daveman
Diamond Member
I repeat:
"If the promoters of man-made climate fears truly believed the "debate is over" and the science is "settled", why is there such a strong impulse to shut down debate and threaten those who disagree?"
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I repeat:
What is the insuperable line? What will it take to convince the naysayers? Apparently, for them, the true test of science is not empirical evidence but political correctness. They will face the reality of global warming at the grocery store when they are fighting in the isles for the food on the shelves. Then it will be a real problem - one that we should have done something about when we had the chance.
"Climate Change"..............obviously..........alot of things but NOT real science............
Changing Tides: Research Center Under Fire for 'Adjusted' Sea-Level Data - FoxNews.com
So, you are saying that 100% agreement is required? If so, we are lost. End of argument.
I did. I have come to the conclusion that it is too late to do anything; we are beyond the tipping point. There is now only the consequences to address.
You should know that the effects of global warming are everywhere about us; and yet we literally cannot see the forest for the trees. Still, sometimes it is not the big picture, but rather the little things that tell us the truth. In this, a little mentioned aspect of global warming is the decline of Antarctic krill (estimated at 80% since 1970); which is significant both for its role in regulating carbon emissions into the atmosphere and because it is at the base of the ocean food chain - not to mention a substantial commercial harvest. Krill feed on phytoplankton beneath the sea ice, and it is the melting sea ice due to rising temperature that has caused the dramatic decrease in krill populations. This, in turn, will increase of amount of carbon emissions, exacerbating global warming and its effects. It is a vicious cycle; and one that will have profound consequences.
Second, "Scientific inquiry is generally intended to be as objective as possible, to reduce biased interpretations of results"
How can Warmers meet this test when the IPCC is on record as being driven by the predetermined outcome that they need to strangle western civilization through manmade global warming?
"...one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy." -- IPCC
The IPCC has been caught redhanded with their thumb on the data scales
I did. I have come to the conclusion that it is too late to do anything; we are beyond the tipping point. There is now only the consequences to address.
No, no one's saying that, and there's no rational way you could come to that conclusion.So, you are saying that 100% agreement is required? If so, we are lost. End of argument.