Nature accomplished what Science couldn't accomplish

You do realize that Trump started keeping promises the US reneged on at Mar-a-Lago, don't you?!
Funny you should bring it up.

Anyway, a 10 foot deep flood is nothing. We had dire famine in 1975:

We disappeared in a cloud of blue steam in 1989

 

We had an Ice Age by the year 2000:

 

I couldn't care less what scientist "think". Only thing that matters is what they can prove. But, again, it's been 20 years already explaining to denialists what this means. And they never got it.

I don't care. There is a consensus among scientific peer-reviewed studies, and that's the only thing that matters.

All fine and good, but the problem is that denialists have already shown not to be the "reasonable source" to turn to for insights on this subject. I trust the input of those who were right from the beginning. There was time 20 years ago for an orderly and gradual transition. It would have been great if you had fought and promoted that at the start of this century. But the right wasn't doing that, back then. They were too busy attacking Al Gore for "daring" to alert the population and "defending" the Koch brothers from some "worldwide conspiracy of scientists". Now there is no more time. Now we do what we have to do. Even by electing this creep currently in the White House we lost another 4 years.

But it's a good lesson for you guys to learn for the future: be on the right side of history. Learn to identify how history will see the present. How do you think history will judge those who try to justify Trump's criminal activity? What will kids learning history in school think 20 years from now think about those who opposed universal healthcare, marriage equality, women rights, gun control ... and who favored racism, putting children in cages, racism and white supremacy, ....

It's too late now for many to be on the right side of history on climate change. Because history already caught up with them. But not too late to be on the right side on many of the issues that we debate about today.

 

He would be correct to say that China emits twice the GHG's to support a lower GDP than the US ,,, that increasing the cost of production in the US would simply move production to a filthy manufacturer. People who support transferring US production back to China are traitors to their country and fellow Americans

 

The word "alarmists" have little to do with. The AGW crowd are most concerned with stronger storms and rising sea levels. Neither is happening in Houston. It is a tropical storm which has stalled out because of a combination of upper air winds and a coast line.

It has nothing to do with what scientists told us.. It is simply a tropical storm, which is the category weaker than a hurricane which stalled out because of light upper winds and a coast line that has been there for a hundred thousand years.

They can't prove anything. They can only evaluate and forecast.

By your own admission, peer review only means they went through the correct procedure. It does not mean that anything in them is accurate.

 

Yep, time for my last beer.

 

[/B]
You want us to refer to Science denial as "independent thought"? Sounds very PC, but not very accurate. Science denial might be independent from Science, rational thought and Science, but it was created by the Koch Brothers and the Oil Industry in the early 2000s. So it's not independent. And it's certainly not "thinking". More like "repeating"

They've been doing it for 20 years. Electing Trump alone took us back 4 years. And I'm not saying not to vote for Trump for this reasons (there are many other reasons) But, as we know, Trump doesn't have any convictions of his own. He'll do whatever he thinks his supporters want. So if they just stop talking about it, maybe he'll stop being the greatest hindrance in the world.

We used to say it was "everybody's". But I'll take "everybody except denialists", if they just stay out of the way.

Anything from not contributing to it to actually working on mitigation efforts and even to fending off lumpen, like we do on this forum.

For 20 years we have been trying to explain the specific workable solutions to Science denialists. In my opinion this is the time when we need to stop trying, accept the fact that denialists will never grasp them, and just ask them to stay out of the way.

 

I don’t think you are able to determine the difference between science deniers and independent thinkers because you admittedly are just repeating things with appeal to authority as your fall back position. While simultaneously accusing others of the same behavior.

I know Trump is your hammer, but with me it’s a 1/4 pound rubber mallet because he has nothing to do with my thoughts on this subject. He’s completely irrelevant. He didn’t obstruct anything for the eight years previous to his inauguration either.

Am I a denialist? Should I, one of about 3-4 people on this forum who are actively doing anything to reduce carbon emissions or mitigate their supposed effects on our life, get out of the way of people who admit all they want to do is parrot things they admittedly don’t understand? You can’t even give any details when asked of what everyone is supposed to do at your puppeteer’s command.

So you see yourself as the savior of humanity by calling people names?

There are no specific workable solutions to what you believe the problem is. If there were you would give them air time here and you would be practicing them voluntarily in your personal life. Again, please state what specially people are to stay out of the way of.

 

As the post I referred to you says, don't subscribe. Subscription period is over anyway. Too late for that. At this point, all that is asked is that you let subscribers do their job and try to save some lives.

 

Please explain to us how AGW was responsible for the tropical storm which hit Houston.

 

Check and check. No idea where you got the "most concerned" part but... we got all of the above....

Oh... I see... So you thought that the word "Global" in "Global Warming" meant Houston.

One more check on the "wrong" column.

 

They'll think our parents and grandparents saved us from owing a lot of money and kept our 2nd Amendment rights for us.

 

This just proves that you will believe anyone with a label “scientist”.

