Scientific Fraud

[TitoFan]

Climate change deniers can be profiled.


Profile of a Climate Denier - New Freethinkers


Here's an interesting excerpt:


Climate Change Denial is Psychological

Many climate change skeptics can present evidence or arguments against anthropogenic climate change. Psychological factors seem to play a huge role in determining who makes those claims and who does not. Social and economic conditions are also influential. Individuals who benefit from the social order use motivated reason to defend it from threats. The argument for climate change raises the risk of costly changes to society, and loss of freedom. People who benefit from that system, mostly white males, seem to feel the need to push back against environmentalists on climate change.

....uh huh, does that change the FACT that mother nature produces more CO2 than man?


No?

Shame that

Which in and of itself means nothing toward your argument, if man does produce a significant quantity in the overall scheme of things. But be that as it may, it boils down to the same type of argument we usually have. You again adopt the extremist viewpoint, denying there can ever be ANY effect of man's carelessness on the environment.... while I just open the door to the possibility that we just might be affecting things a little to everyone's detriment... and that we could do better than just dismiss scientific studies as so much gobbledygook.

[El Kabong]

Which in and of itself means nothing toward your argument, if man does produce a significant quantity in the overall scheme of things. But be that as it may, it boils down to the same type of argument we usually have. You again adopt the extremist viewpoint, denying there can ever be ANY effect of man's carelessness on the environment.... while I just open the door to the possibility that we just might be affecting things a little to everyone's detriment... and that we could do better than just dismiss scientific studies as so much gobbledygook.

What SHOULD the climate be right now, what is the 100% best setting for our Earth's "thermostat" if you will?

I mean IF man has caused such a horrible impact on the climate then certainly someone could tell me what the climate would be like sans the impact of mankind and that setting is no doubt the default setting that Climate Alarmists would like to see us at.



I applaud your use of hyperbole "You again adopt the extremist viewpoint, denying there can ever be ANY effect of man's carelessness on the environment".....it makes every discussion with you ever so enjoyable.

[TitoFan]

Which in and of itself means nothing toward your argument, if man does produce a significant quantity in the overall scheme of things. But be that as it may, it boils down to the same type of argument we usually have. You again adopt the extremist viewpoint, denying there can ever be ANY effect of man's carelessness on the environment.... while I just open the door to the possibility that we just might be affecting things a little to everyone's detriment... and that we could do better than just dismiss scientific studies as so much gobbledygook.

What SHOULD the climate be right now, what is the 100% best setting for our Earth's "thermostat" if you will?

I mean IF man has caused such a horrible impact on the climate then certainly someone could tell me what the climate would be like sans the impact of mankind and that setting is no doubt the default setting that Climate Alarmists would like to see us at.



I applaud your use of hyperbole "You again adopt the extremist viewpoint, denying there can ever be ANY effect of man's carelessness on the environment".....it makes every discussion with you ever so enjoyable.

I know you prefer equally extremist, opposite viewpoints. It makes your nonsense seem logical in comparison. Unfortunately, when faced with neutrality and common sense, you become frustrated and lash out with your one-line zingers. If you prefer, I can side with the doomsayers and throw in a few global warming chants to get you going.

[El Kabong]

So that's no answer on what the climate SHOULD be? OK, thanks

[TitoFan]

So that's no answer on what the climate SHOULD be? OK, thanks

No.... there's no answer.

Then again I've never professed to be a climatologists. I'm guessing neither are you, but that doesn't stop you from dismissing everything that's said by scientists with a lot more knowledge on that topic than you. Nor does it stop you from ridiculing everyone that dares utter an opposing viewpoint to yours. Couple of pages back you even had your ass handed to you by someone who put forth a very good argument, although admittedly sans the one-line zingers you like to use so much.

Not that it matters for the sake of this conversation... but as in other topics, I find myself trying to talk a little objective sense into you, by looking at both sides of the argument... whereas you prefer your extremist point of view, shrugging off everything anyone else has to say, if it doesn't agree with you.

I can see why you don't get much joy out of our conversations.

[El Kabong]

No.... there's no answer.

Then again I've never professed to be a climatologists. I'm guessing neither are you, but that doesn't stop you from dismissing everything that's said by scientists with a lot more knowledge on that topic than you. Nor does it stop you from ridiculing everyone that dares utter an opposing viewpoint to yours. Couple of pages back you even had your ass handed to you by someone who put forth a very good argument, although admittedly sans the one-line zingers you like to use so much.

Not that it matters for the sake of this conversation... but as in other topics, I find myself trying to talk a little objective sense into you, by looking at both sides of the argument... whereas you prefer your extremist point of view, shrugging off everything anyone else has to say, if it doesn't agree with you.

I can see why you don't get much joy out of our conversations.

.....when Climate Change alarmist #1 Al Gore buys a $9 million house on the beachfront...the same Al Gore which said....



....then, nah, I don't buy into the "consensus"


Data has been fudged, and none of the climate models are accurate Freeman Dyson has said as much...but I guess he's not "scientist enough" to DARE question Anthropogenic Climate Change.


We must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree.....we must all agree....we must all agree

[TitoFan]

Other than the fact that this guy takes 4 minutes to say what he could've said in 30 seconds, the message is good.









What Al Gore says or believes about global warming has NO BEARING on whatever the truth is, and where it lies on that continuum between 0% truth and 100% truth. Common sense. Second point, which doesn't surprise me at all.... is the stark reality that Gore's house is not at the water's edge, waiting to get swallowed up by the slightest rise in water level. I've read it's at least 25 feet above sea level, and about 700 feet from the coast line. I doubt during Gore's lifetime he's going to have to worry about that.

But that's not even the real point, because I'm not an Al Gore fan, nor do I trust what he says.
He's a lying, conniving jerk, as far as I'm concerned.

But here again..... latching onto Al Gore's stupidity and manipulation of the facts, in order to dismiss countless studies by scientists..... is a little like shouting "AHA!!!" after using an electron microscope to prove that a just-mopped floor isn't perfectly clean. You look hard enough for something to back up your mistaken viewpoint..... you'll find it.