I was born a poor, white child...

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
Take it up with the guy who wrote the editorial.

3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816406286 208998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844609550582231725359408128481 11745028410270193852110555964
Mmmmmm pie....
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
I'm surprised you know that since you think CO2 emissions are a symptom of global warming.
Again, if you wanna keep spouting what is an obvious lie work away.

But I actually said emissions were symptomatic of our dependence on carbon based fuels, even my predictive text was able to write that as soon as I wrote the word "dependence".
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
why do you feel the need to make things up?
Repeating something I heard is not " make things up", dumbass. You might contest the accuracy of the statement, but claiming I made it up is dishonest. Tho, that is what you are...,dishonest.
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Again, if you wanna keep spouting what is an obvious lie work away.

But I actually said emissions were symptomatic of our dependence on carbon based fuels, even my predictive text was able to write that as soon as I wrote the word "dependence".
No you didn't. You said emissions are symptomatic of the problem. Those were your words. You don't know what the problem is because you disagree with the consensus among climate scientists.

CO2 emissions are not symptoms of global warming, they are the primary cause, ya dingus.
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
No you didn't. You said emissions are symptomatic of the problem. Those were your words. You don't know what the problem is because you disagree with the consensus among climate scientists.

CO2 emissions are not symptoms of global warming, they are the primary cause, ya dingus.
And again, you didn't understand the context.

The problem is a technological dependence on carbon based energy sources.

Anything else is symptomatic of that dependence, whether your dole-dependent ass wants to believe it or not.
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
And again, you didn't understand the context.

The problem is a technological dependence on carbon based energy sources.

Anything else is symptomatic of that dependence, whether your dole-dependent ass wants to believe it or not.
Despite your disagreement with the consensus among climate scientists regarding the vast body of data, CO2 emissions are not symptoms of global warming, they are the primary cause.
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
And again, you didn't understand the context.

The problem is a technological dependence on carbon based energy sources.

Anything else is symptomatic of that dependence, whether your dole-dependent ass wants to believe it or not.
Yes. I agree.

What I am interested in hearing is the plan to reduce emissions. I don't want to hear platitudes such as, "use green energy".

The simple fact is, the world relies on fossil fuels. Until there is a viable alternative, we will continue to rely on fossil fuels.

Nuclear fission to produce electricity is a clean alternative to fossil fuel use, but the Greenpeace types will fight tooth and nail to prevent that.
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
So, you have nothing. That's what I thought.
I have familiarized myself with the conclusions of the consensus among climate scientists regarding the vast body of research on climate change.

You just seem to be familiar with the Koch funded disinformation presented as research which contradicts it.

You also apparently espouse the same conspiracy theory that kkk dickhead David Duke does regarding climate change.
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
I have familiarized myself with the conclusions of the consensus among climate scientists regarding the vast body of research on climate change.

You just seem to be familiar with the Koch funded disinformation presented as research which contradicts it.
So what's the solution?

Crying or research?

You seem to exclusively support the former and I support the latter.
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
I have familiarized myself with the conclusions of the consensus among climate scientists regarding the vast body of research on climate change.

You just seem to be familiar with the Koch funded disinformation presented as research which contradicts it.
I am familiar with both.

You seem to clutch your pearls and wobble to the fainting couch while croaking "Koch". That is not a convincing argument, except to the likes of Paddy, and Sky.
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
I am familiar with both.

You seem to clutch your pearls and wobble to the fainting couch while croaking "Koch". That is not a convincing argument, except to the likes of Paddy, and Sky.
I think that the words "consensus among climate scientists" are not quite making the appropriate impression on your feeble little mind.
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
I think that the words "consensus among climate scientists" are not quite making the appropriate impression on your feeble little mind.
If you think "consensus" reflects the scientific method, it is not my mind that is feeble in this discussion.

But, for the sake of argument let's assume global warming is caused solely by man. What is the prescription for that?
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
If you think "consensus" reflects the scientific method, it is not my mind that is feeble in this discussion.

But, for the sake of argument let's assume global warming is caused solely by man. What is the prescription for that?
Fly your spaceships and all technology into the sun and start again as hunter gatherers in peaceful coexistence with the Cylons.
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
If you think "consensus" reflects the scientific method, it is not my mind that is feeble in this discussion.

But, for the sake of argument let's assume global warming is caused solely by man. What is the prescription for that?
Nobody said consensus reflects the scientific method or that warming is caused solely by man. There is a consensus because so many scientists have the same findings. The consensus among climate scientists regarding the vast body of research on climate change only agrees to the conclusions that can't be disproved by the scientific method.

Your mind is so feeble, which is in keeping with the negative correlation between racism and cognitive function, also reached by peer-reviewed scientific research.
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
Nobody said consensus reflects the scientific method or that warming is caused solely by man. There is a consensus because so many scientists have the same findings. The consensus among climate scientists regarding the vast body of research on climate change only agrees to the conclusions that can't be disproved by the scientific method.

Your mind is so feeble, which is in keeping with the negative correlation between racism and cognitive function, also reached by peer-reviewed scientific research.

Yeah, yeah, yada, yada.

What should we do about global warming? Is the whole point of this panic just to get us all to wring our hands and develop ulcers from worry? Or, should we enact a bunch of new taxes to transfer money from the middle class to the ruling class?
 
Top