What Do We Think About Climate Change

Guillermo, do you have a "well done" stamp for Boston?

 

I am itching for November. There will be another sudden increase in unemployment of Democrat(hah, what a joke) politicians. They will all, of course, be immediately hired by left-wing universities.

 

Why, did Boston finish digging a well?

 

curious George again

is the 160 year game anything like the 1998 game where you cherry picked years from some mythical 12 year interval and then used the wrong data to try and hoist some crazy idea about the how the world is cooling


cheers
B

 

what I'd like to know, what benefit is it to those of us taking part in this thread to deny climate change?

 

We don't deny there is, as always, climate change. We deny it is anthropogenic of any significance.

 

why, when it has been studied and the conclusion is that it is?

this argument reminds me of shockly who invented the transistor later chimed in on genetics and people listened to him because, well he won the nobel

 

denying the denial
now thats classic

mas isotope analysis clearly shows that the excess co2 in the atmosphere is directly the result of the burning of fossil fuels

co2 and temp have moved in lockstep for as far back as it can be analyzed

the odds of the recent warming being a simple coincidence with the rise in co2 was calculated to be a billion to one

90% confidence
97% consensus
a billion to one odds

cheers
B

 

The problem is that those who believe AWG isn't happening believe it for political reasons, not scientific ones. You'll notice that most of them can't go five minutes without veering off into a diatribe against lefties, liberals, greenies, New World Orders, international conspiracies to kill and enslave mankind, etc.

When they believe something for irrational political reasons instead of scientific ones, you aren't going to change their minds with rational arguments and science....

Prediction: they'll hop on this post and accuse me of believing in AGW for irrational reasons, call me a liberal or a dupe of the international conspiracy, and accuse me of religious fervor not based on sound science--all for believing what the vast majority of scientists worldwide believe....

 

One world order will more likely come from unfettered , unregulated capitalism than from any leftist conspiracy

 

Yeah. the logical end result of unfettered, unregulated competition is that you eventually wind up with winners and losers, and the winners then have no restraints on them.

 

take out the "competition" and I agree with you

most don't seem to understand that regulation done fairly fosters competition

 

Aye, there's the rub: competition 'done fairly.' In the late 1800's, people like Rockefeller, Jay Gould, Leland Stanford, etc. showed what happens when there are no restraints on competition: the company that gains an advantage uses it to grind its competition into the dust. Then since it no longer needs to compete, there's nothing to stop it from abusing its customers--because they have nowhere else to go.

Just as democracy needs some ground rules and restrictions to protect minorities from abuse by the majority, economic competition also needs ground rules.

 

Don't pretend you are against monopoly when you propose big government solution. That is a monopoly.

 

thought it was called democracy

I'd like a list of freedoms lost since the last election


not counting the freedom of the right wing to run things their way