Crocoduck! You blithering idiot! I watch Fox because it's full of FOXES! Morning, noon and night. Do you think just because LDX2 (learning disabled liberal democrats), those fools who scream the loudest, are wise? Carbon tax? Right... The only reason conservatives don't engage with such nonsense is simple...liberal brains...duh-huh.
For some time, we have had the technology to produce cheap passive CO2 scrubbers. Place them anywhere, about 200 million would reduce CO2 levels to pre-industrial concentration in a decade or two. 200 million is about the number of cars manufactured worldwide in 32 months.
Have you heard any of this before? I doubt it. We conservatives call them solutions. Sound it out... Sol-loo-shuns. Try not to make that hissing-quack noise. Might piss somebody off and then they'd go and step on you and as weird as this sounds...I'd miss you (LMAO). Never got to argue with a crocoduck before.
The root cause of our biosphere's depletion is overpopulation. 98.6F X 7 billion (I'm a bit warmer when I watch Fox), and far too many have IQ's much much lower than average body temperature. Just slightly higher than the AK -47's they use to kill people. Anyways...that contributes to global warming. Where once there were woods and now an asphalt parking lot, pretty easy to figure out which one will fry an egg in August. Forget about fossil fuel combustion, that's a slam-dunk.
But where does that heat go? (See how it is done...don't go asking framed questions my little sharp-toothed duck-a-saurus) Most is probably taken up by the oceans, along with CO2, and that could well be the reason for our global average temperatures holding reasonable steady. I don't doubt CO2 warming models, just all the screaming Chicken Littles. Didn't Al Gore pocket a few 100 million and then buy beach-front property in California?
If CO2 atmospheric concentration reaches 0.04% and proves the model right, with water's high heat capacity...Man-O-Manischewtz! Beach front-property in Nevada! Biblical! California could use a good scrubbing. I hope Big Al drowns first.
I don't watch Fox News. I get my information from the scientific world. One thing in life you learn if you are intelligent, consensus is not science!
“The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.”
―Bertrand Russell
And finally, can anyone prove that there is a consensus of scientists in favor of AGW? NO! Absolutely not. 75 scientists do not make up 97% of the worlds scientists.
I don't watch Fox News. I get my information from the scientific world. One thing in life you learn if you are intelligent, consensus is not science!
“The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.”
―Bertrand Russell
And finally, can anyone prove that there is a consensus of scientists in favor of AGW? NO! Absolutely not. 75 scientists do not make up 97% of the worlds scientists.
Because consensus is an opinion not hard science. And they don't generally believe in Fox News, some actually study the science. Next many oppose the cures that are opposed for various reasons, not that change is happening or is effected my man's existance.
Talk of the right and the left seems to be an American thing, most Australians and British try not to think about politics at all as both sides are as bad as each other. Look at the rest of the world and regardless of the countries politics the worlds scientists think AGW is happening, public opinion in the U.S. is being pushed by a solid campaign to try and run down science and dispute the evidence, sadly as someone who has worked in science for decades I find it amazing that people are fooled by the rather sad excuses for 'science' deniers use, many here back slap and cheer each other on over answers that would not fool a first year high school science student, claims for which the only evidence that can be provided is this blog or that blog said it was true.
In the real world blogs have no effect at all on what is happening sea level is still rising, 2014 is set to be the warmest year yet, Antarctic and Greenland glaciers are shrinking as is the Arctic sea ice, yet deniers try to ignore all that and only want to talk about Antarctic sea ice as this is growing a little.
I think denial falls into a number of sub categories
You have a set of minority groups with pet hatreds of (greens, communists, politicians, scientists) there are many conspiracy theories that have simply been invented to draw in these sub groups and they concentrate on the theories aimed at them and ignore the others.
You also have the trolls, who don't care about the issue but like to just cause trouble, I think we have a number of them here as well.
Then you have what is probably the majority who are simply poorly informed, I think over time they will drift away from denial as the real world effects move to the point where they can no longer be denied.
A good example of the way denial works can be seen in the sea level rise data, we have years of deniers saying this data could not be trusted, yet suddenly they switched to say it showed AGW was over in 2011 when there was a dip in the level of rise, these same denier simply went back to claiming the data could not be trusted when the data went back to showing a rise in sea level
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/
This is not the behavior of anyone interested in science or facts, but it is a symptom of clinical denial.
P.S. I find Spock's answer 'fascinating' given real climate scientists are working in fields they have decades of research in, it is denier experts who follow Spocks example Engineers, Nuclear Physicists, a botanist and of course a tv weather man and an English lord who invents games.
i.e.
