Get Off HIs Back - By Ben Stein 9/4/2005
Previous 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Blue_Nose @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:18 am
IceOwl IceOwl:
Not to a degree that it would threaten nearly all life on the planet, barring the evolution of some other animal that ended up causing the same problem.
I fail to see how humans have managed to cease evolution. You must be very knowledgeable in this area to suggest such a thing.
IceOwl IceOwl:
In other words, I've given up arguing with people who can't be reasoned with, and am changing the subject to something you can't possibly disagree on.
You changed the subject when I simplified it enough that you couldn't argue your point. Global warming is likely caused, in part, by humans, but 'likely' isn't good enough for the scientific world.
It's obvious, even in this thread, that people are now hesitant to pay any attention to anyone who mentions the environment. Tree huggers and hippies have bastardized science and exploited partial investigations in these areas, and have virtually ruined the chances of intelligent people with valid research to be taken seriously. The environment is important and needs serious attention, but we should leave its defense to people who know what they're talking about.
Jaime_Souviens @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:14 am
DerbyX DerbyX:
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
DerbyX DerbyX:
I will believe the experts when they say that human made CO2 is a major contributing factor in the current temperature increase.
![[cheer]](./images/smilies/icon_cheers.gif "Cheer"){kind=icon}
BartSimpson has pushed you off your absolutist assertion that CO2 is the cause of global warming!!!!!!!!
Once again you missed the point. Doesn't it ever bother you?Every time you say I missed the point, it's because I've said something that's over your head.
BartSimpson got you to back away from your obsessive and ultimately political standpoint that global warming is solely caused by human activity.
For that, he deserves congratulations, ---
and for that matter so do you.
Congratulations, DerbyX for backing away from at least one irrational absolute!!!
We only have several thousand more to go...
Jaime_Souviens @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:17 am
IceOwl IceOwl:
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
IceOwl IceOwl:
$1:
If all of humanity did not exist you know what would happen? The climate would definitely change at some point.
Not to a degree that it would threaten nearly all life on the planet, barring the evolution of some other animal that ended up causing the same problem.
Absurd.
"If at first the idea is not absurd, there is no hope for it." -Albert Einstein
Is that the basis of your determined efforts to be completely absurd, on the odds that there might be some hope for some part of your speculations?
Jaime_Souviens @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:19 am
IceOwl IceOwl:
...We cause the same effect with all of the soot we generate from burning stuff constantly, as well as all of the contrails we generate with thousands of jet airliner flights every day - another phenomenon called global dimming, which is actually protecting us from the full effects of global warming.
So no matter what happens long term, you can still claim success.
Great theory.
Not much predictive value, but great theory.
Jaime_Souviens @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:21 am
Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
The environment is important and needs serious attention, but we should leave its defense to people who know what they're talking about.
Well, that's no fun...
What will all of us in this thread post about?
Blue_Nose @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:38 am
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
Well, that's no fun...
What will all of us in this thread post about?
What will all of us in this thread post about?
haha, no I'm not talking specifically about this forum. I'm talking about all the "Research Centres" who have the gall to spin science to promote their opinions on the environment. Same thing is done by religious zealots.
You get a biased study by someone with an agenda, and then a biased counter-study to denounce it. Nobody benefits from this, as we're filled with distrust.
Jaime_Souviens @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:53 am
Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
Well, that's no fun...
What will all of us in this thread post about?
What will all of us in this thread post about?
haha, no I'm not talking specifically about this forum. I'm talking about all the "Research Centres" who have the gall to spin science to promote their opinions on the environment. Same thing is done by religious zealots.
You get a biased study by someone with an agenda, and then a biased counter-study to denounce it. Nobody benefits from this, as we're filled with distrust.
Worse, if you look to the universities to be impartial because their funding is derived from the university endowment, it turns out that the university funding also comes from the donation of 'interested parties'.
We're a planet of liars and shills.
But in the long run, some theories will have predicted the future, and others will prove embarassingly wrong...
DerbyX @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:23 pm
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
DerbyX DerbyX:
I will believe the experts when they say that human made CO2 is a major contributing factor in the current temperature increase.
BartSimpson has pushed you off your absolutist assertion that CO2 is the cause of global warming!!!!!!!!
Once again you missed the point. Doesn't it ever bother you?Every time you say I missed the point, it's because I've said something that's over your head.
BartSimpson got you to back away from your obsessive and ultimately political standpoint that global warming is solely caused by human activity.
For that, he deserves congratulations, ---
and for that matter so do you.
Congratulations, DerbyX for backing away from at least one irrational absolute!!!
We only have several thousand more to go...
No. You just can't ever figure out what other people are saying. That's because most of this forum converses at a level above grade 4 reading and writing comprehension.
