How Much Koolaid Would A Climate Cook Drink?

abe23 · Dec 7, 2009

I don't get it....why would there be a conspiracy about this? In whose interest would it be to raise unfounded fears about the effects of human activity on the environment? Seriously, do you honestly believe that this hyped-up story about a couple of emails some jackasses were exchanging nullifies ALL climate science?Nobody knows for sure what's happening and it's difficult to make any predictions with so many variables, but we do know that humans are pumping a shit-ton of stuff into the atmosphere at an exponential rate and if it keeps up we risk changing the environment dramatically and possibly irreversibly. None of these bs emails contradict any of this anymore than they contradict nuclear physics or evolution.

I can see why republican politicians would jump to the defense of the polluters -they get pac money and campaign contributions for their efforts. But what's in it for you is beyond me. We can figure out ways of making our activities more sustainable in the long-term and it's everyone's interest to try and make that happen but unless you admit to the problem, you won't find a solution. Pollution does have a very real economic cost and right now we are all paying to let the polluters fuck up the planet for us and everyone else.

Keenly · Dec 7, 2009

your post makes me laugh

when conversations contain words and phrases like

"trick"

"destroy data"

"hide the decline"

yeah global warming is bullshit

no question about it

jersey boi · Dec 7, 2009

jeff f · Dec 9, 2009

abe23 said:
I don't get it....why would there be a conspiracy about this?.

oh i dont know, why woulb people want to tax every bit of energy you use? TOO CONTROL EVERY ASPECT OF YOUR LIFE. :cry:

wake up and follow the money. cap and trade is a carbon trading scheme to sell what you dont use. so algore polutes more in one plane trip than me or my family have ever poluted. how does he get around it? he buys "credits" from someone who only poluted twice as much as me and my family. stupid? unless you are trading offsets.

dont believe me? read. read, read. :peace:

jeffchr · Dec 9, 2009

jeff f said:
oh i dont know, why woulb people want to tax every bit of energy you use? TOO CONTROL EVERY ASPECT OF YOUR LIFE.

wake up and follow the money. cap and trade is a carbon trading scheme to sell what you dont use. so algore polutes more in one plane trip than me or my family have ever poluted. how does he get around it? he buys "credits" from someone who only poluted twice as much as me and my family. stupid? unless you are trading offsets.

dont believe me? read. read, read.

You can't fault a guy for making a profit off of what he believes. Al Gore believes in global warming and has positioned himself to profit from it. he is not in public life. it's capitalism. i thought you right wingers all liked capitalism.

We can't even control 1/6 of our economy. The health insurance companies have monopolized their industry at the expense of citizens. And you're worried about Al Gore?

It's a scientific given that global warming exists. These emails and documents from the UK climate research unit will, ultimately, have no impact. They are just a political nuisance.

So the planet is preparing to rid itself of the human race. It may take a while.

But who gives a fuck, right? We'll all live out our lifetimes.

Antidisestablishmentarian · Dec 9, 2009

Mr. Al does live a public life.

T.V. appearances, made a movie, does public speaking, was the vice president, ran for president.

I think he definitely wants to be a public figure.

That scientific given is being shown to be false.

That scientific given is being shown to have been manipulated to achieve a desired result, not a true result.

That is not science.

Pollution, bad.

Global warming, bullshit.

jeffchr · Dec 9, 2009

Antidisestablishmentarian said:
Mr. Al does live a public life.

T.V. appearances, made a movie, does public speaking, was the vice president, ran for president.

I think he definitely wants to be a public figure.

That scientific given is being shown to be false.

That scientific given is being shown to have been manipulated to achieve a desired result, not a true result.

That is not science.

Pollution, bad.

Global warming, bullshit.

Gore is NOT a public official. He has no conflict of interest as he is not in public service. Being a public figure does not create a conflict of interest.

You're wrong about the science.

Most of this global-warming conspiracy theory is based on what? Some kind of global government or some such, gonna take over your life or something. WTF? Paranoid much.

jeffchr · Dec 9, 2009

jeffchr said:
You can't fault a guy for making a profit off of what he believes. Al Gore believes in global warming and has positioned himself to profit from it. he is not in public life. it's capitalism. i thought you right wingers all liked capitalism.

