Well, that'll certainly fix the flooding we've experienced in the PNW recently
A Thoughtful Article on Climate Change
- Thread starter Onomea
- Start date
Heck, folks can't even decide which Farmer's Almanack (1818 or the "Old" from 1792) ito follow. Unfortunately, nothing can be trusted 100%, but - at least in theory - science is supposed to be impartial and therefore relatively trustworthy. I'll go with that limitation myself, but YMMV (Your Mistrust May Vary)
1000x more often than politicians, pundits, or other lie tradesmen.
As the Earth's next Geomagnetic Reversal nears, I worry about the pickups in my Telecaster. 
UncleEd
Member
Science is never foolproof.
It's methodology in testing
while seeking solutions.
Conclusions are made by
what is deemed a preponderance
of known or discovered evidence.
Based on this, it can be concluded
that climate change deniers have
an imbalance of their four humors.
It's methodology in testing
while seeking solutions.
Conclusions are made by
what is deemed a preponderance
of known or discovered evidence.
Based on this, it can be concluded
that climate change deniers have
an imbalance of their four humors.
Proud denier here.
Please post pics of your EV and solar panels.
Why do you need more than one vehicle per person?
Please post pics of your EV and solar panels.
Why do you need more than one vehicle per person?
Last edited:
smoothshooter
Member
So what if the climate changes some? It has before, and is always changing somewhere.
How do we maintain our standard of living without burning fossil fuels and mining? Computers, chips, tires, food production, pharmaceuticals, and electricity depend on those activities.
Who is willing to give all those luxuries up?
We are an adaptable species, as are others. Those that can't adapt become extinct. That's how Mother Nature works.
Who can say what the "ideal" average temperature is?
Solar flares, along with above water and below water volcanic eruptions have more effect on temperatures than anything mankind is doing.
Last edited:
Grayfox
US Veteran
LOL. As my (scientist) GF might say, "And the cockroaches shall inherit the earth". They'll be cracking a cold one in a million years and saying, "Survived another one, Fred!" We are vitally important only to us. However, that kinda has me worried 'cuz I'm not a cockroach
When all else fails, when faced with opposition to personally held beliefs...CALL THEM DENIERS!!!
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2006
- Messages
- 19,815
- Reaction score
- 31,684
For people to claim the climate is changing is like looking at the stock market for ONE day and saying the Market is showing a new upward trend.
The Earth is 4.5 BILLION years old and the records we keep are only 120 years old. The period of so called climate change these political hacks are looking at are completely meaningless and way too short to make any claims at all. There are some scientists that are claiming we might still be in the ice age. No one knows how long the ice age is suppose to last and we might now be in a downward blip. 120 years of official climate records are useless over 4.5 Billion!!!
I've also read scientific reports that there have been iceberg core samples taken that show the earth is actually cooling, but since that doesn't fit their narrative no one ever hears that on the evening news.
The Earth is 4.5 BILLION years old and the records we keep are only 120 years old. The period of so called climate change these political hacks are looking at are completely meaningless and way too short to make any claims at all. There are some scientists that are claiming we might still be in the ice age. No one knows how long the ice age is suppose to last and we might now be in a downward blip. 120 years of official climate records are useless over 4.5 Billion!!!
I've also read scientific reports that there have been iceberg core samples taken that show the earth is actually cooling, but since that doesn't fit their narrative no one ever hears that on the evening news.
coltle6920
Member
I consider myself a doubter. I neither deny or accept a lot of what is shoved down my throat.
It has been proven time and time again that people will use only the data the proves their argument. And it is evident that the arguments in this thread are based on what our beliefs or theories are.
Scientists can only project what will/might happen. They can only base some things where they have historical evidence and that evidence isn't finite. IMO they have no idea what this planet was actually like in the beginning. Earth might've had a constant temperature of 100 degrees prior to the Ice Age.
The glaciers have been receding for many years. Well,Duh!! Many of us can remember as a child what happened to that tray of ice cubes left in the freezer for weeks. They disappeared. IMO that's what's happening to the glaciers on a larger scale. You can't prove me wrong. My theory is just as valid as any scientists.
Our history is only factual as far back as we can actually validate. Anything more is just a guess.Projections are only valid if the things in the argument remain constant. There is no constant to base things on and there never will be. The one word missing in every argument is "IF". If this happens then expect that to be the result.
