I 've thought for a long time that leading climate change alarmists misrepresented or misinterpreted the available evidence. They also made unrealistic assumptions in their climate models, though I couldn't very well argue that. HOWEVER this article surprised me. Even shocking.
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
AG Warming: Evidence left out!
Collapse
X
-
Ouch..."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
-
It's a link not actually directly contradicting the article, but posted as pretending to deal with it in lieu of actually dealing with it, in the style of leftist journalism and manager-ese. Toss that weak crap back to Upworthy and show me that you can actually string an argument together before I throw you in with the fusionists as the miserable careerist failures who bear primary responsibility for the loss of trust and excellence in American science.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Epoetker View PostIt's a link not actually directly contradicting the article, but posted as pretending to deal with it in lieu of actually dealing with it, in the style of leftist journalism and manager-ese. Toss that weak crap back to Upworthy and show me that you can actually string an argument together before I throw you in with the fusionists as the miserable careerist failures who bear primary responsibility for the loss of trust and excellence in American science.Last edited by Truthseeker; 07-27-2014, 02:43 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Truthseeker View PostThe article does cite a claim that CO2 levels lag temperature by about 800 years give or take several centuries. Please, lao Tzu, explain IN DETAIL why we should take the alarmist side on this question.
Your source is WUWT. This particular author is an economist and his article runs from PRATT to PRATT, without getting called on it by Watts, surprise, surprise. You call the scientific consensus, led by every national academy on the planet, including our own, "alarmists." Your religious tradition has a long history of rejecting science. That's a lot of good reasons to line up on the other side.
And you're posting this in Civics.
You want details? Great. Educate yourself. Got questions? Post them in Nat. Sci.
As ever, Jesse
Comment
-
Originally posted by lao tzu View PostBecause there is a great deal of utility in rejecting out of hand outrageous accusations made by kooks.
Your source is WUWT. This particular author is an economist and his article runs from PRATT to PRATT, without getting called on it by Watts, surprise, surprise. You call the scientific consensus, led by every national academy on the planet, including our own, "alarmists." Your religious tradition has a long history of rejecting science. That's a lot of good reasons to line up on the other side.
And you're posting this in Civics.
You want details? Great. Educate yourself. Got questions? Post them in Nat. Sci.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Truthseeker View PostI 've thought for a long time that leading climate change alarmists misrepresented or misinterpreted the available evidence. They also made unrealistic assumptions in their climate models, though I couldn't very well argue that. HOWEVER this article surprised me. Even shocking.
Who is Alec Rawls anyway?
https://watchingthedeniers.wordpress...ag/alec-rawls/
Comment
-
Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
Now, the paper by Rawls that made me create this thread was published in 2012. Since then, he has not retracted the paper. Indeed he continues to make serious charges against the AGW crowd.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 03:46 PM
|
12 responses
66 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:18 AM
|
||
Started by Ronson, Yesterday, 01:52 PM
|
2 responses
34 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 07:45 AM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 09:08 AM
|
6 responses
59 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by RumTumTugger
Yesterday, 10:30 AM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 07:44 AM
|
0 responses
22 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Yesterday, 07:44 AM | ||
Started by seer, Yesterday, 07:04 AM
|
50 responses
232 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 08:36 AM |
Comment