We can't even control 1/6 of our economy. The health insurance companies have monopolized their industry at the expense of citizens. And you're worried about Al Gore?

It's a scientific given that global warming exists. These emails and documents from the UK climate research unit will, ultimately, have no impact. They are just a political nuisance.

So the planet is preparing to rid itself of the human race. It may take a while.

But who gives a fuck, right? We'll all live out our lifetimes.

so who was the balless little prick who gave me -rep for this post?

towlie · Dec 9, 2009

abe23 said:
I don't get it....why would there be a conspiracy about this?

Neither do they. It's a fucking joke. A couple of years ago when I came here at the suggestion of some friends after getting cancer I assumed the level of debate would be higher. But I come from a college town and most of the 420's I know are college professors (even the conservative ones.)

But don't ask any of them to produce any scientific data. From what I've seen they believe political rhetoric over peer review (a historically asinine belief.) Basically it's a belief in a conspiracy theory that started with Swedish physicist Svante Arrhenius in 1896... or perhaps it was when CO2 was found to be a green house gas in 1860. Regardless the conspiracy theory has infiltrated all levels of science including all intergovernmental panels, all global research programs (NASA, ESA, etc), the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, as well as the Academies of Science, General science, Earth sciences, Meteorology and oceanography, Paleoclimatology, Biology and life sciences, as well as all scientific journals...

Jesus! When you think about it. Why wouldn't the people who've dedicated their life to the advancement of science be the first to prostitute it just to make Al Gore money?

Especially when you can produce confounding information from the American Association of Petroleum Geologists...

Instead they'd rather talk about e-mails taken out of context... It's no different than arguing with a UFO conspiracy theorist... As a mater of fact. The level of corruption they're insinuating is exactly the same.

Keenly · Dec 9, 2009

why are so many people calling for an independent investigation?

JustAnotherFriedDay · Dec 10, 2009

jeffchr said:
You can't fault a guy for making a profit off of what he believes. Al Gore believes in global warming and has positioned himself to profit from it. he is not in public life. it's capitalism. i thought you right wingers all liked capitalism.

We can't even control 1/6 of our economy. The health insurance companies have monopolized their industry at the expense of citizens. And you're worried about Al Gore?

It's a scientific given that global warming exists. These emails and documents from the UK climate research unit will, ultimately, have no impact. They are just a political nuisance.

So the planet is preparing to rid itself of the human race. It may take a while.

But who gives a fuck, right? We'll all live out our lifetimes.

It's not global warming. It's not global cooling. It's global seasonal extremities. Is it a result of man? Who knows, the last ice age had no humans.

jeffchr · Dec 10, 2009

JustAnotherFriedDay said:
It's not global warming. It's not global cooling. It's global seasonal extremities. Is it a result of man? Who knows, the last ice age had no humans.

thanks for the clarification
I googled "global season extremities" and got -0- hits
but I'll let everybody know about the new term you invented

abe23 · Dec 10, 2009

Keenly said:
why are so many people calling for an independent investigation?

Ummm, in one word? Politics. You need another? Money.

Since you guys are so eager for a conspiracy, why don't you start by looking into the conspiring that goes on between the oil, gas and coal industries and the members of congress who defend those industries' right to pollute as if their reelection depended on it...

Seriously, you guys love yourself a good conspiracy theory, but as soon as it starts hitting a little too close to home, we leave the realm of the perfectly plausible and realistic (govt, science, academia and half the world is in on a conspiracy to control your bodily fluids with fluoridation....err, i mean control your lives by lying about climate change) and suddenly it becomes a cooky left-wing nut-job conspiracy theory.

Keenly · Dec 10, 2009

conspiracy is a buzz word used to discredit what you dont understand

here are the facts

data was manipulated

lies were told

legislation was attempted to be put into effect based on false scientific data that had been changed to their liking

thats corruption....

and your ok with that?

it appears the only thing you know about politics comes from the television (I.E. nothing)

jeffchr · Dec 10, 2009

Keenly said:
conspiracy is a buzz word used to discredit what you dont understand

here are the facts

data was manipulated

lies were told

legislation was attempted to be put into effect based on false scientific data that had been changed to their liking

thats corruption....

and your ok with that?

it appears the only thing you know about politics comes from the television (I.E. nothing)

I am not OK with it. I haven't read the actual documents; I've only seen news reports. From what I've heard, I don't like the content of those emails and documents. And the retort in defense of what was quoted is lame. But like I said, I don't have any first-hand experience with the content.

