- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Do you believe in global warming?
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:15 pm to WhiskeyPapa
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:15 pm to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
Your problem seems obvious to me. You don't trust the government to be able to solve -any- problems, let alone global warming. To say that the government can't solve problems, big or small is unpatriotic.
What are you basing that claim on?
0
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:19 pm to Strophie
Correlation does not equal causation.
Appeal to Authority fallacy in a nutshell.
Appeal to Authority fallacy in a nutshell.
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:20 pm to Damone
quote:
I thought it was "climate change" now? If that's the case, then yes, I do believe the Earth that is billions of years old goes through slow and periodic temperature shifts.
Agreed
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:26 pm to Strophie
Strophie..how many of the predictions made by these experts over the last 100 years, have shown themselves to be true? If these dire warnings were based in real life observations, one would think that the global temperatures would have risen more than .8 of 1 degree.
Did any of them predict this rate of rise?
Did any of them predict this rate of rise?
This post was edited on 12/15/16 at 4:27 pm
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:28 pm to rpg37
Technology will make this conversation moot in 50 years anyway...
This might be the dumbest thing to get your panties in a wad about...
Our grandchildren's grandchildren will most likely die in traffic just like us.
This might be the dumbest thing to get your panties in a wad about...
Our grandchildren's grandchildren will most likely die in traffic just like us.
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:28 pm to Dale51
quote:
Correlation does not equal causation.
Certainly not. So I guess I'll hedge and say that it's not outright impossible that a huge, exponential, unprecedented increased in C02 in the atmosphere with the isotopic markers that tie it to human activity and the burning of fossil fuels, concluding in carbon parts-per million amounts that are nearly historical, an exponentially growing temperature shift, and large scale increases in weather pattern volatility. I mean, that COULD be coincidental. But Occum's Razor says it's pretty certainly not.
quote:
Appeal to Authority fallacy in a nutshell.
An appeal to authority would be to claim that anthropogenic climate change must be true because those with authority claim as much. That's not why I provided sources. The sources were to show that actual science has been done on the matter, and to show that I wasn't pulling claims out of my arse. I could care less what "authority" the authors of those papers have. I don't need authority to show that 2+2=4.
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:35 pm to Strophie
quote:
An appeal to authority would be to claim that anthropogenic climate change must be true because those with authority claim as much. That's not why I provided sources. The sources were to show that actual science has been done on the matter, and to show that I wasn't pulling claims out of my arse. I could care less what "authority" the authors of those papers have. I don't need authority to show that 2+2=4.
You accurately state the fallacy.....and then provide the same example of the fallacy. Odd.
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:35 pm to Dale51
quote:
Strophie..how many of the predictions made by these experts over the last 100 years, have shown themselves to be true?
So, basically, you're saying this:
"We don't have flying cars or teleportation machines. Since these predictions from the last 100 years didn't come true, Moore's law and the exponential increases in computer power that the so called 'experts' talk about must be a fallacy and a conspiracy. There's nothing to prove it's real."
Meanwhile, we keep plotting Moore's law, showing that it's true, and continue feeling it's impacts.
I feel the same way with regard to your critique. I honestly could care less what predictions were made over the last 100 years. I'm looking at hard data from the last two decades. Hard, factual historical data, showing this happening. "Predictions" be damned; it IS already happening. You can see it in the data, and if you can't, you're either completely blind to it, or you're choosing not to see it.
(That's the general "you", by the way, not you specifically Dale)
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:39 pm to rpg37
According to co2.earth, global carbon (C) emissions from fossil fuel use were 9.795 gigatons (Gt) in 2014.
What kind of idiot thinks that could contribute to global warming in any way, shape or form?
What kind of idiot thinks that could contribute to global warming in any way, shape or form?
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:45 pm to Strophie
quote:
So, basically, you're saying this: "We don't have flying cars or teleportation machines. Since these predictions from the last 100 years didn't come true, Moore's law and the exponential increases in computer power that the so called 'experts' talk about must be a fallacy and a conspiracy. There's nothing to prove it's real."
No. You're trying to change the subject using another logical fallacy. Strawman.
Flying cars and teleportation machines don't exist.
You're claiming the predictions of the "experts" and "scientists" are showing things that DO exist and they are basing their science on the objective and observable reality.
Again...have any of these dire predictions come to pass in the last 100 years?
Do you understand the part of scientific methodology know as falsification? In part, if your hypothesis leads to predictions, and those predictions do not come to pass, you need to abandon the hypothesis or refine it until it shows indications of validity..
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:51 pm to Cruiserhog
quote:
Nope man doesnt have anything to do with this curve at all.
What about volcanic eruptions, the graphs seem to be very similar.
