Democrats say look at the science

Democrats say look at the science. They claim science proves there is global warming. Therefore everyone has to go along with it.

Yet science has proved there are only two sexes. Yet democrats still claim there are from 75 to 100 different sexes.

Well -------- do they believe science or not?

 

Fallacy of false logic.

 

Al Gore said the science is in, there is no more debate about global warming/climate change. The "prophecies" in his book "An Inconvenient Truth" have all failed to come to fruition. Yet here we are still arguing about lies. These people pushing this green new deal and AGW need to be stopped.

 

Confirmation science argumentation just does not matter.

 

I do agree that the debate is over. They're free to stop using electricity and oil if they want, but there is no need to debate with people who think the only solution is government.

 

Canada produces less than two percent of global atmospheric gas emissions.......
If we burden taxpayers and companies here with fifty billion dollars in Carbon Taxes over the next
three decades would this prevent ocean levels from rising?

No........ a Carbon Tax would be ineffective at addressing the threat of rising ocean levels.

We Canadians are forced by our geography to think about such ideas:

"If average ocean levels rose by eight to ten cms (3 or 4 inches) could high tide...
... rise by one meter in the Isthmus of Chignecto in Nova Scotia, Canada?

This question is logical because the geography of Canada's Bay of Fundy produces the world's highest tides. In my part of Nova Scotia in Guysborough County there is very little funnelling of tidal waters......... so high tide is only about one to one point five meters above low tide.

In the eastern area of the Bay of Fundy high tide levels are up by ten to fifteen meters."

 

Carl Cantrell and I did put in two submissions for the Virgin Earth Challenge back in 2007......
but we were kind of sarcastic..... and we did not win the twenty five million!


My two somewhat humorous submissions for $25 million Virgin Earth Challenge.


"Dr James Hansen, Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies: "I think we have a very brief window of opportunity to deal with climate change ... no longer than a decade, at the most. This is why I am supporting the Virgin Earth Challenge as a judge " we must explore all means, both known and unknown, to help alleviate this crisis."

Dennis Tate
March 15, 2007

Sir Richard Branson
Virgin Earth Challenge
120 Campden Hill Road
London W8 7AR
United Kingdom

Dear Mr. Branson:

It is my firm belief that the number one technological device to reduce atmospheric greenhouse gases has already been invented. It is the tree.

What is desperately needed at this time is not necessarily a new mechanical device but instead a paradigm shift in economic theory regarding monetary policy. We require a readily understandable explanation on how leaders in business and government can direct not only millions, but actually trillions of dollars of investment into combating global warming.


One of the most effective practical methods that could be put into place in the least amount of time would be dozens of the largest possible desalinization plants all along the Mediterranean and Red Seas. Huge quantities of fresh water could be dripped onto the Sinai and Sahara deserts and voila, well chosen species of newly planted fast growing trees could soon change the color of these relatively desolate areas, significantly reduce atmospheric CO2, positively affect local weather patterns and at the same time significantly counterbalance the increases in worldwide ocean levels as the polar ice caps melt. This will buy us some extra time and thus expand the "very brief window of opportunity to deal with climate change."

So who is going to finance the construction of all these massive installations not to mention the planting of all those seedling trees?

I believe that it is possible for you to do this yourself Mr. Branson. You have already created a Virgin currency unit/coupon which has astonishing long term potential. My wife Maria Jose just returned from a two week trip to the British VIRGIN Islands. It is theoretically possible to link your Virgin coupon with the national currency of a small nation and you could soon be playing around in macro-economics. Considering the volume of business being done through your Virgin Group I would submit that you already are.


and......

Global Warming II by Carl Cantrell

 

No either you believe in science or your dont. You cant pick and chose.

 

From the Scientific American:

Biologists now think there is a larger spectrum than just binary female and male

Sex can be much more complicated than it at first seems. According to the simple scenario, the presence or absence of a Y chromosome is what counts: with it, you are male, and without it, you are female. But doctors have long known that some people straddle the boundary—their sex chromosomes say one thing, but their gonads (ovaries or testes) or sexual anatomy say another. Parents of children with these kinds of conditions—known as intersex conditions, or differences or disorders of sex development (DSDs)—often face difficult decisions about whether to bring up their child as a boy or a girl. Some researchers now say that as many as 1 person in 100 has some form of DSD.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/

 

Sorry but there only two sexes. DNA proves that. Environment and stupid parents explain the rest. Those beyond male and female are victims of a mental health problem.

 

You see the fact is true science is an absolute fact. Liberals have problems with facts. Facts get in the way of their feelings today.

 

After the big crisis of Ike having his heart attack science and government got involved in eating and came up with the food pyramid, which food pyramid infiltrated the public schools.

Result: People are a hell of a lot more overweight and a lot less healthy with a lot more diabetes.

Science caused nothing but harm in this crisis.

 

citation needed

NOAA, NASA and every reputable climatological research center on earth has confirmed anthropogenic climate change by intensive compilation and analysis of a vast amount of empirical data.

Only a residue of crackpot ideologues remain in denial. The less sentient among them labor under the delusion that it is a Chinese hoax.

​

 

Global warming is not about science. It is about carbon credits, and carbon taxes. If you want to discover the truth, follow the money.

 

If you're not an ideologue in pathological denial, and want to confirm the truth, follow the science.

​

 

Science is a product purchased by corporations to increase profits. Who do you think pay for these climate studies? The same people who will control carbon credits.

Like our legal system, we have the best science money can buy.....

 

Its a real thing but that won't stop libs from taking fuel sucking private jets to attend global warming conferences

 

Such consuming paranoia requires a zealous devotion to ideological dogma.

Spewing millions of tonnes of industrial greenhouse gases into the atmosphere has an impact on the atmosphere, a common sense conclusion that is supported by a plethora of climatological data.

Your delusion that all major scientific institutions worldwide and all the world's nations (excepting Assad's and Trump's pariah nations) are participants in or dupes of such a vast conspiracy, whereas you possess the truth, is quite deranged.

 

For those in the know, GW / green whatever / carbon credits - it ultimately is mostly about the redistribution of wealth... Go over to India & China w/ your outraged 'token' kids. (berating the UN a few hours ago, lol.)

 

A lot of the people that talk about science as though it's some sort of deity worship science as though it were a deity and it can never ever be wrong.

This is probably the most incredible way someone can misunderstand science. Science is a method for which we gather information. And things that are not well defined with in science are often proven wrong by new discoveries.

To hear people say the science is settled and this is absolute fact listen and believe sounds a lot like religion. And you'll know that you're stabbing right in the heart of the way they think by the way they react. So mention that climate change at least all the cultural following of it is a religion and they will freak the f*** out. They do this because what you said was true.

It's like veganism. Believe it or not this is actually a branch of the climate change cult. And if you tell them that's a religion they do not like that.

 

Fallacy of false logic? Did that make sense to you when you typed it? A fallacy is a flaw in logic.

 

All people who understand how science works know that global warming is a proven fact and that change must come about.

Good for Greta Thunberg. The confirmation 'scientists' need to go back to the classroom.

 

That's not what the debate is about what the date is about as they want to take your money. They want to take money away from poor people who can only afford used cars that run on gas and redistribute it to wealthy people that I can afford to buy brand new electric cars.

It's redistribution of wealth but it's entirely opposite of the way they like to say it would go.

 

This issue is not about the environment, it is about carbon credits and carbon taxes. If you truly believed in climate change, you would be advocating reducing total global population as that is the most obvious and effective solution....

 

I walked around in the Bay of Fundy about twenty years ago among the grounded boats and then watched the tide come rushing in. Has something changed?