Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Filthy Fernadez

Late June in Colorado..........snowing.

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Kanil said:

Global Warming is the cause, Climate Change is the effect.  The global rise in average temperature (Global Warming) causes a change in the weather patterns and leads to more severe weather events (Climate Change).

As for scientific consensus:

  • Are you vaccinated?
  • Do you go to an actual doctor with a degree instead of some witch in a hut?
  • Do you drive a car?
  • You obviously use a computer.
  • Do you believe in man made global warming?
  • Do you wear your seatbelt?
  • Is the Earth round?
  • Do you believe in gravitational theory?
  • Do you believe smoking raises your risk of cancer?

All of these items are brought to you because of science.  If you believe in 8 out of 9, you are being selective.  If you honestly think every focking scientist that says man made global warming exists and is dangerous is on some imaginary payroll, you're a focking idiot.

The difference between what you listed above and climate change is that those listed above were either created by man or observed using the scientific method.  Most of the predictions from the climate change scientists are based upon computer modeling, and their computer modeling has consistently been WRONG.  Not to mention the numerous scandals that have come out of that community.  If the science is so settled how come the scientists can't accurately predict climate change? 

Look, no one doubts climate change and global warming.  The question is how much is man made.  There are a lot of other factors that contribute and the question is how much is just natural progression as the earth has done time and time again, how much is attributable to other factors, and how much is man made.  The problem is the politicization of the issue to the point that it's hard to trust anyone on the subject.  And, given that, I'm not willing to destroy our economy to "fix" something I"m not even sure we can fix or are responsible for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Strike said:

The difference between what you listed above and climate change is that those listed above were either created by man or observed using the scientific method.  Most of the predictions from the climate change scientists are based upon computer modeling, and their computer modeling has consistently been WRONG.  Not to mention the numerous scandals that have come out of that community.  If the science is so settled how come the scientists can't accurately predict climate change? 

Look, no one doubts climate change and global warming.  The question is how much is man made.  There are a lot of other factors that contribute and the question is how much is just natural progression as the earth has done time and time again, how much is attributable to other factors, and how much is man made.  The problem is the politicization of the issue to the point that it's hard to trust anyone on the subject.  And, given that, I'm not willing to destroy our economy to "fix" something I"m not even sure we can fix or are responsible for.

My biggest problem with GW is the cult like behavior the "believers" have taken on. It's the same behavior that get people to drink the cool aid so they can ascend to the great spaceship in the sky. These people think the world will end in 10-12 years and are getting more aggressive in their behavior.  Elites and nations have learned they can use the GW scare to divert billions of dollars. A look at the Paris accord shows you just how much money was being redirected.

People who say the science is settled don't know what they are talking about or liars at worse. Science is never settled

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kanil said:

Global Warming is the cause, Climate Change is the effect.  The global rise in average temperature (Global Warming) causes a change in the weather patterns and leads to more severe weather events (Climate Change).

As for scientific consensus:

  • Are you vaccinated?
  • Do you go to an actual doctor with a degree instead of some witch in a hut?
  • Do you drive a car?
  • You obviously use a computer.
  • Do you believe in man made global warming?
  • Do you wear your seatbelt?
  • Is the Earth round?
  • Do you believe in gravitational theory?
  • Do you believe smoking raises your risk of cancer?

All of these items are brought to you because of science.  If you believe in 8 out of 9, you are being selective.  If you honestly think every focking scientist that says man made global warming exists and is dangerous is on some imaginary payroll, you're a focking idiot.

Are you a scientist or engineer?  I am.  I've said it recently and often:  until the cult (and it is a cult) of global climate warming change embraces nuclear energy, please kindly STFU while Al Gore drives his Suburban to his private jet to fly to Davos and get into an Escalade to figure out how to make more money out of this.  Solar and wind energy are unicorns which don't scratch the surface of our electricity needs and there is no technical foreseeable path to change that, yet the human hater cult keeps pushing them.  Why is that?  I think you know.  If not let me know.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jerryskids said:

Are you a scientist or engineer?  I am.  I've said it recently and often:  until the cult (and it is a cult) of global climate warming change embraces nuclear energy, please kindly STFU while Al Gore drives his Suburban to his private jet to fly to Davos and get into an Escalade to figure out how to make more money out of this.  Solar and wind energy are unicorns which don't scratch the surface of our electricity needs and there is no technical foreseeable path to change that, yet the human hater cult keeps pushing them.  Why is that?  I think you know.  If not let me know.

