Global Warming Smoking Gun (Feb 2nd)

Here's what they won't say... how to deal with it as best we can, which is really what we need to focus on now.
 
Godmode said:
Here's what they won't say... how to deal with it as best we can, which is really what we need to focus on now.
Click to expand...


Well, of course they won't say that. That's because there's always some delusional neocon pinhead who insists that there's nothing there to deal with, and so the discussion can't progress past that point.

It's hard to have a meaningful discussion about which umbrella to buy when the chairman of the committee has packed the room with shills who are screaming that there is no evidence that it ever rains.
 
drkitten said:
Well, of course they won't say that. That's because there's always some delusional neocon pinhead who insists that there's nothing there to deal with, and so the discussion can't progress past that point.

It's hard to have a meaningful discussion about which umbrella to buy when the chairman of the committee has packed the room with shills who are screaming that there is no evidence that it ever rains.
Click to expand...

Even funnier when its alrealdy raining...
 
Overman said:
Even funnier when its alrealdy raining...
Click to expand...

"That's not rain. I simply worked out before I came here to this meeting, and my hair is still wet from the shower. So are my clothes. I always shower in my clothes. Outdoors. In the middle of thunder."
 
drkitten said:
That's because there's always some delusional neocon pinhead who insists that there's nothing there to deal with,
Click to expand...

Opposition to environmentalists is fairly old-school conservativism in this country. I fail to see any connection to "neocons".
 
Ziggurat said:
Opposition to environmentalists is fairly old-school conservativism in this country. I fail to see any connection to "neocons".
Click to expand...

Ah. The pinheads arrive. You're about two posts behind schedule, but I'll assume that you hit traffic. No great loss.

The difference is, old-school conservatism tended to accept the results of scientific inquiry, but argued over whether the benefits exceeded the costs. For example, "Is saving the spotted owl really worth shutting down the Oregon timber industry?"

Neoconservatism simply rejects the results of scientific inquiry outright. "There is no spotted owl. There never was any such animal as the spotted owl."

There may be a legitimate reason to believe that the costs of addressing global warming will exceed the benefits. (IF there is, I've never seen one -- but it's not outside of the realm of possibility.) There is no legitimate, or even reality-based, reason to deny that anthropogenic global warning exists and will result in major climatic changes in the moderate-term future.


Please keep in mind your membership agreement regarding civility toward other forum members; don't make this a personal issue by name-calling.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jmercer
 
Last edited by a moderator:
drkitten said:
Ah. The pinheads arrive. You're about two posts behind schedule, but I'll assume that you hit traffic. No great loss.

The difference is, old-school conservatism tended to accept the results of scientific inquiry, but argued over whether the benefits exceeded the costs. For example, "Is saving the spotted owl really worth shutting down the Oregon timber industry?"

Neoconservatism simply rejects the results of scientific inquiry outright. "There is no spotted owl. There never was any such animal as the spotted owl."

There may be a legitimate reason to believe that the costs of addressing global warming will exceed the benefits. (IF there is, I've never seen one -- but it's not outside of the realm of possibility.) There is no legitimate, or even reality-based, reason to deny that anthropogenic global warning exists and will result in major climatic changes in the moderate-term future.
Click to expand...
Interesting explanation, but even assuming it's correct, I see no validation for calling Zig a pinhead.
 
drkitten said:
Neoconservatism simply rejects the results of scientific inquiry outright. "There is no spotted owl. There never was any such animal as the spotted owl."
Click to expand...

I don't think you really know what the term means. You probably think Bush is a neoconservative. He is not. Neither are christian fundamentalists (the group normally associated with rejecting science in the US over the evolution issue). I repeat: what has neoconservatism got to do with anti-environmentalism? Your caricature of them is not a substitute for an explanation.

The kicker to your silliness, of course, is that your argument doesn't depend upon the use of the term. You could make your point better without it.
 
steverino said:
I say the "Ice Age" is coming!

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914-1,00.html
Click to expand...
:) That was a fun read. Of interest from it, among other things:
Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7° F. Although that figure is at best an estimate, it is supported by other convincing data.
Click to expand...
All of the data I've found today shoes, at most, about 1° of change from the 1940s to the 1970s. I wonder if they are better at estsimating today(?)
Temperatures have been as high as they are now only about 5% of the time.
Click to expand...
So a small dip over about 30 years and they're sensationalizing about an ice age? That dip in global mean temperature was nothing compared to the rise we've seen more recently.
Warns Hare: "I don't believe that the world's present population is sustainable if there are more than three years like 1972 in a row."
Click to expand...
Don't know if Ware was right or wrong about that, as we did not have three straight years like 1972 since.
 
steverino said:
I say the "Ice Age" is coming . . .
Click to expand...
. . . the sun's zooming in
Meltdown expected
the wheat is growing thin
Engines stop running
But I have no fear
Cos London is drowning and I
I live by the river!

Heck, even the Clash saw this one coming. If I were them, I'd sell that river front property.

DR
 
Ziggurat said:
I don't think you really know what the term means. You probably think Bush is a neoconservative. He is not. Neither are christian fundamentalists (the group normally associated with rejecting science in the US over the evolution issue). I repeat: what has neoconservatism got to do with anti-environmentalism? Your caricature of them is not a substitute for an explanation.
Click to expand...

And there, Snide, is the justification for calling Ziggurat a pinhead. Right on schedule.
 
So, anyway, Al Gore's film has been nominated for two Oscars. One for best documentary, and one for Melissa Etheridge's song in it.

I'd say Al has a lock on the Award, considering the political bent of Hollywood.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom