abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
nice 180climate changing really IS settled science.
nice 180climate changing really IS settled science.
The science is settled. Doesn't matter what you would say.I would say that humans are unquestionably contributing to increases in CO2. Is this in doubt?
I would say that CO2 is a known greenhouse gas. Is this in doubt?
Why would it matter what I say? I'm not anybody important! Chill out bro, just a discussion! Be inclusive.The science is settled. Doesn't matter what you would say.
Well of course the climate changes, which is what I said.Present even one comment I have ever made on this forum that even hints at this, ya dingus.
Mabye a 360? I'm still where I started. Climate change and AGW/AGC are different terms. But for the record I give the IPCC worst case about a 5% chance, middle case a 20%, and low end 75% chance.nice 180
Revolution, smashing capitalism.What are your non-governmental solutions to this most dire problem?
Not really an answer, but I admire your spunk and consistency!Revolution, smashing capitalism.
SONot really an answer, but I admire your spunk and consistency!
Big giant Government shall save us all...
Speaking of consistency, I just wanted to point out that your first line in your first comment in this thread was a personal attack against me and a falsehood. You have followed that up by ignoring my response and then fallaciously claiming that my next argument did not answer your red herring that did in fact answer your purile question. So my previous retort still stands unanswered. Find one post where I have ever even hinted that I am an unabashed statist.Not really an answer, but I admire your spunk and consistency!
Big giant Government shall save us all...
You've been downgraded to sharing a post with this other idiot since you're just talking from both sides of your mouth. You suggested the science is not settled, yet didn't post any science, then did a 180 and admitted the science is in fact settled. You're an idiot. No wonder you're in such a good mood, ignorance is bliss.Happy to stop bitching because I'm in a great mood. I really appreciate you respecting my free speech, mighty big of you. Step into the light brother! You are carrying so much darkness!
Free market is an oxymoron. Good question though.SO
What is the free market solution to global warming?
That's a good question. I guess it would have to occur at the grass roots level with everyone doing more to conserve and being willing to pay a bit more for products that are more energy efficient.SO
What is the free market solution to global warming?
That's not the point and you know it. The point is that we are changing the climate more rapidly and thus make the environment unable to sustain us.AC is an unabashed Statist who simply parrots the big Government mantra that only the Government can save the future of the planet.
It makes no difference whatsoever that somehow, miraculously, the Earth has survived and endured tumultuous change in climate well before the advent of Human Beings.
Wild gyrations in temperature occurred millions of years ago...no Humans around.
No possibility of AGW or AGC...there were no Humans to blame!
The climate has changed dramatically before mankind existed, and will most certainly continue to change when mankind exits the planet.
With or without Humans, you can all rest assured, that the climate will most certainly continue to change.
I'll bite. Explain?Geosolar
I just like tossing that out there when there's a segue
Humans can most definitely have an effect.AC is an unabashed Statist who simply parrots the big Government mantra that only the Government can save the future of the planet.
It makes no difference whatsoever that somehow, miraculously, the Earth has survived and endured tumultuous change in climate well before the advent of Human Beings.
Wild gyrations in temperature occurred millions of years ago...no Humans around.
No possibility of AGW or AGC...there were no Humans to blame!
The climate has changed dramatically before mankind existed, and will most certainly continue to change when mankind exits the planet.
With or without Humans, you can all rest assured, that the climate will most certainly continue to change.
OR maybe he was quibbling over the speed at which the changes might occur or how much of a change would occur.BS
This old canard about not agreeing with alarmism assumes science is alarmist in nature. The findings are the findings and the reaction is either alarmist or not. He says the science is not settled, but he never presented an iota of scientific findings that upend the settled science.
Fair enough, nice chatting with you. I'm unbelievably upset by the downgrade. Really hurt my feelings bro.Speaking of consistency, I just wanted to point out that your first line in your first comment in this thread was a personal attack against me and a falsehood. You have followed that up by ignoring my response and then fallaciously claiming that my next argument did not answer your red herring that did in fact answer your purile question. So my previous retort still stands unanswered. Find one post where I have ever even hinted that I am an unabashed statist.
The government can't save us, the gov't is the biggest obstacle to our ability to save ourselves. I have never wavered from this stance. By all means, continue with your fallacious and false insistence that I am advocating something I'm not. It only proves you can't address my arguments.
You've been downgraded to sharing a post with this other idiot since you're just talking from both sides of your mouth. You suggested the science is not settled, yet didn't post any science, then did a 180 and admitted the science is in fact settled. You're an idiot. No wonder you're in such a good mood, ignorance is bliss.
Who said it was? When was that ever claimed by anyone? When you put that last comment at the end of the thread starter, you must have thought that was what people were touting as settled science.The AMOUNT OF WARMING is the part that isn't settled.