zoogs Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Well, there's your problem then. "What are the extents and consequences, if any, of anthropomorphic climate change" is a purely academic question. Link to comment
huskerXman Posted October 16, 2012 Author Share Posted October 16, 2012 Well, there's your problem then. "What are the extents and consequences, if any, of anthropomorphic climate change" is a purely academic question. My question to you is when has this ever been an academic issue? When the government started applying regulations based on this "academic" issue, they made it political. The whole study of global warming was nothing more than political. Link to comment
zoogs Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Why is it not one? If you're using your political beliefs to answer a scientific question, you're doing it wrong. Link to comment
knapplc Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 My question to you is when has this ever been an academic issue? So lemme get this straight. Your implying that congress or the president or... someone... from the government started this whole climate change kerfluffle? Link to comment
huskerXman Posted October 16, 2012 Author Share Posted October 16, 2012 Why is it not one? If you're using your political beliefs to answer a scientific question, you're doing it wrong. I will ask again.. when has this ever been an academic issue? So what belief are you using? The one were scientist say man is part of the problem, or the one were scientist says it is more natural event? By the way, were do you think the funding comes from? Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 This issue is so friggen political that it shouldn't even be considered a scientific study anymore. Link to comment
huskerXman Posted October 16, 2012 Author Share Posted October 16, 2012 This issue is so friggen political that it shouldn't even be considered a scientific study anymore. BINGO, we have a winner!!!! It was from the beginning Link to comment
knapplc Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I can just imagine those Senators and Congressmen hunkered down in the climatology labs, poring over the data from the last several decades and coming up with their politically-motivated conclusions. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Did someone mention amateurish arguments? Link to comment
huskerXman Posted October 16, 2012 Author Share Posted October 16, 2012 My question to you is when has this ever been an academic issue? So lemme get this straight. Your implying that congress or the president or... someone... from the government started this whole climate change kerfluffle? Yes, that is what I am saying (sort of).. What study do you think started this whole thing? IPCC.. Link to comment
zoogs Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 So what belief are you using? The one were scientist say man is part of the problem, or the one were scientist says it is more natural event? By the way, were do you think the funding comes from? None, because scientific questions aren't answered by belief, but by evidence. And consensus. You don't use belief to answer these questions, that is so mind-bogglingly wrong I can't begin to fathom how you justify that. Where does the funding come from? I'm guessing big oil Don't conflate the alarmist media portrayal of the issue with the scientific consensus, by the way. My understanding is that anthropomorphic globally warming is a widely accepted phenomenon, but its extent, consequences, and so forth, are both widely misunderstood and subjects of continued study. "How it should affect policy" is a political question, but the topic itself is a scientific one. Link to comment
zoogs Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 My question to you is when has this ever been an academic issue? So lemme get this straight. Your implying that congress or the president or... someone... from the government started this whole climate change kerfluffle? Yes, that is what I am saying (sort of).. What study do you think started this whole thing? IPCC.. Global warming research was started in 1988 by an international scientific body set up and endorsed by the United Nations ? That's funny, I distinctly remember reading papers published in the 1960s. Must have been imagining things. Link to comment
knapplc Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 So... what predated the IPCC? Your contention is that, for no particular reason whatsoever, the UN decided to create a body to study the climate back in 1988? You don't think climate data gathered decades before the IPCC ever existed had anything at all to do with its foundation? Do some basic research on this stuff. It's pretty simple. Link to comment
huskerXman Posted October 16, 2012 Author Share Posted October 16, 2012 So what belief are you using? The one were scientist say man is part of the problem, or the one were scientist says it is more natural event? By the way, were do you think the funding comes from? None, because scientific questions aren't answered by belief, but by evidence. And consensus. You don't use belief to answer these questions, that is so mind-bogglingly wrong I can't begin to fathom how you justify that. Where does the funding come from? I'm guessing big oil Don't conflate the alarmist media portrayal of the issue with the scientific consensus, by the way. My understanding is that anthropomorphic globally warming is a widely accepted phenomenon, but its extent, consequences, and so forth, are both widely misunderstood and subjects of continued study. "How it should affect policy" is a political question, but the topic itself is a scientific one. Big oil? seriously? Do a little research and see what side has the most funding.. You might be shocked. Link to comment
huskerXman Posted October 16, 2012 Author Share Posted October 16, 2012 So... what predated the IPCC? Your contention is that, for no particular reason whatsoever, the UN decided to create a body to study the climate back in 1988? You don't think climate data gathered decades before the IPCC ever existed had anything at all to do with its foundation? Do some basic research on this stuff. It's pretty simple. No kidding, you should try that. I am saying the current state of global warming hysteria is driven by politics Link to comment
Recommended Posts