Why keep focusing on the lies instead of the useable portions?

What's the "useable portion" of over estimating the impact of just one of the greenhouse gases?

Draconian measures to cut CO2: If it turns out to be statically insignificant with regards to this increasing global temperatures, what negative impacts to people would there be?

"What's the point of repeatedly asking questions only to deny the answers given by experts in the field?..."

 I assume its so they can repeat themselves, or the hopes that the answer will eventually be one they want.  Also it's so easy now to type in anything and the search algorithm will find globally anyone who shares the same ideas.  Like flat earth, or that dinosaurs are a "big paleo" hoax.  

 For instance regarding these weather models that are long-term.  (Again I feel it's important to indicate that these are long-term and not the exact opposite or short-term.)  The data must be compared without knowledge of how the models create their predictions.  This way the result is based off of accuracy and not what people want to hear, so at least the numbers will be sound.

 Of course I do not expect people to accept the results unless those results reflect the answer they want to see.

 We are doing the same thing with 400 Whoppers.  People will still deny the information even though it will all be on video.  That's just the way it goes.

"The media, the government, the constant pounding of the
GLOBULL WARMING FEAR DRUM
is YUGE..
And you want to declare some right to promote a lie
Because you believe that right wingers are LYING about the threat to the second amendment,,"

 I do not want to declare anything.  Nothing.  Including some right to promote some lie.  

 I do not believe right wingers are LYING about the threat to the second amendment.

 I do however think that the same number of government takeovers matches exactly the number of confirmed UFO sightings.  The same number of doomsday weather predictions, also the same number of Jesus sightings, human ending disease and nuclear holocausts.

"Show me where I'm always going off about martial law."

 I never said you did.  In this thread alone I referenced the Federal Reserve and Pizza restaurants.  This does not mean you are always going off about money and pizza:

"Just like people who hate the Federal Reserve only focus on negative financial movement.

Just like people who hate pizza focus on how many pizza joints there are around town."


"So STFU about global warming."

 I never brought up the topic.  I asked why long, not short, NOT SHORT-TERM weather models that have worked aren't the ones people are concerned with and spending their time using as a way to indicate doomsday models are nonsense?

 Maybe if you were capable of adult conversation and less about insulting people over opinions we would get somewhere sometime.

"The fukking global warming models are all wrong."

 I don't agree.  I think some long term, not short term models are correct and useable.

 I already agreed with you multiple times in multiple posts that the doomsday models are wrong.  I agree with you but you are so emotionally involved in making a simple discussion some sort of competition that you are apparently incapable of seeing it.

"STFU and STOP pushing the lies."

 I never pushed anything.  Stop pretending I am arguing for global warming models that aren't accurate.  Stop pretending I ever once said carbon taxes are viable.  Certainly stop making up things like "you want to declare some right to promote a lie" when I have never said anything close to that.  Or this: "you believe that right wingers are LYING about the threat to the second amendment" another thing I never said.

 I asked a question about long-term weather models and you repeatedly referred to short term ones then tried to say I was the one moving goalposts.  You referenced information that was the opposite of what I said.  How hard is that to understand?

 Why focus on the inaccuracies of prediction models instead of the accurate ones?

 Have you even though about why that question could even be considered upsetting?  It appears to be a valid question to me, and even if it wasn't no part of it should illicit an anger response.

My bottom line to this climate chage is pretty simple.

The fact that certain gasses can create a greenhouse effect is obvious a fact. We all eat food or view flowers that exist only because of the greenhouse effect. It is not a hoax.

Some 30 years ago, a theory was launched by a small group of scientists and then given an international platform by the UN within a committee known as the IPCC. In the time since, "global warming" morphed into the more palatable phrase "climate change".

The temperature prediction given by the committee have never hit their targets. They've always been under. None of the predicted environmental impacts are definitively observable.

Those whose basic political platforms tend to involve controlling the personal freedoms of people more so than other platforms, grabbed ahold of doomsday scenarios and have been preaching to the globe ever since theeed to conform to their rigid ideas to avoid disaster which is always right around the corner.

It is entirely believable that 7 billion people have an impact on the climate. However, given that the temperature prediction have not matched observations, given the zealousness of which political parties have demanded ridiculously disproportionate responses, given obvious hypocritical actions from the high priests of climate change, (carbon credits, global flights, seaside mansions, professionals with alternative theories trashed) the idea that climate change is threatening the globe with impending doom.......is a hoax.

it is truth  will take about 175 M years

what can we learn from this
what did we learn from three mile island
from love canal
from the A bomb
from leaded gasoline

thumperclone wrote on 08/31/19 at 06:50:04:


Probably true.....in a few million years or something.

So?

you are the dupe' be happy in your folly

we have be going round on this since 2006 on this forum
you haven't seen any changes in your local weather since then?

at one time I suggested you lock yourself in your garage with your car running to witness the effects you didn't do it or you wouldn't be here..