How Silly is Climate Change Denial?

[Tyger]

Why not just educate yourself and save us both time?

Ha! That's one rationale to use to get out of having to post anything longer than one sentence at a time.

 

[Tyger]

You have study both sides of the science. The man made and programmed climate models and the historical and actual observed data.

Yep.

 

[Jeff Davis]

Here is the problem with this type of WAR. That's right, that's all you will EVER witness within such a pretension as is exhibited by debate and argument fueled by the ego of cause, namely: WAR.

In war there is no true victor. Only those left with the resources to recover from such folly.

Let me break it down for you: Man is by nature a pack animal. In a pack, there must be leadership based organization in order for that pack to survive. So what happens when several packs develop over time? Confrontation is inevitable due to the primary instinct. That primary driver is simply survival. One must dominate the other or survival is threatened. One of two things happen at this point.

Annihilation, or, War. What is the difference? The concept of annihilation is simple. Attack and destroy the other pack, completely, and totally. See: Guns, Germs, and Steel.

War on the other hand is what occurs when the former is not quickly and decisively possible. It's what happens when both sides are prepared for one another due to the conditioning that only experience based survival can afford.

This conditioning is both, carried within on an instinctual level, and externalized via the actual. It is the intentional confusing of the two that allows one man to manipulate another. Such is the fodder of WAR as directed by the leaders of the packs.

Common sense sits on the side lines of the football game of war and yawns.

Still in yet, war is ultimately a potentially destructive and misguiding force within nature, of nature.
We are all doomed.

So begins the modern experience of rising above the sentient baseline of survival based commonality. That which we are contained by becomes an environment of transcendence.

Transcend WAR. Use common sense to para (beyond) explore the internal and external conditioning entrapping all of us.

 

[pixelsmith]

Yep.

I tried to start up a discussion with you. I will try again.
What do you feel is a safe ppm level of CO2?
What temperature should the planet be set at?
How much warming should we expect for a doubling of CO2?
Why hasn't it warmed for 18 years now even tho CO2 has risen?
Answer these questions and I think we can get somewhere in this discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pixelsmith]

The "warmists" here are not very good at defending their position which is no surprise to me because they can't. It hasn't warmed when they said it would, weather has not been more extreme, there have not been more hurricanes, glacial activity is normal, sea levels are normal, polar bears are thriving, etc etc... not one IPCC prediction has come true, in fact IPCC, NOAA and other scientists are jumping ship left and right..

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to
know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” – UN IPCC
Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical
chemist.

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of
scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” – U.S Government
Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of
NOAA.

“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” – Nobel Prize Winner for
Physics, Ivar Giaever.

 

[pixelsmith]

Climate "science" is a politically left leaning and controlled discipline now. The ONLY way "they" can make the data show warming is to manipulate new data, alter the historical climate records and control the peer review process. If the claims of global warming are true it should be very simple to prove it. So prove it. At least make an argument explaining how the 3% CO2 anthropogenic contribution is warming the planet more than the 97% CO2 contribution from Mother Nature. Explain how this trace greenhouse gas affects warming more than the most abundant ghg H2O. H2O kills more people everyday than CO2 ever will yet no one here has mentioned it. why?

 

[pixelsmith]

Let me give you a clue, BoyintheMachine, as you could use a few: You have dismantled nothing. You keep repeating the same mantra and keep ignoring all the evidence that makes you look foolish. If you cannot produce a meaningful, logical refutation of global warming — forget for the moment the cause — I'll just close this thread and be done with it. It's really getting tiresome, and I'm sorry you seem to be far too obtuse to understand how your arguments have been demolished over and over and even over again.

And, no, I will not discuss any of this with you. My worthy colleagues here are doing great.

