Vaginas, Sea Level, and the Beginning of Reality

[youngterrier]

Dude, I haven't said anything about government altruism, all I've talked about is the science and the lack of logic from a scientists perspective (and counter to that, the government's perspective) in the concept of a "conspiracy." And if you actually think, you'll see it's bullshit too.
But hey this is how our conversation goes:

You: CONSPIRACY
Me: No, and here's why____________(explanation)
You: NO CONSPIRACY, DONKS HATE US OUAgrjmtr;no

I mean really, you're not even proposing substance, just blind talking points. You clearly don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the purpose of data collecting or experimentation. I can only conclude that you're either extremely stupid and deluded by philosophy or you're trolling. I'm leaning towards the latter.

it's not a "conspiracy", YT. It's just the way government IS. Trust me, if funding the anti-AGW crowd would result in increased government control/growth/spending, they'd be taking THAT slant.

unfortunately that right there needs to be the opening line - before any debate on politics even begins...
Let us be be deceived
Committees do not dissolve themselves
Departments do not seek less influence and less funding
Politicians do not demure

So you admit you're forfeiting yourself from the conversation?

[AZGrizFan]

it's not a "conspiracy", YT. It's just the way government IS. Trust me, if funding the anti-AGW crowd would result in increased government control/growth/spending, they'd be taking THAT slant.

So you admit you're forfeiting yourself from the conversation?

No. But I DO give up trying to talk sense to you. It's like trying to talk to my dipshit nephew. Hopeless.

[youngterrier]

So you admit you're forfeiting yourself from the conversation?

No. But I DO give up trying to talk sense to you. It's like trying to talk to my dipshit nephew. Hopeless.

I feel the same way talking to you
Me: But Science....
You: THE GOVERNMENT OUarjlfnhkgafj
Me: but there's consensus
You: LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM COMING TO TAKE MY GUNS
Me: but....
You: WHERE'S OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE

You've wandered to where we're not talking science and instead you wish to talk up Sean Hannity-level "liberals hate us and want big government you guise" talk.

[Cap'n Cat]

North Carolina...Michigan

Your "Moment of Clarity"

[youtube]http://leecamp.net/2012/06/vaginas-sea- ... y-moc-149/[/youtube]

http://leecamp.net/2012/06/vaginas-sea- ... y-moc-149/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I believe the title is supposed to be the "Banning of Reality" and not the "Beginning...."

Anyways, I got a good chuckle out of it...especially where he said "Climate Change" is a reality.
Of course it's a reality, the climate has been changing for billions of years.

Guys,
Baldy it absolutely right. His idol, Rush Limbaugh says so, too. The Climate HAS been changing for billions of years.


What they deny is the monumental change in the last 130 years.

[Baldy]

I believe the title is supposed to be the "Banning of Reality" and not the "Beginning...."

Anyways, I got a good chuckle out of it...especially where he said "Climate Change" is a reality.
Of course it's a reality, the climate has been changing for billions of years.

Guys,
Baldy it absolutely right. His idol, Rush Limbaugh says so, too. The Climate HAS been changing for billions of years.


What they deny is the monumental change in the last 130 years.

Monumental change? You sound as silly as yt.

Where you're living now was once under 50 feet of ice, and Antarctica was once a tropical paradise with the proverbial swaying palm trees and everything. That is monumental change.

[Cap'n Cat]

Guys,
Baldy it absolutely right. His idol, Rush Limbaugh says so, too. The Climate HAS been changing for billions of years.


What they deny is the monumental change in the last 130 years.

Monumental change? You sound as silly as yt.

Where you're living now was once under 50 feet of ice, and Antarctica was once a tropical paradise with the proverbial swaying palm trees and everything. That is monumental change.

And Darien, GA, will be buried in ice in 1000 years.


Conks live just
for the moment.

[Baldy]

Monumental change? You sound as silly as yt.

Where you're living now was once under 50 feet of ice, and Antarctica was once a tropical paradise with the proverbial swaying palm trees and everything. That is monumental change.

And Darien, GA, will be buried in ice in 1000 years.


Conks live in
the real world.

FIFY.

[JohnStOnge]

So if you believe that it's happening based on as high of a certainty we can get without direct experimentation, why are you here?

I mean really, all you're doing is reiterating the same fact over and over again that we all understand. It doesn't add to discussion, it just distracts as a matter of fact.

I don't know if it's established with as high a level of certainty as is theoretically possible with observational study. I just believe we have had an impact.

I think what reminding people of the principle detracts from is the effort to create the impression that the need to take drastic action to curtail climate change has been firmly established. For instance: What if every time Climate Change were discussed in media or during policy making discussions the following disclaimer were issued:

"We cannot uequivocally say that humankind is a factor in climate change because being able to do so would require controlled experiments that are not possible to conduct."

Suppose that general qualifier were to be emphasized during every Discovery Channel, etc., documentary on clmiate change instead of having an atmosphere in which the impression is created that anthropogenic climate change is unequivocally known to be fact.

I think it would make a difference. And I think it's interesting that, though there is a reference to that situation in the body of the IPCC Physical Science Basis Report, there is no mention of it in the report's Summary for Policy Makers. Suppose the Summary for Policy Makers began with that disclaimer? It would somewhat neuter everything that came after. It would also be more intellectually honest.