Page 94 of 111 FirstFirst ... 44848990919293949596979899104 ... LastLast
Results 1,861 to 1,880 of 2209
  1. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1861  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Sadly, the "other factors...that are causing climate change" are often made up by big oil-supported "think tanks" that try to refute the mountains of evidence supporting climate change with their own "facts."

    There is a strong financial incentive to refute climate change--and they will try all they can to confuse the public with nonsense science. I've seen it in the healthcare debate, previously in the "does smoking cause cancer" and "is there acid rain" debate, and now in the climate change debate.
    That makes absolutely zero sense. Try to stay with me here. CO2 levels have continued to rise, and yet temperatures have plateaued and in some cases come down over a 10 year period. Thus, OTHER FACTORS are overwhelming whatever effect CO2 concentrations have in terms of global temperature.

    You know--things like the Sun. Hardly something "made up" by "big oil."

    This isn't a theory--its fact. The effect of CO2 in the atmosphere, which is stated as THE cause of increasing temperatures has been overwhelmed by other factors (whatever they may be) and resulted in lower temperatures--contrary to what various climate models and AGW theory predicts would happen. Will this continue? No one knows.

    Its interesting to note the hollow nature of your accusations.

    Strong financial incentive to refute climate change? Well, first, people are refuting the THEORY that man is THE cause of this, which as demonstrated the last 10 years, it hardly a wild bit of theory. CO2 Concentrations are NOT the most important factor in temperatures on Earth. Of course, any first grader is capable of understanding that our Temperatures rely on the Sun more than any other factor.

    Of course, it is true that many people do have financial stakes...in their own business, which hysterical propagandists are attacking...to THEIR financial advantage. So, in other words, people don't want to let some radical propagandists pretending to represent "Science" ruin their businesses, as well as the Economy of the world, while fleecing taxpayers for billions or trillions of dollars. Seems to me that the party that has the most to gain are the AGW people--for producing NOTHING other than propaganda.

    Nonsense science? Yes, that's interesting that people attempting to look at ALL of the information are being accused of "nonsense" while leading AWG alarmist organizations are destroying data, refusing the reveal data, and engaging in concerted efforts to attack and marginalize contrary views--of other scientists. The hypocrisy is amazing.

    All of you Global Warming supporters...I'm sorry, climate change supporters, are twisting and turning as best as you can--changing your story as need by and conveniently sidestepping facts that don't suit you in order to keep pushing, an agenda--not science, but an agenda. Science is just a toy--something to be manipulated and misrepresented in a long (20+ year) propaganda campaign.

    KAM
  2. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1862  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    It could go two ways:

    1) If climate change is truly a global hoax, taking measures to find alternate fuels would lead us to energy independence and stopping pollution. There would be whole sectors of jobs relates to alternative fuels. I assume we would be relying more on nuclear energy so there may be a few nuclear mishaps. We would also need to find places for nuclear waste.

    2) If climate change is manmade by the burning of fossil fuels, doing nothing would lead to the continued melting of glaciers, rise of ocean waters, covering of island countries and parts of continents, loss of fresh water supplies for much of the world's population, changes in weather patterns causing problems in areas not used to such weather (heat waves in Europe, hurricanes decimating North American coasts, shrinking animal habitats, wine growing in England--all of which have already started, by the way...etc.), increased wars as people flight over the remaining resources.

    The only bad side I see to alternative fuels is big oil won't make so much profit and be the reason we fight wars in the middle east...and that's not so bad.
    Herein lies a problem--because those aren't the only two options. The third is that the Earth does experience climate change, but that manmade factors are small--and overwhelmed by natural factors, and that spending billions upon billions of dollars to "fix" the problem won't do anything...except wreck the global economy...more than it already is.

    We can spend trillions of dollars chasing a problem that is out of our control, making scam organizations that offer "carbon offsets" rich, and allowing the inevitable corruption that will come with cap-and-trade (which is in itself a total scam)--paying for something that has no value.

