wiffleball 4,649 Posted January 20, 2017 Just now started hearing this word: Turns out, mouf-breavers used to be "Climate Change Deniers". Now, they're "Climate Change Denialists". - What? Like it's a skill set now? "I'm a radiologist, what about you?" "Oh, I'm a denialist!" I'd say something like "It's not even a word!" But, MW, in it's futile quest not to be entirely irrelevant, immediately adds stupid shiit like this as soon as it's uttered. They're the same people who now see "LOL" and "AXE" as legitimate words. , Note: When you hear about some guy going all 'Charlie Hebdo" on Merriam Webster, that'll be the day that they somehow recognize the poop emoji. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,325 Posted January 20, 2017 Is this some kind of code? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SUXBNME 1,343 Posted January 20, 2017 Same thing as the term Barista, right? YOU SERVE COFFEE. YOU'RE NOT SPECIAL Also, I love how it's morphed from MMGW to GW to CC. Stoopid greenies 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fandandy 3,311 Posted January 20, 2017 I think lexicon is already a word, dude. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,716 Posted January 20, 2017 It's not a question if the climate is changing. It is (like always). The question is what's causing it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GobbleDog 822 Posted January 20, 2017 I changed my paradigm and synergized in the 90's. Um, why does "synergized" have red squiggly lines under it when typed? Lexicon my ass. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SUXBNME 1,343 Posted January 20, 2017 It's not a question if the climate is changing. It is (like always). The question is what's causing it? Hence, my earlier post. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penultimatestraw 473 Posted January 20, 2017 It's not a question if the climate is changing. It is (like always). The question is what's causing it?that ain't the question. Its agreed upon that man is making an impact. The questions are: How much? What can we do about it? Is it worthwhile to alter our behavior to lessen our impact? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 20, 2017 Three questions to the Climatologists here: 1. How old is the Earth? (approx 4.5 billion years old) 2. How long have we been accurately tracking the weather patterns and global temps? (maybe 200 years MAX) 3. What percentage of #1 is #2? (less than 1%) Pretty clear we don't know with any degree of certainty that people are the cause of climate change. Should we treat the world irresponsibly? No, of course not. Should we continue to investigate our impact? Sure albeit with a much CALMER attitude. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brad GLuckman 518 Posted January 20, 2017 Three questions to the Climatologists here: 1. How old is the Earth? (approx 4.5 billion years old) 2. How long have we been accurately tracking the weather patterns and global temps? (maybe 200 years MAX) 3. What percentage of #1 is #2? (less than 1%) Pretty clear we don't know with any degree of certainty that people are the cause of climate change. Should we treat the world irresponsibly? No, of course not. Should we continue to investigate our impact? Sure albeit with a much CALMER attitude. We can all try to play scientist here, but in reality we have no idea what we are talking about. I'll defer to the 97% of climate scientists who agree climate change is man made. And there are ways of collecting climate info from long ago, by looking below ice sheets in Antarctica Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 20, 2017 We can all try to play scientist here, but in reality we have no idea what we are talking about. I'll defer to the 97% of climate scientists who agree climate change is man made. And there are ways of collecting climate info from long ago, by looking below ice sheets in Antarctica http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425232/climate-change-no-its-not-97-percent-consensus-ian-tuttle http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/05/26/wsj-the-myth-of-the-climate-change-97-what-is-the-origin-of-the-false-belief-that-almost-all-scientists-agree-about-global-warming/ That's disingenuous to say the least and really just a talking point for those that have a vested interest in keeping their funding going. As far as looking below ice sheets in Antarctica, again it's their bread and butter so do I trust their motives are pure? Hardly. 97% of all stats are made up on the spot btw. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted January 20, 2017 Three questions to the Climatologists here: 1. How old is the Earth? (approx 4.5 billion years old) 2. How long have we been accurately tracking the weather patterns and global temps? (maybe 200 years MAX) 3. What percentage of #1 is #2? (less than 1%) Pretty clear we don't know with any degree of certainty that people are the cause of climate change. Should we treat the world irresponsibly? No, of course not. Should we continue to investigate our impact? Sure albeit with a much CALMER attitude. Actually...we do know with quite a bit of certainty that we have an effect. To what extent is the only question. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cyclone24 1,814 Posted January 20, 2017 Ooooh....youre an anti denial-lite. I am not an anti denial-lite!! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 20, 2017 Actually...we do know with quite a bit of certainty that we have an effect. To what extent is the only question. Even on cloudy days my shadow is always here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 20, 2017 Pretty clear we don't know with any degree of certainty that people are the cause of climate change. Actually...we do know with quite a bit of certainty that we have an effect. To what extent is the only question. Yep........thanks for verifying what I said. We don't know with any degree of certainty that people are the cause climate change (i.e. the whole change). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RLLD 3,455 Posted January 20, 2017 Is it that they deny climate change, or that they deny humans have any impact on it? The distinction is important I think. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites