Philosophy Now Forum

Dateline: Lapland

http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/finland/fin ... icant.html

And one published paper repudiating 'man made' climate change is also insignificant against all the ones supporting it.

It's not the only, but it is the latest to replace the GI/GO computer modeling that gets passed off as science.

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?"

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.

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.

Walker wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:49 pm You might want to work on those reading comprehension skills.

The link I provided includes information about man's effect. Your advice should be directed to yourself, as usual.

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.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:17 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:49 pm You might want to work on those reading comprehension skills.

The link I provided includes information about man's effect. Your advice should be directed to yourself, as usual.

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.

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.

Global warming morons with unconstitutional regulatory authority do affect everyone's pocketbook.

Yeah, I know. Might be time to take that 'authority' away, yeah?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 12:31 am Yeah, I know. Might be time to take that 'authority' away, yeah?

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.

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?

"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?

"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?

Walker wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 12:12 am
Do you actually know of anyone who denies that climate changes?

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.