Report: No "Global Warming" for 325 Months...

[ArcadiaGP]

Did ABC news forget that only the Senate ratifies?

Obama and Chinese president ratify landmark climate change agreement 'to save our planet' https://t.co/CfXUzYafyI https://t.co/oLLoCovzEe

 

[Leadeye]

Did ABC news forget that only the Senate ratifies?

Mere technicalities, like most of the Constitution.

Always follow the money

 

[churchmouse]

Did ABC news forget that only the Senate ratifies?

There have been many that have forgotten the chain of authority in the last 7 1/2 years.

 

[marmion]

I liken the Left's absurd obsession with global warming as analogous to worrying about a dripping faucet in the upstairs bathroom while a tsunami barrels toward your home. The tsunami being the destruction of western culture and the rule of law.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I liken the Left's absurd obsession with global warming as analogous to worrying about a dripping faucet in the upstairs bathroom while a tsunami barrels toward your home. The tsunami being the destruction of western culture and the rule of law.

They are part and parcel, the means to that end.

 

[Jludo]

I liken the Left's absurd obsession with global warming as analogous to worrying about a dripping faucet in the upstairs bathroom while a tsunami barrels toward your home. The tsunami being the destruction of western culture and the rule of law.

Its actually the debt/entitlement obligations but you were close

 

[jamil]

Its actually the debt/entitlement obligations but you were close

I kinda think one is the unruly offspring of the other.

 

[churchmouse]

I kinda think one is the unruly offspring of the other.

I understand marmion's point.
Oh look....another squirrel....

 

[churchmouse]

They are part and parcel, the means to that end.

Chicken little comes to mind.

 

[david890]

How insecure in your beliefs must you be to overtly ban discussion and dissent?

If you were an evolutionary biologist, would you want Young Earth Creationists signing up for your class? I doubt the discussion would change minds, and dissent goes against the very facts to be taught.

It would be another thing if the YECs had some objective data to support their position, but the evidence suggests otherwise.

 

[david890]

Chicken little comes to mind.

And if Chicken Little is right?

The issue isn't "global warming" (though we continue to see record highs month after month), but "climate change". We know the climate has cycled in the past (ice age to ice age), but we've never seen CO2 levels rise as quickly as the past 100 years or so, and this period coincides with increasing use of fossil fuels.

 

[jamil]

David, do you think dissent should be banned?

 

[printcraft]

David, do you think dissent should be banned?

Just think of how easy it would be to teach if everyone thought the same?!

 

[pudly]

Just think of how easy it would be to teach if everyone thought the same?!

Explains the decline of the education system. Just teach what to think rather than how to think and there will be far less discussion/debate.

 

[david890]

David, do you think dissent should be banned?

Of course not. However, dissent that clearly flies in the face of overwhelming evidence shouldn't be encouraged.

 

[Woobie]

And if Chicken Little is right?

The issue isn't "global warming" (though we continue to see record highs month after month), but "climate change". We know the climate has cycled in the past (ice age to ice age), but we've never seen CO2 levels rise as quickly as the past 100 years or so, and this period coincides with increasing use of fossil fuels.

I didn't realize we were still arguing CO2 was bad. I thought they had moved on to a new boogeyman. Arguing that an element that exists in such vast quantities and has existed bonded with O2 at levels up to 6 times the current level is akin to the banning Dihydrogen Monoxide spoof. I really think someone was sitting around after they had moved past CFC's and such, and suggested "what's the most ridiculous thing we can get them to be scared of? Water? Nah, but I'll bet we could sell them CO2!" And he and his buddy bet a beer on it.

And as an aside, I feel sorry for people who are constantly afraid of their own shadow, unlocked movie theatre exits and Carbon freaking Dioxide.

 

[rhino]

I didn't realize we were still arguing CO2 was bad. I thought they had moved on to a new boogeyman. Arguing that an element that exists in such vast quantities and has existed bonded with O2 at levels up to 6 times the current level is akin to the banning Dihydrogen Monoxide spoof. I really think someone was sitting around after they had moved past CFC's and such, and suggested "what's the most ridiculous thing we can get them to be scared of? Water? Nah, but I'll bet we could sell them CO2!" And he and his buddy bet a beer on it.

And as an aside, I feel sorry for people who are constantly afraid of their own shadow, unlocked movie theatre exits and Carbon freaking Dioxide.

Hey, there is a good reason to fear CO2. What if you're trapped in a plastic bag filled with only CO2? You could have a problem. That would be scary.

 

[actaeon277]

Overwhelming evidence.

You know, like..
Flat earth
Sun revolves around the earth
Faster than sound flight is impossible
Flight is impossible
Transatlantic flight is impossible

 

[jamil]

Of course not. However, dissent that clearly flies in the face of overwhelming evidence shouldn't be encouraged.

View attachment 49810

Let's address the quote first. He has it wrong. He is conflating anti-intellectuallism with anti-eliteism. If his complaint is that many people oppose the appointing of elite intellectuals to determine the fate of everyone else, I'm certainly guilty of that and quite proud to oppose it. Self determination is moral. Elitist intellectual tyranny is not.

So, on to the climate argument. Are you a climate scientist? I'm happy to admit that I'm not. My opinions about it are formed from my observations about human behavior and the quality of their arguments. I will accept the advice of experts, if experts behave like they're not trying to hide something. I'll accept the advice of experts when they've established that their warnings are accurate. I'm not going to argue the science of it, because, frankly, I don't think you're a climate scientist either. So if we start arguing the science of it, we'd just be throwing "experts" at each other. So no. That's not productive. Instead I'm going to argue on the basis of the quality and tactics of the message from alarmists. I've said many times that if you (rhetorically "you") act like you're hiding something, you're probably hiding something.

Rather than regurgitate what I've said about that, I'll just point to some previous posts in this thread that pretty much tell you where I'm at on the subject. A couple of these are mine. One is a post from someone else, which I mostly agree with.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...global-warming-228-months-14.html#post5653898


https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...global-warming-228-months-32.html#post6170072


https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...global-warming-228-months-32.html#post6170146

Bottom line as it pertains to you. I strongly believe your agreement with the climate zealots is more because of ideas and hyperbole than an honest appraisal of where the actual truth resides. I think the same thing about both sides of the issue. Essentially, you're either a zealot or a denier because that's the only two sides left in the argument, and your position is based more on what your side says than any truth.

I tend to be skeptical about it because of the tactics used to stifle dissent, and the politics, and not to mention, the green industrial complex. Maybe there is something to it, but whatever it is, it's doubtful that it is worth the hysteria. Act like you're hiding something, I'll believe you're hiding something. Act like you're lying, I'll believe you're lying. Show me there's money to be made, and I'll suspect it's about the money.

 

[Woobie]

Hey, there is a good reason to fear CO2. What if you're trapped in a plastic bag filled with only CO2? You could have a problem. That would be scary.

Very true.

On a somewhat related note, wouldn't it be cool if we could invent a gas that trees and other plants could respirate which would provide an essential element for their growth?