Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Tina Fey Calls Out ‘Hollywood Bullshit'

1235

Comments

  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:
    The best part is you blast scientists for being paid off about global warming. Then link to two sites that are paid to paint a picture of climate change as a myth.
  • HFNYHFNY Member Posts: 5,198 Standard Supporter
    I guess I'm in the middle. Better to be safe than sorry but also not be stupid.

    The USA is doing a pretty good job in moving towards natural gas (while being more vigilant about methane leaks when fracking), wind, and solar while phasing out coal (the dirtiest of the all...basically the Sasha Grey of power production).

    China and India will be getting in line...partially due to declining arable land and partially due to citizen complaints of terrible pollution (acid rain, spoiled bodies of water, suffocating smog, etc).

    China is hurting badly due to overcapacity and bad debts in the steel / coal sector anyway though India needs to get its act together faster if it wants to take advantage of low oil prices to reinvest in their non-oil infrastructure and power.
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,886

    salemcoog said:

    Give lower earners a tax credit then to make up for the (slightly) higher prices they would face at the pump.

    Proving it will help of course is impossible until you try it, but that doesn't seem to stop innovation in tech and pharma, etc.


    Yes!!!! Throw Tax credits and Government Mandates at the problem. Always an effective method of achieving a desired result. Warming is real. It may be man made. It may not be but charging the poor American working stiff trying to get to work and maybe take the family to the park or the woods won't even put a scratch in the level of Co2 emissions on this big blue marble. Assuming that Co2 is the problem.

    But libtards will feel good because they can say they did something as they cruise their electric car which is probably half powered by coal plants silently down the road.
    Nearly all climate scientists agree that it's man-made, but I'm going to listen to some Cuog on a message board. Sure.
    I'm hearing the science is settled.
    That's a fucktarded metaphor.
    Free Pub!!!!
    HFNY said:

    I guess I'm in the middle. Better to be safe than sorry but also not be stupid.

    The USA is doing a pretty good job in moving towards natural gas (while being more vigilant about methane leaks when fracking), wind, and solar while phasing out coal (the dirtiest of the all...basically the Sasha Grey of power production).

    China and India will be getting in line...partially due to declining arable land and partially due to citizen complaints of terrible pollution (acid rain, spoiled bodies of water, suffocating smog, etc).

    China is hurting badly due to overcapacity and bad debts in the steel / coal sector anyway though India needs to get its act together faster if it wants to take advantage of low oil prices to reinvest in their non-oil infrastructure and power.

    But what does the post have to do with jumping up and down Screaming that WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING NOW!!!!
  • TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,985 Standard Supporter
    Is this a cached page? A whoosh? You can't still be arguing this point.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,394 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:
    The best part is you blast scientists for being paid off about global warming. Then link to two sites that are paid to paint a picture of climate change as a myth.
    Lots of scientists disagree with the global warming crap. The collusion that's pulling down all the grant money has been caught red handed fudging the numbers, the deniers haven't.
  • ThomasFremontThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:
    The best part is you blast scientists for being paid off about global warming. Then link to two sites that are paid to paint a picture of climate change as a myth.
    Lots of scientists disagree with the global warming crap. The collusion that's pulling down all the grant money has been caught red handed fudging the numbers, the deniers haven't.
    This is the stupidest fucking argument of them all.

    If you are making the money argument, you're doing it wrong.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:
    The best part is you blast scientists for being paid off about global warming. Then link to two sites that are paid to paint a picture of climate change as a myth.
    Lots of scientists disagree with the global warming crap. The collusion that's pulling down all the grant money has been caught red handed fudging the numbers, the deniers haven't.
    Your news source must be scientists studying global warming for free.
  • TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,985 Standard Supporter
    It's much easier to sit back and deny, deny, deny, than to prove a scientific theory. Yet the deniers pretend they're equivalent. So some climate scientists got ahead of themselves and over-stated their cases. It's not right, but that shit happens, and it got corrected. But, because some scientists fudged does not, ipso facto, invalidate the entire field or theory, especially with mounds of supportive data and research. Yet, confirmation bias enters the picture and people then extract from one example to conclude it's a complete fraud. Not exactly empirical or scientific, yet politically extremely effective. Obviously.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,394 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:
    The best part is you blast scientists for being paid off about global warming. Then link to two sites that are paid to paint a picture of climate change as a myth.
    Lots of scientists disagree with the global warming crap. The collusion that's pulling down all the grant money has been caught red handed fudging the numbers, the deniers haven't.
    Your news source must be scientists studying global warming for free.
    The deniers need only use the data the liars have. Simple stuff.


