Politics: The Undiscovered Country

[ShadySands]

2 hours ago, Skarpen said:

http://www.thegwpf.com/european-climate-declaration-there-is-no-climate-emergency/

So much for consensus on climate catastrophe. 

This are the guys I can get behind on climate issues. Not some deranged teenager screaming idiocy.

 

Not really

A small anti-climate change activist group writing a letter to the UN doesn't really mean much of anything and has even less to do with the scientific consensus on the issue.

Edited September 24, 2019 by ShadySands

[smjjames]

25 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

One that would have some ideas and solutions that aren't complete lunacy or powergrab rather than fearmongering and brainwashing kids. Oh and not being a hypocrite would be nice. I'm a little fed up with climate warriors that fight pollution with littering

Fair enough. Though we are at the point where some of the solutions really have to be radical and dramatic. Also, I haven't heard of any proposals to fight pollution by littering more, so I'm confused by that part. Are you referring to the plastic straw ban stuff?

28 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

anti red meat advocates that engage in mass steak grilling.

I think those are the counterprotestors? Though I do get your point about hypocrisy.

[ShadySands]

1 hour ago, Gromnir said:

oh, and 'cause am getting figurative hoarse from repeating, the biden stuff and ukraine calls and all the other guesses and demands for transcripts and whatnot is all freaking side issues. there is a credible and urgent whistleblower complaint which is being withheld by the dni 'cause o' urging from somebody not in dni chain of command. how is this fact quickly becoming tangential? 

It's Trump's superpower.

[Hurlshort]

The supposed deranged teenager, as Skarpie called her, is a teenager with aspergers. She is also not pushing a specific agenda, but rather imploring people to listen to the vast majority of scientists on the issues. 

But hey, gotta dig around until you find a few folks who reinforce your chosen narrative, I suppose.

[Skarpen]

33 minutes ago, ShadySands said:

Not really

A small anti-climate change activist group writing a letter to the UN doesn't really mean much of anything and has even less to do with the scientific consensus on the issue.

Not small and not activists. 500 leading climate scientists who are asking for talking the issue like adults. Feel free to point me to other scientists that agree with the fear mongering regarding climate change. And might I point in advance neither Greta nor AOC are scientists.

 

11 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

The supposed deranged teenager, as Skarpie called her, is a teenager with aspergers. She is also not pushing a specific agenda, but rather imploring people to listen to the vast majority of scientists on the issues. 

But hey, gotta dig around until you find a few folks who reinforce your chosen narrative, I suppose.

I re-listened to her "speech" if one call call it that. Not a single sentence was about what actual scientists are saying on the climate and for people to listen to them. It was melodramatic political shtick of the highest order. I'm agreeing on something with Greta however, she said that she shouldn't be there and I concur.

27 minutes ago, smjjames said:

Fair enough. Though we are at the point where some of the solutions really have to be radical and dramatic. Also, I haven't heard of any proposals to fight pollution by littering more, so I'm confused by that part. Are you referring to the plastic straw ban stuff?

I think those are the counterprotestors? Though I do get your point about hypocrisy.

I really doubt that any reasonable scientific solution would be as radical or dramatic as what some politicians are advocating for. I mean Bernie "minimum wage, but not from me" Sanders is advocating for population control.

In the first one about littering I'm refering to DC climate change protests

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-shut-down-dc-climate-protests-are-a-trojan-horse-for-socialism 

And the second ones are Dems presidential candidates. 

https://freebeacon.com/politics/dems-cook-10500-steaks-while-lecturing-americans-about-eating-less-meat/

[Gromnir]

26 minutes ago, ShadySands said:

It's Trump's superpower.

at least maxwell lord had to suffer the scanners kinda nose bleed when he used his powers. 

HA! Good Fun!

[ManifestedISO]

did not have 'unanimous Senate approval' or 'bipartisan complaint investigation' on my Constitution bingo card

which is not to make light of it ... this week is the most pivotal in the nation's history

 

[smjjames]

@Skarpen I don't see 'fight pollution with pollution' in that washington examiner link, but again, and drivel screaming about socialism on the link aside, I get your point about hypocrisy,

[ShadySands]

1 hour ago, Skarpen said:

Not small and not activists. 500 leading climate scientists who are asking for talking the issue like adults. Feel free to point me to other scientists that agree with the fear mongering regarding climate change. And might I point in advance neither Greta nor AOC are scientists.

They're not all scientists and even if they were what's 500 against the entirety of all scientists who disagree with them.

