• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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!

Climate scientist tells Joe Rogan he refuses to debate dissenters on climate change

LOL climate alarmism is flat earth theory, so thanks for admitting it!



Scientists debate other scientists on TV all the time on a variety of subjects. The fact that the climate cultists refuse a dialog is because they know their claims dont stand up to scrutiny. Its as simple as that.


It's cowardly to refuse a debate.


Oh so now you think you can just make up lies? Well, you must be a member of Stormfront, that much is clear.
Not debating someone who is full of shit is smart, not cowardly. All it does is give legitimacy to CT kooks.
 
Not debating someone who is full of shit is smart, not cowardly. All it does is give legitimacy to CT kooks.
Except the debate that Dessler was talking about was with Richard Lindzen a published and recognized climate scientist.
 
I understand your analogy, but it's not particularly relevant.

In the context of climate change specifically, why are you bothered by this baseline? Would referencing 1500 or 1700 or 1000 as a baseline change anything? What do you, Chainsawmassacre, even mean by "baseline?" Do you mean the "zero" point on a temperature anomaly chart? Because if we go with your analogy, you seem to think people are referencing the LIA as a baseline for the rate of temperature change. Is that correct?
The climate change alarmist routinely start their charts and graphs during the LIA which as per my mpg example drastically amplifies and skews statistics.
 
The climate change alarmist routinely start their charts and graphs during the LIA which as per my mpg example drastically amplifies and skews statistics.
It does not do that at all. Temperature has risen about .8 degrees since 1950 and that is true whether you start the chart at 1850 or 1550.

The charts often start at 1850 because that's when the instrumental temperature record begins.
 
Show the data.
 
Give a timestamp for the data.
 
So you think this explains the slope on the end of this graph, and it's perfectly OK and nothing to worry about?
If you are asking me, people worry too much about things they don't need to worry about, things which they cannot change. We are ALL dying anyway, so why are you holding on so tightly? The planet will last a long, long, loooooong time longer than we will.

I was reading a scientific article about how long it takes for plastic to decompose and the consensus is between 700 hundred to a 1000 years. "oh my, how awful that my Starbucks cup will take ten centuries to disappear.... what a disaster--- oh my a thousand years, oh my!!!!!"

So, people are worried about plastic straws and the planet will thinking in a few Billion years like: "what were those tube things that those ape like things used to drink with--- you know the ape like things that eventually figured out how make wheels?"

LOL--- the planet does NOT give a shit about our concerns. We will be gone and replaced with some other kind of ape, or lizard like things that will eventually invent plastic all over again. That is if our sun doesn't supernova, or our entire solar system implodes back down to condensed mater as compact as a thumbnail. So, why are people like you so worried about this stuff? You are dying, we all are dying. Stop worrying about it, but mostly please stop whining about it, because it is kind or embarrassing to hear.




15comet-articleLarge.jpg


p-4752-Sinclair_Motor_O_4f11cbe322a56.jpg


2001-a-space-odyssey-dawn-of-man-apes.png
 
Last edited:

We’ve already discussed this on another thread and found it to be totally ridiculous and full of misinformation. Is this really the “best” you can do?
 
If you are asking me, people worry too much about things they don't need to worry about, things which they cannot change. We are ALL dying anyway, so why are you holding on so tightly? The planet will last a long, long, loooooong time longer than we will.

I was reading a scientific article about how long it takes for plastic to decompose and the consensus is between 700 hundred to a 1000 years. "oh my, how awful that my Starbucks cup will take ten centuries to disappear.... what a disaster--- oh my a thousand years, oh my!!!!!"

So, people are worried about plastic straws and the planet will thinking in a few Billion years like: "what were those tube things that those ape like things used to drink with--- you know the ape like things that eventually figured out how make wheels?"

LOL--- the planet does NOT give a shit about our concerns. We will be gone and replaced with some other kind of ape, or lizard like things that will eventually invent plastic all over again. That is if our sun doesn't supernova, or our entire solar system implodes back down to condensed mater as compact as a thumbnail. So, why are people like you so worried about this stuff? You are dying, we all are dying. Stop worrying about it, but mostly please stop whining about it, because it is kind or embarrassing to hear.




15comet-articleLarge.jpg

So what? You’re attitude seems to be to despoil the planet all we want. I don’t see that.
 
LIke people have already posted, scientist wouldn't argue with flat earth morons, or young earth creationists

Climate change has already been decide,and those who oppose have no facts, just the same tired bullshit lies they always spew

As typical, the loser right trying to pretend to be the victim.
 
So what? You’re attitude seems to be to despoil the planet all we want. I don’t see that.
Hey, you want only use a bamboo tooth brush, and ride a bike everywhere, I'm not stopping you. But if you actually believe that developing countries are not going to continue to deforest in order to create ranch and farmlands the way North America and Europe did for centuries. Or if you think China is going to give up on coal powered plants, or that people in India are all going to go out and buy Teslas instead of driving around in vehicles with two-stroke gasoline motors....well, then good luck with that fantasy.

