends on which sides wins, yeah?
Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant
I remember all the OStriches did so in the 90's. only in the last 15 yrs have most of them ammended it to "no man made climate change"
fool all.
in another 20 yrs they will be like you are now and post here:
Do you actually know of anyone who denies man changed climate?
.............and only crickets will be heard, for all the Ostriches will deny they ever thought climate change was natural and not man made, just as they deny today they only 20 yrs ago denied climate change!
so ya, you are full of it.