1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Other views on global warming

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by hondo, Dec 11, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    This statement says a lot more than people realize.

    Now that the temperatures don't support the theory of global warming, those who worship at the church of global warming have had to shift the argument.

    There's a severe thunderstorm (even though there have been severe thunderstorms forever)? Claim that it would have been less severe if not for "global warming."

    Snow in areas that almost never see snow? Blame it on "global warming."

    And you're so far down on your knees to the church of global warming you don't realize how rediculous you're being.
     
  2. Pastor

    Pastor Active Member

    The argument has never shifted. It has always been about the hardiness zones.

    Obviously, you are unaware of this. Thus, this is just one more notch on the old_tony-is-an-ignorant-man belt.
     
  3. JR

    JR Well-Known Member

    Next up for discussion: "Evolution: Theory or Hoax?"
     
  4. I think most of us basically place it in the hands of the vast majority of scientists who know much better than we do, who have dedicated their lives to studying this. It's silly for a bunch of laymen to sit here and argue over thunderstorms.
     
  5. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    The argument always shifts. You know it and I know it.

    But just for fun, let's read just a little bit on "Hardiness zones":

    And, for just a little more fun:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081212/ap_on_re_us/south_winter_weather
     
  6. SigR

    SigR Member

    The dogma of global warming is what's scary. It really has become a religion. You don't need to understand what, where, why or how -- you just need to believe. And if you don't believe, you want the earth to die, obviously.

    Does it make anyone else squirm that it is *well known* in the scientific community that presently if you want to get funding to research something, you don't ask for money to research that something, you ask for money to research the effects of global warming on that something.

    Does it occur to anyone that there may well be global warming, but the effects of global warming would actually have a positive impact on the world?

    Does anyone remember that in the 1970's many were freaked out by the prospect of global cooling?

    Does anyone realize that accepting global warming and creating worldwide laws is actually an establishment-upholding mechanism? The point being that if you create a new set of laws, it creates a huge barrier to entry for upstart or innovative firms in various industries that are affected by those restrictions. This is especially apparent in third world nations that haven't yet properly industrialized--we'd be just holding a boot to their neck and more or less telling them that the status quo of foreign exploitation is how it's going to be. No more cheap foreign labor if the world is allowed to industrialize.

    Too many smart people are caught up in the rapture of global warming. You don't have to go to idiotic lengths to try to disprove it (see people who use short-term localized weather to make points about global climate), you just need to keep a more open mind about things.

    And finally, how do you control the masses? Fear. If leftists aren't afraid of terrorists, the backdoor mechanism could be to play on their environmental concerns.
     
  7. Or, instead of paranoid maunderings, we could all just decide to believe the overwhelming scientific consensus, agree that studies financed by the oil and coal industries are pretty much just worthless propaganda, and get to work on the problem.
    (o_t, what's the source on your "hardiness zone" clip? Inquiring minds etc.....)
    It has nothing to do with religion. You're making typically unfunny rightist snark into an actual argument?
    Wow.
     
  8. SigR

    SigR Member

    It's not my intention to use rightist snarkery. From my perspective, the belief in global warming has many things in common with organized religion. In general, I don't like how the right argues against global warming. It's almost as if they do it out of idle thumb-twiddling and because someone told them that they were supposed to.

    I think the big problem with "scientific consensus on global warming" is that people read too much into it. Assuming that we do accept that most scientists believe that the earth is warming, that is merely a scientific consensus that the earth is in fact warming. And I might even give my opponent that fact in a debate. The next two questions that arise from that consensus are the critical ones: Is man causing it? Do we need to do something about it?

    This is where science definitely does not reach a consensus, and the final question of whether we should do something about it is not even a question that a scientist ought to be answering. Yet, many who want to follow the global warming hysteria believe that not only have scientists said that there is warming, but that we should do something about it. It's politicians, environmentalists, and people with too much time on their hands who have up to this point made those calls. Nobody asks what the cost is of "doing something", and if they do, they are only looking for a dollar sign. They are immensely preoccupied with the cost of not "doing something", which is a lot less certain than the impact of making laws that make it harder for firms and indivuals to do business.
     
  9. Again: YOUR PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE THOUGHT IT WAS AN ISSUE THAT NEEDED TO BE DEALT WITH IMMEDIATELY.

    Is that not enough?
     
  10. Batman

    Batman Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]
    "Hoax!"
     
  11. Batman

    Batman Well-Known Member

    I've known about hardiness zones since I was 13 and saw an issue of Playboy for the first time.
     
  12. As I was saying...
    http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/14/inhofe-plays-while-the-boxers-away/


    http://climateprogress.org/2008/12/12/scientist-our-conclusions-were-misinterpreted-by-inhofe-co2-but-not-the-sun-is-significantly-correlated-with-temperature-since-1850/
    Call me Kreskin.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page