• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

How Silly is Climate Change Denial?

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

It was a pretty typical "debate" with a liberal socialist type. I am used to it. None of them know shit and just say what they are told.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thats actually laugable considering you are helping promote the fossil fuel industrys con job.

That their products are safe and good for the environment, when anyone with half a brain can see the damage thats being done by this industry.
 
Do you think mike is somehow unaware the debate is about the IPCC claims of catastrophic climate change due to runaway global warming caused by manmade co2 emmisions, or is it just willful blindness, they just ignore that we all agree on who the bogey bad bad men are, and how disgraceful they are.

They cant rant and rage against people that agree with them, they have to manufacture garbbage like oil company dupe etc, anything than other than admit the claim is bogus, its the big fib, based on pure faith..regurgitating over and over discredited falsified data as gospel, or unheard of activist journalists, as if they the dogs bollocks.

We all agree on the rest, we ALL agree the climate is changing

All mikes got to reveal yet is how many people need to be removed from the cycle to be in be in balance with nature, and who it is that has to 'go away' to get down to that number, for the greater good of man..
 
Last edited:
Yes most of these alarmists don't know the very foundation of what they are fighting for. Sad really. Makes them look really ignorant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
On the contrary, foundation is defined as the basis or groundwork of anything:

Rather than cherry pick a single element and try and make a blinkered case on that, I have made my case on the very foundation of the problem.

Our overuse of dirty fossil fuels, an overuse that has as its foundation, overpopulation as its root cause
 
Stop. You know nothing. We could let it slide as ignorance before but now we've explained to you what the IPCC is all about and what the foundation of their global warming movement is in that CO2 from humans is causing runaway catastrophic global warming. if you continue speaking on this you are bordering on stupidity instead of ignorance. I'm sure you don't want to end up like Tyger.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
pixelsmith said:
Stop. You know nothing. We could let it slide as ignorance before but now we've explained to you what the IPCC is all about and what the foundation of their global warming movement is in that CO2 from humans is causing runaway catastrophic global warming. if you continue speaking on this you are bordering on stupidity instead of ignorance. I'm sure you don't want to end up like Tyger.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. You have explained nothing. Take a look at your posting history on this thread - it's all one-liner posts. You have done nothing to flesh out your ideas. It's in your ballpark. Start articulating your views with back-up evidence to substantiate how you see things.

Please Note: Opinion pieces are not evidence. Linking to opinion pieces does not further your case, whatever it is - unless the person voicing the opinion has some standing of themselves and cites evidence.
 
pixelsmith said:
Stop. You know nothing. We could let it slide as ignorance before but now we've explained to you what the IPCC is all about and what the foundation of their global warming movement is in that CO2 from humans is causing runaway catastrophic global warming. if you continue speaking on this you are bordering on stupidity instead of ignorance. I'm sure you don't want to end up like Tyger.
Click to expand...

The only person who can command me to stop is Gene, His playground, His rules.

You on the otherhand are likely skating on thin ice with your insults instead of arguments here.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it"

Winston Churchill
 
Back to sceptical science as their bible, some discredited aussie no mark hack journalist, and round and around the farcical shyte continues.

They are pm'ing each other, they are just utterly taking the piss.
 
manxman said:
Back to sceptical science as their bible, some discredited aussie no mark hack journalist, and round and around the farcical shyte continues.

They are pm'ing each other, they are just utterly taking the piss.
Click to expand...

How about you argue your points rather than endlessly giving evidence of your paranoia?
 
Last edited:
Fascinating article - not really apropos Global Warming - but interesting in how an area evolves, changes and recovers.

The maps within the link are the best part -

Watch: How Europe is greener now than 100 years ago By Rick Noack December 4
LINK: Watch: How Europe is greener now than 100 years ago - The Washington Post

TEXT: "Within the last 100 years, Europe has experienced two World Wars, the end of communism, the emergence of the European Union and a series of other transformative political and economic developments. A team of scientists has now been able to visualize the impact of historical events in maps that show the growth and decline of settlements, forests and croplands."

