Poster Crusader Frank has started a thread here entitled "A Warmer Explains". The problem, of course, is that Frank is anything BUT a 'warmer'. His stated intention is to point out the flaws in the "warmer" position by explaining things using his understanding of that position. If you know Frank, the problems are obvious. If you don't, imagine having the advantages of a free and open democracy explained to you by Special Ed versions of Abubakar Shekau of Boko Haram or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi of ISIS. Don't get me wrong. I don't want to even imply that Frank is evil and I won't try to tell you that he is in any sense a leader among deniers. It's just that he would have a very difficult time explaining his own position (if you can call it that) and accomplishing what he's attempting here given the biases and limitations under which he suffers is simply impossible.
I thought of titling this thread "A Denier Explains", but answering a falsehood with a falsehood is not the way to move forward, is it.
So, if anyone would care to hear my best estimation of mainstream science's position on global warming, I'm perfectly willing to give it a shot. I'm not a climate scientist. I have a bachelor's degree in ocean engineering and have spent the last few decades working on naval sensor systems. I consider myself to have an "environmentalist" stance and have had an interest in this issue for quite a few years. I'm 60 years old.
There are several posters here with just as much good, objective knowledge as I on this issue and significantly more on some, particularly where their specialties come into play. But there are more than a few here that consistently put out claims ranging from dubious to utter nonsense. I think making certain that such claims and contentions do not go uncorrected is a major motivation for many of us here.
Questions?
I thought of titling this thread "A Denier Explains", but answering a falsehood with a falsehood is not the way to move forward, is it.
So, if anyone would care to hear my best estimation of mainstream science's position on global warming, I'm perfectly willing to give it a shot. I'm not a climate scientist. I have a bachelor's degree in ocean engineering and have spent the last few decades working on naval sensor systems. I consider myself to have an "environmentalist" stance and have had an interest in this issue for quite a few years. I'm 60 years old.
There are several posters here with just as much good, objective knowledge as I on this issue and significantly more on some, particularly where their specialties come into play. But there are more than a few here that consistently put out claims ranging from dubious to utter nonsense. I think making certain that such claims and contentions do not go uncorrected is a major motivation for many of us here.
Questions?
Last edited:
But weve always heard this about the liberal "elitists" who truly believe they can run your life better than you...........when meanwhile, virtually all of their gay social engineering has been a total disaster in the last 50 years. And we are supposed to trust these people with allowing them to tax us back to the mid-1800's in terms of quality of life??!!!