#climatechangebeatdown

Good work, jerry!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jerryskids said:

Are you a scientist or engineer?  I am.  I've said it recently and often:  until the cult (and it is a cult) of global climate warming change embraces nuclear energy, please kindly STFU while Al Gore drives his Suburban to his private jet to fly to Davos and get into an Escalade to figure out how to make more money out of this.  Solar and wind energy are unicorns which don't scratch the surface of our electricity needs and there is no technical foreseeable path to change that, yet the human hater cult keeps pushing them.  Why is that?  I think you know.  If not let me know.

I'm 100% with you on nuclear. It's the easiest way out of this mess. Too bad the masses are afraid of the word nuclear.  Just another example of scientific illiteracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Kanil said:

I'm 100% with you on nuclear. It's the easiest way out of this mess. Too bad the masses are afraid of the word nuclear.  Just another example of scientific illiteracy.

Why aren't the climate change scientists beating this drum?  If their message was "We need to get rid of carbon and nuclear is our best option" maybe others would listen to them.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lake are high. The rivers are swift. I could have skipped buying a fishing license in Fort Worth. That is for sure. 😐

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Strike said:

Why aren't the climate change scientists beating this drum?  If their message was "We need to get rid of carbon and nuclear is our best option" maybe others would listen to them.......

Because their money is in wind and solar, they do not consider hydroelectric power to be green either. This has nothing to do with climate change it is about taking your money legally. No one has every explained to me why global warming is bad and unnatural.

 

Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

- Michael Crichton

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Kanil said:

Global Warming is the cause, Climate Change is the effect.  The global rise in average temperature (Global Warming) causes a change in the weather patterns and leads to more severe weather events (Climate Change).

As for scientific consensus:

  • Are you vaccinated?
  • Do you go to an actual doctor with a degree instead of some witch in a hut?
  • Do you drive a car?
  • You obviously use a computer.
  • Do you believe in man made global warming?
  • Do you wear your seatbelt?
  • Is the Earth round?
  • Do you believe in gravitational theory?
  • Do you believe smoking raises your risk of cancer?

All of these items are brought to you because of science.  If you believe in 8 out of 9, you are being selective.  If you honestly think every focking scientist that says man made global warming exists and is dangerous is on some imaginary payroll, you're a focking idiot.

Science doesn’t have the answers. It guesses, tests, and guesses again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Baker Boy said:

Science doesn’t have the answers. It guesses, tests, and guesses again.

 

Are you saying don't trust the answers that science has given us?  You don't think vaccines (or anything else on my list) are an answer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Strike said:

Why aren't the climate change scientists beating this drum?  If their message was "We need to get rid of carbon and nuclear is our best option" maybe others would listen to them.......

They are but the loud extremists don't repeat it because they're scared of nuclear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Kanil said:

They are but the loud extremists don't repeat it because they're scared of nuclear.

Links?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Kanil said:

Are you saying don't trust the answers that science has given us?  You don't think vaccines (or anything else on my list) are an answer?

Climate change science is different.  Much of it is based upon computer modeling which has been shown to be inaccurate in this case.  Until the climate change scientists can reliably predict something, anything with regard to climate change it's gonna be hard to trust them.  Their approach seems more religious than scientific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Strike said:

Links?

I guess I can only provide the names of the people I really follow (and are active on social media) but people like Dan Broadbent and Yvette d'Entremonte are the first that come to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Strike said:

Climate change science is different.  Much of it is based upon computer modeling which has been shown to be inaccurate in this case.  Until the climate change scientists can reliably predict something, anything with regard to climate change it's gonna be hard to trust them.  Their approach seems more religious than scientific.

I agree that it isn't AS settled as some of the other things I listed but when the vast majority of the science points in one direction, it really should not be ignored.  They may not be hitting the bullseye currently but they're definitely scoring points and getting closer to center each day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Kanil said:

I guess I can only provide the names of the people I really follow (and are active on social media) but people like Dan Broadbent and Yvette d'Entremonte are the first that come to mind.