Ignoring the fact that neither you nor Bart have in any way studied this phenomenon we have to allow for the fact that you are just parrots for the self-interest groups who use whatever means necessary to refute scientific evidence that human produced levels of CO2 gas are the major contributing factor and thus can be said to be causing global warming. The rest of your argument, since I destroyed you on your laughable stance that it is not the primary goal of science to explain the observable, is a pathetic attempt to make someone else appear to do that which you cannot. Keep trying though.
DerbyX @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:26 pm
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
Well, that's no fun...
What will all of us in this thread post about?
What will all of us in this thread post about?
haha, no I'm not talking specifically about this forum. I'm talking about all the "Research Centres" who have the gall to spin science to promote their opinions on the environment. Same thing is done by religious zealots.
You get a biased study by someone with an agenda, and then a biased counter-study to denounce it. Nobody benefits from this, as we're filled with distrust.
Worse, if you look to the universities to be impartial because their funding is derived from the university endowment, it turns out that the university funding also comes from the donation of 'interested parties'.
We're a planet of liars and shills.
But in the long run, some theories will have predicted the future, and others will prove embarassingly wrong...
How very wrong you are. Some univer sity professors may get funding from "motivated self-interest" groups but most don't. How it works in US universities is not how it works around the world and there is a good amount of concensus of the CO2-global warming connection.
Jaime_Souviens @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 5:26 pm
DerbyX DerbyX:
No. You just can't ever figure out what other people are saying. That's because most of this forum converses at a level above grade 4 reading and writing comprehension.
Ignoring the fact that neither you nor Bart have in any way studied this phenomenon we have to allow for the fact that you are just parrots for the self-interest groups who use whatever means necessary to refute scientific evidence that human produced levels of CO2 gas are the major contributing factor and thus can be said to be causing global warming. The rest of your argument, since I destroyed you on your laughable stance that it is not the primary goal of science to explain the observable, is a pathetic attempt to make someone else appear to do that which you cannot. Keep trying though.
Ignoring the fact that neither you nor Bart have in any way studied this phenomenon we have to allow for the fact that you are just parrots for the self-interest groups who use whatever means necessary to refute scientific evidence that human produced levels of CO2 gas are the major contributing factor and thus can be said to be causing global warming. The rest of your argument, since I destroyed you on your laughable stance that it is not the primary goal of science to explain the observable, is a pathetic attempt to make someone else appear to do that which you cannot. Keep trying though.
I never had such a stance.
I have no idea what it is you claim to have destroyed.
All that's happened here is that you've been forced off your simple-minded irrational pontifications.
Jaime_Souviens @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 5:29 pm
DerbyX DerbyX:
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
Well, that's no fun...
What will all of us in this thread post about?
What will all of us in this thread post about?
haha, no I'm not talking specifically about this forum. I'm talking about all the "Research Centres" who have the gall to spin science to promote their opinions on the environment. Same thing is done by religious zealots.
You get a biased study by someone with an agenda, and then a biased counter-study to denounce it. Nobody benefits from this, as we're filled with distrust.
Worse, if you look to the universities to be impartial because their funding is derived from the university endowment, it turns out that the university funding also comes from the donation of 'interested parties'.
We're a planet of liars and shills.
But in the long run, some theories will have predicted the future, and others will prove embarassingly wrong...
How very wrong you are. Some univer sity professors may get funding from "motivated self-interest" groups but most don't. How it works in US universities is not how it works around the world and there is a good amount of concensus of the CO2-global warming connection.
Universities are as poilitical as parliaments.
Your naive belief in the purity of the academy is nearly shocking.
DerbyX @ Sat Sep 17, 2005 5:38 pm
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
Well, that's no fun...
What will all of us in this thread post about?
What will all of us in this thread post about?
haha, no I'm not talking specifically about this forum. I'm talking about all the "Research Centres" who have the gall to spin science to promote their opinions on the environment. Same thing is done by religious zealots.
You get a biased study by someone with an agenda, and then a biased counter-study to denounce it. Nobody benefits from this, as we're filled with distrust.
Worse, if you look to the universities to be impartial because their funding is derived from the university endowment, it turns out that the university funding also comes from the donation of 'interested parties'.
We're a planet of liars and shills.
But in the long run, some theories will have predicted the future, and others will prove embarassingly wrong...
How very wrong you are. Some univer sity professors may get funding from "motivated self-interest" groups but most don't. How it works in US universities is not how it works around the world and there is a good amount of concensus of the CO2-global warming connection.
Universities are as poilitical as parliaments.
Your naive belief in the purity of the academy is nearly shocking.
You utter lack of knowledge is actually par for the course. I doubt very much you have experience with any univeristy beyond your own. They may be political but it is not only those scientists that are supporting the CO2-human-global warming connection.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific ... ate_change
In any case your own words work against you. Your scientists that deny the GM-CO2-human connection have the same political strikes against them and they are in the minority. Don't waste my time with some strawman tactic that at one point the "majority" of scholars believed the earth was flat. We have the evidence to back up the claim.
Previous 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 Next