Global Warmists -- Read ( Climategate )

[Leif]

Leif usually bows out after stuff like this gets posted, I'll make his next 10 climate change posts for him, oh wait he's given us this genius copypasta talking point already.

I bow out when I get bored. Thankfully, I haven't gotten bored with this yet.

Stop hallucinating, Max, embrace the truthiness. Leif's just going to keep posting this until you see his way of thinking, after all.

Posting what? That's pretty much my entire point. There is nothing to post because there is nothing to debunk.


The simple fact is nobody can answer these questions:

- Is "global warming" man-made?
- Is "global warming" bad?
- Can man stop "global warming"?
- If man does stop "global warming", what will he have to give up?
- If we don't want to stop it and only "reduce" it, how much do we need to reduce it?
- Should man stop "global warming"?
- Why has there been no "global warming" for the past decade?
- Why are scientists doctoring evidence?
- If there is "global warming", what are the major causes?
- If it is man made, how much of it is man made? How much of it is possibly natural variations in the climate/stuff with the sun/etc?


You don't get to force everyone to subscribe to your hysteria until you can answer these questions. And if the world truly is ending, I suggest you get to it. Answer these questions!

And finally, you don't get to call everyone crazy deniers just because they want these questions truthfully and honestly answered. The simple fact is, whether or not there is "global warming" (of which nobody has been able to produce evidence of), the political left in America and abroad are more than willing to change a potential issue of "global warming" into an excuse to expand government and gain control of people's lives.

There is no available evidence that can even begin to answer any of these questions to a reasonable certainty (ie. better than predicting a coin toss). When you find some, come let me know. In the meantime, tell all your "scientists" to stop faking evidence.

Does being a patriot mean only agreeing with republicans? Is it not possible to both want the best for your country and NOT want to start a war?

No, because there are bad eggs in the Republican party too. Unfortunately, conservatives just love America more than liberals do. They are willing to defend it and fight in its name. You need not look past the fact that almost every Soviet spy or presidential assassin has been a liberal. You need not look past the fact that liberals are always the ones that mock people for pledging allegiance to the flag. You need not look past the fact that liberals always side with the enemy. The list goes on and on and on.

[Nystul]

The problem is that the questions are largely irrelevant. Even if global warming was tomorrow proven to be untrue or whatever you want to call it, many of the changes proposed by environmentalists still carry significant benefits.

Anyone that has ever visited Mexico City or LA or any other smog-ridden area can see how fossil fuel pollution has negative effects outside of global warming.

Anyone can see clearly that a smart, efficient recycling program is a good idea because resources are obviously limited.

Anyone can put 2+2 together and understand that depletion of resource rich areas like rainforests deprive us of all kinds of potential benefits.

Simply put, one could dismiss all of your questions by asking: "if global warming was disproven tomorrow, what practices would you actually change? Is climate change the only reason for any policies enacted in the interests of environmentalism?"

[Nystul]

No, because there are bad eggs in the Republican party too. Unfortunately, conservatives just love America more than liberals do. They are willing to defend it and fight in its name. You need not look past the fact that almost every Soviet spy or presidential assassin has been a liberal. You need not look past the fact that liberals are always the ones that mock people for pledging allegiance to the flag. You need not look past the fact that liberals always side with the enemy. The list goes on and on and on.

Oh please. I mean...Seriously. Thats just absurd. Thats just trolling. Unsubstantiated, blanket statements that you yourself provide exceptions to, unverifiable allegations, absolutes etc. One could just as easily say conservatives fear change, pine for the days of slavery and oppression of the lower classes, desire war for wars sake and don't really love their country- they just aren't smart enough to do something other than what their leadership tells them to do. OBEY!

Reducing someone who thinks something different than you do down to some sort of boogeyman caricature is a sign of a small, scared, childish intellect.

