Far-Right Climate Denial Is Scary. Far-Right Climate Acceptance Might Be Scarier. - Page 12 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Any other minor ideologies.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15026049
Palmyrene wrote:You mean back in the 50s? Science progresses dude. What was "common sense" then isn't "common sense" now.

It was the early 60's. The scientific method has remained the same. It is just that the progressives dudes do not want to follow it because it is too hard and restrictive to their imaginations.

Palmyrene wrote:Seasons aren't climates dingus. You said you did "real science" for two years and you don't even know what a climate is?

The average of the seasonal temperatures determine the climate, doofus.

Palmyrene wrote:And you wouldn't lose your mind anymore than you do now. You believe that Jesus will come back to life and declare himself the messiah but believing in global warming is too much for you? Are you joking?

Also weathermen believe in climate change.

Jesus already came back to life and was caught up into heaven. I am waiting for His return to set up His kingdom on the earth. I also believe in climate change, global warming and cooling just like the weathermen. But even the weathermen do not believe they can predict the temperatures for the climate 10 to 12 years from now.
#15026078
Hindsite wrote:It was the early 60's. The scientific method has remained the same. It is just that the progressives dudes do not want to follow it because it is too hard and restrictive to their imaginations.


Do you have any evidence other than FOX News that climate change wasn't discovered through the scientific method?

Do you have any proof that current scientists don't use the scientific method?

The average of the seasonal temperatures determine the climate, doofus.


Again, not the climate.

Jesus already came back to life and was caught up into heaven. I am waiting for His return to set up His kingdom on the earth. I also believe in climate change, global warming and cooling just like the weathermen. But even the weathermen do not believe they can predict the temperatures for the climate 10 to 12 years from now.


Science has progressed to be capable of doing that.

Honestly it's not even that much time. It's not like they're predicting 100000 years into future it's just 12 years and they've changed to 18 months.

It's not that big of a deal to believe in climate change. Your religious beliefs won't get effected and it's not like you'll stop being Republican because you believe in climate change.

You're making a big deal out of nothing.
#15026083
Climate change is supported by the scientific method. Pretending otherwise is simply denying reality. I don't think you know what scientific method is, @Hindsite.

The scientific method and climate change: How scientists know
The scientific method is the gold standard for exploring our natural world. You might have learned about it in grade school, but here’s a quick reminder: It’s the process that scientists use to understand everything from animal behavior to the forces that shape our planet—including climate change.

“The way science works is that I go out and study something, and maybe I collect data or write equations, or I run a big computer program,” said Josh Willis, principal investigator of NASA’s Oceans Melting Greenland (OMG) mission and oceanographer at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. “And I use it to learn something about how the world works.”

Using the scientific method, scientists have shown that humans are extremely likely the dominant cause of today’s climate change. The story goes back to the late 1800s, but in 1958, for example, Charles Keeling of the Mauna Loa Observatory in Waimea, Hawaii, started taking meticulous measurements of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere, showing the first significant evidence of rapidly rising CO2 levels and producing the Keeling Curve climate scientists know today.

Since then, thousands of peer-reviewed scientific papers have come to the same conclusion about climate change, telling us that human activities emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, raising Earth’s average temperature and bringing a range of consequences to our ecosystems.

“The weight of all of this information taken together points to the single consistent fact that humans and our activity are warming the planet,” Willis said.

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2743/the- ... ists-know/

Scientific Consensus: Earth's Climate is Warming
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.

The scientific method’s steps
The exact steps of the scientific method can vary by discipline, but since we have only one Earth (and no “test” Earth), climate scientists follow a few general guidelines to better understand carbon dioxide levels, sea level rise, global temperature and more.

Form a hypothesis (a statement that an experiment can test)
Make observations (conduct experiments and gather data)
Analyze and interpret the data
Draw conclusions
Publish results that can be validated with further experiments (rinse and repeat)
As you can see, the scientific method is iterative (repetitive), meaning that climate scientists are constantly making new discoveries about the world based on the building blocks of scientific knowledge.