[Zoraptor]

Well yeah, you could probably find that number of scientists who (genuinely) think smoking doesn't cause lung cancer as well. It's kind of the fundamental problem of science that it's very difficult to unequivocally prove anything in a complex system.

I have to agree with Skarpie on Thunberg's speech though. It was the UN equivalent of someone being outraged on twitter or, god forbid, tumblr. She's young sure, but Malala was a similar age and far more impressive precisely because she didn't resort to histrionics.

1 hour ago, Skarpen said:

I really doubt that any reasonable scientific solution would be as radical or dramatic as what some politicians are advocating for. I mean Bernie "minimum wage, but not from me" Sanders is advocating for population control.

Population control is absolutely 100% essential. To quote the old axiom: anyone who believes in unlimited growth in a finite environment is either stupid, or an economist politician.

If climate change is a scam it's not because it isn't happening, it's because the only things that will get done about it are politically expedient guff around the edges. You don't get a peep about our population growing 25% in 5 years here because it makes the economy look like it's growing and they can kick the superannuation can down the road for another decade, but huge tracts of productive agricultural land are going into McMansions with all that lovely CO2 generated by the concrete, machinery etc. Instead we have to focus on methane which doesn't even accumulate and avoiding highrises because that's for overseas slums.

[Malcador]

4 hours ago, Hurlshot said:

The supposed deranged teenager, as Skarpie called her, is a teenager with aspergers. She is also not pushing a specific agenda, but rather imploring people to listen to the vast majority of scientists on the issues. 

But hey, gotta dig around until you find a few folks who reinforce your chosen narrative, I suppose.

Somewhat funny to see people slam her for melodramatics or label her as deranged when they idolize Trump.  

[ShadySands]

12 people in the next debate as Gabbard qualifies

[Guard Dog]

20 minutes ago, ShadySands said:

12 people in the next debate as Gabbard qualifies

I was happy to see that. Still holding out hope she can climb back into this. 

[Skarpen]

3 hours ago, smjjames said:

@Skarpen I don't see 'fight pollution with pollution' in that washington examiner link, but again, and drivel screaming about socialism on the link aside, I get your point about hypocrisy,

I said littering and the part with throwing confetti and such.

3 hours ago, ShadySands said:

They're not all scientists and even if they were what's 500 against the entirety of all scientists who disagree with them.

Please provide those scientists who do so. No scientist agree with the climate alarmists. Scientific community is pushing back on fearmongering and doomsday scenarios.

3 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

Population control is absolutely 100% essential. To quote the old axiom: anyone who believes in unlimited growth in a finite environment is either stupid, or an economist politician.

If climate change is a scam it's not because it isn't happening, it's because the only things that will get done about it are politically expedient guff around the edges. You don't get a peep about our population growing 25% in 5 years here because it makes the economy look like it's growing and they can kick the superannuation can down the road for another decade, but huge tracts of productive agricultural land are going into McMansions with all that lovely CO2 generated by the concrete, machinery etc. Instead we have to focus on methane which doesn't even accumulate and avoiding highrises because that's for overseas slums.

You do understand what population control means and why it's an evil idea right?

[Guard Dog]

@Gromnir: Yes I understand everything you said. Short posts are ill suited for nuance. And while it was not completely accurate to say the outcomes of the Muller affair in any way proved Trump's innocence the end result was pretty much the same. 

[Maedhros]

9 hours ago, Skarpen said:

One that would have some ideas and solutions that aren't complete lunacy or powergrab rather than fearmongering and brainwashing kids. Oh and not being a hypocrite would be nice. I'm a little fed up with climate warriors that fight pollution with littering or anti red meat advocates that engage in mass steak grilling.

Again, people being hypocrites doesn't make climate change less real. It's as if you're unable to see the scientific consensus (instead listening to "smoking isn't harmful!" equivalent of scientists) because of your focus on people who don't matter. Why is the mass body of scientific work irrelevant to you?

I agree that fearmongering is bad though. That won't solve much, and only create barriers between people. I like the ones who go at it in a positive creative way (warning, some facts/fearmongering, but still a pretty cool invention): www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/09/30/can-a-burger-help-solve-climate-change/amp

Edited September 25, 2019 by Maedhros

[Skarpen]

3 minutes ago, Maedhros said:

Again, people being hypocrites doesn't make climate change less real. It's as if you're unable to see the scientific consensus (instead listening to "smoking isn't harmful!" equivalent of scientists) because of your focus on people who don't matter. Why is the mass body of scientific work irrelevant to you?

