Climate Change -- conspiracy theory or is it time we all drive a Prius?

December 18th, 2019 at 5:23:08 AM permalink
SOOPOO
Member since: Feb 19, 2014
Threads: 22
Posts: 4157
Quote: terapined
Your playing Checkers. Go for the obvious move.
Putin plays chess. Sometimes you sacrifice.
I honestly believe Trump thinks Putin has something on him. Putin either does or is able to make Trump think he does.
Not only does he control Russia, in a close US election , he can meddle enough to push it his way. That's power


Ed, seriously, you are aware Putin ‘meddled’ in our election DURING OBAMA’s Presidency! How come Obama did not stop him?




The answer is, Obama, just like Trump, is not an all knowing all seeing being. You ridiculously thinking that Trump is somehow working for Putin is just, well ridiculous!
December 21st, 2019 at 7:44:50 AM permalink
odiousgambit
Member since: Oct 28, 2012
Threads: 154
Posts: 5055
I haven't followed this [apparently] hijacked thread till now, but I assume this is the right place

I've been watching not-very-good-anyway reruns of the National Geographic Wild series "when predators attack"*, recording them, but I quit doing so. They covered the various animals that will attack humans, excessively hyping it all, but also disgusting me by claiming bears, wolves, pythons, whatever, are attacking "even more due to climate change". This of course is ridiculous. If the claim has been totally discredited, like global warming devastating the polar bear [the polar bear population is increasing] , it doesn't matter, it all gets trotted out again.

It doesn't surprise me National Geographic is on board with this, and am willing to believe they told the producers they are looking for programs with this kind of baloney in them.

Now I ask you what are we supposed to think of the people advancing the argument that we have to do something about climate change when we see them being so willing to just totally lie?

* yeah, I can sometimes watch total crap as long as it's topics like that
I'm Still Standing, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah [it's an old guy chant for me]
December 21st, 2019 at 7:56:39 AM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 14
Posts: 4470
Quote: odiousgambit
I haven't followed this [apparently] hijacked thread till now, but I assume this is the right place

I've been watching not-very-good-anyway reruns of the National Geographic Wild series "when predators attack"*, recording them, but I quit doing so. They covered the various animals that will attack humans, excessively hyping it all, but also disgusting me by claiming bears, wolves, pythons, whatever, are attacking "even more due to climate change". This of course is ridiculous. If the claim has been totally discredited, like global warming devastating the polar bear [the polar bear population is increasing] , it doesn't matter, it all gets trotted out again.

It doesn't surprise me National Geographic is on board with this, and am willing to believe they told the producers they are looking for programs with this kind of baloney in them.

Now I ask you what are we supposed to think of the people advancing the argument that we have to do something about climate change when we see them being so willing to just totally lie?

* yeah, I can sometimes watch total crap as long as it's topics like that


73% of National Geographic TV was sold to Fox years ago. That controlling share is of course now owned by Disney since their purchase of Fox. The channel since that sale has been run more as an entertainment channel with lots of pseudoscience documentary style programs.
"but if you make yourselves sheep, the wolves will eat you." Benjamin Franklin
December 21st, 2019 at 9:06:39 AM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 188
Posts: 18631
Quote: kenarman
Quote: odiousgambit
I haven't followed this [apparently] hijacked thread till now, but I assume this is the right place

I've been watching not-very-good-anyway reruns of the National Geographic Wild series "when predators attack"*, recording them, but I quit doing so. They covered the various animals that will attack humans, excessively hyping it all, but also disgusting me by claiming bears, wolves, pythons, whatever, are attacking "even more due to climate change". This of course is ridiculous. If the claim has been totally discredited, like global warming devastating the polar bear [the polar bear population is increasing] , it doesn't matter, it all gets trotted out again.

It doesn't surprise me National Geographic is on board with this, and am willing to believe they told the producers they are looking for programs with this kind of baloney in them.

Now I ask you what are we supposed to think of the people advancing the argument that we have to do something about climate change when we see them being so willing to just totally lie?

