• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

An Excellent Send-Up of Confirmation Bias Among the AGW Advocates

late

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
4,583
Reaction score
1,261
Location
Southern Maine
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
The link is old news (2010 whining) and there's no "Big Oil" connection anywhere.
If it looks like a duck, and it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck... you've found fowl play.

Love the way you just make up Alt-facts, as if anyone with an ounce of common sense would believe them.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
93,453
Reaction score
27,974
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If it looks like a duck, and it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck... you've found fowl play.

Love the way you just make up Alt-facts, as if anyone with an ounce of common sense would believe them.
Not sure what you think I've made up. I'm not the one making unsupported allegations.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Do you think there is a remote posibility that we could burn all the fossil fuels in the world ever???

If so how the hell would we manage that?

If not then you have posted a deliberate misrepresentation of the situation. Are you proud of that?
Assuming some gigantic asteroid doesn't take us out first, or some idiot provokes a nuclear war that renders the planet essentially uninhabitable, I think it entirely likely that some generations ahead, we will have depleted enough of available fossil fuel to make it impractical as an energy source.

By that time I also fully expect, as humankind always manages to do, that we will have discovered and developed and will be utilizing wonderful new energy sources that we now can only imagine.

I recall the line from the movie "Starman" when Jenny Hayden explains that they need to stop for gas--energy--fuel for the car. ". . .understand?" And he replies, "No, I do not understand. How can car need fuel so soon?"

I think humankind will advance so that we all see it as Starman did.
 

Tim the plumber

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
15,608
Reaction score
3,535
Location
Sheffield
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Assuming some gigantic asteroid doesn't take us out first, or some idiot provokes a nuclear war that renders the planet essentially uninhabitable, I think it entirely likely that some generations ahead, we will have depleted enough of available fossil fuel to make it impractical as an energy source.

By that time I also fully expect, as humankind always manages to do, that we will have discovered and developed and will be utilizing wonderful new energy sources that we now can only imagine.

I recall the line from the movie "Starman" when Jenny Hayden explains that they need to stop for gas--energy--fuel for the car. ". . .understand?" And he replies, "No, I do not understand. How can car need fuel so soon?"

I think humankind will advance so that we all see it as Starman did.
I share your optimism, but I am also more concearned with possible dangers;

Today there are apparently 75% less flying insects about as there were just a 30 years ago. This refelects the problems with bees. This is a symptom of a massive possible environmental catastrophy. That our environmental attention is diverted to the none problem of CO2 has allowed this to creep up on us.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-41670472
Research at more than 60 protected areas in Germany suggests flying insects have declined by more than 75% over almost 30 years.
The possible destruction of humanity due to deliberate act is also more real than ever. We have the capacity to make diseases which could kill all of us. That a science training generally stops people doing this is somewhat hopeful but.....

When the hype of CO2 bursts and the science[SUP]TM[/SUP] is shown to be fraudualent there is a strong possibility of a backlash agianst the whole science endevour. This could very easily reverse this golden age of advancement into a very deep dark age. Dark ages are more normal than progressive ones. As you say without progress we will use up the easily extractable resources and will cause some sort of overload of the ecosystem.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
I share your optimism, but I am also more concearned with possible dangers;

Today there are apparently 75% less flying insects about as there were just a 30 years ago. This refelects the problems with bees. This is a symptom of a massive possible environmental catastrophy. That our environmental attention is diverted to the none problem of CO2 has allowed this to creep up on us.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-41670472


The possible destruction of humanity due to deliberate act is also more real than ever. We have the capacity to make diseases which could kill all of us. That a science training generally stops people doing this is somewhat hopeful but.....

When the hype of CO2 bursts and the science[SUP]TM[/SUP] is shown to be fraudualent there is a strong possibility of a backlash agianst the whole science endevour. This could very easily reverse this golden age of advancement into a very deep dark age. Dark ages are more normal than progressive ones. As you say without progress we will use up the easily extractable resources and will cause some sort of overload of the ecosystem.
Well my post was directed specifically to the issue of fossil fuels, but I agree we must as a society work together to achieve the most beneficial environment for all which, in my opinion, has little or nothing to do with the ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Like you, I wish the lion's share of the funding routed to climate 'research' that appears to be highly questionable could be directed toward finding a solution to the kill off of the bees, et al. The latest I read on that suggested it is the widely used agricultural fungicides previously thought to be harmless to insects, birds, mammals, reptiles, etc. that is likely affecting the immune systems of the bees so that they then succumb to tiny parasites that once didn't bother them.

There are now so many of us humans that what we do can have wide ranging affect that we are still pretty ignorant about. At least all the hundreds of billions spent on climate research is advising most of us that CO2 is most likely not part of it.
 

late

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
4,583
Reaction score
1,261
Location
Southern Maine
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I'm not the one making unsupported allegations.
"...and there's no "Big Oil" connection anywhere."

"Curry receives ongoing funding from the fossil fuel industry. In an interview with Curry for a October 2010 Scientific American profile[4], Michael Lemonick reports (pers. comm.) that he asked Curry about potential conflicts of interest, and she responded,

"I do receive some funding from the fossil fuel industry. My company...does hurricane forecasting...for an oil company, since 2007. During this period I have been both a strong advocate for the IPCC, and more recently a critic of the IPCC, there is no correlation of this funding with my public statements."
https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Judith_Curry#Fossil_fuel_industry_funding

Alt-reality...
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
93,453
Reaction score
27,974
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
"...and there's no "Big Oil" connection anywhere."

"Curry receives ongoing funding from the fossil fuel industry. In an interview with Curry for a October 2010 Scientific American profile[4], Michael Lemonick reports (pers. comm.) that he asked Curry about potential conflicts of interest, and she responded,

"I do receive some funding from the fossil fuel industry. My company...does hurricane forecasting...for an oil company, since 2007. During this period I have been both a strong advocate for the IPCC, and more recently a critic of the IPCC, there is no correlation of this funding with my public statements."
https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Judith_Curry#Fossil_fuel_industry_funding

Alt-reality...
A fossil fuel company is a customer of her company. There is not a word to describe how insignificant that is.
 
Top Bottom