Why 'Climate Change' Alarmists Will NEVER Debate Skeptics

Why 'Climate Change' Alarmists Will NEVER Debate Skeptics​

By Bob Parks
9/13/17

It's been floated for years and there's growing momentum for the criminalization of thought for anyone who dares not give full allegiance to the climate change religion. Because we all know that throwing political opposition in jail is a tried-and-true tactic used by socialists, and that's far preferable and easier to actually having to be knowledgeable on the topic at hand.

6/2/15: Senator: Use RICO Laws to Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics
[http://www.weeklystandard.com/senat...secute-global-warming-skeptics/article/963007]
10/1/15: Should Climate Change Deniers be Prosecuted? [http://www.newsweek.com/should-climate-change-deniers-be-prosecuted-378652]
3/10/16: Attorney General Lynch Looks Into Prosecuting ‘Climate Change Deniers’
[http://dailysignal.com/2016/03/10/a...king-into-prosecuting-climate-change-deniers/]
4/14/16: Bill Nye, Is Open To Criminal Charges And Jail Time For Climate Change Dissenters [http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/14/bill-nye-open-criminal-charges-jail-time-climate-c/]
6/2/16: California Senate sidelines bill to prosecute climate change skeptics
[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/2/calif-bill-prosecutes-climate-change-skeptics/]
9/11/17: Calls To Punish Skeptics Rise With Links To Climate Change, Hurricanes
[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/11/climate-change-activists-want-punishment-for-skept/]​

Source: https://www.blackandblondemedia.com/2017/07/12/climate-change-alarmists-will-never-debate-skeptics/

______
If they do go through with this debate they are talking about at the link, I say they get Lord Moncton to take part in the debate on the conservative side! He has a thick skin, and a great, cutting sense of humor! But they will never do it. According to the Progressive Marxists Bob Parks is not only wrong but an Uncle Tom to boot.

​

 

Granny ain't changin' her mind...

The Climate Is Changing For Climate Skeptics
March 23, 2018 ― Climate change skeptics may have outlived their usefulness to the fossil fuel industry.

 

i'm not going to debate deniers for two reasons:

1) climate change deniers are like flat earthers but somehow more insufferable and i'm not putting myself through that
2) it's probably too late to stop climate change from collapsing civilization and killing billions anyway, so i would rather focus on thinking about how humanity can possibly recover and move on from that

 

Let us know if you come up with something.

 

The real problem is that are generally just two polarized groups: deniers and alarmists. And neither side wants to admit that the other side has any valid points. As is the case virtually always, the truth is between the two extremes. I believe that the reality is that AGW is happening to some degree, but the effects are never as severe as those predicted by the models the alarmists use. The weatherman on the TV can't even give you a reliable 5-day forecast, yet some alarmists will call you a science denier if you don't have faith in the accuracy of an apocalyptic 200-year forecast. People need to just dial it down and realize that there is a problem, but we've got plenty of time to deal with it, and therefore future technologies to deal with it as well.

 

YAY! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#Scientific_discussion

Well, it's not about the criminalization of thought, because deniers aren't thinking in the first place.

 

Beyond being a false, crackpot claim, there is a better question.

Why do crackpots post on the internet instead of publishing?

Because they're crackpots! And no credible journal will publish their drivel. Science isn't about popular opinions, crackpot claims, or internet cheerleaders.

 

Isn't there a "conspiracy theory" subforum on this site, or one at least for spam?

 

Oh, I almost certainly won't. Nobody else will either, most likely, but who knows?

 

I don't necessarily agree with number 2, but I agree with number 1 wholeheartedly.

There is little reason at all to take the deniers seriously at all.

 

Because you can't debate people who are dishonest.

Deniers are like 9/11 truthers. They use their own cherry picked out of context "facts" and as soon as one is shot down they come up with another nonsensical misinterpretation of the facts...and when that gets shot down they go back to the original claim as if that wasn't already debunked.

It's a pointless exercise. The information is indisputable and available

 

As you've stated there are a number of scientifically logical and factual evidence published that the Sun is responsible for the temperate and climate of Earth.

How Sunlight Controls Climate - Scientific American
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-sunlight-can-control-climate/
Latest news and features on science issues that matter including earth, ... subtropics when the sun is stronger, climate scientist ... waned in intensity over the ...

~~~~~~~~~~~~​

What causes the Earth's climate to change? | Climate change ...
http://www.bgs.ac.uk/discoveringGeology/climateChange/general/causes.html?src=topNav
Global climate change has usually occurred very slowly over thousands ... When the Earth is closer to the sun our climate is ... the temperature of the Earth ...

~~~~~~~~~~~~​

The Sun and Sunspots - National Weather Service
https://www.weather.gov/fsd/sunspots
Can an increase or decrease in sunspot activity affect the Earth's climate? ... the Sun's temperatureat the surface ... changes in the Sun's energy output over time ...

​

 

More Denier bullshit

 

Yeah, if there was no Sun, Earth would be a lot colder.

But it is the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that traps the heat.


https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/

 

~~~~
We have noted well the uninformed 'Chicken Little'. Your sky is falling....

 

Facts about climate befuddle the global warming nuts.

 

The reason that NO ONE knows what the hell the climate will be is because there is NO WAY to predict the output of the sun. Global warming nuts dont want to talk about this fact. It messes with their agenda.

 

Considering that many so called denialists were funded and many quite openly ny oil and energy companies then I cannot deny this

What " facts". I have yet to see anything defined or delineated from the denialists

In other words get back to me when you have a researched paper that not only challenges every piece of research in the IPC
C reports but also lays out alternative explanations

 

The term denier is fake. What do we deny? I have yet to see a poster on either side allege the climate is static. Never changes. What we do deny very powerfully is the claims of the alarmists that humans are now in charge of climate and we humans know how to change climate and shall manage climate if only we who trust the forces of nature over humans stand down. But we will not stand down,.

I have many times over on various forums called the attention to the Alarmists of the wonders of nature. I speak to them of the enormous Great Lakes. I have visited one of them and advise any to go see the great lakes. When you see the Great lakes, you see the end result of climate change. notice the difference from the former glaciers to the current fresh water lakes. Man did not create those. But how about Yosemite Valley, which i have also used as proof of climate change. How on earth did man cause Yosemite Valley? We did not. But go there and see for yourself proof of climate change.
Folks, man can't control climate. The alarmists will have you believe we do control climate.

 

The other reason that fossil fuel industries are moving away from funding climate denial is that they themselves have become heavily invested in alternate energy

 

Not one person is saying that climate has not changed in the past

Even the ipcc reports support that

 

LOL...so we know this Bob Parks guy is not too swift right off the bat.

Anyone who claims to be credible and would title their piece 'Why 'Climate Change' Alarmists Will NEVER Debate Skeptics' is clearly not.

'Never'?

So - he is telling us - that he can see into the future can he?

Amateurs use terms like that for effect.

 

They debate them all the time.

 

Yes and......

Is the sun responsible for the current change?

Well even your links do not support you on that

Suggest in future before you post a link you read the entire article

 

Given that skeptics have little use for science I am not sure what they would debate.