BoyintheMachine this is what they always do with the global warming threads. They lose their argument then close the thread and/or ban you. Sadly it is the only they can "win" in a climate debate. I was banned once or twice for my views on this topic.
All Gene and company have to do is show how the 3% CO2 contribution of humans is causing this runaway global warming... they can't and never will. It is hard to show warming when it hasn't warmed in 18 years now. They also seem to forget we are still emerging out of the last ice age... um... last i checked when coming out of an ice age one would expect a little warming. lol..
BoyintheMachine is one of the most intelligent posters here on this subject. I hope he comes back or did Gene ban him?

 

[pixelsmith]

“The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these
dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through
changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then, is humanity itself.“
– Club of Rome,
premier environmental think-tank,
consultants to the United Nations

 

[pixelsmith]

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the
industrialized civilizations collapse?
Isn’t it our responsiblity to bring that about?”
– Maurice Strong,
founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)

 

[pixelsmith]

“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.“
– Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation

 

[pixelsmith]

Snowfalls Are Now Just A Thing Of The Past :

20 March 2000

According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.

“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.

 

[pixelsmith]

“Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound
reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world
has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both
governments and individuals and an unprecedented
redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift
will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences
of every human action be integrated into individual and
collective decision-making at every level.“
– UN Agenda 21

 

[pixelsmith]

“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.”
– Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Rio+20 Earth Summit, 1992.

 

[pixelsmith]

This is pretty typical of a climate debate... the greenies run as soon as someone challenges them on their BS belief system.

 

[Jeff Davis]

This is pretty typical of a climate debate... the greenies run as soon as someone challenges them on their BS belief system.

Stop it, you BRUTE, you! LOL!! It's not surprising that this type of thing shows up the unceasing nature of the pack animal human so clearly. In days of old we used religion to program, monitor, and control the preservation of organized power. Now we are using pseudo belief system inspired politics to do the precise same thing as it's volleyed from one corporate faction to another in an effort to confuse the surface level befuddled masses. New lamps for old.

 

[manxman]

They [the public]are not confused jeff, they are convinced, that's the problem, i would say global warning hysteria cost's me in-directly over £1000 a year in forced green tax's, for fees on top of private enterprise normal charge's, like an extra £12 for tyre disposal ontop of the bill, when getting 4 new tyres fitted etc etc etc et feckin cetera.

And the same again in direct taxation, to cover government green expense's.

It's a racket, a job creation scheme, a contrived 'new' industrie.

 

[pixelsmith]

Stop it, you BRUTE, you! LOL!! It's not surprising that this type of thing shows up the unceasing nature of the pack animal human so clearly. In days of old we used religion to program, monitor, and control the preservation of organized power. Now we are using pseudo belief system inspired politics to do the precise same thing as it's volleyed from one corporate faction to another in an effort to confuse the surface level befuddled masses. New lamps for old.

It good to know there are still a few who can see.
Perfectly stated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tyger]

"The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human." - Aldous Huxley

 

[pixelsmith]

"The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human." - Aldous Huxley

Your "side" believes humans are a virus on this planet. We aren't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tyger]

This is pretty typical of a climate debate... the greenies run as soon as someone challenges them on their BS belief system.

I wouldn't say 'the greenies' ran. You've been pretty decently argued in the past (as you well know). I have yet to see you yourself argue points. I have only ever seen you post one-liners. A series of quotes do not say much about your ability to think through the evidence. Anyway, it's clear how you go about 'arguing' with your own brand of BS. Sometimes it's just not worth the time for some. Just saying. (P.S. Just to be clear, I am not a 'greenie' nor am I having a discourse with you on this topic. I've seen enough of your MO in this area not to be interested in a re-play of your same ol' stuff.)

Whether or not we 'should' be worried, the flood of information is for sure interesting. Food for thought.

LINK: These Stunning Photos of Greenland's "Dark Snow" Should Worry You | Mother Jones

LINK: NASA Finds 'Amazing' Levels Of Arctic Methane And CO2, Asks 'Is a Sleeping Climate Giant Stirring in the Arctic?' | ThinkProgress