Global Warming's Terrifying New Math

[Ice_nine]

The rich will start eating us. Jonathan Swift 2.0

Edited December 9, 2012 by Ice_nine

[theculturewarrior]

Or the poor will start eating them... HG Wells 2020

[Aloysius]

L_D for science king of phatmass!

 

but seriously folks, he's never even here anymore.  you should all make threads complaining that pluto should be a planet and post them on his facebook wall until he can't help but come here and post.

[Amppax]

L_D for science king of phatmass!

 

but seriously folks, he's never even here anymore.  you should all make threads complaining that pluto should be a planet and post them on his facebook wall until he can't help but come here and post.

 

I would, but we're not facebook friends.  :cry:

[Nihil Obstat]

I can make this happen. :evil:

Actually one that will really get him is if people start defending intelligent design and rejecting evolution.

[Aloysius]

God intelligently designed Pluto as a planet.

[Nihil Obstat]

God intelligently designed Pluto as a planet.

 

And also global warming is a liberal conspiracy from Pluto.

[4588686]

The worst suffering may start with the poor, but it won't take long to work its way up. It's not exactly going to be easy for the wealthy to buy their way out if food becomes scarce.

 

It's still going to hurt the less wealthy and powerful more than the wealthy and powerful.  That's almost a truism.  But obviously I agree that it's going to impact everyone badly.  Which is why I cannot, cannot, cannot understand why and how parents can be trite or apathetic about this issue. 

[WillT]

It's still going to hurt the less wealthy and powerful more than the wealthy and powerful. That's almost a truism. But obviously I agree that it's going to impact everyone badly. Which is why I cannot, cannot, cannot understand why and how parents can be trite or apathetic about this issue.

I agree that there are scenarios where it could impact the poor disproportionally, but I could easily see it being roughly equal for everyone. At any rate, it's an important issue but I have exams tomorrow and Wednesday so I probably won't post much until that's over. Hopefully the thread won't die between now and then. :)

[Anomaly]

It's still going to hurt the less wealthy and powerful more than the wealthy and powerful.  That's almost a truism.  But obviously I agree that it's going to impact everyone badly.  Which is why I cannot, cannot, cannot understand why and how parents can be trite or apathetic about this issue. 

People are trite and apathetic about it because of the agenda behind it.  You hit the nail on the head when you classify it as a battle between the poor and wealthy.  It's really a battle between already powerful people and other already powerful people, using fear of man-made climate change as a ready weapon.  Global freezing, global warming, they're both political weapons.

 

One of them was the late Stanford University Professor Stephen Schneider who authored The Genesis Strategy, a 1976 book warning that global cooling risks posed a threat to humanity. Schneider later changed that view 180 degrees, serving as a lead author for important parts of three sequential IPCC reports.

Schneider candidly summed up what appears to be a prevalent IPCC view of scientific responsibility: “On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, on the other hand, we are not just scientists, but human beings as well. And like most people, we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that, we need to get some broad-based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of the doubts we might have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”

In other words, trust not what we tell you, but believe that we have your best interests in mind, because our intentions, if not our methods, are ethical. Accept what we tell you for that reason alone. If we have to exaggerate and alarm to get your attention, recognize that this is for a righteous cause.

Nobel Physics laureate Ivar Giaever has called global warming (aka. climate change) a “new religion”. When scientists emulate spiritual prophets, they overstep all ethical bounds. In doing so, they forfeit our confidence.

Edited December 10, 2012 by Anomaly

[Amppax]

God intelligently designed Pluto as a planet.

 

[Amppax]

Also, Darwin was an Alien.  

[southern california guy]

Come on you guys!  If the world is becoming warmer... it must be caused by people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  And it must be caused by CFC's, or carbon, or smog, or pollution, or um... I don't know.

 

It cannot have a natural cause -- like the sun...  And it can't be a natural phenomenon or you could find evidence of it in the rock record -- which you can....

 

And our sun must be a perfectly "stable star" -- which it isn't.. 

 

And the results from it will definitely be disastrous -- which they weren't in the past...  

 

And if glaciers are melting on some parts of the earth than glaciers must not be growing on other parts -- which they are..  

 

And the theory that global warming is man made must be the only scientific explanation -- which it isn't..   

 

And we must do something to stop it -- which we probably can't...

 

Face it, the end of the world is "near"!  But if may be a long long long lonnnng time in coming.. :reaper:

Edited December 10, 2012 by southern california guy

[Fidei Defensor]

Come on you guys!  If the world is becoming warmer... it must be caused by people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  And it must be caused by CFC's, or carbon, or smog, or pollution, or um... I don't know.

 

It cannot have a natural cause -- like the sun...  And it can't be a natural phenomenon or you could find evidence of it in the rock record -- which you can....

 

And our sun must be a perfectly "stable star" -- which it isn't.. 

 

And the results from it will definitely be disastrous -- which they weren't in the past...  

 

And if glaciers are melting on some parts of the earth than glaciers must not be growing on other parts -- which they are..  

 

And the theory that global warming is man made must be the only scientific explanation -- which it isn't..   

 

And we must do something to stop it -- which we probably can't...

 

Face it, the end of the world is "near"!  But if may be a long long long lonnnng time in coming.. :reaper:

 

No one is saying that natural phenomenon aren't contributing. However, the bulk of the scientific observation points to humans accelerating the warming process.  If you're going to assert the things you have, you need to provide some citations and evidence to support your claim. Others have done so, and so must you.

[4588686]

People are trite and apathetic about it because of the agenda behind it. You hit the nail on the head when you classify it as a battle between the poor and wealthy. It's really a battle between already powerful people and other already powerful people, using fear of man-made climate change as a ready weapon. Global freezing, global warming, they're both political weapons.

One of them was the late Stanford University Professor Stephen Schneider who authored The Genesis Strategy, a 1976 book warning that global cooling risks posed a threat to humanity. Schneider later changed that view 180 degrees, serving as a lead author for important parts of three sequential IPCC reports.
Schneider candidly summed up what appears to be a prevalent IPCC view of scientific responsibility: “On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, on the other hand, we are not just scientists, but human beings as well. And like most people, we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that, we need to get some broad-based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of the doubts we might have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”
In other words, trust not what we tell you, but believe that we have your best interests in mind, because our intentions, if not our methods, are ethical. Accept what we tell you for that reason alone. If we have to exaggerate and alarm to get your attention, recognize that this is for a righteous cause.
Nobel Physics laureate Ivar Giaever has called global warming (aka. climate change) a “new religion”. When scientists emulate spiritual prophets, they overstep all ethical bounds. In doing so, they forfeit our confidence.

Just floopy me in in the head.