    It is incredibly misleading to forward the notion that this will be one benefit or another, when in fact--the cost of spending this money--opposing what is financially beneficial is a huge, detriment. There is not an infinite supply of money, and spending on a fantasy (that we can control the climate) means that it isn't being spent on something else that isn't a fantasy.

    Of course, for the people being enriched by these proposed "solutions" it doesn't really matter--they are made rich--for doing essentially nothing. Snake oil salesmen is what they are--only on a global scale. Do what we say or the world will come to an end. Hmmm, where are all the people who are so angry about fear mongering now? Given this is about as big as you can get with Fear mongering (end of the world), you'd think this would really bother you.

    Of course it doesn't--fear mongering is perfectly acceptable when it benefits you, and an unacceptable disgrace when you can accuse others of it.

    KAM
  3. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1863  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Last year, Mexican coasts were affected. We've had hurricanes affect US coasts very recently. Ask anyone older who grew up in Florida. They will tell you hurricanes never used to affect its coasts.
    Hurricanes have never affected coasts before? Ridiculous statement. Of course, this is an interesting point. Where are all those hurricanes that propagandists said would continue, worse and worse. Oh right, that NATURAL high period has returned to a low activity period--like it always has. Bad timing for the propagandists. Don't worry though--I'm sure when the natural cycle picks up again (and it will) they will be right there blaming SUVs.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    If we had energy independence, we wouldn't care who killed whom in the Middle East.
    If we didn't have politicians who didn't block us finding and using our own (massive) energy resources we might have a much higher degree of energy independence. And why? Oh right--Global Warming hysteria is a major reason that these criminals use to enslave us to the Middle east.

    That being said...even with energy independence we might have SOME stake in the Middle east--like we do in other parts of the world where we aren't dependent on oil.

    KAM
  4. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1864  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Oh, that's a new one: all of the climate change debate is really about dismantling capitalism?

    So, if you create new renewal energy industries, that's not capitalism? It's not about capitalism, it's about big oil and the destruction it is causing.
    Actually, its not a new one at all. People that aren't buying into propaganda are well aware of how the climate change propagandists fantasy "solutions" will attack and damage capitalism. Whether it is an intentional goal or not isn't really relevant--it will be the effect.

    What an incredibly...ignorant point of view. "Big oil, Big oil." Yes, these horrible, horrible companies that...oh, provide us our entire economy's life's blood. How incredibly ignorant can you be? You greatly benefit from "big oil" in your daily life in ways you can't even count.

    Let me teach you something about Capitalism--putting massive burdens on an existing industry and giving another massive subsidies is NOT capitalism.

    I see these various commercials about wind power and solar and such, and I say--Great, go ahead and do it. What's stopping you? All you folks who love this idea--go ahead. Compete in a free market--I'd love for that to happen.

    Of course, that's not what you are talking about and not what these Global Warming Propagandists want. What they want is a massive payoff--to produce power in a way that is less cost effective, and has zero chance of meeting our energy needs any time soon.

    What you are suggesting is a fantasy, and I'll admit...its one that I'm tempted to buy into, because I (honestly) LOVE the idea of Solar and wind power. If I had the means I would buy a solar/wind system that made me totally energy independent (well at least for my home).

    Another interesting fact--I am likely to benefit financially from an increase in wind power in the USA. If this takes off, it will put money in my pocket at least indirectly. However, I'm not going to fool myself into thinking that it is a viable alternative. It isn't. We can put up wind turbines all day, and we won't replace our existing capacity, and even if we do, wind is not constant--and requires many other systems to make it viable.

    Bottom line--wind power cannot survive in an actual capitalist match up--it just isn't cost effective at this point. AGain--you are welcome to try, but don't whine and complain that I don't want to pay you for your flights of fancy. AGW folks aren't advocating capitalism--not even close.

    KAM
  5. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1865  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    This is the call of the blocker. Ignore all the evidence that exists. Pretend what exists is highly questionable. Create doubt.

