Life In 19x19

Magicwand wrote:I am surprised that so many ppl have different view than mine.
views are not only different it is a religion to them.
there are many facts and evidences that goes against their belief but will not hear or consider any.

Religion? Everyone would be happy to believe that climate change is not a threat. Unfortunately, evidence from reliable sources indicates otherwise. Ignoring evidence religiously better describes what climate change deniers do. Open minded people look at the evidence. When the evidence is incorrect (see Hermann's post), reasonable people either look for better evidence or change their mind. Unless of course their objection is not based on evidence but rather is politically motivated (see mirror?).

funny

daal wrote:

Magicwand wrote:I am surprised that so many ppl have different view than mine.
views are not only different it is a religion to them.
there are many facts and evidences that goes against their belief but will not hear or consider any.

Religion? Everyone would be happy to believe that climate change is not a threat. Unfortunately, evidence from reliable sources indicates otherwise. Ignoring evidence religiously better describes what climate change deniers do. Open minded people look at the evidence. When the evidence is incorrect (see Hermann's post), reasonable people either look for better evidence or change their mind. Unless of course their objection is not based on evidence but rather is politically motivated (see mirror?).

what evidence you have that global warming is caused by pollution?
i will answer it for you. NO EVIDENCE.
what evidence you have that climate change is a threat?
No evidence again!!!
reliable source??? there is two different views and you are picking one and i am picking other. now what make you right and me wrong?
I can post counter example of hermann's post but i wont.. because i know you wont change your mind after i give you my evidence.

now you see mirror!!

Magicwand wrote:I can post counter example of hermann's post but i wont.. because i know you wont change your mind after i give you my evidence.

Counter-example? I simply pointed out that your source took a four year old video and put a new date on it. How do you give a counter-example to that?

Magicwand wrote:I am surprised that so many ppl have different view than mine.
views are not only different it is a religion to them.
there are many facts and evidences that goes against their belief but will not hear or consider any.

i guess that is typical of liberls so not surprised.

mybestthrowaway: your sarcasm was meant to ridicule my belief..then you have failed. since english is my second language i really didnt understand anything you wrote. next time try something i might understand.

Some people only understand what they want.
The worst argument that I have seen for a long time.

But keep your religion, but don't be so surprised that there are different opinions, because some people (try to) understand where you fail.

Boidhre wrote:

Magicwand wrote:I am surprised that so many ppl have different view than mine.
views are not only different it is a religion to them.
there are many facts and evidences that goes against their belief but will not hear or consider any.

i guess that is typical of liberls so not surprised.

mybestthrowaway: your sarcasm was meant to ridicule my belief..then you have failed. since english is my second language i really didnt understand anything you wrote. next time try something i might understand.

Do you know my biggest problem with your post? That you think the answer to a scientific question is a political position. This attitude being so prevalent in your country is deeply worrying to me.

In the 19th century the Missouri legislature passed a law declaring the value of π to be exactly 3.

In the past conservatives used to care about the environment. Think Teddy Roosevelt and the national parks, Richard Nixon and the EPA, George HW Bush and acid rain.

This earth-hating aspect of conservatives is new, and very scary. Ideology over reason.

I find mildly (to put it mildly, too) disturbing that Magicwand thinks this is a political issue while taking a masters degree in a mathematics-related field. As a mathematician, I can easily pull temperature data and get a loess trend that indicates rise. Same thing with CO2 absorption in the ocean, deforestation levels. Correlation usually does not mean causation, but since the effect of CO2 in the blockage of radiation is well known, arguing against man-made climate change is downright... well, won't put any adjective. Arguing against the fact that is a theat is actually stupid. Lots of people live in coastal areas that sooner or later (likely sooner) will be inches down the sea.

RBerenguel wrote:Lots of people live in coastal areas that sooner or later (likely sooner) will be inches down the sea.

Which isn't even the main concern with global warming / climate change.

Bill Spight wrote:In the 19th century the Missouri legislature passed a law declaring the value of π to be exactly 3.