  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:
    The best part is you blast scientists for being paid off about global warming. Then link to two sites that are paid to paint a picture of climate change as a myth.
    Lots of scientists disagree with the global warming crap. The collusion that's pulling down all the grant money has been caught red handed fudging the numbers, the deniers haven't.
    Your news source must be scientists studying global warming for free.
    The deniers need only use the data the liars have. Simple stuff.


    Now you get yours news from cartoons. Nice work.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,394 Standard Supporter
    I thought the picture might help in your case.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    I thought the picture might help in your case.

    What, the picture that's about as truthful as a cartoon?
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,394 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    I thought the picture might help in your case.

    What, the picture that's about as truthful as a cartoon?
    Except it's the NOAA saying it.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    I thought the picture might help in your case.

    What, the picture that's about as truthful as a cartoon?
    Except it's the NOAA saying it.
    Got a link? Given your cartoon says 1996 and 2016. I'm curious how the NOAA knows what the mean temperature is 2 months into the year.

    It's clear you really are the dumb.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,394 Standard Supporter
    Here ya go. Cooking the numbers and getting caught. Same old story.

    http://www.newsmax.com/LarryBell/CATO-DQA-MIT-NOAA/2016/02/01/id/712153/

  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    Here ya go. Cooking the numbers and getting caught. Same old story.

    http://www.newsmax.com/LarryBell/CATO-DQA-MIT-NOAA/2016/02/01/id/712153/

    You don't answer my question about 1996 and 2016.

    Then you link to a dude who wrote 2 books about climate change hoax. Do you think he donated the profits from the books to charity?
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,394 Standard Supporter
    You link nothing then complain that anything anyone else links is BS so whats the point? You'd link stuff by the guys paid to show the problem exists. When other scientists who aren't being paid peer review the data and say call them out you ignore it. That's how the science community works, peer review. Maybe you need to tell them they're doing it all wrong.


  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    You link nothing then complain that anything anyone else links is BS so whats the point? You'd link stuff by the guys paid to show the problem exists. When other scientists who aren't being paid peer review the data and say call them out you ignore it. That's how the science community works, peer review. Maybe you need to tell them they're doing it all wrong.


    Sounds like you agree with All Gore's profit motive.

    You want a link with facts and evidence.... Here you go.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

    Do you want to listen to journalists and book writers? Or people paid to study the topic for a living?
  • greenbloodgreenblood Member Posts: 14,505
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    You link nothing then complain that anything anyone else links is BS so whats the point? You'd link stuff by the guys paid to show the problem exists. When other scientists who aren't being paid peer review the data and say call them out you ignore it. That's how the science community works, peer review. Maybe you need to tell them they're doing it all wrong.


    Sounds like you agree with All Gore's profit motive.

    You want a link with facts and evidence.... Here you go.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

    Do you want to listen to journalists and book writers? Or people paid to study the topic for a living?
    I agree with you on this Honda about climate change. I think that there is a human element that is speeding up the natural occurrence of it. However, I think you've also acknowledged that America has come a long way in reducing their impact, and in many ways is leading the world in this effect. But if other countries like China and India don't come on board, we're really not helping the overall problem. This needs to be a global effort, and when a few countries get involved, it creates economic imbalance, and enables those advantaged countries (who are creating most of the problem), to continue their over production of green house gases.

    I think further restrictions within our own border will cause a greater proportion of economic difficulties than the desired effect on climate change, when others don't participate. If these other countries voluntarily or by force (sanctions) come on board, then I'd be for further steps to help the issue.
Sign In or Register to comment.