toldailytopic: Man made global warming crisis: is the hoax finally dead for good?

[DocJohnson]

Its more about milking the oil companies than the average Joe. We give people incentives and give payouts to other options. This is how government encourages behavior.

Okay, you really are a fool if you don't realize that the average Joe works for the oil companies, and right now he's at least making a living off of proven technology!

 

[Alate_One]

That's baloney. The grant covers the cost of their research. The money the researchers make beyond that is dependent upon whether or not they can get schmucks like you to believe them enough to buy their published research material.

Okay what are researchers making beyond their salaries? Can you tell me exactly what that is? Since I'm a professor and I'd like to know how I get all this extra money. I sure didn't see any of my professors at MSU and Purdue raking in the dough from their research either. So maybe you can let us all in on the secret to wealth through university based research.

Nobody buys anyone's research materials. Scientists give it away for free to publishers like Nature and science which then turn around and demand money for us to see it. The open access ones charge for publication.

 

[drbrumley]

I was just talking about this very thing on the other green thread. Here's Van Jones:

“Right now we’re saying we want to move from suicidal gray capitalism to some kind of eco-capitalism where at least we’re not, you know, fast tracking the destruction of the whole planet.
Will that be enough? No it won’t be enough. We want to go beyond systems exploitation and oppression altogether; but that’s a process.
And I thing what’s great about the movement that’s beginning to emerge is that the crisis is so severe in terms of joblessness, violence, and now ecological threats that people are willing to be both very pragmatic and very visionary.
So the green economy will start off as a small subset, and we’re going to push it, and push it, and push it, until it becomes the engine for transforming the whole society.”

VAN JONES SHOCK ADMISSION: Goal is Complete Revolution

​

Nice to Know you were duped into this huh Alate?

 

[DocJohnson]

Okay what are researchers making beyond their salaries?

My goodness, but you are a child.

Any time a scientist writes an article or a book that gets published, he's compensated for it. Customarily (at least in the past century) compensation was in the form of money. Scientists also compete with one another just as any other dog-eat-dog business out there. Just because they're in the science field doesn't mean they're pure as the wind-driven snow.

 

[Alate_One]

Don't Worry About the Weather

Note the charts Alate.

That's not real climate data anyway, its from a random number generator. And yes climate data has a lot of variation in it (no duh) the point is, on average there's a change that is actually ABOVE statistical noise.

And yes a few warm or cold days do not a trend make, which is why you need a full analysis of global climate data to make a decision one way or another.

 

[drbrumley]

That's not real climate data anyway, its from a random number generator. And yes climate data has a lot of variation in it (no duh) the point is, on average there's a change that is actually ABOVE statistical noise.

And yes a few warm or cold days do not a trend make, which is why you need a full analysis of global climate data to make a decision one way or another.

:rotfl:

 

[Alate_One]

My goodness, but you are a child.

My goodness but you are an ignoramus.

Any time a scientist writes an article or a book that gets published, he's compensated for it. Customarily (at least in the past century) compensation was in the form of money. Scientists also compete with one another just as any other dog-eat-dog business out there. Just because they're in the science field doesn't mean they're pure as the wind-driven snow.

If you publish a book you can be paid and you can be paid quite a bit of money. But you don't publish your *research* in the book. You publish some kind of popular opinions and if it for some reason becomes popular, sure you can make millions but that sort of thing is highly unusual.

You assuredly do NOT get directly paid for publishing research in journals (unless you're a drug researcher and you get some sort of under the table deal). I never said scientists were 100% "pure". Scientists are competitive because more famous papers and bigger splash they make the more likely they get tenure (they get to keep their jobs) and also they get prestige, recognition etc. But there's very little actual extra money involved. The drive for prestige can make people corrupt just as well as money.

However in climate science we're talking about 620 climate scientists from 40 countries. Are they then ALL corrupt? :kookoo:

 

[drbrumley]

However in climate science we're talking about 620 climate scientists from 40 countries. Are they then ALL corrupt? :kookoo:

And 31,478 American scientists say otherwise. Are they corrupt as well or just ignorant too?

 

[Alate_One]

And 31,478 American scientists say otherwise. Are they corrupt as well or just ignorant too?

Are they *climate* scientists? How are we classing people as "scientists"? The last one of these scientist lists I saw included mechanical engineers as "scientists". :sigh:

 

[Stripe]

There is scientific consensus about global warming. Do you accept other types of science? Do you take vaccines? Do you take antibiotics? Do you drink pasteurized milk?