This post was edited on 12/15/16 at 4:55 pm
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:52 pm to Mars duMorgue
quote:
What kind of idiot thinks that could contribute to global warming in any way, shape or form?
Thats a non sequitur.
Correlate carbon to warming. That said...giving your "point" the benefit of the doubt..should that huge MEGO number lead to more than a .8 degree temperature rise over 100 years?
Posted on 12/15/16 at 4:54 pm to EA6B
That very up swing in has been addressed in the last few days based on a basic data entry flaw. It's a mathematical artifact.
Posted on 12/15/16 at 5:08 pm to Dale51
quote:
No. You're trying to change the subject using another logical fallacy. Strawman.
It was an attempt at an analogy. Maybe a weak one. But nonetheless, I wasn't strawmanning. I'm not trying to argue a point you aren't making. What I'm saying is that if you judge the merit of current data based on the historical accuracy of the field from a century earlier, you can shoot down a shite load of other factual happenings, like Moore's law. Hence, I fail to see what good it does to claim that predictions in the last 100 years are wrong. Basically my response is, "Yeah. And?"
quote:
You're claiming the predictions of the "experts" and "scientists" are showing things that DO exist and they are basing their science on the objective and observable reality.
Are you contesting the validity of the observations over the past two decades?
Are contesting the validity of the parts per million increases in carbon in the atmosphere?
Are you contesting the isotopic signatures in said carbon that tie it to industrialization and the burning of fossil fuels?
Are you contesting the acidification of the oceans?
None of these are predictions. These things are factually happening. Sure,you can extrapolate from there in ways that are too pessimistic ("we're all dead in 20 years!"), but to flatly deny those data or what they imply is asinine. You keep asking me about predictive models. Frankly I could care less. What I do care about is that objectively something happening, and based on everything we know, it's unprecedented.
Posted on 12/15/16 at 5:11 pm to Strophie
I don't believe co2 is a pollutant.
I believe volcanic activity dwarfs man made whatever.
I believe volcanic activity dwarfs man made whatever.
Posted on 12/15/16 at 5:14 pm to Strophie
quote:That is where you jumped the shark.
an exponentially growing temperature shift, and large scale increases in weather pattern volatility.
If in fact the significant atmospheric changes in CO2 (nowhere remotely near known highs BTW) did correlate to an exponentially growing temperature shift, and large scale increases in weather pattern volatility, you might have a point. In fact AGW-based models have been horribly inaccurate. CO2 and temp changes do not correlate as predicted. Further we have no idea as to extent or timing of extraterrestrial input on the same equation.
The latter is an obscene oversight in consideration of any climate equation.
Posted on 12/15/16 at 5:16 pm to rpg37
The question itself is a hoax.
It's designed to limit the spectrum for debate and create two sides: black and white. Yes or no.
The sport of global warming in the political arena is ALL about money and power, from both sides, it has nothing to do with actually doing what is right by the planet.
It's designed to limit the spectrum for debate and create two sides: black and white. Yes or no.
The sport of global warming in the political arena is ALL about money and power, from both sides, it has nothing to do with actually doing what is right by the planet.
Posted on 12/15/16 at 5:18 pm to rpg37
it may be happening, but people flying big jets, living in big cities, with big demands for power, should not be telling people with smaller energy demands to decrease energy use.
Posted on 12/15/16 at 5:22 pm to Killean
quote:
No exceptions. You are quite literally so fricking dumb that you threaten the survival of humanity as a species.
SUFFER
Posted on 12/15/16 at 5:23 pm to Sleeping Tiger
Sadly, the sport of this has created two very polarized sides with 'facts' to enhance the division.
The way we live on this planet is not even close to correct. The economic systems designed to NEED more and more is disastrous. The amount of bull-shite trinkets and junk and crap and unnecessary production for no other reason than paper profits because every quarter has to outdo the last quarter is nothing short of absurdity.
Ignorance to the real natural cost of goods because of how our economies have built themselves to hide the real cost is the embarrassment of our time.
They call a champ who's a fraud a paper champ. He has the belt but he's picked his opponents based on good match-ups for himself. We are a paper champ civilization. We think we're so great, but it's mostly bull-shite.
The way we live on this planet is not even close to correct. The economic systems designed to NEED more and more is disastrous. The amount of bull-shite trinkets and junk and crap and unnecessary production for no other reason than paper profits because every quarter has to outdo the last quarter is nothing short of absurdity.
Ignorance to the real natural cost of goods because of how our economies have built themselves to hide the real cost is the embarrassment of our time.
They call a champ who's a fraud a paper champ. He has the belt but he's picked his opponents based on good match-ups for himself. We are a paper champ civilization. We think we're so great, but it's mostly bull-shite.
Page 8 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News