    This method is used regularly by the creationism supporters, anti-climate changers, anti-healthcare reformers...and those who still maintain the earth is flat.
    This continues to amaze me. You keep talking about "ignoring evidence" when you are parroting the propaganda of a campaign that has dedicated itself to slandering those who disagree with it--to create a false "consensus", who have destroyed data rather than allow it to be scrutinized, and who manipulate, backpedal and use wording tricks to keep forwarding their AGENDA, despite Evidence.

    Very simple example--Climate Models have been proven wrong--temperatures are not doing what they say, but has there been ANY change in the Agenda? No, zero. In other words--this "evidence" which turns out to be incorrect has NO BEARING on the goals. In short--Evidence is irrelevant to the AGW crowd. When it is no longer convenient they simply stop talking about it.

    When "global warming" doesn't sell to the public anymore, they simply change their propaganda to "climate change" and keep on the same course.

    Apparently you are so unable to separate yourself from this propaganda that you fail to realize that what you accuse others of doing is EXACTLY what your AGW propagandists are doing. THEY are the ones denying facts that don't fit their preconceived conclusions. THEY are cherry picking data, THEY are the ones who refuse to modify their demands, even as their predictions prove false. They simply pivot and keep going.

    Isn't it interesting that these so-called "science" based goals rely so heavily on religious-like belief. Global Warming Alarmists are directly analogous to Armageddon death cults--that make a prediction, and when it fails to come true, change their story.

    I imagine it would be hard to admit to oneself that you are buying into an ideology that pretends to be scientific, with methods no credible scientist could ever put stock in--and with analysis methods that are in their infancy, while making unchanging, absolutist conclusions.

    The predictions of AGW kooks are an embarrassment to real science--a violation of what science is. Of course, its easy to see why--its like a religion to its believers--not something to be analyzed, but to have faith in. Of course, I'm not going to engage in hypocrisy and attack people who have faith, but I'll always call it what it is--devoted belief--not science.

    The hypocrites who follow this cult of AGW are claiming to represent science, but that's one of the world's biggest lies--they represent belief that puts a mask of science over it, and that denies evidence that threatens its position.

    KAM
  6. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1866  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    We can directly relate the increased temperatures to the increase in Co2.

    Over the last few thousand years, we can directly relate changes in temperature to Co2 (from Arctic ice analysis). Now that Co2 is rising exponentially, we also see temperatures rising with direct correspondence.
    Actually, there is not direct correspondence. CO2 levels continue to rise, and temperatures go up, plateau and even decline. Some even suggest that CO2 levels TRAIL the increase in temperatures. Further--correspondence isn't causality. CLEARLY as I mentioned earlier--other factors can and are overwhelming any effect of CO2 on global temperatures--which is why we've had the temperatures diverge from CO2 concentrations at various times (like in the last 10 years).

    The fact is--these so called experts really do not know what is happening and why? A real scientist admits the limitations of what he is claiming, and doesn't understate the uncertainty in their work.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Does it really matter that we don't know the exact temperature 1 billion years ago? Do you really want us to sit around and do nothing because we'll never know?
    That sounds about right--"we have to do something"--um, no we don't. That's the demand of illogical panic. In fact, doing something might cause this world great harm, while chasing idiotic fantasies that have a very poor record of accuracy.

    Climate science is NOT at all exact, yet they want us to make absolute decisions based on it, as if it were. That's part of this entire fallacy. All science is not equal, and climate science is VERY inaccurate compared to others. This is an important thing to understand--and everyone, please note--see how the argument turns to "but we can't do nothing"--forget about whether or not its accurate--we just have to do something, now. No, we certainly do not.

    Essentially, what this is akin to is an Engineer trying to build a bridge over a chasm when he doesn't understand anything about the other side, or the bottom below, but pretending that he can come up with a relevant, logical solution anyway.

    What global warming propagandists are demanding is that we do something that WILL be harmful to the economy of the world, and that MAY (even if you believe their predictions fully) do some good.