[See link for entire article with maps.]
 
How is it you are all clones.

I will make it simple for you to convince me and many others that Catastrophic Climate Change, leading to extinction, due to runaway Global warming, that is caused by manmade co2 emissions, as you claim is correct.

And remember it is YOUR claim.

Show me the models that enable you and mad mike to make this leap of faith.

Show me the models, by that i mean the corroborating parallel independent modeling that forecast the future climate you are so sure of, is their any ?.

Or is the modelling secret ?, the criteria and data used etc etc, i mean they would be open and honest with such dire predictied consequene's from their modelling wouldnt they.
I mean you would want your modelling to be stress tested by the very best scientific minds, if they are forecasting extinction.

What about the tremendous fuel poverty the poor will suffer, the extortinate taxe's we will all suffer, our childrens tax's wasted on a politically motivated fantasy, just to prop up a broke country, and failing president who make's great tweets,, if those secret models are wrong..

And explain to us what it is about the modelling that makes you so sure of the deadly forecast consequence's if we dont completely drop fossil fuels now, convince me.

Convince me why i should be all for having the human race turned upside-down, because of some wooey semi secret science, making an extraordinary claim.




Or just keep on regurgitating reems and reems of SS shyte, with mad mike.
 
Last edited:
Drilling in the Arctic......At 04:40 sec the impact of a sudden methane release - would this drilling cause a 'methane burp'? What we know about the Arctic......

Holy Moly! The Arctic Drilling Disaster About to Happen...
Holy Moly! The Arctic Drilling Disaster About to Happen... - YouTube

TEXT: "Published on Dec 5, 2014 - John Deans, Greenpeace USA joins Thom Hartmann. The Arctic is one of the few places on Earth that Big Oil hasn't completely destroyed - but that could soon be changing. Why is the Obama administration considering approving Arctic drilling - and how devestating would an oil spill in the Arctic be?"
 
manxman said:
I will make it simple for you to convince me and many others that Catastrophic Climate Change, leading to extinction, due to runaway Global warming, that is caused by manmade co2 emissions, as you claim is correct. And remember it is YOUR claim.
Click to expand...

Hardly my claim. :rolleyes: Have you read the links to the science?

The problem is you don't actually read the thread - and you then paint everyone with the same brush. Each poster here has their own pov as far as I can see. A commonality may be an acceptance of the science on Climate Change/Warming/AGW - but I think to assume even that would be presumptuous. I know at least one poster you harangue has stated very clearly that while they entertain human complicity in our changing world they are not fully on-board with all the details because they feel the natural system is too much of an unknown to make such broad statements. Did you catch that? No. Do you catch the nuances in Mike's pov? All the evidence is: no.

I post what interests me - you make assumptions from a very superficial understanding of the science presented. If you want to understand the part of the opinion continuum that is predicting extinction, look up the science yourself. Why in the world you think posters on this thread should try to convince you of a pov they might not even hold themselves is simultaneously ludicrous and audacious. :rolleyes: You do not appear to be a scientist so why do you think you will understand the arguments - even if they were presented by scientists? You don't get it now when you can read science papers. How will you 'get it' on a chat thread with non-scientists?

You posit an argument and seem keen on finding a sparring partner for the envisioned debate. I wish you luck. But more productive - rather than setting tasks for your yet-to-be-identified mystery opponent - why not just get in there and start reading the scientific papers? You want to understand the models - start reading about them. Seems the thing to do.

You can start your reading here - and make your own determination. Kolbert writes for the non-scientific person.

LINK: The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History Hardcover – by Elizabeth Kolbert (Author) (February 11, 2014)

TEXT: "A major book about the future of the world, blending intellectual and natural history and field reporting into a powerful account of the mass extinction unfolding before our eyes.

"Over the last half a billion years, there have been five mass extinctions, when the diversity of life on earth suddenly and dramatically contracted. Scientists around the world are currently monitoring the sixth extinction, predicted to be the most devastating extinction event since the asteroid impact that wiped out the dinosaurs. This time around, the cataclysm is us. In The Sixth Extinction, two-time winner of the National Magazine Award and New Yorker writer Elizabeth Kolbert draws on the work of scores of researchers in half a dozen disciplines, accompanying many of them into the field: geologists who study deep ocean cores, botanists who follow the tree line as it climbs up the Andes, marine biologists who dive off the Great Barrier Reef. She introduces us to a dozen species, some already gone, others facing extinction, including the Panamian golden frog, staghorn coral, the great auk, and the Sumatran rhino. Through these stories, Kolbert provides a moving account of the disappearances occurring all around us and traces the evolution of extinction as concept, from its first articulation by Georges Cuvier in revolutionary Paris up through the present day. The sixth extinction is likely to be mankind's most lasting legacy; as Kolbert observes, it compels us to rethink the fundamental question of what it means to be human."


Then there is always the cheery predictions of Guy McPherson. Read his book - 'Going Dark' - where he talks about the 32 feed-back loops, etc. Book: Going Dark – by Guy R. McPherson (October 1, 2013)

If reading isn't your thing, Mc Pherson gives a a fairly comprehensive summary of his ideas in this interview.

As he says in the below interview, he posits that humanity will not go extinct because the planet is warm, but because of the loss of habitat for humanity's food chain, like the plankton in the ocean and the land plants, which will not be able to adapt rapidly enough. It's one of the extreme views. You do with it what you want.

Guy McPherson Thom Hartmann Conversation with great minds 4 4 14 720p

TEXT: "Published on Apr 6, 2014: Thom Hartmann´s Conversation with great Minds, April 4th, 2014"



 
pixelsmith said:
Run away Tyger run away!!!
Click to expand...

You're such a troll. :rolleyes: You need to find someone else to play with, Pixel. I ain't that poster. I'm not interested in playing with you. Have you got that? I comment here and there. I post what I think is interesting. That's it. I do this only while it's amusing and pleasant. For the most part it is very much that on this chat site. Move along, Pixel. Harass someone else. I intend to keep posting as I do. I am not, nor have I ever been, interested in a dialog with you. Got it?

Probably not. Why bother. Ignore is as good as it gets since you appear unable to not read my posts. :rolleyes:
 
You are obviously unable to convince anyone, even with your BLIND faith and al gore disaster movies.

Any time you or mad mike can actually verbally communicate to us the reason we should take your 'leap of faith' and believe the extraordinary claims for our future we are all ears.



So we dont loose focus of what the debate WE are having is actually about, ive copied theway you can convince us.

It is not a devious or an impossible to answer question/s, infact it couldnt be a SIMPLER request, show us the modelling evidence, that bacs up the extradinary claim/s you whole-heartedly have endorsed, here long and loud, about.

Does skeptical Science not have the answer, ?.

No being the top top top climate guru he is, all he will have is advice on how to slip the question, how to avoid direct response, just like i bet you will.








I will make it simple for you to convince me and many others that Catastrophic Climate Change, leading to extinction, due to runaway Global warming, that is caused by manmade co2 emissions, as you claim is correct.

And remember it is YOUR claim.

Show me the models that enable you and mad mike to make this leap of faith.

Show me the models, by that i mean the corroborating parallel independent modeling that forecast the future climate you are so sure of, is their any ?.

Or is the modelling secret ?, the criteria and data used etc etc, i mean they would be open and honest with such dire predictied consequene's from their modelling wouldnt they.
I mean you would want your modelling to be stress tested by the very best scientific minds, if they are forecasting extinction.

What about the tremendous fuel poverty the poor will suffer, the extortinate taxe's we will all suffer, our childrens tax's wasted on a politically motivated fantasy, just to prop up a broke country, and failing president who make's great tweets,, if those secret models are wrong..

And explain to us what it is about the modelling that makes you so sure of the deadly forecast consequence's if we dont completely drop fossil fuels now, convince me.

Convince me why i should be all for having the human race turned upside-down, because of some wooey semi secret science, making an extraordinary claim.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top