What is your education level?
Have you ever taken a statistics class in college? If you did, you would not need a scientist to tell you that projecting 100 years of reliable weather data on 4.5 billion years of history is foolish. Think about it - 100 vs 4,500,000,000.
Next: earth had times when there was a lot more CO2 in the atmosphere. There were times global temperatures were quite a bit higher than they are now. Did you know that our ice caps are just a few million years old? Are you aware of the fact that we are on the worming stage of interglacial period? Do you know that the sun is getting brighter and hotter every day and that when earth formed the suns output was just 70% of its output today? If you are aware of all these things then how can you claim that a rise in temps for a few degrees is a human caused trend? How can you even reliably compare current trend from the last 100 years to the last several million years, especially when you also need to realize that the continents are constantly moving and your archeological finds should be taken with a grain of salt because the area of the find could have been physically in a different climate zone.

I’m all for clean earth, recycling, reduction of the use of plastics and oil derived products, but it does not mean we should bend over and inflict an economic pain on ourselves over this. There are many signs that we were on a warming trend for a very long time and there is nothing we can do about it.

 

The title of your OP. You lead off with.
Nature accomplished what Science couldn't accomplish

Which I followed up with.

You are the one claiming that the tropical storm which hit Houston is a direct result of AGW. Now we hear the denial. Or are you now back tracking on your whole OP.

 

Yep! Repeating science and appealing to the authority of Science. Guilty!

Yeah, but the Koche Brothers and Oil Corporations don't quite have the same weight or credibility that Science does.

So you are saying that he never abused his Presidential powers before he was President. Got it!

To be a Science denialist all you have to do is deny science. Anything else is irrelevant as to the term.

This is one of the things denialists have refused to understand. Doing things in your personal life does not give anybody any merit whatsoever. It's like "giving air" to what you bought your children so they could eat. You do these things because it's an obligation. Nothing to brag or promote. You don't see anybody expecting others to cheer because they bought their kid a toy for Christmas.

In their personal life, everybody does what they can. If they can afford a Prius, great! If they can't, they can't.

Nobody cares what you do in your personal life! But if you go out spewing ignorance about Scientific fact, so that the ignorant become more ignorant. And so that politicians don't feel the pressure to enact legislation. And elect a President who withdraws from international efforts to do something about the problem... That's when you're really doing damage.

And that's why we have been trying to explain to you for 20 years what this is really about. So you don't do the above. But your wingnut media kept telling you that the left just wanted to take away your SUV gas guzzler. That's nonsense! But you believed it. We don't give a crap about what car you own, or anything you do in your personal life. We tried to explain this so you wouldn't be a bad influence on others.

But what I am saying now is: don't bother trying to understand! it's too late for that. We need to be done with explaining facts to you and start taking action in spite of you. We don't need you to understand anything. We just need you to get out of the way!

 

Uh wrong as per usual...

 

That's what I'm saying. For 20 years we have been trying to be "careful" to be as precise as possible so denialists could understand. It's absurd to expect that I would write one post, or point you to an article, and you would understand what you have refused to understand for 20 years. Denialists only understand (or read) short sentences. So let's leave it at "AGW is responsible for all the storms". This may not be scientifically accurate. But Scientific accuracy is not something denialists have any right to demand. They have denied Science for 20 years (at least), now they shouldn't get to enjoy the precision of Science.

The only thing they will understand is when their house is under water, or in the path of a Cat 5 Hurricane, or a forest fire... Thus the OP.

Please read here

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ldnt-accomplish.561802/page-3#post-1070988045

 

Denialists? Never heard that one before.

Anyway, I welcome climate change. I figure a bit of warming will do wonders for real estate prices in Alaska. There might even be enough to open a Disneyland in Antarctica.

 

So you believe that women's rights and marriage equality are expensive?

 

Just a few parting shots.

Having doubts about aspects of science is not denying science.

Don't blame your lack of ability to convince people on the people you are trying to convince. Take a look first at your own communications ability.

Frankly, much of what you say is pure BS. Especially, the absurd claim that science has nothing to do with consensus.

When you your fallback position is insults, your argument is faulty.

 

I always shudder when somebody jumps into a debate I'm having with another poster without bothering to read the context. Because, as a matter of fact, the discussion I was having with that poster was mostly fueled by the fact that believing anyone with a label "scientist" or not is irrelevant. It make no difference what a Scientist says. Only thing that matters in Science is what they can prove with proper peer-reviewed studies.

Very high.

Allow me to quote myself. This is part of one of my responses to the poster I mentioned above.

 

Nature accomplished what Science couldn't accomplish. ie: convincing very conservative people in very conservative states, which have been drinking right-wing kool-aid for decades, that Global Warming is real.

You actually didn't understand something as simple as that?

 

Do you know what a peer review is and it’s limitations?

Doubt that, if it was you’d just answer the question.

And in that quote you just confirm that you prefer not to think for yourself and believe what others tell you. Back in Medieval Times Europeans blindly followed religion. These days liberals around the world religiously believe in AGW without even daring to question it.

 

Yes I understand that. I believe I explained it very well. You took an event which had little to nothing to do with AGW and tried to use that event to convince people that AGW existed. A very dishonest approach.

If you have a valid argument, you don't need to be dishonest to make it. The events in Houston had little to nothing to do with AGW. it was a relatvely weak storm. It was a stationary storm due to a coast line and light easterly upper air winds, neither of which had anything to do with AGW.

 

Yes. It is. Questioning established science with no basis (i.e. at least one peer-reviewed study that concludes the contrary, though there has not been one in 20 years) is denying science.

Sorry dude. But you're pretty much outside your element here.

Huh??? Where the hell did I ...

Ah... forget it! Don't let me disrupt your little fantasy world.