    KAM
  7. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1867  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Woof's question was utterly hypothetical. How can you demand facts for conjecture?

    Now let me ask a question: What would happen if there really were man-made climate change due to burning fossil fuels and we did nothing to stop it?

    I want facts!

    (Does that sound as stupid as Woof's demand sounded?)
    How can AGW alarmists demand action on conjecture--which is what these predictions are--conjecture masquerading as scientific fact.

    KAM
  8. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1868  
    Quote Originally Posted by edroberts View Post
    ... And that's the most important thing. It's GREAT that we are paying more attention to the environment. You can argue about the fact that global warming is a many multi-billion dollar a year industry and the junk the governments may be doing, but the environment is hopefully going to benefit in the end. At least that's the hope.
    My question is what will we NOT do for the Environment, because we are chasing the spectre of AGW? What other benefits will we not be able to pay for because we are wasting billions upon billions on a weak speculation?

    I think the opposite effect of what you hope for will be the result. Again--there is not infinite money, and in fact, following this AGW hysteria will likely go far beyond the actual costs and depress the economy such that we can't afford much of anything. There will be less money (direct and indirect) to pay for actual environmental needs.

    KAM
  9. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1869  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    We're so "empathetic" to the problems in the Middle East but couldn't give a hoot about civil wars, rapes, famine, etc in Africa.

    We're empathetic to countries that produce oil for us.
    Actually, the guy you hate so much (George W. Bush) expanded our aid to Africa significantly, exactly opposite of your claim.

    KAM
  10. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1870  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Well, as long as we're making decisions based upon 8th grade science....I'm much more comfortable now that we have entirely dismissed those with greater expertise. Barely missed the bullet there!

    Someone could actually try to explain why CO2 can both be something we exhale, and yet still be a danger on a global scale, but folks would then start another couple of pages about why that data isn't valid, the scientists are actually part of the Illuminati, and the US Geological Society (as well as every scientific organization - even the ones in other countries) are pawns of the U.S. Democratic Party.

    But haven't we already done that enough?
    No, they are simply low-grade hucksters who produce nothing of value, and expect to be paid for it. Leftists don't really understand how wealth is produced (or don't care), but they think they deserve it, so they come up with schemes like this--that uses Fear mongering to pour money into "research" (that yields inaccurate predictions) and various schemes to drain money away from the productive to the unproductive.

    You try to make the people who know this out to be conspiracy theorists, when it is much simpler than that. Its just another example of leftists and their mindset of entitlement that attempts to steal money from those who earn it.

    Your claims are hypocritical and laughable--if people like you weren't poised to do this world great harm. You claim to value data, while supporting those who do everything they can to ignore, manipulate and destroy data that doesn't agree with their non-scientific beliefs.

    You preach that there is "consensus" while supporting and spreading propaganda that does everything it can to silence and intimidate those who disagree.

    You put yourselves in the position of saviors...which of course is only accomplished with the use of other people's money and efforts.

    This isn't a conspiracy--its just another example of the leeches of this world draining the productive of what they earn. Its nothing new, and you aren't fooling anyone...well, that's not true--you are fooling a lot of people. Perhaps you are one of the fooled, and just don't realize it, because it will harm you just as much as me.

    It must take a certain special mindset to believe that the rest of the world wears the blinders that you happily put on yourself. This sort of scheme isn't new and it surely isn't science that is driving this--rather, its the same old thing, and it might work. One day however, there simply won't be anything else to take, and I'm sure that the leeches will blame those they've drained for not having more blood.

