• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Historian Looks at Climate Change


Not only a climate denier, but also a science skeptic.
Again: *L*
 
Robertinfremont said:
He is from Canada. He has his Doctors degree. And he looks at Climate as a historian.

What do you have to lose being educated?

Click to expand...

If he has anything other to say than human caused global warming is a reality, I wouldn't waste my time.
 
watsup said:
Because he would be totally wrong.
Click to expand...

I wish the alarmists spent more time flying an airplane. We are very interested in climate. Climate is just longer period weather. Temp rises should not alarm you. If you have been harmed by rising temp, please make your case.
 
Robertinfremont said:
I wish the alarmists spent more time flying an airplane. We are very interested in climate. Climate is just longer period weather. Temp rises should not alarm you. If you have been harmed by rising temp, please make your case.
Click to expand...

The “you” in question is humanity in general, and yes, Eskimos and South Sea Islanders are presently suffering harm to their environment as a result of manmade global warming. They are acting as the canary in the cage at the present time, but it will get worse and affect quite literally millions of humans in the future. Of this there is simply no doubt.
 

We have a saying in flying. Weather is not predictable. And so long as man can't predict weather, he can't predict climate.

Be aware you did nothing to harm Eskimos. If you feel you did, I suggest you donate to them.
 
He'll be granted the credibility he deserves as a ph.d historian. But he'll suffer the denials the same way Greta Thunberg does. If anybody claims to know more than their learning entitles them to know then they will make enough waves to catch the interest of Climate scientists. Then he will be worth the experts time to take down.

Apparently he hasn't earned enough interest in his denial theories yet to be taken down. He may have to be but he might just continue to be ignored.

Greta had to go through the period in which lay persons tried to take her down too. But her denialists didn't receive any backing from climate science experts. Mostly because she didn't make any claims that could be challenged. She parroted climate science!
 
Robertinfremont said:
We have a saying in flying. Weather is not predictable. And so long as man can't predict weather, he can't predict climate.

Be aware you did nothing to harm Eskimos. If you feel you did, I suggest you donate to them.
Click to expand...
That which makes Robson a star will be the recognition he gets from genuine climate scientists. Is there any to find? I haven't found any yet but there could be? Then it would be worth serious people's time to evaluate Robson's arguments against climate science.

There's a charlatan or fake coming forward every day to deny climate science. Only the best of them will be honoured by a rebuttal from an expert.

Stay the course on him Robert! Maybe a star has been born?
 
Best Greta Thunberg replacement:

Climate change Boss (Brit terrible teen) LOL
 
As if the recent droughts, heatwaves, tidal surges, hurricanes, wildfires, and other powerful weather events weren't evidence enough as to the impact of climate change. Add to this that thirteen of the last 14 warmest years were recorded in the 21st Century, and that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere today far exceeds that which occurred thousands of years ago, because you know, livestock flatulence was the primary polluter up until about the 20th century. That said, I'm fairly certain most can form a relative idea of when actual climate change all began. Most notable, are the increases in earth's rise in surface temperatures as indicated by today's top climatologists. Which started at an average of about 0.85° (1.4F), to who knows how much further the increase could go should we simply chose to believe climate change (or global warming) is all but a hoax. As for any sudden need to feel alarmed about all this, if you happen to be in denial of all the scientific data, then just take the political route in support of the fossil fuel industry. After all, it's not like you're ever going to suffer the consequences, despite the fact our future generations will.
 
Jack Hays said:
Hardly. Myrdal won a Nobel Prize and Kuhn's book is generally considered one of the most important of the 20th century.
Click to expand...
"Kuhn's book" is generally not considered at all by working scientists, it's a wet dream for philosophical debates though. But there are limitations to his over-simplified theory of scientific progress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.