What voters think about global warming

  • Thread starter Thread starter News Feed
  • Start date Start date
N

News Feed

Guest

N0bHxI2gY5Q


Original Source: CNN
- Continue reading...
 
Gee, CNN (Clinton News Network) has a poll that has 3 pro-global warming answers and one "I don't know" answer. Where is the "Global Warming is a Hoax" answer? I bet the method to collect poll responses was above the table too:rolleyes:
 
Also, no option for "A majority of statistical data appears to indicate that various regions of the Earth may be warming, but we don't have enough facts or knowledge about the carbon cycle, cloud formation, solar events, and other variables, including possible errors or bias, to understand why. WE'D LIKE TO DEDICATE SOME MONEY AND BRAINPOWER TO SOME ACTUAL REAL SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH INSTEAD OF MAKING THIS A POLITICAL ISSUE."

Climate scientists on both sides of the coin need to be able to publish papers and theories without fear of losing funding or being ostracized if their findings don't support the current political bullshit of the day.

Of course, it's probably a good idea to reduce atmospheric CO2 PPM, anyhow, though. I don't really think there's any denying that it is higher than it was a few hundred years ago... And that probably isn't a good thing. So lets also dedicate some research on how to best sequester CO2 and maybe get a few people on less developed continents to stop chopping up the rainforests, as those seem to be kind of an important carbon sink. This might be a bit more reasonable than trying to encourage people to give up the advancements of the 20th century, especially while the politicians selling it are still flying around in their private jets.
 
ilwrath said:
Climate scientists on both sides of the coin need to be able to publish papers and theories without fear of losing funding or being ostracized if their findings don't support the current political bullshit of the day.
Click to expand...

I'd be fine with this as long as ALL financial gain was removed. Carbon taxes are nothing more than a mechanism to redistribute the wealth of the bottom 99% to the top 1%.
 
redrumloa said:
Carbon taxes are nothing more than a mechanism to redistribute the wealth of the bottom 99% to the top 1%.
Click to expand...
We have a carbon tax on fuel here in BC. Everybody who buys gasoline pays it - but people with a lower income get rebates. I don't get one - I earn too much, but that's OK with me.
 
I'd be fine with this as long as ALL financial gain was removed.
Click to expand...

Well, certainly, that has to be considered part of the freedom scientists need. When the people who are paying for a study are telling you what they want to find in it... You're not going to see any honest discussion. Just ask the intelligence community about their reports on Iraq.
 
redrumloa said:
I'd be fine with this as long as ALL financial gain was removed. Carbon taxes are nothing more than a mechanism to redistribute the wealth of the bottom 99% to the top 1%.
Click to expand...
Not quite sure how that will work. Scientists need financial gain for their labor so they can feed themselves and their families. I'm sure you don't want Communism to take over and people not be rewarded for their labor. And on the other side, there is no way to remove the financial gains by Big Oil to fund an anti-GW agenda. They're afraid their mature industry w/ the largest profits in the history of the world will end up making less and add in their fear of no longer getting their government welfare.
 
Not only is Climate Science a problem in the public, so is Germ Theory. About 2% of the public fail to vaccinate children and about 28% fail to follow the schedule and don't think it's important. http://edition.cnn.com/2011/10/03/health/parents-doubt-vaccine-safety/

Again what we are seeing here is the anti-scientific thought of anti-vaccers are taking over the press and warping the public's view on subjects. This is fairly similar to the anti-scientific thought of the anti-climate stance which is slowly dominating the press and warping the public's view on the subjects.

Now one can believe whatever they want. The problem is facts, you don't get your own set.
 
@Jim:

metalman said: ↑
Its between the "canals on Mars" and "continents don't move."​
Click to expand...
redrumloa said:
Don't forget Female Hysteria, that is always a classic.
Click to expand...

Perhaps Metalman genuinely believes there is no evidence but your position is much more interesting and displays a determined level of willful, cognitive dissonance that intrigues me.
You continuously make posts implying there is no such thing as global warming and almost the whole scientific community are involved in a massive, worldwide plot, the main aim of which is to steal your money.
However, when pushed, you have recently begun to concede that there is evidence that global temperatures are rising but that it's entirely due to natural fluctuations and therefore nothing to worry about.
Then (usually within a day or two) you post another thread which argues that there is no such thing, biggest scam in human history and the usual hyperbole.
Then, when pushed, you concede there is but it's natural and not a problem....

.... and round and round we go.
 
faethor said:
and @Metalman -- ALL of your issues were remedied by science itself! None, zilch, zip, nada from 'Momma-Sense'.

Here's a good answer and probably as friendly as I could make it. -- http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_specter_the_danger_of_science_denial.html
Click to expand...

Don't see anything to disagree with in the video, GMO foods are scientific progress, Vaccines and Modern Medicine are scientific progress.
those who are anti GMO, anti vaccine, and believe in man made global warming are all hysterical Luddites.
 
Robert said:
Perhaps Metalman genuinely believes there is no evidence but your position is much more interesting and displays a determined level of willful, cognitive dissonance that intrigues me.
You continuously make posts implying there is no such thing as global warming and almost the whole scientific community are involved in a massive, worldwide plot, the main aim of which is to steal your money.
However, when pushed, you have recently begun to concede that there is evidence that global temperatures are rising but that it's entirely due to natural fluctuations and therefore nothing to worry about.
Then (usually within a day or two) you post another thread which argues that there is no such thing, biggest scam in human history and the usual hyperbole.
Then, when pushed, you concede there is but it's natural and not a problem....

.... and round and round we go.
Click to expand...

You put words into my mouth again? I have always said anthropogenic global warming is a scam. Has the world warmed? It depends on your time frame. Only a fool would claim it hasn't warmed since the Little Ice Age. Then again, there are plenty of fools making claims that the Little Ice Age and Medieval Warming Period either didn't happen or were insignificant compared to today's temperatures. When you don't "hide the decline", you see there has been a decline in temps over the last 10 years and has not been a significant statistical warming over the last 100 years. For some reason you support draconian taxation and reduction of basic human rights in support of a for profit hoax, Whyzzat?
 
faethor said:
Again what we are seeing here is the anti-scientific thought of anti-vaccers ...
Click to expand...

I don't believe that is true. What you are seeing, I think, is the human thoughts of anti-vaccers. I think you'll find a lot of them are pro-science.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top