    KAM
  11. #1871  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    Your claims are hypocritical and laughable--if people like you weren't poised to do this world great harm. You claim to value data, while supporting those who do everything they can to ignore, manipulate and destroy data that doesn't agree with their non-scientific beliefs.
    .
    .
    .
    This isn't a conspiracy--its just another example of the leeches of this world draining the productive of what they earn. Its nothing new, and you aren't fooling anyone...well, that's not true--you are fooling a lot of people. Perhaps you are one of the fooled, and just don't realize it, because it will harm you just as much as me.
    Invalidating science and data, while simultaneously making outrageous statements with no evidence (other than a belief that "they" are out to control the world), and attacking anyone who disagrees with said statements, is pretty much the definition of a conspiracy theory.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  12. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1872  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214 View Post
    These scientists present these data pools to the alarmist politicians but do these scientists take into account volcanic activity as a contributing factor? Do they take into account cycles of volcanic and glacial activity that have taken place for thousands of years rather than simply what has happened in the past 50 or less?!

    Do these scientists account for sun cycles? How about the eccentric orbit of the earth around the sun which does not stay constant? Axial tilt has an effect. Sometimes the orbit goes inward toward the sun while at other stages of earth`s history its outward. These alarmists claim that increased CO2 will trap heat within our atmosphere causing temperature to rise, when in fact the pace of heat radiated into space has actually been increasing for the past 20 years.

    Its unfortunate when politicians spin scientific fact for political gain and posturing. Its the height of dishonesty.
    No, they ignore things that aren't favorable to their position, and attack, bully and intimidate those that have more scientific ethics than they do to suppress any attempt to account for other factors.

    You've seen it here--"oh they are "big oil" funded. The hypocrisy is amazing. It is perfectly ok for their side to fund studies that benefit their point of view, but if the other side does--well, that's a crime against humanity.

    Another trick these liars like to keep trying (you see it here a lot), is that they put on this mantle of elitism--where they define reality, and if you don't agree then you are outside the norm. I find myself often having to remind these propagandists that they don't define reality. Someone who lives their life by propaganda has a hard time understanding this however. There actually is reality, beyond their make-believe world where they pretend to be the intellectuals who tell the little people what to believe.

    Then, they have the audacity to claim to represent facts, evidence, data, science--whatever. Its literally like someone telling you black is white, and if you don't believe it, they will malign you as a "denier" or someone who will kill the planet. They will tell your children that the world will come to an end unless they buy into their various schemes. Then they accuse others of fear mongering.

    Its also interesting to hear these people position themselves as champions of truth, while turning a blind eye to the many examples of lies, distortions, and hypocrisy that their side depends on. They believe massive media campaigns are equal or superior to even one piece of valid data, and that it is ok to silence things that contradict them--all because they really know what's best.

    And that's what it really comes down to--they know what's best. They pretend to value science, but keep pushing them and taking apart their "arguments" and they will default back to "but we are right anway" as if they have the power to decide such things. Its that sort of arrogance that fuels people like this and enables them to buy into their own lies so thoroughly that they aren't even able to discern the difference themselves.

    Repeat something enough times, and get your media buddies to carry your message and it doesn't matter what the facts are. Reality is irrelevant.

    KAM
  13. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1873  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Invalidating science and data, while simultaneously making outrageous statements with no evidence (other than a belief that "they" are out to control the world), and attacking anyone who disagrees with said statements, is pretty much the definition of a conspiracy theory.
    Thanks for providing the example I just finished posting about. Repeat a lie enough times and even you can't tell the difference.

    It is so richly hypocritical to hear you accusing me of "invalidating science" while supporting with religious fervor those who have done exactly that. Hearing you claim to represent a scientific point of view--parroting the views of people who have destroyed and manipulated data in order to CREATE predictions about the future (which have already been shown to be inaccurate and untrue--can't even predicts short term, let alone long term) is pathetic. Truly, pathetic.

    From dictionary.com
    conspiracy theory

    -noun
    1. a theory that explains an event as being the result of a plot by a covert group or organization; a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a group.
    2. the idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.


    And no--your petty little accusation again falls short, because a conspiracy theory requires it be "covert" or "secret" and I've not said any of this is either of those things. In fact--the exact opposite is true--its being played out very much in the open.

    What you don't seem to understand is that liars and propagandists, and those who parrot them don't keep things secret--they just repeat lies. I don't believe I ever claimed that any of this was secret or covert.