There is plenty of evidence, consensus, scientific study and momentum to keep the green movement rolling.

abe23 · Dec 10, 2009

Keenly said:
conspiracy is a buzz word used to discredit what you dont understand

here are the facts

data was manipulated

lies were told

legislation was attempted to be put into effect based on false scientific data that had been changed to their liking

thats corruption....

and your ok with that?

it appears the only thing you know about politics comes from the television (I.E. nothing)

Ok, I'll play...
No, conspiracy is when people secretly decide to do something nefarious and then deceive or mislead other about their intentions. But ok, i'll leave that word out. You are implying that government, academia, environmentalists and people in niger who have had to leave their land because of desertification are all somehow lying to the world in order to somehow let the UN take control of our lives and cockblock any economic growth. I understand your silly theory....I just happen to think it's poppycock.

Yes, scientists are human and some of the people involved in this stuff tried to cut corners and publish deceptive data, but that doesn't mean that everything science is telling us about what's going on with the planet is bullshit. Do you really think what rush limbaugh and jim inhofe think about carbon-emissions trumps peer-reviewed scientific literature? Another question: do you believe in evolution? Or is that another lie from the evil government-science nexus?

Data manipulated, lies told, legislation enacted based on inaccurate claims? Sounds a bit like the lead-up to the iraq war, but I'm guessing your inquisitive nature wasn't quite on top of that one at the time. I'm not saying that climate science is a lie or that the lies about the iraq invasion would somehow justify that. I'm just saying that you seem only interested in conspiracies that are potential political problems for democrats. I guess it's better to be a partisan hack than a conspiracy nut, but only barely.

Corruption to me is when your congressman gets money from the polluters, puts it into a pac or his reelection chest and then does their bidding in washington. Scientists being sloppy and trying to influence public opinion towards their conclusions is pretty shitty, but it's a long way from corruption.

Everything you know about politics seems to come from AM radio, my friend, but let's not go there. I actually don't even own a television....

jeffchr · Dec 10, 2009

abe23 said:
Ok, I'll play...
No, conspiracy is when people secretly decide to do something nefarious and then deceive or mislead other about their intentions. But ok, i'll leave that word out. You are implying that government, academia, environmentalists and people in niger who have had to leave their land because of desertification are all somehow lying to the world in order to somehow let the UN take control of our lives and cockblock any economic growth. I understand your silly theory....I just happen to think it's poppycock.

Yes, scientists are human and some of the people involved in this stuff tried to cut corners and publish deceptive data, but that doesn't mean that everything science is telling us about what's going on with the planet is bullshit. Do you really think what rush limbaugh and jim inhofe think about carbon-emissions trumps peer-reviewed scientific literature? Another question: do you believe in evolution? Or is that another lie from the evil government-science nexus?

Data manipulated, lies told, legislation enacted based on inaccurate claims? Sounds a bit like the lead-up to the iraq war, but I'm guessing your inquisitive nature wasn't quite on top of that one at the time. I'm not saying that climate science is a lie or that the lies about the iraq invasion would somehow justify that. I'm just saying that you seem only interested in conspiracies that are potential political problems for democrats. I guess it's better to be a partisan hack than a conspiracy nut, but only barely.

Corruption to me is when your congressman gets money from the polluters, puts it into a pac or his reelection chest and then does their bidding in washington. Scientists being sloppy and trying to influence public opinion towards their conclusions is pretty shitty, but it's a long way from corruption.

Everything you know about politics seems to come from AM radio, my friend, but let's not go there. I actually don't even own a television....

