|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
 Posted - 05/13/2007 : 20:32:45 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Dave ----have you read the ipcc report? |
I'm working on it.| Or do you, apeal to authority and trust without reading the data for yourself. |
When did I appeal to authority? Would you care to quote me even suggesting that the IPCC report is correct? I assure you I did no such thing.| Please look at the data supplied and show me what scientific porposes would be severed by comparing 10 years of data to 42 years of data. |
Your unreasonable refusal to explain the purpose given in the report is noted. In its light, your insistence that we discuss the science in the report is laughable.| I have presented this infomation from the ipcc to debate; as of yet no one has taken the challange. |
You have failed to present all of the relevant information, and so have purposefully prevented a substantive, informed debate. Such challenges are made by bullies, not by people seeking rational discourse.| Dave you claim "false dichotomy" when i clearly stated "I am open for another resonable explaination" which you quoted. |
That's not a choice you offered. You suggested that either the scientists are crooks or they are incompetent, and then you essentially dared everyone to prove you wrong. Your transparent school-yard "debate" tactics are rejected.| Now dave you know that was not fair to accuse me of presenting a false dichotomy when your quote of me proves your assertion false. |
Asking if anyone has any other ideas does not eliminate or lessen the severity of the charges you laid on the table. Nor does it erase the fact that you were only imaginative enough to come up with two possibilities, both of which tar 1,200+ scientists with a very broad brush.
You also wrote: Dave-- could you please quote me as name calling.
I do not seem to recall. |
Then your memory is faulty, as you'd just gotten finished calling the IPCC scientists crooks or fools. In your OP, you call them manipulative frauds. Sure, sure, you don't use those words, but again your political tactics are transparently childish. Your meaning was clear, even if the verbiage you choose was deliberately neutral.| Or is this another attempt to not talk about the data in the ipcc reports? |
You're the one who has been avoiding the discussion of the science by making ad hominem attacks on the scientists. Your klutzy attempts to misdirect from your culpability there are as bad as those employed by the punks who tried a "Total Truth Takeover" of our website regarding the 9/11 events just last week.
You seem to be under the impression that you retained the logical, ethical and scientific high ground after you posted your OP which did nothing less than accuse thousands of scientists from all over the world of perpetrating a fraud on their own families and friends in favor of corporate and governmental profits which most of those scientists will never see. Unfortunately for you, you gave up all of the high ground at the end of just the title to this thread. Demanding that we now talk about the science is disingenuous at best, and a deliberate attempt to insult our intelligence at worst.
If you want to talk about just the science, then perhaps you should start over fresh, just talk about the science, and not talk about the scientists. Once you've demonstrated that the science is wrong, then you can speculate on why the scientists reported badly. But calling the scientists thieves (or bunglers) before you've shown the science to be faulty is putting the cart before the horse, and does nothing to indicate that you're at all interested in the science. Quite the opposite, in fact. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
Hondo
New Member
USA
25 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 20:52:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
It seems to me that there's a huge error in logic here. In particular, the arguments for man-made global warming far transcend one single report. Rather, they have been put forward for years now in various journals and books. If one were to posit a giant conspiracy, one would have to look back at myriad data from myriad sources and try to find the governmental hand in all of them-- an unlikely scenario, no?
|
Speaking for myself, I don't think there's any need for a "conspiracy" regarding this subject, nor is there necessarily a black-and-white "either/or" option. I have no doubt CO2 (and other) emissions have a negative impact on our environment but I don't buy into the Al Gore fear-mongering spiel as the sole reason for climate change ... what "cured" the Ice Age? Republicans, Democrats ... Sheryl Crowe?
CO2 emissions aren't doing us any favors but I don't think we should start rationing toilet-paper just yet. |
| Edited by - Hondo on 05/13/2007 20:52:47 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 21:29:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Hondo
CO2 emissions aren't doing us any favors but I don't think we should start rationing toilet-paper just yet. |
I bet lots of the IPCC scientists go  over such stories, too.
That said, on the plus side is that Gore is at least doing something to spread awareness and change. If he's relying on fear-mongering to do it, that's bad, but at least he's got thousands of years of precedent of people using fear to change behaviour, including every Christian sect that teaches that Hell is an eternal punishment. I'm not saying it's right, only that it's common. Gore himself was probably brought up that way, so it'd be likely for him to see it as a reasonable method. He'd be wrong, but still, it's understandable.
Sorta like with people who get the answer to the Monty Hall Problem wrong the first time around. It's understandable, but it's wrong. One gets a cause for concern when you teach 'em the reason why they gave the wrong answer, but still they insist - angrily - that it's correct. Has Gore yet publicly offered an answer to the criticisms that he's fear mongering? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:01:02 [Permalink]
|
Hondo said:
| I have no doubt CO2 (and other) emissions have a negative impact on our environment but I don't buy into the Al Gore fear-mongering spiel as the sole reason for climate change ... |
Source for Al Gore (or anyone else for that matter) saying that humans are the sole cause of the current warming? Oh, wait, there is no such source, because no one has ever said anything that stupid.