Statement on Climate Change from 18 Scientific Associations
"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver." (2009)2

AAAS emblem
American Association for the Advancement of Science
"The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society." (2006)3
ACS emblem
American Chemical Society
"Comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem." (2004)4
AGU emblem
American Geophysical Union
"Human‐induced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes." (Adopted 2003, revised and reaffirmed 2007, 2012, 2013)5
AMA emblem
American Medical Association
"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2013)6
AMS emblem
American Meteorological Society
"It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide." (2012)7
APS emblem
American Physical Society
"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now." (2007)8
GSA emblem
The Geological Society of America
"The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s." (2006; revised 2010)9
SCIENCE ACADEMIES
International Academies: Joint Statement
"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies)10

UNSAS emblem
U.S. National Academy of Sciences
"The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere." (2005)11
U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
USGCRP emblem
U.S. Global Change Research Program
"The global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat-trapping gases. Human 'fingerprints' also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice." (2009, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies)12
INTERGOVERNMENTAL BODIES
IPCC emblem
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen.”13

“Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems.”

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
#15026204
Godstud wrote:Climate change is supported by the scientific method.

We know climate changes, and always has. Where is the science that says if we stop using fossil fuels, the climate will stop changing?

Thought not.
Pretending otherwise is simply denying reality.

Pretending that those who question anti-fossil-fuel hysteria claim climate doesn't change is not only denying reality, it is deeply dishonest.
I don't think you know what scientific method is,

As they say in Japan, "It's mirror time!"
#15026211
Truth To Power wrote:We know climate changes, and always has. Where is the science that says if we stop using fossil fuels, the climate will stop changing?

Thought not.


No one is arguing that climate change has to stop or will stop if we stop using fossil fuels.

That is a strawman.

The actual argument is that anthropogenic climate change is more harmful than beneficial and that it is driven primarily by fossil fuel use.
#15026336
Hindsite wrote:Strawman arguments are as good as any arguments you have.
:lol: That's rich, coming from Mr Fake News, himself. You just hate the fact that you can't make a cogent argument.

I presented proof that your argument that they don't use Scientific Method is just you making up bullshit, to defend your unscientific argument. :knife:
#15026401
Pants-of-dog wrote:No one is arguing that climate change has to stop or will stop if we stop using fossil fuels.

Thank you for admitting that calling anti-fossil fuel hysteria "climate change" is despicably dishonest propaganda.
That is a strawman.

No. Calling those who question the anti-fossil-fuel hysteria campaign "climate change deniers" is the strawman, and I will thank you to remember it.
The actual argument is that anthropogenic climate change is more harmful than beneficial and that it is driven primarily by fossil fuel use.

No. The actual argument is that warming climate is more harmful than cooling climate; that global temperature is more sensitive to CO2 level than CO2 level is to global temperature; that most of the warming observed since the Little Ice Age ended ~200ya has been caused by increased CO2 due to fossil fuel use; and that continued fossil fuel use will cause catastrophic warming before the end of this century. Of course, all of those claims are objectively and demonstrably false.
Godstud wrote::lol: @blackjack21 and @Truth To Power. You're just arguing semantics.

No, I am pointing out fallacies.
You know exactly what they mean and are making up strawman arguments.

I do know exactly what they mean, and am identifying the fact that it is therefore THEY who are using the strawman fallacy by calling their claims "climate change" and falsely calling those who question their claims "climate change deniers."
#15026594
Pants-of-dog wrote:In a cartoon that went viral before the Copenhagen climate summit in 2009, a conference presentation lists some of the side benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, from cleaner air to green jobs, as a man in the audience asks: "What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"

Image

I can't help but wonder if the people who create these sort of cartoons aren't total retards. It just beggars my belief that people can write such stupid things. For a start many so called Green technologies are not actually low carbon when measured over their full life cycle. Also many Green policies can have counter intuitive outcomes in terms of green house gas emissions, but even where they do reduce green house gas emissions they are often horrendously bad for the environment in other respects see wind farms and solar.

I'm a real feminist Green, hence I support nuclear power and the eradication of Islam. We should be investing big time in Nuclear, done properly it can be economic.
#15027332
Rich wrote:For a start many so called Green technologies are not actually low carbon when measured over their full life cycle.


Please provide evidence for this claim. Thanks.

Also many Green policies can have counter intuitive outcomes in terms of green house gas emissions, but even where they do reduce green house gas emissions they are often horrendously bad for the environment in other respects see wind farms and solar.


Please provide evidence for this claim. Thanks.
#15029662
Not gonna lie first the title piqued my interest, but then it grabbed my attention.

It’s a very concerning development how in the USA, acceptance of empirical climate science has become a matter of political identity. As in all things this has the danger of happening in Europe because of cultural and political Americanisation.
  • 1
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
The Next UK PM everybody...

Statement of "Jews Against Boris" conce[…]

UK votes for Boris...

This is coming to a head sooner than later. It wi[…]

I know you don't. Or at least you say you don't[…]

Absolutely!! I LOVE abuse of power. Hitle[…]