70 posts - jesus christ
who is this guy?

way to lay it out there Abe. that's plaigerizable!! :eyesmoke:

ChChoda · Dec 10, 2009

abe23 said:
1-
Ok, I'll play...
No, conspiracy is when people secretly decide to do something nefarious and then deceive or mislead other about their intentions. But ok, i'll leave that word out. You are implying that government, academia, environmentalists and people in niger who have had to leave their land because of desertification are all somehow lying to the world in order to somehow let the UN take control of our lives and cockblock any economic growth. I understand your silly theory....I just happen to think it's poppycock.

2-
Yes, scientists are human and some of the people involved in this stuff tried to cut corners and publish deceptive data, but that doesn't mean that everything science is telling us about what's going on with the planet is bullshit. Do you really think what rush limbaugh and jim inhofe think about carbon-emissions trumps peer-reviewed scientific literature? Another question: do you believe in evolution? Or is that another lie from the evil government-science nexus?

3-
Data manipulated, lies told, legislation enacted based on inaccurate claims? Sounds a bit like the lead-up to the iraq war, but I'm guessing your inquisitive nature wasn't quite on top of that one at the time. I'm not saying that climate science is a lie or that the lies about the iraq invasion would somehow justify that. I'm just saying that you seem only interested in conspiracies that are potential political problems for democrats. I guess it's better to be a partisan hack than a conspiracy nut, but only barely.

4-
Corruption to me is when your congressman gets money from the polluters, puts it into a pac or his reelection chest and then does their bidding in washington. Scientists being sloppy and trying to influence public opinion towards their conclusions is pretty shitty, but it's a long way from corruption.

5-
Everything you know about politics seems to come from AM radio, my friend, but let's not go there. I actually don't even own a television....

1-
Government, academia, and environmentalists? Absolutely. They draw from the same slush fund. I haven't read the "man made global warming report" issued by the Nigerian farmers, though. Can you link to that, please?

2-
Didn't fellow scientists and Governments shun Darwin, in his own time?

3-
It was Bush's fault.

4-
Corruption is when supposed scientists get there funding from the UN, an international political body, with a political agenda.

5-
Neither do those poor Nigerians. Or a computer, you lucky, albeit polluting, bugger.

jeffchr · Dec 10, 2009

ChChoda said:
1-
Government, academia, and environmentalists? Absolutely. They draw from the same slush fund. I haven't read the "man made global warming report" issued by the Nigerian farmers, though. Can you link to that, please?

2-
Didn't fellow scientists and Governments shun Darwin, in his own time?

3-
It was Bush's fault.

4-
Corruption is when supposed scientists get there funding from the UN, an international political body, with a political agenda.

5-
Neither do those poor Nigerians. Or a computer, you lucky, albeit polluting, bugger.

some of that was decent satire, thx. lol

abe23 · Dec 10, 2009

Ok, then....

1- What slush fund are we referring to? Governments get their revenue through taxes on individuals and businesses and if they think economic growth will suffer if we try to reduce gas emissions, how would it be in their interest to do that? Wouldn't they end up loosing revenue? I'll give you that it is in the interest of some researchers and environmental groups to exaggerate their findings (a bit like we all like to exaggerate the benefits of MMJ to suit our cause) but for them to be fabricating this entire is pretty far fetched. But ok....
Desertification in the sahel is just one example and I brought it up because I've seen it first hand, but it's pretty clear that the climate is changing and there are other examples. The question is whether human activity is mainly responsible and the answer seems to be yes.

2 - Yes, there was skepticism about the theory of evolution when darwin first wrote about it. Then it caught on. Today, there are still some morons out there who believe in creationism and most of them agree with you that climate change is a big hoax.

3- Uh huh. Couldn't agree more. But it's the same cretins on the right mouthing off on this issue who were Bush's biggest cheerleaders in 2003. Since january of this year, they are suddenly questioning everything....

4- So is it corruption whenever a government (with it's political agenda) gives funding to a university or research institute? Because in that case, academia is corrupt to the core....

5- Yes, I'm lucky to be living in the west. But the point was that I haven't learned anything about politics from TV, as keenly had suggested, because I don't own one. Or a car, you pedantic, albeit amusing, prick.

How Much Koolaid Would A Climate Cook Drink?

Active Member

Keenly

Guest

Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Keenly

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Keenly

Guest

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member