    Now, of course your side is adhering to something very similar to a conspiracy theory--that "big oil" is conspiring to end the world in order to increase their profits. That's what they are doing right--increasing their profits, while destroying the planet. Literally, that's what this childish swipe at "Big oil" is saying "They are intentionally destroying the planet (AGWist claim) to line their pockets." Apparently, you are very much in favor of conspiracy theories--if you support the views of Global Warming Alarmists.

    But keep repeating your little line--you've got nothing else to stand on.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 12/11/2009 at 10:44 AM.
  14. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1874  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Invalidating science and data, while simultaneously making outrageous statements with no evidence (other than a belief that "they" are out to control the world), and attacking anyone who disagrees with said statements, is pretty much the definition of a conspiracy theory.
    Another lie I'd like to point out here. I've not "invalidated" any data to my recollection. I've simply not bought into the conclusion that AGW alarmists demand that I agree with.

    That's my crime--not agreeing with hysterical conclusions borne of fear mongering, and CLAIMING to represent science.

    It is the Global Warming...sorry, Climate Change Alarmists who MUST invalidate data that doesn't agree with them. Obviously this data doesn't allow them to reach the false conclusion that they've created.

    The most I've done is QUESTIONED data and how its been used (or ignored), cherry picked, manipulated and in some cases destroyed and pointed out where that certain predictions are factually incorrect.

    You on the other hand, don't really address any of this, like the scientists you believe in--because the actual data and your conclusions have little to do with one another in the end. You and AGW alarmists continue to push the exact same "solution" no matter what the data says--how incorrect the predictions are, how inaccurate the analysis. Again--its not a conspiracy--just arrogance to believe that anyone should believe you.

    So, please stop lying about what I've said or done.

    KAM
  15. #1875  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    And no--your petty little accusation again falls short, because a conspiracy theory requires it be "covert" or "secret" and I've not said any of this is either of those things. In fact--the exact opposite is true--its being played out very much in the open.
    You keep referring to "they". So who, other than just a general term such as "liberals" or "they", are the masterminds behind said conspiracy? How are they getting every major science institution to go along with their master plan? You're saying (with the certainty of a zealot) that it's all a purposeful plan, and involves virtually every national and internation science institution on the planet. Who's running this conspiracy?

    You're not "questioning" data...you've stated with fervor that the data is invalid. So what evidence do you have of this conspiracy to control all of our lives?
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  16. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1876  
    Hello Everyone,

    I apologize for the volume of posts.

    However, there remains a few important points. I had just mentioned that my 'crime' that people here seek to accuse me of is simply--not agreeing with their hysterical demands.

    They claim to represent science, and despite the FACT that this "Science" is heavily polluted by politics and various ideologies, and even in the face of this manipulation being exposed, they still DEMAND that everyone agree with them--or else they will slander you--labeling you as a denier--which is an intentionally chosen term meant to paint you as a holocaust denier. This is the level of hatred that these people are eager to use.

    The point however is that, they claim to represent conventional wisdom--based in science. I will again however point out that throughout history (and continuing today), science is proven to be FACTUALLY WRONG. Global Warming...I mean Climate Change advocates claim that man kind is responsible for the increase in global temperatures (not solar activity, not any other natural pattern), and that we can control this--if we do what they say. That's the "consensus".

    I will remind you again of a few instances of "consensus" being totally wrong.

    Heavier objects fall faster--disproved by Galieo.
    The Earth is Flat--duh. Ironically, these global warming people are adhering to their theory in similar fashion, while accusing others of being "Flat Earthers.
    The Sun revolves around the Earth.
    The sound barrier can never be breached.

    Conventional wisdom and SCIENCE of the day which was protected by scientists DEMANDED that people believe them, and agree with them. Those who disagreed were treated in similar fashion as those who do not buy into the hyperbole and hysteria of the Global Warming advocates.

    This is no different. Those who worship at the altar of "consensus" depend on volume to drown out dissenting views. Intimidation, fear mongering, name-calling, lying--these are the weapons directed against those who dare to disagree.

