Why is the climate change debate a political one in the United States?

Not Quite Right

Trusted Member
May 11, 2013
1,636
5
38
Visit site
You keep proving hydorgen3's point... thanks.

Seriously, is that the best you can do???, or am I expected to wait until FOX News & Friends is over to receive some type of relevant response? In all honesty HYDROGEN3 has yet to make a point. Unless the point was to show the rest of the board their complete and utter ignorance of the subject matter, then that point has been made quite effectively ...
Now my sincere apologies for continually interrupting your daily briefing of BS. This should help you catch up on the latest intel ...
Fox & Friends CRU email segment: Climate change denial? Check. Email falsehoods? Check. Outrage? Check. | Video | Media Matters for America
 

hydrogen3

Well-known member
Jan 16, 2013
1,056
0
0
Visit site
Okay Mr. Common Sense, Please explain how it's common sense that pumping your body full of garbage will have adverse effects, and eventually kill you?
View attachment 67850

Yet that same common sense doesn't tell you that doing essentially the same things to our planet will produce similar results?
View attachment 67851View attachment 67852View attachment 67853View attachment 67854



Good grief man.. Yes, we pollute the planet.... That's 100% correct.. Point?
 

Amamba

Well-known member
Mar 4, 2014
191
0
16
Visit site
With all due respect, many people calling themselves "conservatives" are not. Dubya was the prime example - a radical if there ever was one. (His dad was more of a traditional conservative).

"Conservatism" and "liberalism" are such broad, vague, misused and abused labels, they hardly mean anything anymore.

There's a change in climate. That much we do know. It may have some (large, small, medium) human component. This is safe to assume. There are things that can only be done on the global scale, you can't fix the pollution problem in the EU/US by pushing the manufacturing to the countries that are polluting even more, in the end you just end up with more pollution and fewer jobs (and as your economic power dwindles, so does your ability to influence these other countries). We're seeing it happening now.

Both the self styled "conservatives" and self styled "environmentalist" are fighting an ideological battle and not really addressing the real issues. The "deniers" refuse to accept that there's a real scientific consensus, or that there's even a man made component to climate change. The "tree huggers" refuse to accept that one-sided restrictive laws in the end only result in more pollution, not less. It's all just blind faith and pre-canned ideas. On both sides, mind you.

You don't want to burn fossil fuel ? Build more nuclear stations. There's currently no better alternative. Wind and solar are niche and will remain niche for quite some time.

You want to impose suffocating environmental regulations on domestic companies ? Do you then also have the power to impose severe trade tariffs on imports ? Oh, you have no control over that ? Too bad, you just increased global pollution and shrunk your economy.

There's no free lunch.
 

hydrogen3

Well-known member
Jan 16, 2013
1,056
0
0
Visit site
Position Statements By Other Major Scientific Institutes

The following is a list of climate change position papers put out by the major governmental scientific institutes of the world that deal with the atmosphere, ocean, and climate. All of these organizations agree that significant human-caused climate change is occurring:

United Nations IPCC
American Meteorological Society
NOAA
U.S. National Academy of Sciences
NASA
EPA
American Geophysical Union
National Center for Atmospheric Research
Royal Society of the United Kingdom
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Science Council of Japan, Russian Academy of Science, Brazilian Academy of Sciences, Royal Society of Canada, Chinese Academy of Sciences, French Academy of Sciences, German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina, Indian National Science Academy, Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Italy), Royal Society (UK) (PDF File)
Australian Academy of Sciences, Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts, Brazilian Academy of Sciences, Royal Society of Canada, Caribbean Academy of Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, French Academy of Sciences, German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina, Indian National Science Academy, Indonesian Academy of Sciences, Royal Irish Academy, Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Italy), Academy of Sciences Malaysia, Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, and Royal Society (UK)

United nations..imagine that.. We discussed the U.N already. Do you by chance watch The" Alan Colmes Show," He's on Fox news... What a slide show....
 

A895

Well-known member
Jan 17, 2014
1,038
0
0
Visit site
Where is the so called evidence for climate change or now climate collapse you speak of? Well!?! Several people have posted research showing the Earth has not warmed in the past 17-20 years.... Oceans are actually cooling..

Ignore the obvious...

It hurts talking to a wall. I can't even....

Posted via the iMore App for Android
 

A895

Well-known member
Jan 17, 2014
1,038
0
0
Visit site
You can't argue with believers.

You don't have to have any belief. The climate is changing, that isn't and shouldn't be in debate. The problem is we aren't doing nothing so that our kids and grandkids won't be breathing CO2 or be forced to abandon earth because previous generation were all happy go lucky with pollution.

Posted via the iMore App for Android
 

A895

Well-known member
Jan 17, 2014
1,038
0
0
Visit site
Right as rain.

Why is it belief? Why can't you and others separate beliefs and facts? Fact is the Earth climate is changing, fact is people like you sticking your fingers in your ears going "lalalalala", thinking everything is politically motivated and ignoring hard facts backed by a lot of people.

I'm sorry if you believe that conserving the Earth's environment is some hidden political agenda.

Posted via the iMore App for Android
 

jdhooghe

Well-known member
Aug 25, 2013
522
0
0
Visit site
Once upon a time it was scientific consensus the earth was flat...how did that turn out?

That is how science works. You have your hypothesis and you test it. The flat-earth hypothesis didn't stand up to evidence and neither the hypothesis that the earth was the center of the universe. Copernicus and Galileo said otherwise and the Church labeled them as sinners who said the Bible was wrong. Are you going to say that Quantum Mechanics is all wrong because Classical Mechanics was ultimately wrong despite scientists believing in it since Galileo/Isaac Newton/James Maxwell/the rest? No, you aren't because that is not how science is done. Once upon a time scientists believed the earth was flat but due to scientific reasoning and evidence you now have your iPhone due to the same scientific method. Science is not based on belief or bias. If you believe scientists are all bunk then you should give up all your modern day gadgets, medicine, electricity, and sanitation. That is all science.

These scientists are collecting data and testing it. There is such a thing called scrutiny in the scientific community and if you try to fake it, you get absolutely reamed and your reputation goes to ****.
 

hydrogen3

Well-known member
Jan 16, 2013
1,056
0
0
Visit site
That video was from your BFF's over at FOX News & Friends spewing their typical erroneous BS.

Ineresing wat you choose to quote and reply to.. Still ignoring the facts......

Ya"all can see the morning...But we can see the light....Please don't cry because Al Gore told you that lie...Just let it slide....
 

Trending Posts

Forum statistics

Threads
260,016
Messages
1,765,330
Members
441,221
Latest member
CØR