Atheists love to point to the popularity of an idea as if that were somehow evidence for the idea.

 

[Alate_One]

Atheists love to point to the popularity of an idea as if that were somehow evidence for the idea.

You can stop repeating the same line of garbage over and over. This is EXPERT OPINION. Its how you decide to get a shot, your doctor decides what drugs to prescribe for you.

If consensus and expertise is meaningless, then anyone's opinion is as valid as anyone else's, no matter what. Seen any of those "man on the street" bits lately? No thank you. Please feel free to live in your fantasy world alone.

 

[Stripe]

You can stop repeating the same line of garbage over and over. This is EXPERT OPINION. Its how you decide to get a shot, your doctor decides what drugs to prescribe for you.

I don't get shots. :idunno:

Expert opinion was once that the earth went around the sun. You're going to keep getting called out on acting like an atheist every time you do.

Better to change than to express your frustration. :up:

If consensus and expertise is meaningless, then anyone's opinion is as valid as anyone else's, no matter what. Seen any of those "man on the street" bits lately? No thank you. Please feel free to live in your fantasy world alone.

Not claiming that expert opinions are meaningless. I am claiming that they do not constitute evidence. And you keep bringing them up as if they are.

 

[Alate_One]

Here's the TED talks version of climate change 20 minutes but pretty cool.

TED talks

 

[Alate_One]

I don't get shots. :idunno:

YOu NEVER got a shot in your whole life? I'm sure you'll be smart enough to take them once another emerging disease comes from China.

Expert opinion was once that the earth went around the sun. You're going to keep getting called out on acting like an atheist every time you do.

This isn't atheism Stripe. I'm being logically consistent, you aren't.

Not claiming that expert opinions are meaningless. I am claiming that they do not constitute evidence. And you keep bringing them up as if they are.

Its not direct evidence no. But if you are incapable of evaluating the evidence completely yourself, its your best option. Since no one is capable of being an expert in all fields, we ALL must rely on expert opinion at some level.

 

[Stripe]

YOu NEVER got a shot in your whole life? I'm sure you'll be smart enough to take them once another emerging disease comes from China.

You mean like SARS or H1N1? Nope.

This isn't atheism Stripe. I'm being logically consistent, you aren't.

:rotfl: Claiming popularity as evidence ain't logical.

Can you point out where I am being irrational? I'd like to fix that if it's true. lain:

Its not direct evidence no.

It's no evidence - direct, indirect or otherwise. :nono:

But if you are incapable of evaluating the evidence completely yourself, its your best option. Since no one is capable of being an expert in all fields, we ALL must rely on expert opinion at some level.

:blabla: This really is a useless line of reasoning. We do not agree with the "consensus" you keep proclaiming. Why should we bow to your demands that we must?

 

[Alate_One]

You mean like SARS or H1N1? Nope.

Have fun with that . . . .

Claiming popularity as evidence ain't logical.

Scientific Consensus isn't evidence, its a REFLECTION of the strength of the evidence.

This really is a useless line of reasoning. We do not agree with the "consensus" you keep proclaiming. Why should we bow to your demands that we must?

Then you're a denialist. You deny modern science because you feel like it, not because of evidence. You're in essence saying "I'm smarter than all of those climate scientists and I know climate science better than they do." Does that make any sense?

 

[Nick M]

Given your way of thinking, we'd never see clouds, at all, since water molecules are also heavier than air. :duh:

Not as a vapor they aren't. Try again. I take it you had no idea that CFC 12 sinks to the ground. Which is why if you use a chemical sniffer to look for an A/C leak, you are to test the bottom.

 

[Nick M]

You know what disbelieving in scientific ideals is called? denialism, this thread is full of it.

I guess you all missed todays BBC news.

The 2000s are thus far the warmest decade on record.

Another climate gate claim already debuked you fool .The corrected hockey stick was put on TOL already. Did you ignore it?

 

[Nick M]

So you think a 33% increase in CO2 (not to mention other gases) doesn't DO anything?

33% of less than 1% of something that isn't a good greenhouse gas? You are joking right? No you aren't. Pathetic.

 

[Alate_One]

Another climate gate claim already debuked you fool .The corrected hockey stick was put on TOL already. Did you ignore it?

Hey Nick, did you actually read the link I just posted? That bit of information came out TODAY. (I know reading isn't your strong suit) The hockey stick is ooold and not as far off as you think.