Otherwise your guess is as good as mine.
We have more to be concerned with what's happening underground than above. What we do to the atmosphere will destroy us long before it has an effect on the planet. We are but fleas on the back of Mother Earth.
I,too,only have a high school education but common sense has made me skeptical of a lot of things in my life. Facts are what they are but still subject to question based on how they were arrived at. Projections as not factual when there is no constant to base them on.
An agenda doesn't have to be political. It can be selfserving to gratify one's ego. It's like "You must believe what I say because I'm smarter than you".
This planet is far more unpredictable than we realize and while we should be more respective as its inhabitants we should not use fear as a motive to change.
It has been proven time and time again that people will use only the data the proves their argument. And it is evident that the arguments in this thread are based on what our beliefs or theories are.
Scientists can only project what will/might happen. They can only base some things where they have historical evidence and that evidence isn't finite. IMO they have no idea what this planet was actually like in the beginning. Earth might've had a constant temperature of 100 degrees prior to the Ice Age.
The glaciers have been receding for many years. Well,Duh!! Many of us can remember as a child what happened to that tray of ice cubes left in the freezer for weeks. They disappeared. IMO that's what's happening to the glaciers on a larger scale. You can't prove me wrong. My theory is just as valid as any scientists.
Our history is only factual as far back as we can actually validate. Anything more is just a guess.Projections are only valid if the things in the argument remain constant. There is no constant to base things on and there never will be. The one word missing in every argument is "IF". If this happens then expect that to be the result.
Otherwise your guess is as good as mine.
We have more to be concerned with what's happening underground than above. What we do to the atmosphere will destroy us long before it has an effect on the planet. We are but fleas on the back of Mother Earth.
I,too,only have a high school education but common sense has made me skeptical of a lot of things in my life. Facts are what they are but still subject to question based on how they were arrived at. Projections as not factual when there is no constant to base them on.
An agenda doesn't have to be political. It can be selfserving to gratify one's ego. It's like "You must believe what I say because I'm smarter than you".
This planet is far more unpredictable than we realize and while we should be more respective as its inhabitants we should not use fear as a motive to change.
How dare you...DENIERS!
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVlRompc1yE&t=11s[/ame]
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVlRompc1yE&t=11s[/ame]
smoothshooter
Member
I didnt see that said here but perhaps some did. All I understood about masks was that they were one way to help prevent spreading the virus, along with social distancing. Having never been faced with a pandemic on this scale, everyone was scrambling to find the best way to protect ourselves and undoubtedly some mistakes were made. But at least we now have some hindsight and experience that should better guide us. We are still learning. And most of us have probably been exposed to it, either through vaccination (the easy way) or getting sick (the hard way, esp. for some) , so we are hopefully more resistant now as they work on dealing with the more subtle aspects of the darned thing rather than desperately trying to keep people out of hospital.
There is considerable panic on the "climate change" thing because what was, a few decades ago, something to worry about for the future, is hitting us where it hurts right now, to various degrees in parts of the country and across the world. How much of it is nature just doing her thing and how much we - the most enormously successful and invasive species ever - have exacerbated the situation, may be open to debate (like the "9 vs 45" argument
The doo doo is no deeper now than it ever was.
Kinda' presumptuous of people living now to think we know what the ideal conditions are for everyone. One region's loss is another region's gain.
smoothshooter
Member
When I was in High School in the seventies we were being told that we were on the brink of a catastrophic Ice Age.
Go figure.
smoothshooter
Member
The only thing green about the Green Movement is the money being made in it.
smoothshooter
Member
In answer to your question, no I have not.
But I am only 66 years old. A mere blink of the eye on the Timeline of history..
I'll bet the Mississippi has been at those lower levels before.
Many times.
Last edited:
You have to trust science to prove that.
Last edited:
smoothshooter
Member
Why don't we ever hear about any studies evaluating the environmental impact on the U. S. of unrestricted mass immigration?
The increased water usage, human waste disposal costs and pollution, food consumption, medical waste, etc., is enormous.
The increased water usage, human waste disposal costs and pollution, food consumption, medical waste, etc., is enormous.
Similar threads