If you follow those people you should be able to provide links where they are beating the drum for nuclear. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Kanil said:

I agree that it isn't AS settled as some of the other things I listed but when the vast majority of the science points in one direction, it really should not be ignored.  They may not be hitting the bullseye currently but they're definitely scoring points and getting closer to center each day.

I'm not seeing this.   And the problem is, the issue is so politicized at this point I don't know that either one of us would see it even if it did happen.  And that's on the climate change scientists.  They're the one's who've been caught in numerous scandals and lies on this issue.  Those of us who are skeptical just want some form of reliable proof/evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Strike said:

If you follow those people you should be able to provide links where they are beating the drum for nuclear. 

I'll have to dig them out.  I can't see most social media from my work computer so I'll have to search on my phone and then forward links.  I'll try to do it this afternoon but no promises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kanil said:

Are you saying don't trust the answers that science has given us?  You don't think vaccines (or anything else on my list) are an answer?

The things you listed are proven scientific facts, MMGW and it’s effects on the planet are theories base on models set up by scientists who were paid large sums of money to prove a predetermined outcome. 

Science is wrong more than it’s right. In the 70s they were preaching the next ice age. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Kanil said:

I'm 100% with you on nuclear. It's the easiest way out of this mess. Too bad the masses are afraid of the word nuclear.  Just another example of scientific illiteracy.

The masses are afraid of the word nuclear?  Aren't the masses also afraid of our planet turning into a fireball in the next 20 years?  That seems worse, JMO.  We've created a multi-billion dollar industry around global climate change, and lots of people have built their careers around combating it, so those people can't let it be solved by an obvious solution like nuclear, because if it is solved, they are out of a job.  So those experts will continue to push unicorn solutions like wind and solar, and keep the masses at Defcon 1 about the imminent demise of our planet so that they can continue to get funded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

The masses are afraid of the word nuclear?  Aren't the masses also afraid of our planet turning into a fireball in the next 20 years?  That seems worse, JMO.  We've created a multi-billion dollar industry around global climate change, and lots of people have built their careers around combating it, so those people can't let it be solved by an obvious solution like nuclear, because if it is solved, they are out of a job.  So those experts will continue to push unicorn solutions like wind and solar, and keep the masses at Defcon 1 about the imminent demise of our planet so that they can continue to get funded.

They can do this because it's not a real problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

They can do this because it's not a real problem.

Well... maybe it is, even if scientists modify the data to make it seem worse.  Let's presume it is a real problem.  If humans are causing it, I've already addressed the first point that nuclear is the solution, but climate alarmists won't embrace it.  The second point, which I've also commented on here, is that as near as I can tell there is insufficient research on how to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere.  Not EMISSIONS, but CO2 levels.  Because that wouldn't meet the cult requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Well... maybe it is, even if scientists modify the data to make it seem worse.  Let's presume it is a real problem.  If humans are causing it, I've already addressed the first point that nuclear is the solution, but climate alarmists won't embrace it.  The second point, which I've also commented on here, is that as near as I can tell there is insufficient research on how to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere.  Not EMISSIONS, but CO2 levels.  Because that wouldn't meet the cult requirements.

If GW is a real problem and the Earth is in danger. Solar/wind isn't a real solution while nuclear is. Than we would be building the fock out of nuclear power plants.

If GW isn't a real problem and the Earth isn't in danger. Solar/wind can be pushed and wealth distribution can be forced in the name of climate change.

It's one of these two.

In other words if your house is on fire you don't try to put it out with bucket of water when you have a fire truck standing by. #hoax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

The masses are afraid of the word nuclear?  Aren't the masses also afraid of our planet turning into a fireball in the next 20 years?  That seems worse, JMO.  We've created a multi-billion dollar industry around global climate change, and lots of people have built their careers around combating it, so those people can't let it be solved by an obvious solution like nuclear, because if it is solved, they are out of a job.  So those experts will continue to push unicorn solutions like wind and solar, and keep the masses at Defcon 1 about the imminent demise of our planet so that they can continue to get funded.

