No. The burden of proof lies with those who think humans are dangerously warming the world. They haven’t established those facts. The null hypothesis is the nature changes climate and that the changes we see are within the normal distribution of climate variability.
Are you, dear Capt, the arbiter of who is and who is not a ‘climate scientist’? State your authority.
How many “How about this” from me will defeat your two “How about this”? I’ll see you two and up you another one. We could do this all day. My article at the top was about the Marshall Islands. Are they sinking or not? Note the sea level graph in the article I linked specific to that locality. They sure are bleating for cash handouts and playing for the sympathy vote. It seems they’ve won yours so send them money. They haven’t won me.
Sea levels rise. So what? They’ve been rising for thousands of years not just since we invented ‘climate scientists’. Get over it.
I couldn’t care less about Charleston. If people in Charleston want to ride their motor bikes under water, let them. Is Charleston seeking compensation from the world of “polluters” to save it from floods? No? So deal with it, Charleston. The sea rises or falls as it wishes. That’s life!
Oh, I do. Believe me. And nature is telling me it’s the boss, and science tells me believe what nature says.
It must be a supreme comfort for people like you that we can just twiddle the mythical, magical CO2 control knob and dial up the Goldilocks-like not too hot, not too cold, but just right temperature … that existed … when, exactly?
Oh ye of little faith.
Then you didn’t read this whole thread.
You keep asking for a debate. I am not sure what there is to debate. Some Marshalese are taking advantage of a given situation to elicit sympathy? Money? That’s been the history of man since the first one stood up on his hind legs.
I gave you my opinion. But I think you want an argument. You’re doing it wrong. See how the pros do it.
Do you believe humans are dangerously warming the world (and calling it climate change) and causing the seas to rise, and if so, can we stop it, and if so, at what cost (human and cash), and knowing that, is it worth it?
I say our contribution is insignificant so don’t bother about it.
Do you believe we should accede to the Marshall Islander’s pleadings?
I say tell them to bugger off or just laugh at them. I say we stop publishing such pleadings and heartstring pulling without accompanying appropriate Monty Python skit.
CFC’s deplete the ozone layer, ok lets get rid of them and we did.
Lead is bad for you, so we removed it from fuel
Cars produce smog, ok lets modify them and remove it
The EPA’s of the world have been cracking down on all sorts of pollutants for years, why did this one suddenly need taxation to cure?
there is no proof just fudged models thats why there is so much controversy but this time governments wanted it to be true and dodgy science was used for that
Such a troll. Why would anyone care what you think or attempt to change your mind? You don’t have any power to make decisions any more than anyone else on this forum, so who cares?
You missed the point. I’m trying to change YOUR mind. And I see that’s a dead end.
I didn’t say whether I agreed with you or not, I just stated that no one should care what some stranger on an Internet forum has to say. There’s no onus on anyone to provide evidence for an argument that you are trying to make and you started. I’m not a scientist so I’m not qualified to provide evidence nor draw any conclusions. And neither are you. You seem to be a bored old man with nothing to do other than troll an Internet forum. Either that or you are trying to draw web traffic to your article by baiting us, which I also won’t bite on.
So I should just sit here and be told how to live by “scientists”? I have a brain even if you don’t.
I don’t consider the gigantic fraud of anthropogenic climate change to be a minor matter, nor one I’m unqualified to give an opinion on.
And if you’re answering, perhaps you’ve taken my bait.
An argument would help, but you resort to insult. Suit yourself.
1 Like
As you stated, you are soliciting your opinion and article about the subject. You started the thread. Therefore, you need to provide evidence if you wish to change people’s minds, not just your opinion and that we should all just listen to you based on your unspecified qualifications. Anyone that hasn’t agreed with you on this you’ve gotten upset with. Just pointing out an observation, neither agreeing nor disagreeing, because in the end, I really don’t care that much either way.
My post probably rather asks why people believe such rubbish without evidence. My own eyes say it’s rubbish. Do you see the world warming? Can you feel it? How do you notice it? Was it different when you were young? Can you honestly say that in your lifetime you’ve noticed an average temperature change of less than a degree?
If you don’t care, shame on you. I care because this hurts the poor and starving billions more than it worries comfortable others. African politicians say they aren’t allowed to build coal fired power stations to allow their people to see their first electric light. They say the IMF won’t lend funds for that but will for stupid, unreliable solar panels and wind farms. A village in India wanted electricity and so the big wigs set up a solar panel which couldn’t power a light that would stay on. They somehow were able to publicise this stupidity, shame the sanctimonious idiots who thought this was a 21st century solution and were connected to the coal fired power grid in months. Kids can now read at night with homes clear of real polluting cooking fires and kerosene lamps.
Think about those things in your nice cosy comfortable house and feel good that you’ve saved the world from warming no greater than the lapse rate difference between your standing head height and your feet.
I add this link for all those who kowtow to “scientists”.
Even if I had access to the full published articles and you were capable of understanding them I’m not about to post a few thousand studies here, let alone the tens of thousands that there are. The fact is that is been proven, whether you like the results or not isn’t of consequence.
It HAS been proven.
Yes they have.
No, but most, if not all, of the “experts” and “Nobel prize winners” why speak against climate change aren’t experts in the field.
1 Like
…At least Steven Crowder tries to prove points that merit better arguments that don’t support personal agendas or complete foolery.
- 1 for troll of the day.
So cite ONE proof.
So cite it.
No they haven’t.
Are you, dear Capt, the arbiter of who are and who are not “experts in the field”?
You don’t understand science, otherwise you wouldn’t ask for “one” proof of such a complex topic.
When they aren’t climate scientists they aren’t climate scientists. It’s not something you can just “identify” as because you want to say you are.