Exaggeraters Should Be the New Term for AGW Alarmists

Discussion in 'Environment' started by IanC, Apr 14, 2011.

  1. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,200
    Thanks Received:
    1,071
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,448
    Most of the data about our climate is equivical. It can be used to support as many theories as there are scientists, even more actually.

    The current fad is to take any set of conditions and extrapolate it out using faulty computer modelling into a catastrophic conclusion. I think we are giving these alarmists too much credit by calling them just alarmists. Exaggeraters is a more meaningful term as it implies the mindset behind their dire predictions. Skeptics have been labelled with the emotionally charged term 'denier', now it is time to find a similar type of term for the alarmists.

    Any other sugguestions out there?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. westwall
    Online

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    41,000
    Thanks Received:
    7,981
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +19,751



    Prevaricators....cut to the chase.
     
  3. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,200
    Thanks Received:
    1,071
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,448
    you cant prove that they are lying. often deluded but personal opinions arent lies.
     
  4. westwall
    Online

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    41,000
    Thanks Received:
    7,981
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +19,751



    Climategate disproves that my friend. Before climategate I would have agreed with you.
     
  5. konradv
    Offline

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,571
    Thanks Received:
    2,558
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,674
    That's a switch!!! I thought there wasn't any AGW. Trampling on your own message aren't you?
     
  6. Si modo
    Offline

    Si modo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    41,538
    Thanks Received:
    6,382
    Trophy Points:
    1,810
    Location:
    St. Eligius
    Ratings:
    +8,703
    I just have to wonder what exactly you saw in that post.

    :wtf:
     
  7. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,200
    Thanks Received:
    1,071
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,448
    haha, I was wondering too! Warming, yes. Anthropogenic portion, yes- land use is probably more significant than CO2. Catastrophic conclusions, no way. Just fevered imaginations trying to out do each other in trying to make outlandish predictions.
     
  8. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    Moonbats, wackaloons, hoaxers, cargo cultists, neo-Luddites, scaremongers, snake oil merchants, Chicken Littles, democrats.....
     
  9. Mad Scientist
    Offline

    Mad Scientist Deplorable Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,940
    Thanks Received:
    5,212
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +7,683
    Natural climate change? Sure.
    Man made global warming? Doubtful.
     
  10. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,200
    Thanks Received:
    1,071
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,448
    cargo cultist is good but not enough of the public knows about Feynman. It a pity he's not around to cut through the BS.
     

Share This Page