Climate Change

[ceeboo]

For the record. I know a lot of people that were unable to get the same education I got. I love them.

Love you back and thanks for having the courage to go on the record and stand up for all of us uneducated folks.

[Gunnar]

Carl Sagan Predicted The Mess 2021 Would Be 25 years Ago

This quote from Sagan's The Demon-haunted World in that clip nails it - and not just for America:

I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness...

The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance.

Didn't Trump say 'I love the poorly educated'?

It has been a long time since I read The Demon Haunted World. That is a great book. It is time I read it again.

Trump may well have said "I love the poorly educated", but that is an obvious lie. What he loves is that they are poorly educated. That is the main reason they fell for his bovine excrement. I'm sure that you love the poorly educated far more than Trump did or ever will, but that you hate the idea that they are poorly educated enough to be so easily deluded by him.

[Gunnar]

Carl Sagan Predicted The Mess 2021 Would Be 25 years Ago

This quote from Sagan's The Demon-haunted World in that clip nails it - and not just for America:

I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness...

The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance.

Didn't Trump say 'I love the poorly educated'?

It has been a long time since I read The Demon Haunted World. That is a great book. It is time I read it again.

Trump may well have said "I love the poorly educated", but that is an obvious lie. What he loves is that they are poorly educated. That is the main reason they fell for his bovine excrement. I'm sure that you love the poorly educated far more than Trump did or ever will, but that you hate the idea that they are poorly educated enough to be so easily deluded by him.

[ceeboo]

Like most conversations that are labeled with "Climate Change," this was never about the actual climate or change or climate change, this was only about a particular ideology.

Your spot on observations seem to be extremely dialed in recently.

Impressive!

[Gunnar]

Like most conversations that are labeled with "Climate Change," this was never about the actual climate or change or climate change, this was only about a particular ideology.

Your spot on observations seem to be extremely dialed in recently.

Impressive!

Ceeboo, if you think that at least 97% of all the world's scientists, including nearly 100% of the climatologists are wrong about the danger and extent of man-caused climate change, how would you answer the questions and the evidence I posed in this post: viewtopic.php?p=2742172#p2742172, let alone the abundant and compelling evidence already presented numerous times by others on this forum? Do you have any compelling counter evidence that proves all these scientists (including the very scientists employed by Exxon itself) are all wrong, incompetent and/or dishonest?

Particularly this question:

On the other hand, who would benefit from lying about mankind's activities adversely affecting our climate and environment if it were not true? The answer is glaringly obvious, isn't it? The fossil fuel industry has an enormous vested interest in selling as much as they can of fossil fuels, and suppressing any bad news about what our reliance on fossil fuels is doing to us and costing us. They simply don't care what happens to future generations as long as they can keep their gravy train going for what remains of their lives.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Like most conversations that are labeled with "Climate Change," this was never about the actual climate or change or climate change, this was only about a particular ideology.

Your spot on observations seem to be extremely dialed in recently.

Impressive!

-_-

[ceeboo]

Howdy Gunnar

Your spot on observations seem to be extremely dialed in recently.

Impressive!

Ceeboo, if you think that at least 97% of all the world's scientists, including nearly 100% of the climatologists are wrong about the danger and extent of man-caused climate change..............

Your questions to me lends additional support (and obvious support) to the posts that I have made in this thread. All of them.

Having said that, I think it might be beneficial for you to consider why you would ask me that question. Your answer might be very telling (It also might shock you.)

[canpakes]

Having said that, I think it might be beneficial for you to consider why you would ask me that question. Your answer might be very telling (It also might shock you.)

Good thing to consider. It reminds me of something.

What claims or topics do you consider as extreme or unnecessary within the climate change debate?

[Gadianton]

when every challenging and complex topic is brought to the table (gun control, border, abortion, heath care, immigration, climate change, taxes, etc.) When one of these kinds of topics are brought to the table, it is extremely rare and exceedingly difficult for any of us to take off our political masks/armor and actually discuss what is before us.

One of these things is not like the others. Climate change is a scientific fact inasmuch as we are in possession of scientific facts. your other issues: immigration, abortion, gun control; these aren't scientific matters. Science gets pulled into these discussions, but there is far more room for perspective and subjectivity. There is nothing science can say if, at the end of the day, society values unrestricted gun proliferation and is fine with the externalities.

Climate change is more like vaccine efficacy. Science can tell us if the climate is changing and if the vaccines work. Science can't tell us if healthcare is a right. There is an economic dimension to immigration, but that doesn't necessarily determine whether we seal our borders or not. In contrast, our values have nothing to do with weather the vaccine is effective or if the climate is changing.

Nevertheless, one might yet argue that climate scientists themselves are so thoroughly politicized that their work isn't trustworthy. For instance, I believe -- although I'm not certain -- that WWII historians say that Nazi Germany's prejudice against Jewish scientists significantly hindered their nuclear program. I also understand that China had/has an entire buffer layer responsible for vetting scientific discoveries based on possible metaphorical interpretations of science that aren't friendly to Communism.

Given the highly distributed, international effort behind climate study, superficial prejudices and state interference doesn't seem incredibly likely. It is still possible. Could also be some kind of epic international group-think; but you can't just assume that's the case, you need to point to evidence for it. Cultellus' inability to register an old truck doesn't prove climate science is a sham. Neither is A-Mike's example of Sally Struthers infomercials from the 80s evidence against Climate Change.

[Gunnar]

Howdy Gunnar

Ceeboo, if you think that at least 97% of all the world's scientists, including nearly 100% of the climatologists are wrong about the danger and extent of man-caused climate change..............

Your questions to me lends additional support (and obvious support) to the posts that I have made in this thread. All of them.

Having said that, I think it might be beneficial for you to consider why you would ask me that question. Your answer might be very telling (It also might shock you.)

Well, if you don't think that all the scientists trying to warn us about the peril posed by climate change are lying or incompetent, that is encouraging to know. Would you agree then that we do indeed need to take urgent action to ameliorate or slow the climate change and ween us off our dependence on fossil fuels and accelerate the development of greener, more sustainable and less polluting technologies and energy sources? If not, why not?