The masses are the scientifically illiterate people that comprise 90% of today's society.  They hear the word Nuclear and connect it with bombs and Chernobyl.  You're clearly more cynical that I am about the scientists and seem to think that they're on the take.  I have a hard time believing that a significant percentage of them are willing to throw away their children (or grandchildren, great grandchildren, whatever) just to keep some extra dollars in their pockets now.

There's been a huge push against global warming for decades now and those that are "skeptical" about the scientist buy in to the conspiracy theory without any skepticism.  Our senators and congressmen have been paid for decades to fight against the science and with their reach and the size of their audiences it's taken hold.

There would have to be a vast conspiracy involving such a huge proportion of scientists that it's just not feasible.  Those of you that think there's this giant conspiracy theory have clearly never managed a project of any size before.  There's no way it wouldn't have come out by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

If GW is a real problem and the Earth is in danger. Solar/wind isn't a real solution while nuclear is. Than we would be building the fock out of nuclear power plants.

Yeah, we would.  Except we have dummies arguing that it's not a problem.  And their being fooled by the people who are making the real money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Kanil said:

The masses are the scientifically illiterate people that comprise 90% of today's society.  They hear the word Nuclear and connect it with bombs and Chernobyl.  You're clearly more cynical that I am about the scientists and seem to think that they're on the take.  I have a hard time believing that a significant percentage of them are willing to throw away their children (or grandchildren, great grandchildren, whatever) just to keep some extra dollars in their pockets now.

If there isn't actually a problem they're not throwing anything away; they're just enriching themselves.  If anything they're making life easier for their children/grandchildren.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Kanil said:

The masses are the scientifically illiterate people that comprise 90% of today's society.  They hear the word Nuclear and connect it with bombs and Chernobyl.  You're clearly more cynical that I am about the scientists and seem to think that they're on the take.  I have a hard time believing that a significant percentage of them are willing to throw away their children (or grandchildren, great grandchildren, whatever) just to keep some extra dollars in their pockets now.

There's been a huge push against global warming for decades now and those that are "skeptical" about the scientist buy in to the conspiracy theory without any skepticism.  Our senators and congressmen have been paid for decades to fight against the science and with their reach and the size of their audiences it's taken hold.

There would have to be a vast conspiracy involving such a huge proportion of scientists that it's just not feasible.  Those of you that think there's this giant conspiracy theory have clearly never managed a project of any size before.  There's no way it wouldn't have come out by now.

I tend to not believe in large conspiracy theories for the reasons you mentioned.  I don't think it is an overt conspiracy.  "On the take" is a bit strong.  I'd just like to see more effort into solving the actual problem vs. browbeating us humans as to why we suck.  :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Strike said:

If there isn't actually a problem they're not throwing anything away; they're just enriching themselves.  If anything they're making life easier for their children/grandchildren.

So you think all of these scientists are doing it just to get paid?  If not all, what % do you believe are doing so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

We have recorded 200+ years of 5+ billion. Perhaps we should abstain from bringing temperatures, storm systems, etc into this discussion.

 

We also have about the same amount of time with gravitational theory.  Is that in question?  We have a lot less time with vaccinations, do you doubt that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kanil said:

So you think all of these scientists are doing it just to get paid?  If not all, what % do you believe are doing so?

I have no idea.  I do know that nowhere near 98% believe MMGW is the end all be all causing this issue as the climate change movement would have us believe.  I also know that many of the scientists at the forefront of that movement have a "the ends justify the means" attitude towards the issue.  My gut is that many of them feel it is an issue, know they don't have the scientific evidence to prove it but don't think we can wait until they do to start combating it, and as a result they doctor things to help their cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I tend to not believe in large conspiracy theories for the reasons you mentioned.  I don't think it is an overt conspiracy.  "On the take" is a bit strong.  I'd just like to see more effort into solving the actual problem vs. browbeating us humans as to why we suck.  :thumbsup:

This is where the narrative should be.  The discussion should be, "how do we fix it" not, "does it exist".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Strike said:

I have no idea.  I do know that nowhere near 98% believe MMGW is the end all be all causing this issue as the climate change movement would have us believe.  I also know that many of the scientists at the forefront of that movement have a "the ends justify the means" attitude towards the issue.  My gut is that many of them feel it is an issue, know they don't have the scientific evidence to prove it but don't think we can wait until they do to start combating it, and as a result they doctor things to help their cause.