[Correction]

The simple fact is nobody can answer these questions:

list of bullshit questions here

Typical reactionary bullshit. I like how you're continuing to use jargon like 'global warming' when the rest of the scientific community now refers to an acceleration of global climate cycles. Someone says 'yes man is causing global warming' and you change the subject to AH-HA I GOT YOU THERE IS NO WARMING TREND LOOK AT THIS GRAPH, deflecting a mountain of peer-reviewed research that says man is making the global climate picture a fuckton worse than it was before man showed up on the planet.

But silly me, how dare I expect you to have read Max's post and made the effort to comprehend it.

[Leif]

deflecting a mountain of peer-reviewed research that says man is making the global climate picture a fuckton worse than it was before man showed up on the planet.

Seriously. Give me one. ONE. Give me one piece of "peer-reviewed research that says man is making the global climate picture a fuckton worse than it was before man showed up on the planet."

Then, give one piece of "peer-reviewed research" that shows that making the climate "a fuckton worse" is bad for people.

Oh please. I mean...Seriously. Thats just absurd. Thats just trolling. Unsubstantiated, blanket statements that you yourself provide exceptions to, unverifiable allegations, absolutes etc.

Except... it's all true!

One could just as easily say conservatives fear change, pine for the days of slavery and oppression of the lower classes, desire war for wars sake and don't really love their country- they just aren't smart enough to do something other than what their leadership tells them to do. OBEY!

Except for the part of the Republican party being on the right side of slavery when it really counted. To make up for this, Democrats now manufacture their own victims. Is this really news?

Ever wonder how the liberal promotion of single motherhood, gun control, and welfare has created more poverty?

And except for the part where America doesn't go on a conquest of the world. Ever wonder why Canada still exists?

Do conservatives love their country more than liberals? Of course they do. You could win that argument in court!


On the other hand, all of society's problems actually can be fairly blamed on liberals.

The problem is that the questions are largely irrelevant. Even if global warming was tomorrow proven to be untrue or whatever you want to call it, many of the changes proposed by environmentalists still carry significant benefits.

If they are so beneficial, individuals, corporations, and others would be the first to jump in on all those "benefits"! The government would be the one trailing behind. However, because the left are the only ones telling us New York will be underwater in two years, there is almost conclusive proof that global warming is a complete fraud.

[Maguspk]

Does anyone have a good reason for why people would be so adamant about proving global warming/climate change due to human activity is false? The results of believing it (even if we assume it is untrue) are only positive things. The only drawback is the people emitting ridicuolous amounts of waste are forced to spend money regulating themselves, Q_Q? Maybe I am not being clear, but really there is no reason to oppose the stance unless you have a personal stake in it not being enforced, otherwise it's best to shut the fuck up.

[Nystul]

You're so narrow it's hilarious. You see what you do, right? I hope you do. It would be sad if you didn't.

Plenty of blame for societies problems can be blamed on liberals. Absolutely. Unfortunately that does not absolve the sins of the other side. And it does not NEGATE the benefits that have been brought by liberals.

Again, the fact that you are so absolute (and contradictory of yourself in the process which is REALLY entertaining- I'll not point it out specifically because it entertains me so much) shows that you have a poor understanding of the world around you. It is very easy to distill things down to US and THEM! WE ARE ALL GOOD! THEY ARE ALL BAD! THINGS WE LIKE ARE RIGHT! OUR GOD IS BETTER! THEY ARE WRONG! It's hilarious. Even children should be able to understand that the world is more complex than that.

You CHOOSE not to BELIEVE in global warming NOT because of the data and the science behind it. In fact, it doesn't matter what science is done because you would dismiss it out of hand. You choose not to believe in global warming because IF it DID exist, then 1) it means your political ideals lead to something negative, and 2) it means the reforms would be difficult and incongruous with your ideals. So basically, you've painted yourself in a corner. It's like the Pope being unable to change policy because it would be an admission of being WRONG which they can't do. So any evidence that supports your desired beliefs is accepted *without question* and any evidence that does not is rejected *without question*.

Simple proof:
Someone who understood the world as it really is would understand that everyone makes mistakes and no policy, party, or ideology is categorically correct. It is very easy for you to list the occasions when liberals are wrong and conservatives are right. I think you'd struggle to list any situation in which liberals were truthfully right and not because they did something "conservative" and where conservatives were wrong and not just because they did something "liberal."

Seriously. Give me one. ONE. Give me one piece of "peer-reviewed research that says man is making the global climate picture a fuckton worse than it was before man showed up on the planet."

Then, give one piece of "peer-reviewed research" that shows that making the climate "a fuckton worse" is bad for people.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=...001&as_sdtp=on

The fact of the matter is that there is all kinds of evidence that this is happening. The question is not that humans have an impact on the environment. You'd have to be clueless not to accept that. The issue is really to what degree. If you knew what you were talking about, you wouldn't ask for such papers because they are readily available. The first is a review and should have any number of peer reviewed citations in the bibliography for you to review.

If they are so beneficial, individuals, corporations, and others would be the first to jump in on all those "benefits"!

Conservation, recycling, reduced pollution etc require increased cost, increased effort, etc. Are you for real? What fantasy world do you live in where people have a natural tendency to sacrifice time and convenience today for a benefit years from now? Are you aware of the trend of the savings rate in this country? Jesus thats your rebuttal? I'm amazed you can dress and feed yourself.

[Nystul]

Does anyone have a good reason for why people would be so adamant about proving global warming/climate change due to human activity is false? The results of believing it (even if we assume it is untrue) are only positive things. The only drawback is the people emitting ridicuolous amounts of waste are forced to spend money regulating themselves, Q_Q? Maybe I am not being clear, but really there is no reason to oppose the stance unless you have a personal stake in it not being enforced, otherwise it's best to shut the fuck up.

Yea it's simple:

If you're strongly anti-global warming it isn't because of the science. It's political. You believe that deregulation and free markets is flawless. That companies will do the right thing and nothing bad will come of that. And if there IS global warming it means that deregulation isn't flawless, that companies will do the wrong thing if it is cheap and profitable in the short term, and that any fixes would require federal involvement and oversight.

And they can't accept that.

Or they are just a conspiracy theorist nut.

[Cadsuane]

lol. This guy is so good.

As an aside, does anyone here know that the usage of "patriotism" in common parlance is actually just a corruption misappropriated by propagandists around the turn of the twentieth century to encourage blind, unswerving nationalism? Yeah, being a patriot used to not entail nationalism, which is a sentiment rightly feared in the modern world.

[Maguspk]

Yea it's simple:

If you're strongly anti-global warming it isn't because of the science. It's political. You believe that deregulation and free markets is flawless. That companies will do the right thing and nothing bad will come of that. And if there IS global warming it means that deregulation isn't flawless, that companies will do the wrong thing if it is cheap and profitable in the short term, and that any fixes would require federal involvement and oversight.

And they can't accept that.

Or they are just a conspiracy theorist nut.

Either way, those are both stupid reasons, which I'm sure you agree with. Either they are gullible or in hardcore denial.

[CDF]

I'd say it isn't worth your time exchanging words with consipracist/triumphalist/paranoiac/solipsist types, especially ones in thrall to Bug Eyes and Square-Jaw (you sure it's not a troll?) but it sure is "fun" I guess.

[Beckwin]

There is a certain irony in the fact that you and Beckwin go at eachother so much- one day you're both going to realize that you're two sides of the same coin.

I haven't gone at it with that clown for ages (aka after the first thread when it became apparent he was just a troll). So uh basically, fuck off, because that entire post is just you trying to justify and glorify being moderate/bipartisan/centrist/whatever buzzword you want to use. fallacy of the middle- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy..._middle_ground

"Some would say that arsenic is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet, but others claim it is a toxic and dangerous substance. The truth is somewhere in between..."

Leif says that Iraq is a good and necessary war, but Beckwin claims it is not. The truth is somewhere in between....

gray area, middle ground, blah blah blah

[Rothbardian]

Does anyone have a good reason for why people would be so adamant about proving global warming/climate change due to human activity is false? The results of believing it (even if we assume it is untrue) are only positive things. The only drawback is the people emitting ridicuolous amounts of waste are forced to spend money regulating themselves, Q_Q? Maybe I am not being clear, but really there is no reason to oppose the stance unless you have a personal stake in it not being enforced, otherwise it's best to shut the fuck up.

Yes, because those who oppose taxation on every single good, and every single activity have no good reason to raise such objections. Because the Government who condones and allows and prevents lawsuits and litigious actions against Corporations and businesses who pollute our air, water, and land is the same Government that will now save the environment...It does not compute. Have you not even read about the mandate that is being proposed in Britain right now? About each individual having a "carbon allowance" and that you can sell your allowance if you are under, and if you are over will be taxed on top of the carbon taxes all ready in their cap and trade system? Of course, liberty and freedom, private property, and Natural Law are not good reasons to oppose such actions!

[Max™]

I have to say, I'm confused which side you're arguing for, Max.

Neither?

It is happening, we didn't MAKE it happen, we are affecting it unpredictable ways though.

Sooner or later it will tip back towards an ice age, we're not close enough to the sun enter a permanent hothouse scenario, so the question is will it be a smooth changeover, or a drastic crash?

-Is "global warming" man-made?
No

- Is "global warming" bad?
No

- Can man stop "global warming"?
In a sense

- If man does stop "global warming", what will he have to give up?
Not being in an ice age

- If we don't want to stop it and only "reduce" it, how much do we need to reduce it?
Just enough to keep us out of an ice age without destablizing the climate?

- Should man stop "global warming"?
We didn't start the fire, but we should probably stop fanning it without considering what we're doing

- Why has there been no "global warming" for the past decade?
Don't get out much do ya, btw it's called "climate change" now

- Why are scientists doctoring evidence?
Government interests

- If there is "global warming", what are the major causes?
Water vapor and cows farting, plus ya know... that huge fucking ball of nuclear fire in the sky might have a role in it... maybe

- If it is man made, how much of it is man made? How much of it is possibly natural variations in the climate/stuff with the sun/etc?
It isn't man made, but it is affected by our actions, roughly 100 extra ppm of CO2... natural levels vary from lows of 100 ppm to peaks of 250~280 ppm, we're at 350+ ppm now. The low ends are ice ages, the high ends are warm spells, the peaks coincide with the end of the warming periods and reversal back into an ice age.

I know I should ignore this crap, but I can't help it when even a blatant troll uses the word "fact" wrongly like this.

[Boyiee]

What the fuck did I just read. Holy shit my brain and my eyes.

[Correction]

What the fuck did I just read. Holy shit my brain and my eyes.

I think he makes a solid argument for buying ladies imported watches.

[Max™]

Did we just get trolled by an adbot?

Fuck, it's begun... the rise of the machines is upon us!

[Boyiee]

Did we just get trolled by an adbot?

Fuck, it's begun... the rise of the machines is upon us!

but that doesn't gonna stop your argument then for you if human

[Max™]

Exactly why it's monkey fault for blaming!

[Skjie]

Neither?

It is happening, we didn't MAKE it happen, we are affecting it unpredictable ways though.

Sooner or later it will tip back towards an ice age, we're not close enough to the sun enter a permanent hothouse scenario, so the question is will it be a smooth changeover, or a drastic crash?

Ok, that's what I had thought, but I wasn't quite sure. For the record, I do not believe that humanity could really effect a permanent change to the planet and we are currently not doing so. The absolute worst would could do would kill ourselves off before nature would shit kick us off the planet and try again, as it has done many times before us.