The least you can do is accurately portray the position of people on the opposite side of the debate from you. This kind of straw-man bullshit serves no purpose but to make you look the fool.
Usually when people devolve to the tactics you are now using it means that they cannot respond intelligently to the opposing position. Why else would you bother to intentionally distort it?
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:04:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Hondo
Speaking for myself, I don't think there's any need for a "conspiracy" regarding this subject, nor is there necessarily a black-and-white "either/or" option. I have no doubt CO2 (and other) emissions have a negative impact on our environment but I don't buy into the Al Gore fear-mongering spiel as the sole reason for climate change ... what "cured" the Ice Age? Republicans, Democrats ... Sheryl Crowe? |
I was unaware of anybody (outside of strawman arguments, that is) making the argument that humans are the sole cause of global climate change. | CO2 emissions aren't doing us any favors but I don't think we should start rationing toilet-paper just yet. |
I agree here.
Edited to add: It appears that I have, once again, been usurped by Dude mere minutes before! |
| Edited by - Boron10 on 05/13/2007 22:05:55 |
|
|
|
Hondo
New Member
USA
25 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:06:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Hondo
CO2 emissions aren't doing us any favors but I don't think we should start rationing toilet-paper just yet. |
I bet lots of the IPCC scientists go over such stories, too.
That said, on the plus side is that Gore is at least doing something to spread awareness and change. If he's relying on fear-mongering to do it, that's bad, but at least he's got thousands of years of precedent of people using fear to change behaviour, including every Christian sect that teaches that Hell is an eternal punishment. I'm not saying it's right, only that it's common. Gore himself was probably brought up that way, so it'd be likely for him to see it as a reasonable method. He'd be wrong, but still, it's understandable.
Sorta like with people who get the answer to the Monty Hall Problem wrong the first time around. It's understandable, but it's wrong. One gets a cause for concern when you teach 'em the reason why they gave the wrong answer, but still they insist - angrily - that it's correct. Has Gore yet publicly offered an answer to the criticisms that he's fear mongering?
|
Not to my knowledge, nor do I expect him to. I think he's sincere in that he believes what he says, so why would he? Where Gore and those like him are wrong IMO, are their reliance on the belief that our current global warming is predicated specially on man-made emissions. I do think we aren't helping matters but think this warming would occur anyway. It's cyclical and is based on the actions of the sun, a solar body we have yet to properly understand with regards to it's actions or effects on our planet. The arguments are old and the experts not unanimous regarding Sol's past behavior but I'll bet you a coffee and a couple donuts that Sol had something to do with past Earth warming/cooling changes and Al Gore's current spiel had nothing to with it.
So why this time? Because it could? Maybe so, but my jury is still out. |
|
|
|
Hondo
New Member
USA
25 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:17:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
Hondo said:
| I have no doubt CO2 (and other) emissions have a negative impact on our environment but I don't buy into the Al Gore fear-mongering spiel as the sole reason for climate change ... |
Source for Al Gore (or anyone else for that matter) saying that humans are the sole cause of the current warming? Oh, wait, there is no such source, because no one has ever said anything that stupid.
The least you can do is accurately portray the position of people on the opposite side of the debate from you. This kind of straw-man bullshit serves no purpose but to make you look the fool.
Usually when people devolve to the tactics you are now using it means that they cannot respond intelligently to the opposing position. Why else would you bother to intentionally distort it?
|
Spare me your bullshit. If this is how you respond to those you don't share your pristine POV with you can kiss my ass.
Al Gore misrepresents global warming IMO, deal with it. While on the subject of scientific credentials, provide his and yours. Until I'm floored by same I'll continue to post my opinions here, whether it fits into your cosy little world-view or not. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:17:52 [Permalink]
|
hondo said:
| Where Gore and those like him are wrong IMO, are their reliance on the belief that our current global warming is predicated specially on man-made emissions. |
Again, where do you get this garbage?
The position taken by Gore (a reflection of the scientific consensus) is that humans are contributing, significantly, to the current warming.
So much so that we will tip certain feedback mechanisms (permafrost melt, shallow sea methane deposits, etc) past a point of no return, if we continue polluting. The natural cycles of warming and cooling for the last several million years have not managed this, but we are jacking up the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gasses to levels not seen in our ability to look at the atmosphere of the past.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:21:44 [Permalink]
|
hondo said:
Spare me your bullshit. If this is how you respond to those you don't share your pristine POV with you can kiss my ass.
Al Gore misrepresents global warming IMO, deal with it. While on the subject of scientific credentials, provide his and yours. Until I'm floored by same I'll continue to post my opinions here, whether it fits into your cosy little world-view or not. |
So you admit you have no source and you are just making shit up. Thank you.
Al Gore's remarks and statements are a matter of public record. If he has EVER indicated that the current warming is entirely human caused, you should have no problem finding a source.
If you can produce such a source, a credible one, then you will have most members of this forum on your side in a legitimate criticism of such a ridiculous statement.
edited to add:
If I must provide you with scientific credentials in order to be credible, then you yourself must present yours for your criticisms to be accepted as well. So, lets have yours. I'll post mine just as soon as you do.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
| Edited by - Dude on 05/13/2007 22:24:52 |
|
|
|
Hondo
New Member
USA
25 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:23:24 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
hondo said:
| Where Gore and those like him are wrong IMO, are their reliance on the belief that our current global warming is predicated specially on man-made emissions. |
Again, where do you get this garbage?
The position taken by Gore (a reflection of the scientific consensus) is that humans are contributing, significantly, to the current warming.
So much so that we will tip certain feedback mechanisms (permafrost melt, shallow sea methane deposits, etc) past a point of no return, if we continue polluting. The natural cycles of warming and cooling for the last several million years have not managed this, but we are jacking up the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gasses to levels not seen in our ability to look at the atmosphere of the past.
|
"Garbage" is obviously relative here ace. Did you actually bother to read anything I posted? I ain't buying into his rap. It's fear-mongering. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:27:23 [Permalink]
|
Hondo said:
| "Garbage" is obviously relative here ace. Did you actually bother to read anything I posted? I ain't buying into his rap. It's fear-mongering. |
Rudy Guiliani saying that the US won't be safe with a democrat as president is fear-mongering.
Al Gore relaying the scientific consensus on global warming to people is not.
Now, do you have a source for your claim that Al Gore (or anyone else) has ever claimed that humans are the sole cause of the current warming? Yes or no. If yes, post it. If no, admit you are just making shit up and move on.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Hondo
New Member
USA
25 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:31:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
hondo said:
Spare me your bullshit. If this is how you respond to those you don't share your pristine POV with you can kiss my ass.
Al Gore misrepresents global warming IMO, deal with it. While on the subject of scientific credentials, provide his and yours. Until I'm floored by same I'll continue to post my opinions here, whether it fits into your cosy little world-view or not. |
So you admit you have no source and you are just making shit up. Thank you.
Al Gore's remarks and statements are a matter of public record. If he has EVER indicated that the current warming is entirely human caused, you should have no problem finding a source.
If you can produce such a source, a credible one, then you will have most members of this forum on your side in a legitimate criticism of such a ridiculous statement.
|
Do you always put words in people's mouths? Is this how "skeptics" here operate, or are you the gem? The public record of the words Al Gore says isn't the issue, what he implies is. You want to buy it fine, I'm not. He's a doom & gloomer and doesn't have the scientific background to foment fearmongering. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:46:39 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Hondo
It's cyclical and is based on the actions of the sun, a solar body we have yet to properly understand with regards to it's actions or effects on our planet. |
If we don't yet understand how the sun affects our planet, how is it you know that GW is caused by it?
| So why this time? Because it could? Maybe so, but my jury is still out. |
Why should anyone care about your jury? I'm being serious. If you aren't a climatologist, what possible value could your opinion have to anyone?
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Hondo
New Member
USA
25 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:47:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
Hondo said:
| "Garbage" is obviously relative here ace. Did you actually bother to read anything I posted? I ain't buying into his rap. It's fear-mongering. |
Rudy Guiliani saying that the US won't be safe with a democrat as president is fear-mongering.
Al Gore relaying the scientific consensus on global warming to people is not.
Now, do you have a source for your claim that Al Gore (or anyone else) has ever claimed that humans are the sole cause of the current warming? Yes or no. If yes, post it. If no, admit you are just making shit up and move on.
|
So you make the rules on what's considered fearmongering? I don't think so. I have a word of advice for you and anyone else here and y'all can take it or leave it. This scrum aside, I'm a skeptic. I hate woo woos, but here's the thing ... I won't take anyone's shit. I'm not about to start now. I've got banned from more illustrious boards than this, not because I wasn't loyal to the cause, but because I went off on people that don't respect me. Don't like my POV on Al Gore? .. too bad. It's based on my opinion, not a subpoena. If this is gonna be an issue then get used to being called an asshole. |
|
|
|
Hondo
New Member
USA
25 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 22:53:45 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Originally posted by Hondo
It's cyclical and is based on the actions of the sun, a solar body we have yet to properly understand with regards to it's actions or effects on our planet. |
If we don't yet understand how the sun affects our planet, how is it you know that GW is caused by it? |
I don't know that, but I don't discount that. Where's your skepticism?
| So why this time? Because it could? Maybe so, but my jury is still out.[quote]Why should anyone care about your jury? I'm being serious. If you aren't a climatologist, what possible value could your opinion have to anyone? |
So unless someone is a scientist or expert in some field their opinion is irrelevant? What's your excuse? |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
IS GLOBAL WARMING A SCAM TO TAX?
Topic Locked
