Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 26901 - 26920 of total 27277 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Feb 8, 2015 - 10:46am PT
And THANKS for all the shet you been doing for the local VETS. More than so many around the nation are doing for us. That means more to me than any of this other AGW save the world bullshet....
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Feb 8, 2015 - 10:46am PT
I've been thinking of the term skeptic as a label for those who disagree with the findings of the majority of climate scientists, and I think the term falls short of a proper classification for the group.

What is it with you and labeling people, huh?

DMT
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Feb 8, 2015 - 11:30am PT
What he said is not about labeling people, but for people to understand why they have come to the conclusions they have. He's a drawing a distinction between skeptic and denier.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Feb 8, 2015 - 11:40am PT
What he said is not about labeling people

Rubbish.

I've been thinking of the term skeptic as a label for those who disagree with the findings of the majority of climate scientists, and I think the term falls short of a proper classification for the group.

DMT
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Feb 8, 2015 - 02:37pm PT
He is making the point that there is at least a difference between the 2 labels. Those people are already labeled. I believe he is trying to get them to look more closely at why they believe what they do believe.

Why the hell are you attacking him over something so petty? I don't see it as trolling. It's an important distinction.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 8, 2015 - 02:44pm PT
Dingus, my post was in response to EdwardT saying that the lable "denier" was an insult to people. I am trying to point out that the label is correct in its usage, and that it is no more an insult than it is to say that I am a believer.

And what's this with your objection to labels? Do you call yourself a climber? What's your profession, is there a label for it? If not "denier," how do you propose we talk about the group of people who do not believe the findings of the IPCC? Should we always say "the people who do not believe the findings of the IPCC and other climate change scientists"? That is an awful big set of words that we can easily boil down to one word, don't you think?

Maybe you object because you don't want to be cast into a crowd that has the label "denier."

Upstream, you posted that you "remain a skeptic of the doomesaying, as I have from the start. Yall's ability to predict the future is as yet to be validated."

Here you are not directly denying that we are in trouble, but you soften your position by saying you don't believe we can predict the future. That is a fairly understandable argument. However, while there have been many whacky predictions (with some no doubt made to cause a stir), I think that your position does land you in the group I'll label as a denier. I say this because many of the predictions about our future have come true, and we are seeing the predictions about the effects of climate change become more accurate as time passes.
The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Feb 8, 2015 - 02:45pm PT
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA

Feb 8, 2015 - 11:30am PT
What he said is not about labeling people, but for people to understand why they have come to the conclusions they have.

What conclusion is that? If not putting a "Label" on those that they made a conclusion on.



Then, on your next post....


McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA

Feb 8, 2015 - 02:37pm PT
He is making the point that there is at least a difference between the 2 labels. Those people are already labeled.

Which one is it?? Either he is "LABELING" or he isn't?


And why are you all LABELING anyone in the first place?

Maybe you object because you don't want to be cast into a crowd that has the label "denier."


Unless you of course are attempting to single those that do not go along with your agenda as BAD, WRONG etc. Who gives any of you the right to do so?
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Feb 8, 2015 - 02:51pm PT
I kind of thought there might be some irony showing up....or was that another conversation I'm think of?
The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Feb 8, 2015 - 02:55pm PT
The only irony here MCH ^^^^^ is your not answering the question regarding who gave you or any of the others here the right to label anyone?

But then that is typical of ya'll. Deflect.... that is.
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Feb 8, 2015 - 03:01pm PT
That argument is deflecting the point that k-man was making. It's difficult in the context of this idiotic thread to talk about labeling without mentioning labeling. It is his thread after all. It's 5 minutes until that propaganda agency NASA launches the Al Gore satellite. Get yer popcorn!

Anyway, as near as I can tell Chief, you have turned somebody's argument that is about labeling into an argument about labeling.

And Dingus, I just read your 1st post on this thread. I think you are a denier in disguise. I came to that conclusion before finishing what k-man said that above! Great minds think alike!

McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Feb 8, 2015 - 03:49pm PT
Just for the fun of it I rewrote k-man's OP to make it more palpable for the other side here. I would like for one of the anti-AGW people here to take ownership of it;

The un-k-man wrote: " I read a funny quote: We're treating Mother Earth like Martha Stewart treats her bathroom.

Just wondering, are there any more climate change promoters out there? Or did they all die off from gagging on all the left-wing spin on the subject? "

EdwardT

Trad climber
Retired
Feb 8, 2015 - 04:03pm PT
Here's an interesting piece on a skeptics POV and how people respond to public skepticism.

If you're going to criticize it, please read the whole piece.

I posted the first part:

I've never supported the British National Party or the Ku Klux Klan. I've never belonged to the Paedophile Information Exchange, or denied the Holocaust, or made a penny from the banking crash.

But if you read The Guardian newspaper's website, you might think otherwise. A commentator on it urged my own children to murder me.

He did so because of one of the many stories I've written for this newspaper about climate change. I first reported on the subject nearly six years ago: my article was about the 'climategate' scandal, where leaked emails showed university scientists were trying to cover up data that suggested their claim the world is hotter than at any time in the past 1,300 years may be wrong.

Ever since then, I have been labelled a 'climate change denier' a phrase which, since I happen to be Jewish, has particularly unfortunate connotations for me.

And this is despite the fact I believe the world IS warming, and that carbon dioxide produced by mankind IS a greenhouse gas, and IS partly responsible for higher temperatures and have repeatedly said so.

On the other hand, I also think that the imminence of the threat posed by global warming has been exaggerated chiefly because the grimmer computer projections haven't been reflected by what's been happening recently to temperatures in the real world.

I do believe we should invest in new ways of generating energy, and I hate belching smoke stacks and vast open-cast coal mines as much as anyone who cares about the environment.

But I also think current 'renewable' sources such as wind and 'biomass' are ruinously expensive and totally futile. They will never be able to achieve their stated goal of slowing the rate of warming and are not worth the billions being paid by UK consumers to subsidise them.

Some would say this makes me a 'lukewarmer' the jargon for someone who is neither a 'warmist' or a 'denier'. But true believers don't recognise such distinctions: to them, anyone who disagrees with their version of the truth is a denier, pure and simple. The result: vitriol directed my way, the like of which I have never experienced in 34 years as a journalist. Lately, it's become worse.

The remark about my children killing me was made some months ago, after The Guardian published one of several critiques of my work by its climate activist blogger, Dana Nuccitelli. One of the online commenters posted: 'In a few years, self-defence is going to be made a valid defence for parricide [killing one's own father], so Rose's children will have this article to present in their defence at the trial.'

Another commenter compared me to Adolf Hitler. Frankly, I didn't take either of them too seriously. But last week on Twitter, someone else wrote that he knew where I lived, and posted my personal phone numbers.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2934540/What-happens-dare-doubt-Green-prophets-doom.html#ixzz3QUVEGppS
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Feb 8, 2015 - 04:14pm PT
Edward T; I'm sorry but that is not really that interesting. It's only interesting to an 'up and comer'. It's real squeezable and huggy though.
The Chief

climber
RFLMAO here on the Taco
Feb 8, 2015 - 04:16pm PT
WOW!!! Reads like something the old Bruce K, Malnuts or even Bobda would post here on this thread towards him if he was here posting.


I'm sorry but that is not really that interesting

Of course it isn't for you... would are on the side that slings the shet he speaks of.
EdwardT

Trad climber
Retired
Feb 8, 2015 - 04:18pm PT
Edward T; I'm sorry but that is not really that interesting. It's only interesting to an 'up and comer'

Therein lies the rub.
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Feb 8, 2015 - 04:18pm PT
I did edit the Charmin bit before your post showed. So, I'm doing OK chief?

Therein lies the rub.

You are pretty late to the game Ed. In what you posted above; It would be interesting to know WHY the writer began his climate-writing career with writing about Climate-Gate. He want's you to sympathize with him by pointing out people want to kill him. That's cute. I heard the Governor of Wisconsin recently gaining sympathy by broadcasting how people want to harm him and his family. That's all he has to offer.

Reads like something the old Bruce K, Malnuts or even Bobda

What reads like something you would write Chief?
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Feb 8, 2015 - 04:31pm PT
You are pretty late to the game Ed.

Well no, he's the sock puppet of a sock puppet. Been playing his same schtick a long time.

I'm sorry but that is not really that interesting.

But you're right, it's not interesting.
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Feb 8, 2015 - 04:33pm PT
I would like for somebody to take ownership of my modified OP address though! Rick?

The un-k-man wrote: " I read a funny quote: We're treating Mother Earth like Martha Stewart treats her bathroom.

Just wondering, are there any more climate change promoters out there? Or did they all die off from gagging on all the left-wing spin on the subject? "

Chiloe, do you know the family tree of that puppet? It could be handy for those that want to read the thread from beginning to end.
wilbeer

Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
Feb 8, 2015 - 05:01pm PT
"But I also think current 'renewable' sources such as wind and 'biomass' are ruinously expensive and totally futile. They will never be able to achieve their stated goal of slowing the rate of warming and are not worth the billions being paid by UK consumers to subsidise them."


So I suppose the FF'S are .


Today was the first time I let my "Alarmist" view see the light of day on this thread,go ahead look it up.

DMT threw me right in the evangelist crowd:)

That said ,DMT also told me to call someone out awhile back who downtrods renewables.

So this guy writing this op-ed is against renewables because they cost so much.



Let's compare what FF's price's have done in the last 40 years to the price's of Solar and Wind technology in that same time span.

Is there any Return on Investment by using FF's?

What about FF's extended cost?

It IS subsidized as well,probably more so than Renewables.

So is he saying he would rather pay FF subsides than Renewables.

Such a hard sell to anyone tied to FF's.[401's,stock ports,etc.]










Some of the reasons he would be labeled.















The Chief,Just want to tell you this.
Building mcmansions for a couple and their dog is one thing and I have plenty.

To build a HOME for a guy who had his leg blown off by an ied is something I cherish.Right down to the Handicap ramp and moving him in.

We even get materials donated and the crew of pros and laymen doing the work is unbelievable .

They should not be left in trailer parks and we have been doing something about that since Desert Storm and before.

And I think we are making good progress with their quality of life issues over here,they have a great community where these homes have been built.

Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Feb 8, 2015 - 07:16pm PT
I think renewables offer a lot of benefit for humanity, just not for climate change amelioration. It isn't just a question of money, its also a question of output.

Replace the fossil fuel, or watch it get burned.

Its that simple.

DMT

Messages 26901 - 26920 of total 27277 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews