Other views on global warming

cranberry · Dec 15, 2008

SigR said:

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.
Click to expand...

Reducing consumption of fossil fuels, conserving energy, in general, wasting less and being friendly to our environment -- the kinds of things we're being asked to do -- seem like good common sense and good public policy to me. What's the big problem? I don't even see a lot of inconvenience involved.

Even if global warming and its effects turn out to be way overstated, I remain OK with trying to ease up on the destruction of our environment.

hondo · Dec 15, 2008

WaylonJennings said:

Again: YOUR PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE THOUGHT IT WAS AN ISSUE THAT NEEDED TO BE DEALT WITH IMMEDIATELY.

Is that not enough?
Click to expand...

Oh ... so now you think he's a fucking genius?

hondo · Dec 15, 2008

SigR said:

Fenian_Bastard said:

SigR said:

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.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

Sig: don't confuse Fenian with honest questions. It messes with his lockstep liberal view of world affairs.

Fenian_Bastard · Dec 15, 2008

Isn"t there a fake study somewhere you should be publicizing?

YGBFKM · Dec 2, 2009

Don't worry, Obama's got this. He's going to end global warming after he brings the troops home.

Log in or Sign up

Other views on global warming

cranberry Well-Known Member

hondo Well-Known Member

hondo Well-Known Member

Fenian_Bastard Guest

YGBFKM Guest

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Other views on global warming

cranberry Well-Known Member

hondo Well-Known Member

hondo Well-Known Member

Fenian_Bastard Guest

YGBFKM Guest

Share This Page

Useful Searches