Your philosophy reminds me of how these silly cars with "dual climate control" work. On the dash is two sets of controls one for the driver and one for the passenger. The driver (who is usually a male) he likes the AC on full blast, but the passenger (usually a female) likes the heater on high because she is always cold.... cold mostly because the man ha tshe AC on high. So, they each set their respective controls how they want it, and then neither is either cold enough or warm enough because guess what? The climate in the space is SHARED anyway. Those dual controls do not mean dual climate zones.

And that is what happens in the world. We dismantle our carbon based energy, and China, Russia, India, keep expanding theirs. Meanwhile we are the ones riding bikes and recycling our used toilet paper into oragami decorations, while they are building more cars, more refridgerators, more buildings, more ranches and farmland, so how is that any solution? You really think we can tell Xi and Putin what to do? LOL
 
Hey, you want only use a bamboo tooth brush, and ride a bike everywhere, I'm not stopping you. But if you actually believe that developing countries are not going to continue to deforest in order to create ranch and farmlands the way North America and Europe did for centuries. Or if you think China is going to give up on coal powered plants, or that people in India are all going to go out and buy Teslas instead of driving around in vehicles with two-stroke gasoline motors....well, then good luck with that fantasy.

Your philosophy reminds me of how these silly cars with "dual climate control" work. On the dash is two sets of controls one for the driver and one for the passenger. The driver (who is usually a male) he likes the AC on full blast, but the passenger (usually a female) likes the heater on high because she is always cold.... cold mostly because the man had the AC on high. So, the each set their respective controls how they want it, and then neither is either cold enough or hot enough because guess what? The climate in the space is SHARED anyway. Those dual controls to not mean dual climate zones.

And that is what happens in the world. We dismantle our carbon based energy, and China, Russia, India, keep expanding theirs. Meanwhile we are the ones riding bikes and recycling our used toilet paper into oragami decorations, while they are building more cars, more refridgerators, more buildings, more ranches and farmland, so how is that any solution? You really think we can tell Xi and Putin what to do? LOL

Denier talking points. *YAWN*
 
A moderated debate can be a valid way to see the weaknesses in an idea!
There is so much uncertainty in the concept of catastrophic AGW, that it does not work well in debates.
The climate sensitivity is all over than place, and even what we think we know cannot be verified.

Gee, we’ve never heard this from you before. Only like thousands of times.
 
Give a timestamp for the data.
The documentary I suggest you watch is not specifically on climate change and makes no mention of AGW one way or the other but in an in depth look into earth history it gives great insight and perspective that is transferable to the subject.I’ve given you a great source of information that you obviously don’t have the intellectual curiosity to pursue which tells me I’m wasting my time trying to discuss a subject with someone who is locked into a narrative and has no interest in expanding their overall knowledge on said subject. In fact I would proffer the hypothesis that you are highly resistant to any information that may shake the foundation of what you want to believe. All of this together makes me think you are not worth my time.
No offense and have a nice day
 
The documentary I suggest you watch is not specifically on climate change and makes no mention of AGW one way or the other but in an in depth look into earth history it gives great insight and perspective that is transferable to the subject.I’ve given you a great source of information that you obviously don’t have the intellectual curiosity to pursue which tells me I’m wasting my time trying to discuss a subject with someone who is locked into a narrative and has no interest in expanding their overall knowledge on said subject. In fact I would proffer the hypothesis that you are highly resistant to any information that may shake the foundation of what you want to believe. All of this together makes me think you are not worth my time.
No offense and have a nice day
You haven't provided any information. "Watch this 45 minute youtube video" is not an argument.

Your video talks of regional temperature, not global.



Look through the entire IPCC report for full context, 16 degrees in 50 years absolutely is a rare and serious problem. I would offer the hypothesis that you are highly resistant to any information that may shake the foundation of what you want to believe. You're stuck in the cult and will never see the truth, so you're not worth my time.

Have a nice day. No offense.
 
The documentary I suggest you watch is not specifically on climate change and makes no mention of AGW one way or the other but in an in depth look into earth history it gives great insight and perspective that is transferable to the subject.I’ve given you a great source of information that you obviously don’t have the intellectual curiosity to pursue which tells me I’m wasting my time trying to discuss a subject with someone who is locked into a narrative and has no interest in expanding their overall knowledge on said subject. In fact I would proffer the hypothesis that you are highly resistant to any information that may shake the foundation of what you want to believe. All of this together makes me think you are not worth my time.
No offense and have a nice day

More psychological projection.
 
Your video talks of regional temperature, not global.
If you had watched the documentary you wouldn’t say such stupid things. America as we know it has not always occupied the part of the planet it does today. The video tracks it’s travels around the world and its shifting shape and size.
Really difficult trying to have a lucid conversation with such a small and closed mind and I’m not restarting ours but I had to comment on your remark that proves how uninformed you are and wish to remain. Think I’ll call my 10 year old great grandson and have a conversation with someone at least a little better informed than you. lol
 
If you had watched the documentary you wouldn’t say such stupid things. America as we know it has not always occupied the part of the planet it does today. The video tracks it’s travels around the world and its shifting shape and size.
That still doesn't make it a global temperature indicator, LOL. That was a short term regional effect, not a global one. Furthermore, your own video talks about extinctions that happened as a result!

I gave you a link that proves what I am saying. I take it you didn't even click, let alone read all of it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom