Box, you said you will stick with actual science and not CEO's and politicians. Do you agree science is often manipulated?
OK. I'll post it for the third time:
More consumption of media identified as conservative – Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and the like – correlated positively with both a loss of trust in the scientific community and a lack of belief that climate change was happening, Hmielowski said. And more consumption of other kinds of news media led to more trust in scientists and a greater degree of belief in climate change. Attitudes polarized over time, in direct relation to the amount and type of media consumed.
Doesn't my post say exactly that... The Right is manipulating science on the subject of Climate Change.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
I can post a 'scientific paper'. It won't be peer reviewed, it might not be repeatable, but I posted it and there are some gullible people who will believe it.
Look at the source. All science is not valid. Some make mistakes and some are paid to produce a particular results. Peer review eliminates much of that.
Again read the post above, it explains WHY you keep reading conflicting reports.
More consumption of media identified as conservative – Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and the like – correlated positively with both a loss of trust in the scientific community and a lack of belief that climate change was happening, Hmielowski said. And more consumption of other kinds of news media led to more trust in scientists and a greater degree of belief in climate change. Attitudes polarized over time, in direct relation to the amount and type of media consumed.
So who is to say both sides are not wrong, both sides have scientist and universities which still argue their case for or against it, both sides say their findings are fact. It is up to you and me to make up our own mind on this issue going by the research we did. What I don't want is the government using the theory for or against it to change or make policies that could effect us all. I'm all for clean water, air, etc but it doesn't need to be sold on a theory or bs arguments of doom and gloom if we don't obey.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
So who is to say both sides are not wrong, both sides have scientist and universities which still argue their case for or against it, both sides say their findings are fact. It is up to you and me to make up our own mind on this issue going by the research we did. What I don't want is the government using the theory for or against it to change or make policies that could effect us all. I'm all for clean water, air, etc but it doesn't need to be sold on a theory or bs arguments of doom and gloom if we don't obey.
It seems that I'm arguing against the belief in actual SCIENCE. When you go to the doctor, they may make a mistake. They may learn better ways to treat you later... but the best SCIENCE possible is being used today.
Do you consult your senator when you go to your doctor??? Do you ask your congressman the best meds to take for your illness???
Then why do you consult your politician when you hear about Climate Science?
If you want to believe that WORLD WIDE Science is being manipulated... that every legitimate scientist throughout the entire world is being used or scammed... then go ahead.
There is no scientific debate on Climate Change, only political debate.
You don't have to believe it. You can ignore scientific peer review if you want. You can go with the political view of the Right Wing when it comes to science. This isn't new or something that just appeared... Look at the POLITICS OF CREATIONISM! Look at the politics of EVOLUTION.
People ignore the truth every day. You believing the politics instead of the science is your option.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
This consensus is represented in the IPCC Third Assessment Report, Working Group 1 ,(TAR) the most comprehensive compilation and summary of current climate research ever attempted, and arguably the most thoroughly peer reviewed scientific document in history. While this review was sponsored by the UN, the research it compiled and reviewed was not, and the scientists involved were independent and came from all over the world.
The conclusions reached in this document have been explicitly endorsed by …
Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil) Royal Society of Canada Chinese Academy of Sciences Academié des Sciences (France) Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany) Indian National Science Academy Accademia dei Lincei (Italy) Science Council of Japan Russian Academy of Sciences Royal Society (United Kingdom) National Academy of Sciences (United States of America) Australian Academy of Sciences Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts Caribbean Academy of Sciences Indonesian Academy of Sciences Royal Irish Academy Academy of Sciences Malaysia Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
In addition to these national academies, the following institutions specializing in climate, atmosphere, ocean, and/or earth sciences have endorsed or published the same conclusions as presented in the TAR report:
NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Academy of Sciences (NAS) State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS) American Geophysical Union (AGU) American Institute of Physics (AIP) National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) American Meteorological Society (AMS) Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS)
If this is not scientific consensus, what in the world would a consensus look like?
But go ahead... believe FoxSnooze.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Al Gore has the actual climate science FACTS, because he is considered liberal, and liberal politicians understand science. Any science that challenges the consensus scientific theory of climate change is automatically "right wing" science. And don't forget, science isn't politicized when Al Gore uses science to push his political agenda and enrich himself, because only liberal politicians understand science.
It's very simple - conservatives are anti science, so when they use science to support a political agenda, it's manipulated junk science. When liberal politicians use science to support their political agenda, you MUST not question the legitimacy of their science, since only liberals truly understand science.
Al Gore has the actual climate science FACTS, because he is considered liberal, and liberal politicians understand science. Any science that challenges the consensus scientific theory of climate change is automatically "right wing" science. And don't forget, science isn't politicized when Al Gore uses science to push his political agenda and enrich himself, because only liberal politicians understand science. It's very simple - conservatives are anti science, so when they use science to support a political agenda, it's manipulated junk science. When liberal politicians use science to support their political agenda, you MUST not question the legitimacy of their science, since only liberals truly understand science. It's a very simple formula.
There is no scientific debate on Climate Change... Only political debate. Al Gore is a politician. What he says has little do to with the SCIENCE.
IMO, Gore's opinion is no more valid than yours or mine.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
[b]There is no scientific debate on Climate Change... Only political debate.
There is a scientific debate on climate change, difference is you want to shut up those who disagree with the others, saying it is fact doesn't make it so, it is far from it.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
There is a scientific debate on climate change, difference is you want to shut up those who disagree with the others, saying it is fact doesn't make it so, it is far from it.
OK. Show me the PEER REVIEWED work denying Climate Change. There must be at least 3% who disagree since 97% agree.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
OK. Show me the PEER REVIEWED work denying Climate Change. There must be at least 3% who disagree since 97% agree.
That 97% figure you keep throwing around is false, read what I wrote earlier, that was debunked already
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
That 97% figure you keep throwing around is false, read what I wrote earlier, that was debunked already
Saying it's so doesn't make it so.
Read what I posted in post #123. It's science and it's a consensus of Science.
Yours is a blog post.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
I don't believe your 97% consensus is a credible figure. There are many scientists who do NOT belong to that consensus ... many good, credible, well-educated scientists ... because Global Warming remains an unproven theory.
So the scientific debate DOES continue.
Find a job yet DV?
Optimists close their eyes and pretend problems are non existent. Better to have open eyes, see the truths, acknowledge the negatives, and speak up for the people rather than the politicos and their rich cronies.
Or take bets on how long it takes the same people to realize that they've been scammed on their Climate Change Denial belief.
Climate Change is a fact all over the world... except in the USA. There is no scientific debate on Climate Change, only political debate.
keeping track 'on record' doesn't account for MILLIONS/BILLIONS of years of climate change....OF COURSE climate has cycles...but to say it's all about the freaking green house gases and those theories alone is ludicrous..... I don't think anyone here is denying climate change...but to pretend that mankind alone is responsible for it, is very strange thinking on your part. It's like going to a christian church just to go to church because someone told you that you have to, and believing jesus is god's only son because someone told you. science DOES NOT have all the answers and all the scales balanced....one scientific truth that exists is GRAVITY.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
And now it's global COOLING! Record return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 60% in a year
Almost a million more square miles of ocean covered with ice than in 2012
BBC reported in 2007 global warming would leave Arctic ice-free in summer by 2013
Publication of UN climate change report suggesting global warming caused by humans pushed back to later this month
By David Rose
PUBLISHED: 18:37 EST, 7 September 2013 | UPDATED: 07:01 EST, 8 September 2013
A chilly Arctic summer has left nearly a million more square miles of ocean covered with ice than at the same time last year – an increase of 60 per cent.
The rebound from 2012’s record low comes six years after the BBC reported that global warming would leave the Arctic ice-free in summer by 2013.
Instead, days before the annual autumn re-freeze is due to begin, an unbroken ice sheet more than half the size of Europe already stretches from the Canadian islands to Russia’s northern shores.
"Approval ratings go up and down for various reasons... An example is the high post 911 support for GWB even though he could be said to be responsible for the event." --- Box A Rox '9/11 Truther'
Melania is a bimbo... she is there to look at, not to listen to. --- Box A Rox and his 'War on Women'
A 2010 report on the site ClimateDepot.com trumpets the claim that “more than 1000 international scientists dissent” in regard to global warming. A close inspection reveals that many of the scientists who are among the skeptics are not meteorologists or climatologists, but rather are chemists, theoretical physicists, and others whose fields have little or nothing to do with climate and weather.
A survey of peer reviewed literature conducted by SkepticalScience.com found that out of over 12,000 papers that took a position on climate change, 97 percent agreed that global warming is occurring and that humans are responsible. So technically there is disagreement on the subject, but not much.
And:
Bucky is not alone in the world of the uninformed:
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
I know, I know Boxy. Desperate times call for desperate charts from obscure, biased as all fcuk websites such as 'skepticalscience.com' and 'desmogblog.com'
"Approval ratings go up and down for various reasons... An example is the high post 911 support for GWB even though he could be said to be responsible for the event." --- Box A Rox '9/11 Truther'
Melania is a bimbo... she is there to look at, not to listen to. --- Box A Rox and his 'War on Women'
Logged