At least better than declaring 3 to have the exact value of pi

what evidence you have that global warming is caused by pollution?
i will answer it for you. NO EVIDENCE.
what evidence you have that climate change is a threat?
No evidence again!!!

Then i want to know which kind of evidence would be sufficient, as there is no experiment wich can be done again like in physics with et ceteris paribus.

As an amateur is see circumstancuial evidences. I had two semestres of meteorology, in which we were on the surface of the theme.

So we have the normal Greenhouse effect, mainly produced by water. That one I can calculate myself. (in the meaning of the earths temperature 33° warmer than it should be)
Then i can understand a made-easy-version of the theory why especially three-atomed molecules absorb different radiation in other wavelengths. To doubt that would be nonsense cause it is verified by simple experiments.
The theory that the effect of these gases is the reason for the normal Greenhouse effect seems very likely to me.
Then ondoubtedly we put more of these gases into the atmosphere.
In my noobish mechanical thought model I'd guess that more of the same causality gives more of the same effect.
Further we get the observation that the mean temperature is on an upgoing trend.
For myself I'd believe it very likely to be the gases causing this trend.
And there are theories predominant in the scientific society that go along this way of thoughts.

I'd need a very good reason to believe it was something other that causes the trend, especially as i know no other mechanism that could be responsible.

asura wrote:

Bill Spight wrote:In the 19th century the Missouri legislature passed a law declaring the value of π to be exactly 3.

At least better than declaring 3 to have the exact value of pi

Things like this always make me think of Canute demonstrating that he couldn't command the tide.

Magicwand wrote:what evidence you have that global warming is caused by pollution?
i will answer it for you. NO EVIDENCE.
what evidence you have that climate change is a threat?
No evidence again!!!
reliable source??? there is two different views and you are picking one and i am picking other. now what make you right and me wrong?
I can post counter example of hermann's post but i wont.. because i know you wont change your mind after i give you my evidence.

now you see mirror!!

You remind me of Rush Limbaugh a little bit, dude. Same kind if blinders, same kind of arguments.

First you say there is no proof and no data for global warming - but when people produce this proof and this data, all you can produce to counter it are politically-driven and highly biased non-scientific articles from highly politicized sources. And then *you* turn around and accuse others of being 'political' about this issue. Give us one *scientific* study, not only a political propaganda, and we can talk.

Now you seem to have changed your tune from 'there is no global warming' to 'its not human-made' and you say there is no proof. This might be so - but there is a very strong correlation - which is the best we can do, really. Just pull out the numbers - they are freely available, and check for yourself instead of regurgitating political positions somebody else puts in your head.

Well, strong correlation does not seem to be sufficient to you, you insist that if there is no solid proof it must be false. All I can say is - good luck with your math study if this is how your logic goes.

Anyways - you might be willing to stake the lives of your kids and grandkids (if you have any) on the chance that global warming is not human-made or at least human-influenced, or even that it does not exist at all. I am glad so many people here (and not only here) have the brains and the foresight to disagree with you. Including pretty much the whole scientific community around the world.

PS>
There is a *ton* of political and economical interest in denying global warming. There is a lot of money in it - and this is why it is driven so hard. And this is why there is such a strong political push to convince as many simpletons as possible that it is a myth. The ones that have vested interest in such denials are those who care about tomorrow's profit more than about the world they leave behind.

Don't be a simpleton, MW.

People just loooooooove talking about global warming. I googled "global warming" plus a variety of totally irrelevant keywords and got the following results.


Of course, there are many more online bulletin boards that are strictly dedicated to the discussion of global warming. However, no matter what the online forum is about, there seems to be a good chance that there will be at least one long thread on global warming. For whatever reason, global warming is like catnip for keyboard warriors. Global warming is a very important issue of our times, but it is not the only important issue. However, very few important issues are discussed so ubiquitously.

I don't want to fight that lovable bear called Magicwand, so I won't join the discussion, but I think everyone can see the humor in this thread being one of the longest threads on L19. Even RJ might get jealous if this thread keeps going.