Jump to content
idlerboat

UN latest climate outlook

Recommended Posts

I'm sure BP is more than capable of looking after himself, and possibly quite enjoys doing so. Whats more, he does not resort to personal attacks on other posters who disagree with him.

 

I suspect BP will be well aware of what my point is, if you do not understand the message behind my post go do some research of your own.

 

I am not calling any scientists liars, I am, however, open to the possibility that some, or many, of them may be wrong. If you find this possibility hard to believe, may I suggest reading Bill Bryson's layman's guide, it will introduce you to the idea that science is not infallible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Short_History_of_Nearly_Everything nor is it very well informed.

Take a look at this post http://crew.org.nz/forum/index.php/topic/11218-un-latest-climate-outlook/page-125?do=findComment&comment=230119

It points to quite a few "scientific" flip flops.

Science is not meant to be a religion followed blindly, question it, challenge it, check it, thats what science is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest that unless you can answer BP ( rather than an attempt at deflection ) you refrain from posting .

 

AND ..as a reminder..the worry is more extreme weather....

you know IB, you come across incredibly arrogant in the above posting, sounding something like a school teacher who does not like the questions from an inquisitive student. As HT flagged a few posts ago you, along with BP, seem to have the view you are the font of all wisdom on this subject. On the contrary, at best, you are one amongst equals here and indulging in the classic alarmist approach of attacking people with differing views is not going to do anything to convince people of your views.

 

You talk about the "vast majority of scientists" - surely you are not referring to the thoroughly discredited 97% claim? Then you say it is offensive to criticise them with the word "liars". Yet the likes of you and other alarmists have no problem criticising scientists and other professionals who do not buy into the scam and furthermore use emotive labels such as "denier".  The claims of "scientific consensus", "science being settled", "(man made) climate change is real" are just emotive calls. 

Just shows alot of hypocrisy. 

 

BP stated in a post "That's not how science works", well is this how it works?

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/opinion/confront-fraudulent-research-it-spreads

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/12/researcher-swedish-fraud-case-speaks-out-i-m-very-disappointed-my-colleague

being particularly mindful that Lonnstedt undertook her tertiary and post graduate education at JCU, one of the leading institutions for promoting climate alarmism. Not surprisingly they are moving at a rather glacial speed reviewing all her previous publications as they mostly had climate change content 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excuse my arrogance "Black panther" but here you are condoning us non CC believers,but there you are helping to contribute to change by jet setting and leaving a carbon footprint So you want us all to believe in CC and change our ways but you seem happily to contribute??Taken the diesel out yet and installed an electric motor??

You know not of what you speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not trying to convince the regular deniers on here..that proved pointless a long time ago. I am simply pointing out the consistent inaccuracy of that groups posts for others who wish a more scientific and proven set of information.

In the long run you do a service because this helps people to understand.

For example an American history teacher versus the consensus of the worlds universities.

I don't care what you think..And you don't care full stop.

But for the sake of others I will continue to challenge your falsehoods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am simply pointing out the consistent inaccuracy of that groups posts for others who wish a more scientific and proven set of information.

What information?

For example an American history teacher versus the consensus of the worlds universities.

At least the teacher presented some science

I don't care what you think..And you don't care full stop.

Personal attack

But for the sake of others I will continue to challenge your falsehoods.

With what?

 

 

I think it is both sad and fitting that at this time we reflect that what science warned us about is now happening , and at a rate that is showing that the original predictions are probably conservative. Another claim by you with no source?

 

Have another read of your posts, you have consistently personally attacking the character of dissenting posters. You attack the credibility of the messengers presenting dissenting scientific studies without actually refuting the science offered with other evidence. You continually claim your science is better haven't given us any, 

How can you claim to challenge our falsehoods without actually challenging the science offered or offering any other data?

You can run a church like this and convince the masses but to convince me you need to present some more compelling evidence.

If you read back through my posts, I do not personally make any claims one way or another yet you call me a denier. I have just posted information that doesn't match your opinions, and links to other well presented science that challenges your beliefs. If you feel that the only way to deal with this dissonance is to attack the personality of the presenters how do you think this is likely to convince others you are right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have another read of your posts, you have consistently personally attacking the character of dissenting posters

No I dont..... but I gave fair warning. I and a great many of my friends have been badly effected.  We have VERY limited patience for trolling... Constantly posting stuff (very often from the same source) is wearing thin...

 

 

 

 

. You attack the credibility of the messengers presenting dissenting scientific studies without actually refuting the science offered with other evidence. You continually claim your science is better haven't given us any, 

There is 156 pages here...go read,   Like with the smoking cigarettes debate...some stuff is just garbage...

How can you claim to challenge our falsehoods without actually challenging the science offered or offering any other data?

See above... :-)

You can run a church like this and convince the masses but to convince me you need to present some more compelling evidence.

As mentioned, I dont need to convince you.... I wanted to help convince the majority of people. Not unsurprisingly , I no longer have to...

 

If you read back through my posts, I do not personally make any claims one way or another yet you call me a denier. I have just posted information that doesn't match your opinions, and links to other well presented science that challenges your beliefs. If you feel that the only way to deal with this dissonance is to attack the personality of the presenters how do you think this is likely to convince others you are right?

If I chose to constantly post that " walking across the road when the little man is flashing red, is perfectly safe"  and provide "internet based proof" , it would be deemed by most, that , that would be an opinion. Particularly if I did not provide any other contrary opinions....

 

As mentioned..the vast majority of people are under no illusion that the MAN MADE component of climate change is REAL, and a VERY REAL threat to the WELL BEING OF OUR FUTURE CHILDREN.

 

Your extraordinary powers of internet searching are well capable of finding the answers to your own questions...but you chose not too...WHY ? 

Again I can only reasonably assume that you are very opinionated , and wish other to so be convinced. 

 

So at this point , if you dont believe that there has been a radical and disturbing change in the climate, then we are beyond conversation.

If you believe that humans have nothing to do with this change then .... yet again...come up with credible ,  peer scrutinised , data....  not some kind of "da Vinci code, conspiracy"... "well presented crap"  is still crap.

 

So I ask you again to go find the answers to your " questions... "   Even better...go find every "Humans didnt do it"  web site and theory and see if you can match it to an acceptable anwser. Then post the results...

Here is 198 answers from one web site...just to get you started...https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

 

 

 

Your call

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...