I thought you guys were "winning"...?

NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
Doer said:
Gin, somehow you got mind fucked into thinking this is not what is going on. This is exactly how it works and it has come to nothing so far.
-------------
Make alternative fuel a competition with fame and fortune as the carrot. Make the prize enough that our brightest minds may see the risk is worth the reward.
-------------

There are litereal 10s of thousands of grants on this question. The auto industry is spending Billons of their own money on this.

More money does not mean more discoveries. You just have this wrong. It is popular superstition, that this is not the life work of over 1,000,000 people today, hard at it to get an alternative fuel to the market.
Click to expand...
This is an incredibly efficient way to spend development dollars. I am not sure the government should be doing it but compared with what they waste now this is a much better system.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
jahbrudda said:
I see you're now embarrassed to cite your source, is it because John Cook is a blogger and cartoon illustrator and not a scientist. :lol:
Click to expand...
I'm not afraid to cite it, John Cook 2004 is a peer reviewed study by 9 authors. It is an analysis of thousands of peer reviewed studies.

Why are you so convinced that all you have to do is point out that he only has a bachelor's in physics and not a PhD? Do you think that renders his arguments invalid? That's ad hominem.
 
earnest_voice

earnest_voice

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
14 fucking pages of this shit. I post link upon link of peer reviewed studies and position statements from major scientific foundations and I'll give credit to Jahbrudda and Heckler for trying to put forth something scientific but all of the rest of the responses are literally trollery to bury good arguments which took hours to type out which were never rebutted.

The fact that conservatives toe a line says it all. I even linked a trace of the funding for denial, yep, it comes from conservative groups.
Click to expand...
So it literally took you hours to copy and paste your responses?

abandonconflict said:
So what?

explicate the argument.
Click to expand...
I call you out for the unattributed copy and pastes and your response is "so what?" When you resort to plagiarism - you have no argument. It is that simple. When you consider the context of this discussion you're on par with Al Gore.
 
Ceepea

Ceepea

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Nobody controls how data is collected or analyzed, it's completely transparent, and peer reviewed papers are published listing data that proves ACC correct, this is not debatable.

The only people who don't accept ACC right now never will. You could show them hundreds and hundreds of pieces of data (as they've been shown) and nothing will convince them. This is not science. In science, you observe the data and then come up with a valuable conclusion, in politics, what the fabricated "debate" is about is the complete opposite. Energy corporations bribe whoever they can to spread propaganda about the importance of the issue while simultaneously admitting ACC is real. Exxon, for example, has measures in place to curb greenhouse emissions they emit, now why would they have such measures? All for show?

The people still debating the topic while all 34 national science academies unanimously agree ACC is real and is a significant threat to the planet and steps need to be taken accordingly by world governments are the same people still asking for the missing link, over 150 years after the theory of evolution was published. 150 years+... If we wait around 150 years to act, we won't be able to act. Therefore, science and the majority of the educated public have reached an agreement that these peoples voices and opinions are meaningless in science. The only people in opposition of transitioning to renewable, cleaner energy sources have a financial conflict of interest, are completely ignorant regarding the science, or are, sadly, blinded by political bias, like many of the members of this forum, specifically this section.

I have yet to find a single credible scientist who denies ACC. Please, if you know of one, list it, I'd be happy to verify the claim. On the flip side, nearly 98% of scientists, worldwide, who study the climate accept ACC.

98%...

I have a feeling if 98% of the doctors you visited to see if you had a brain tumor agreed, you should probably get it removed, you would not agree with the 2% who don't.

If you had a ham sandwich that was 98% shit, would you eat it?

If you had a date with a woman who was 98% male, would you fuck her?

The margin of error on something like that is larger than the goddamn dissent. It's sad and hilarious the general conservative opinion in regards to ACC is so behind the data/times.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how many independent scientists and organizations agree that ACC is undoubtedly happening, or how insanely weighted the scale is (with evidence) in favor of ACC.

These dumb asses are just going to plug their ears, and cover their eyes..... (I wish they'd cover their mouths too, but that's asking for too much) and spew their borderline retarded arguments.