* yeah, I can sometimes watch total crap as long as it's topics like that


73% of National Geographic TV was sold to Fox years ago. That controlling share is of course now owned by Disney since their purchase of Fox. The channel since that sale has been run more as an entertainment channel with lots of pseudoscience documentary style programs.


Letting Fox "promote" climate change would certainly be a interesting way to discredit climate change. I don't know what Disney's position is but they only acquired Fox in March this year.
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
December 21st, 2019 at 1:10:38 PM permalink
Face
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 61
Posts: 3941
Quote: odiousgambit

Now I ask you what are we supposed to think of the people advancing the argument that we have to do something about climate change when we see them being so willing to just totally lie?

* yeah, I can sometimes watch total crap as long as it's topics like that


Oh geez, don't watch Attenborough's newest Planet Earth II, then. It's THE best nature film out there today, but if climate debate triggers you, you'll be triggered the whole time. If not, though, it's AMAZING and I suggest a viewing. Easiest 5 stars ever.

As to "what are you supposed to do", I suggest due diligence, with an strong emphasis on "diligence". Being highly political, it draws the kooks, the fringe, and the crazies, all of whom get attention far disproportionate to their abundance. In addition, as far as science goes, it's improper as hell by necessity. At least as far as I went in my field, "Control, control, control" was the mantra. To test effects you need a variable, but to be accurate, you MUST ensure there is but ONE variable. ALL the rest MUST be under control. You can't do that with this, even if we understood every single mechanism that involves the climate. Add to that we DON'T understand all the mechanics, and it understandably becomes a guessing game. A highly educated and backed by results guess, but a guess nonetheless. As such, one must be and remain diligent, as new facts, for and against, are coming in all the time.
Be bold and risk defeat, or be cautious and encourage it.
January 9th, 2020 at 2:19:12 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 188
Posts: 18631
Quote:
President Trump said during a White House briefing on Thursday that he is a “big believer” in climate change and that it is “not a hoax” soon after his administration announced a plan to overhaul an environmental policy act. When asked by a White House pool reporter if he believes climate change is a hoax, the president said, “No, no. Not at all. Nothing’s a hoax. Nothing’s a hoax about that. It’s a very serious subject. I want clean air. I want clean water.” He then claimed, “The environment is very important to me.


https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-admits-climate-change-is-not-a-hoax-after-proposing-rollback-of-environmental-law
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
January 9th, 2020 at 3:29:06 PM permalink
SOOPOO
Member since: Feb 19, 2014
Threads: 22
Posts: 4157
Quote: rxwine
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-admits-climate-change-is-not-a-hoax-after-proposing-rollback-of-environmental-law


The two are not mutually exclusive. I wholeheartedly believe that human beings through fossil fuel burning are responsive for climate change, just that the proposed laws/regulations/ are often overkill. The f...ing paper straws I now get instead of plastic are .... ‘the last straw!’

If there was a way to guarantee cutting emissions by 30% per car but it costs an extra $50,000 per car.... is it an easy answer to mandate it?
January 9th, 2020 at 4:29:43 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 188
Posts: 18631
Quote: SOOPOO
The two are not mutually exclusive. I wholeheartedly believe that human beings through fossil fuel burning are responsive for climate change, just that the proposed laws/regulations/ are often overkill. The f...ing paper straws I now get instead of plastic are .... ‘the last straw!’

If there was a way to guarantee cutting emissions by 30% per car but it costs an extra $50,000 per car.... is it an easy answer to mandate it?


Trump is not spending too much. In fact, no evidence he’s doing much but making sure it will be a problem as soon as possible.
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
January 9th, 2020 at 4:37:23 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18136
Quote: rxwine
Trump is not spending too much. In fact, no evidence he’s doing much but making sure it will be a problem as soon as possible.


It has been changing for 4.5 billion years, a 4.5 billion year old "problem" is not a problem.
The President is a fink.
January 10th, 2020 at 2:41:10 PM permalink
odiousgambit
Member since: Oct 28, 2012
Threads: 154
Posts: 5055
this is good

I'm Still Standing, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah [it's an old guy chant for me]