Toggle sidebar

Global Warming the big liberal hoax

V

va87eer

Freshman
Jan 16, 2006
2,565
78
48
No matter your opinion, if you're really interested in the truth I'd suggest reading a broad variety of publications from scientists who are specialists in this field.

It takes a few seconds to find something on google that supports a pre-conceived opinion, no matter what that might be and how it was arrived at.

For the most part you can skip articles you see in the mainstream and not-so- mainstream media as the majority of them are junk. Or if you have half a brain, read them and recognize the biases in their writing style and methodology, source check them, and then make up your own mind.

The lowest common denominator in this discussion is those who make their decision based on the input of some political party or wingnut publications like Mother Jones and Breitbart.
 
W

WVPATX

Sophomore
Jan 27, 2005
28,206
105
53
va87eer said:
No matter your opinion, if you're really interested in the truth I'd suggest reading a broad variety of publications from scientists who are specialists in this field.

It takes a few seconds to find something on google that supports a pre-conceived opinion, no matter what that might be and how it was arrived at.

For the most part you can skip articles you see in the mainstream and not-so- mainstream media as the majority of them are junk. Or if you have half a brain, read them and recognize the biases in their writing style and methodology, source check them, and then make up your own mind.

The lowest common denominator in this discussion is those who make their decision based on the input of some political party or wingnut publications like Mother Jones and Breitbart.
Click to expand...

I agree with that. But one must wonder why the name change from global warming to climate change? This is a big deal. Warming is not occurring so to keep hope alive, the switch to climate change (which no one can deny).

Also, reading balanced analyses is fine. But as we saw with the leaked IPCC emails, warmists scientists have conspired to ensure articles and studies that question global warming are not published, nor peer reviewed. Even this Nobel laureate mentioned that he can't get his studies published. He called global warming a religion.

Hopefully, things will change. The U.N. recently admitted that the models of global warming are wrong and that warming is much smaller than the models predicted. That is a start. Obama is a zealous believer. Maybe with Trump who is a skeptic (as scientists should be), we can begin to get unbiased science out of U.S. agencies. Far too often, scientists chase the money, the government grants, the foundation grants. And the scientists know what position the government and the foundations support. It's no surprise their findings correlate with those providing the funding.
 
B

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
WVPATX said:
I agree with that. But one must wonder why the name change from global warming to climate change? This is a big deal. Warming is not occurring so to keep hope alive, the switch to climate change (which no one can deny).

Also, reading balanced analyses is fine. But as we saw with the leaked IPCC emails, warmists scientists have conspired to ensure articles and studies that question global warming are not published, nor peer reviewed. Even this Nobel laureate mentioned that he can't get his studies published. He called global warming a religion.

Hopefully, things will change. The U.N. recently admitted that the models of global warming are wrong and that warming is much smaller than the models predicted. That is a start. Obama is a zealous believer. Maybe with Trump who is a skeptic (as scientists should be), we can begin to get unbiased science out of U.S. agencies. Far too often, scientists chase the money, the government grants, the foundation grants. And the scientists know what position the government and the foundations support. It's no surprise their findings correlate with those providing the funding.
Click to expand...
Warming IS occurring actually. But they changed the name, because some narrow minded people that have a prejudice to not believe in environmental issues (mostly because it effects there financial well being) would take it TOO LITERALLY. And see only temperature rise in the atmosphere as the absolute indicator of the occurrence.
 
M

Monroeer

Junior
Dec 15, 2013
1,213
278
83
Both sides like to cherry pick their information to prove their points. As said above, reading and listening to articles from many different sources is the only way to have an open mind about it and decide then.

One point in his discussion that just jumped out as ridiculous - he said the oil rig off the Norway coast was going to quit burning fossil fuels to generate electricity. Then says, what are they going to do with that extra fuel? They are going to send it to Europe where they are going to just burn it - so there will be no savings in emissions of carbon dioxide.

It doesn't take a scientist to see what is wrong with that statement.
 
W

WVMade

Redshirt
Aug 23, 2016
1,221
0
0
You'd have to be a fool to believe polluting the Earth has any effect. derp
 
W

WVPATX

Sophomore
Jan 27, 2005
28,206
105
53
Boomboom521 said:
Warming IS occurring actually. But they changed the name, because some narrow minded people that have a prejudice to not believe in environmental issues (mostly because it effects there financial well being) would take it TOO LITERALLY. And see only temperature rise in the atmosphere as the absolute indicator of the occurrence.
Click to expand...

No, they changed the name because warming over the past 20 years has not happened according to both satellite and weather balloon data. And climate change is all about global warming. The attempt to scare the people to believe that CO2 is warming the earth so drastically that Florida and New York will soon be underwater so that the same people will then be willing to give up trillions of dollars of value to Third World countries to avoid using fossil fuel's. I'd also be willing to give up modern conveniences like air-conditioning so that they aren't soon flooded by the Atlantic or Pacific ocean.
 
W

WVPATX

Sophomore
Jan 27, 2005
28,206
105
53
Boomboom521 said:
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-...prd=true&firstbaseyear=1901&lastbaseyear=2000

This just the mean temp for the month of Nov from 1895-2016.
Click to expand...

Again, you have to look at what devices they are using to measure temperatures. Ground temperature measurements are inherently unreliable. Keep in mind, we have been coming out of a little ice age since 1860. Naturally, the climate is going to warm. The hottest year on record is 1930. Or some year very close to that. And we all remember Dr. Mann's famous remark in the hacked email, "hide the decline."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
WV Sports

Latest

  1. 01 WV Sports What Rich Rodriguez wants most from his quarterbacks
  2. 02 WV Sports Jay Boulware sees NFL traits in Cam Cook's complete game
  3. 03 WV Sports Why Rich Rodriguez believes Rick Trickett is the best to ever do it
  4. 04 WV Sports West Virginia fall camp is here. Join WVSports.com for 75% off
  5. 05 WV Sports Inside West Virginia's $6.8 million investment in its football staff
Top Bottom