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm

To those who still doubt co2 is even a greenhouse gas;

For a (brief and incomplete) historical look at how many papers have been published on greenhouse gasses and the research that's been done, simply scroll to the bottom of the link and view the published papers regarding greenhouse gasses.

Papers started being published in 1856.....
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Ceepea said:
It doesn't matter how many independent scientists and organizations agree that ACC is undoubtedly happening, or how insanely weighted the scale is (with evidence) in favor of ACC.

These dumb asses are just going to plug their ears, and cover their eyes..... (I wish they'd cover their mouths too, but that's asking for too much) and spew their borderline retarded arguments.

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm

To those who still doubt co2 is even a greenhouse gas;

For a (brief and incomplete) historical look at how many papers have been published on greenhouse gasses and the research that's been done, simply scroll to the bottom of the link and view the published papers regarding greenhouse gasses.
Click to expand...
Be careful, someone might call you crazy or a pederast or plagiarist. They certainly won't explicate your argument or god forbid, put forth an argument of their own and they definitely won't provide citations.
 
jahbrudda

jahbrudda

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
I'm not afraid to cite it, John Cook 2004 is a peer reviewed study by 9 authors. It is an analysis of thousands of peer reviewed studies.

Why are you so convinced that all you have to do is point out that he only has a bachelor's in physics and not a PhD? Do you think that renders his arguments invalid? That's ad hominem.
Click to expand...
Dude,be honest, he's a cartoonist and blogger, that is it.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
400K+ in NYC over the weekend





"The People's Climate March (PCM) was a large-scale activist event to advocate global action against climate change, which took place on Sunday, September 21, 2014, in New York City. With over 400,000 participants, it was the largest climate march in history."

LOL!
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
I don't care if he is a five year old retard, the argument is valid.
Click to expand...
"
Galileo Galilei (Italian pronunciation: [ɡaliˈlɛːo ɡaliˈlɛi]; 15 February 1564[3] – 8 January 1642), often known mononymously as Galileo, was an Italian physicist, mathematician, engineer, astronomer, and philosopher who played a major role in the scientific revolution. His achievements include improvements to the telescope and consequent astronomical observations and support for Copernicanism. Galileo has been called the "father of modernobservational astronomy",[4] the "father of modern physics",[5][6] the "father of science",[6][7] and "the Father of Modern Science".[8]

His contributions to observational astronomy include the telescopic confirmation of the phases of Venus, the discovery of the four largest satellites of Jupiter (named the Galilean moons in his honour), and the observation and analysis of sunspots. Galileo also worked in applied science and technology, inventing an improved military compass and other instruments.

Galileo's championing of heliocentrism was controversial within his lifetime, a time when most subscribed to either geocentrism or the Tychonic system.[9] He met with opposition from astronomers, who doubted heliocentrism due to the absence of an observed stellar parallax.[9] The matter was investigated by the Roman Inquisition in 1615, which concluded that heliocentrism was false and contrary to scripture, placing works advocating the Copernican system on the index of banned books and forbidding Galileo from advocating heliocentrism.[9][10] Galileo later defended his views in Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, which appeared to attack Pope Urban VIII, thus alienating not only the Pope but also the Jesuits, both of whom had supported Galileo up until this point.[9] He was tried by the Holy Office, then found "vehemently suspect of heresy", was forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.[11][12] It was while Galileo was under house arrest that he wrote one of his finest works, Two New Sciences, in which he summarised the work he had done some forty years earlier, on the two sciences now called kinematics and strength of materials.[13][14]"


I can find plenty more evidence of scientists who went against the common wisdom who were jailed, even killed because they did not agree with the consensus.
 
Harrekin

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
Unfuckingbelievable some of you people.

Goreging on cock, give him your dollars!

Buy carbon credits!

Windmills!

Faery-fart generators.
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
The reason the energy alternatives are "half assed" is because of the conservative right. They feel such measures undermine their efforts, as their politicians tell them.

Had it not been for the conservative right, such measures wouldn't be "half assed".

Blame them.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the conservative gods control physics. Do you have any idea how stupid you sound.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top