Huh? I'm the only one here who actually listens to scientists on the matter instead of fearmongers and political crooks looking to grab more power. The rest seem to follow the "people who don't matter". Why is the mass body of scientific work irrelevant to you?

[smjjames]

Looks like the WH is feeling the pressure, they’re now preparing to release the whistleblower complaint.

edit:no desire to fix that link on mobile (iPad) since highlighting blocks of text is so clunky. 

 

[ManifestedISO]

preparing a redacted version, according to the Times

if the whistleblower does testify this week, would expect Friday, which is Native American Day observed, in CA ... some kind of poignant irony if the beginning of the end of authoritarianism in the United States coincides, nevermind that this whole thing came to light on the birthday of the Constitution

[Gfted1]

The WH should trot out their own mentally challenged and emotionally disturbed child to fight these charges. Its great theater! Ah wait, they've been doing that for a few years now.

[Maedhros]

7 hours ago, Skarpen said:

Huh? I'm the only one here who actually listens to scientists on the matter instead of fearmongers and political crooks looking to grab more power. The rest seem to follow the "people who don't matter". Why is the mass body of scientific work irrelevant to you?

The GWPF is your idea of serious scientists? I repeat, there is a consensus (at over 90%), and you're ignoring it - instead choosing to listen to the creationists/flat-earthers/"smoking isn't harmful!"-equivalents.

https://thebulletin.org/2019/08/millions-of-times-later-97-percent-climate-consensus-still-faces-denial/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/sep/27/global-warming-ipcc-report-humans

Edited September 25, 2019 by Maedhros

[Skarpen]

37 minutes ago, Maedhros said:

The GWPF is your idea of serious scientists? I repeat, there is a consensus (at over 90%), and you're ignoring it - instead choosing to listen to the creationists/flat-earthers/"smoking isn't harmful!"-equivalents.

https://thebulletin.org/2019/08/millions-of-times-later-97-percent-climate-consensus-still-faces-denial/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/sep/27/global-warming-ipcc-report-humans

Huh? This is not what I talk about or what is discussed here. You want to support claims by fearmongers and political crooks by citing scientists consensus on something else? Doesn't work like that. 

Please provide scientists agreeing with statements like we will be extinct in 10 years and so on. 

That the climate is changing and we are contributing as part of the ecosystem is something ppl learn in school. It's nothing new. The extent is larger than expected, but overall it was never denied. 

But using scientists findings and adding to them some phantasmagories about apocalypse coming.

[smjjames]

To whoever fixed up the link earlier, thanks.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Pidesco
No worries. :)

[Pidesco]

4 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

Huh? This is not what I talk about or what is discussed here. You want to support claims by fearmongers and political crooks by citing scientists consensus on something else? Doesn't work like that. 

Please provide scientists agreeing with statements like we will be extinct in 10 years and so on. 

That the climate is changing and we are contributing as part of the ecosystem is something ppl learn in school. It's nothing new. The extent is larger than expected, but overall it was never denied. 

But using scientists findings and adding to them some phantasmagories about apocalypse coming.

Who the what now? Who are these people worried about mankind being extinct 10 years from now? Are you being openly disingenuous for poops and giggles, or are you really that much of a believer in things that are plainly not true? Since when is the climate change argument between people who think climate change is happening but everything is fine, and people who think humanity will be extinguished in 10 years? Are you perchance willfully strawmanning and goal post moving in a single post? Say it ain't so.

[213374U]

1 hour ago, Maedhros said:

https://thebulletin.org/2019/08/millions-of-times-later-97-percent-climate-consensus-still-faces-denial/

The article claims 97% "consensus", but if you actually go to the referenced study, only ~33% of of the articles endorse AGW in the abstracts, while ~66% were found to have "no position" on it. It is only a 97% consensus when they looked at which amount of authors whose studies endorse AGW... who then also agree that humans are the primary cause of anthropogenic global warming. In other words, do you agree that human-caused global warming is caused by humans? 97% say yes.

The author dismissed these observations as a result of authors "not wanting to state the obvious" and abstracts being "valuable real estate". He even threw in an appeal to authority (to himself, ofc), in case you weren't suspicious enough.

This kind of numerical misrepresentation shouldn't go unchallenged, even if one agrees with the author's position. This is the kind of stunt you'd expect from FOX and CNN, not scientists.