    KAM
  17. #1877  
    Of course, your examples don't explain how science was wrong, and disproved by data. Instead, they show the advent of scientific principals disproved beliefs that were based upon non-scientific beliefs (frequently, such as with the sun revolving around the earth, based upon religious belief).

    There was no scientifically-based basis for the earlier beliefs, and science proved more credible than the "gut reactions" that were used to generate those earlier perceptions. Unfortunately, some folks are working the process backwards....using their "gut reactions" to try to disprove science.

    An therein lies many of the arguments presented in this thread.

    Those who worship at the altar of "consensus" depend on volume to drown out dissenting views. Intimidation, fear mongering, name-calling, lying--these are the weapons directed against those who dare to disagree.
    This page alone has repeated use of the term "hypocrites", "lies", "distortions","propogandists". Who is engaging in name-calling and using volume (in the form of long, rambling, name-calling, accusatory posts) to drown out the other side?
    Last edited by Bujin; 12/11/2009 at 11:06 AM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  18. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1878  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    You keep referring to "they". So who, other than just a general term such as "liberals" or "they", are the masterminds behind said conspiracy? How are they getting every major science institution to go along with their master plan? You're saying (with the certainty of a zealot) that it's all a purposeful plan, and involves virtually every national and internation science institution on the planet. Who's running this conspiracy?
    "They" refers to people believe in AGW.

    YOU are saying "masterminds" and "conspiracy"--stop pretending like your characterizations are relevant to anything I've said. Its very dishonest.

    You falsely characterize what I say as a "conspiracy" and then pretend I've said this--its pathetic.

    Certainty of a Zealot? That's a laugh. I'm a SKEPTIC right. That means someone who isn't going along with YOUR point of view. Your attempts to mischaracterize my views are telling.

    See YOUR side is the one with the zealotry. YOUR side demands that others agree with you. YOUR side is the one that attacks those who disagree with you.

    Me...I simply don't want to be harmed by your pushing your (your sides) beliefs on me, and using the power of government to enforce your beliefs on me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    You're not "questioning" data...you've stated with fervor that the data is invalid. So what evidence do you have of this conspiracy to control all of our lives?
    Well, I actually am questioning Data in some cases, but I'm really questioning the conclusion more than anything.

    I know you believe that repeating falsehoods creates reality, but I'm not going to accept this silly little attempt to put words in my mouth. I'll tell you once again. I have not stated a belief in any conspiracy, so kindly stop lying.

    I'll try to sift through that last question and brush aside the inherent lie in how you phrase it.

    The core question there is what evidence do I have of what AGW alarmists advocate. That is very simple--I just listen to what they say. Again, despite your little make-believe claims of conspiracy, it is all out in the open. As far as "controlling our lives"--not sure I made that claim either. What I recall saying is that AGW alarmists--specifically the politicians who buy into this are preparing to take our money. One method is 'Cap and Trade, but there are a variety of proposals that will result in higher energy prices, through manipulation of the market, taxation, or other means.

    Please don't tell me I have to educate you on how making things more costly impacts people's lives. This is simple economics. Regardless of the means, these actions (if they are able to push them through) will incur costs, and those costs will ultimately be paid (directly and indirectly) by the citizens.

    That's not a conspiracy--its just as basic understanding of the plans that people like you advocate. Also--this "conspiracy" as you dishonestly call it...yeah, its been passed by the US House of Representatives.

    Oh, that crazy KAM, with his "conspiracy theory" (in other words, bills that have already passed one house of Congress).

    So, I hope that sufficiently points out the ridiculous nature of your distracting accusations, and petty distortions.

    KAM
  19. #1879  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    I know you believe that repeating falsehoods creates reality, but I'm not going to accept this silly little attempt to put words in my mouth. I'll tell you once again. I have not stated a belief in any conspiracy, so kindly stop lying.
    Please count the number of times you've spoken about what "they" are doing, with "they" being described as the "liberals", the "propogandists", etc. Never a person or an organization...simply "they".