Willie Soon - astrophysicist
Freeman Dyson - nuclear engineering
Timothy Ball, professor geography
Robert M. Carter - Geologist (with strong links to the mining industry)
Ian Plimer, professor mining geology )on the board of several mining companies)
Arthur B. Robinson, American politician, biochemist
These are some of the leading denier experts referenced on many denier blogs and sites yet their climate science credentials are zero.
Deniers only want to hear what supports their fantasies and Fox and denier blogs do that, that's why deniers don't reference real science sites, simply there are none that support denier nonsense.
Some conservatives (mainly the religious right) have an anti-science bias. They don't believe in evolution, the "big bang," and a host of other things. Consequently, they are easily duped by propaganda put out by people with an agenda like the oil and coal companies.
Because it is a lie that you bought into. Why would taxes and giving up technology do anything to help? It wouldn't and even if you believed, the carbon cycle is real science remember? Plants eat carbon. why would you stop having children or pay Al gore? Come on!
"most scientists" are not specialists in the causes behind changes in climate. People involved in this debate who claim expertise about climate change, normally turn out to be studying the EFFECTS of changes in climate.
you can pay a scientist to make a test that would make you the smartest person in the world. But FOX news might not believe you
That is not quite true, even though climate change itself ranked near the bottom of environmental problems tested in a recent poll, even half of the republicans support regulation of carbon dioxide pollution. [1]
I am a conservative. If you want me to believe man made global science, then prove it. At this time there is no proof. All that exist is conjecture, opinion, theory and probability. No facts. What does exist is the desire for money and power. No facts!
most scientists are fools -- opining on things outside their specialized knowledge.
when the editors of the best journals cease publishing studies and articles debunking human caused climate change, then you'll know it's real. so far, it isn't
There is no man made climate change. That's a fact, Jack.
True science is not done by consensus, it is done by facts. The facts say global warming is a hoax. Why are you still getting your information from the liberal media?
no matter what we feel what we feel and we know it.
Conservatives tend to believe what their cartoon network tells them. They still refuse to beleive their precious network is essentially a propaganda machine with an agenda........and that they never give airtime to opposing views.
Fox News?? nonsense... even the most foolish conservative doesn't take this program seriously...
The left has too much of a habit of using stuff like this as power grabs. When poor people, for instance, see super rich people like Kerry using "carbon credits" to justify heating the planet more than many, many poor people-it kind of loses loyalty.
You lefitsts brought a lot of this distrust on yourselves. As for me, I actually break ranks and believe you, but I too don't trust you as the solution.
Liberals R Nuts also makes a great point. When you break with principles like honesty, you can't be trusted again.
Because science is not about consensus, it is about the observable facts and the fact say that there has been no global warming for more than 15 years. BTW, it is NOT Fox News saying it. The fact that Fox reports things that the liberal media don't does not mean they are making it up.
http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/09/07/g...
Because most of such anti-science dupes and charlatans are fake conservatives. Here is a real one:
Liberals were debunked on their mythical "global warming" accusation that they'd been touting for years, they were debunked as of 2014, so instead of acknowledging they were mistaken, libs moved on to change the wording from global warming to man made climate change.
Libs are pathetic. Self righteous goat f****** idiots who serve no other purpose than to be obstacle.
Because the little darlings are sheep when it comes to anything FAUX News tells them, or any of their conservative sites they get their "facts" from. It tells you a lot about their intellect when over 90% of scientists agree, but they choose to believe the naysayers because it fits their agenda.
But but but the media told them so. Just like how the media told them the media was liberal so they should watch more media.
explain to me how taxing me will change the climate and then I'll watch fox and see if I can explain their position
Because in republican world, saying "I am not a scientist" necessarily qualifies you to ignore actual scientists.
Edit: the 'climatedepot' is a crackpot right wing blog that has been routinely debunked by ACTUAL scientists. The creator and content provider for that website is Marc Morano, who has a degree NOT in science at all, but in politics, and his only job prior to his blog was as an aide to climate denier, Jim Inhoffe.
Those "scientists" have been exposed, repeatedly, to have lied and manipulating the data.
Liberals dont care about using ACCURATE data.
because the Repulican party only cares about money
Frankly I don't believe what Fox News tells us. They are just better than ABC, CBS, NBC, and NYTs. I don't understand why you feel you need to believe them but that explains why you are an alarmist. As a scientist, I don't go around looking for people to believe. I try to look at the evidence and use it to try to determine what is most likely true and what is most likely the cause. When you use words like believe, that is a quick clue to me that science isn't your forte.