I agree on the point of the outliers saying sh1t like 12 years are no where near correct.

When you say "many" what % are you estimating there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kanil said:

We also have about the same amount of time with gravitational theory.  Is that in question?  We have a lot less time with vaccinations, do you doubt that?

Vaccines run through years of trials involving hundreds if not thousands of tests. Comparing that to studying the climate is laughable.

Also, you mention gravitational theory. Man's affect on climate change is just that; a theory. Unprovable definitively either way.

You choose to believe the scientists without question and I choose to view it with a great deal of speculation. They've falsified data, continue to burn untold amounts of fossil fuels to beat their wardrum against fossil fuels, want the U.S. to shut down capitalism while letting China and India go on unchecked.

Climate change hysteria is a cult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kanil said:

I agree on the point of the outliers saying sh1t like 12 years are no where near correct.

When you say "many" what % are you estimating there?

I have no idea and I'm not going to pull stats out of my a$$.  I'm still waiting on you to show me some proof of any climate change scientists who are shouting from the rooftops for Nuclear energy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Kanil said:

I agree on the point of the outliers saying sh1t like 12 years are no where near correct.

When you say "many" what % are you estimating there?

I want to clarify something also.  You're referencing a quote by AOC in response to my post.  When I say "many of them feel it is an issue" I'm talking about the climate change scientists, not some idiot like AOC.  I guaranfockingtee you AOC hasn't done more than 5 minutes worth of research in to the actual science of climate change.  She's just hitching herself to a popular cause.  I'm talking about many actual scientists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Vaccines run through years of trials involving hundreds if not thousands of tests. Comparing that to studying the climate is laughable.

Also, you mention gravitational theory. Man's affect on climate change is just that; a theory. Unprovable definitively either way.

You choose to believe the scientists without question and I choose to view it with a great deal of speculation. They've falsified data, continue to burn untold amounts of fossil fuels to beat their wardrum against fossil fuels, want the U.S. to shut down capitalism while letting China and India go on unchecked.

Climate change hysteria is a cult.

Doing a quick search on pubmed yields the following results:

  • "Vaccine Safety" - 1998
  • "Global Warming" - 8257

 

You don't understand scientific theory if you say "it's just a theory".  Gravitational theory is just a theory but would you jump off the Golden Gate Bridge because it's "just a theory"?  That's a ridiculous argument and you should stop making it.

 

I agree that you choose to distrust the science while I trust it.  I agree that this is a global issue and not a US issue.  It's not "US Warming".  That doesn't mean we ignore it.

 

I agree that there are those on both sides that are idiots about it.  The people who say we have 5 minutes to live are just as bad as those who say it doesn't exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Strike said:

I want to clarify something also.  You're referencing a quote by AOC in response to my post.  When I say "many of them feel it is an issue" I'm talking about the climate change scientists, not some idiot like AOC.  I guaranfockingtee you AOC hasn't done more than 5 minutes worth of research in to the actual science of climate change.  She's just hitching herself to a popular cause.  I'm talking about many actual scientists.

I guess I'm assuming that AOC read some fearmongering article that said 12 years (which was probably misrepresenting an actual study).  Those that say "12 YEARS" or similar are the folks I'm calling fringe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Strike said:

I have no idea and I'm not going to pull stats out of my a$$.  I'm still waiting on you to show me some proof of any climate change scientists who are shouting from the rooftops for Nuclear energy. 

Took me forever to get these from my phone to computer but here's some posts from the two people I mentioned:

https://www.facebook.com/scibabe/posts/1428087553994682

https://www.facebook.com/scibabe/posts/692953457508099

https://www.facebook.com/scibabe/posts/1422617331208371

https://www.facebook.com/therealcrediblehulk/posts/2136900406341266

https://www.facebook.com/therealcrediblehulk/posts/1823988984299078

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Kanil said:

Thanks for the links.  However, it's really hard for me to look at 5 facebook posts and consider that scientists beating the drum.  I'd be a lot more impressed with a link to congressional testimony touting nuclear energy or peer reviewed papers in major journals, etc.....I did like the article from Forbes though.  Assuming dudes facts are accurate those are the facts that should be pushed hard at the people making decisions re: climate change mitigation strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×