    If a group of "they" are working together to lie, distort, and propagandize, that's a conspiracy. So I don't see how I'm lying.

    So, I hope that sufficiently points out the ridiculous nature of your distracting accusations, and petty distortions.
    Nope.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  20. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #1880  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Of course, your examples don't explain how science was wrong, and disproved by data.
    Actually, I did refer to a number of specifics as to why I find the conclusions to be factually incorrect. Perhaps you were too busy parroting the view of the authority figures and organizations that you depend on.

    See--I'm just one individual thinking for myself, I don't have the resources to produce fancy (often misleading) graphs and propaganda.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Instead, they show the advent of scientific principals disproved beliefs that were based upon non-scientific beliefs (frequently, such as with the sun revolving around the earth, based upon religious belief).
    Amazing how you ignore whatever doesn't suit you. See--you really do buy into the AGW mindset.

    Actually--in all the examples I stated, those were upheld by the scientific "consensus" of the day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    There was no scientifically-based basis for the earlier beliefs, and science proved more credible than the "gut reactions" that were used to generate those earlier perceptions. Unfortunately, some folks are working the process backwards....using their "gut reactions" to try to disprove science.

    An therein lies many of the arguments presented in this thread.
    No, you are incorrect. The things I listed WERE the accepted beliefs of their day.

    Interesting that you reference working backwards, given that this is exactly what AGW alarmists have done and continue to do by trying to make data fit their Pre-determined Conclusions.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    This page alone has repeated use of the term "hypocrites", "lies", "distortions","propogandists". Who is engaging in name-calling and using volume (in the form of long, rambling, name-calling, accusatory posts) to drown out the other side?
    I'll admit to using those terms, and if you feel they are unfair name calling then I apologize. I believe they are accurate terms. As I stated--"denier" is an intentional reference to holocaust denier. Please don't pretend that bit of carefully crafted propaganda isn't what it is.

    Long rambling posts. Well, I suppose that accusation has some validity, but I'm responding in large part to things other people have said. I know you might dislike opposing views, but I won't apologize for that.
    However, to equate the "volume" of a single poster, or even a handful, to a global chorus of politicians and media is just ridiculous.

    Your ability to evaluate things on a relative scale seems highly...inaccurate.

    However, let's be honest here. You might not be using the word, but throughout this entire exchange you've been calling me a liar. You've accused me of ignoring data, making up conspiracies, etc. The only difference here is that I'm not pretending to sit on any moral high ground.

    I've tried my best not to attack you personally, and specifically posted that I bear you no personal ill will. Obviously, I think your position is incorrect, and I find your methods to be less than honest.

    I think that you share a common trait with many--that you simply want things, and while you often state reasons, and claim to represent a scientific point of view, I really doubt that any of that matters. You've decided that Global Warming is a problem and support those who are pushing various policies to "save us" from it. I don't believe that science matters to you--because you've made up your mind.

    What you apparently don't understand in this--we aren't arguing two competing theories. I am simply in doubt of this AGW theory. As such, I am not in the position of having to prove anything. I'm not demanding anything. I'm not asking anyone to give me anything. YOUR side is, therefore the burden of proof is on them, not me.

    I'm skeptical of the THEORY of your AGW crowd, and that's really it. I have a number of reasons why, many of which are based on contrary scientific evidence. I've not stated that Global Warming doesn't exist, and I'm not in denial of data. I don't need to be.

    The AGW alarmists are the ones that need to hide data, and intimidate others, because THEY are the ones with something to prove, not me. I'm merely thinking for myself and not buying what they are trying to sell. And I'm talking about why.

    If this is such a certainty, then you surely don't have to worry about what some lone individual thinks. The fact is--it isn't a certainty, and I'm guessing that you and other who buy into AGW are really nervous that this whole campaign is threatened by inconvenient evidence. Why? Because what you've decided you WANT depends on it.

    KAM

Posting Permissions