Global warming is not people’s most pressing concern

[TNHarley]

Even AGW scientists dont really believe in it
"ok folks, my speech is over with. Hope you enjoyed the conference on how meat will destroy Earth! Now excuse me while i fly away in my personal jet and eat a 21 ounce t-bone to go to another conference to complain about shit i cant actually prove!"

So the fact that people are hypocrites proves that they don't believe in climate change? It's impossible to be hypocritical about your beliefs? Is that now your new claim? Appeal to hypocrisy
That is a logical fallacy if I've ever seen one.

It certainly doesnt give them much credibility, does it?
Its like a parent yelling at a kid about smoking cigs while puffing on one at the same time. The kid is going to make fun of them in their mind.

No, it actually doesn't speak to their credibility at all. Hence the logical fallacy. Everyone is a hypocrite to some extent or another. You claimed intellectual dishonesty a couple of posts ago, when being yourself intellectually dishonest. It's human.
By the way Harley, I don't want to claim that you are a liar, stupid or any of the sort. But I, just like I believe you, are trying to let the strength of the argument speak for itself. And I don't believe your arguments are at all strong at the moment. You don't believe in man made climate change, fine. But you don't seem to have a better reasoning for the increase in global temperature that fits the available information. You also fly in the face of almost the entire scientific community, people who are trained to gather and analyze that information without bias.

Why cant something just not be explained? Why does there ALWAYS have to be a reason?
It reminds me of people in the ancient world that had to use Gods to explain everything. Man just cant wait for the facts.
Maybe one day we will progress past that

 

[TNHarley]

Even AGW scientists dont really believe in it
"ok folks, my speech is over with. Hope you enjoyed the conference on how meat will destroy Earth! Now excuse me while i fly away in my personal jet and eat a 21 ounce t-bone to go to another conference to complain about shit i cant actually prove!"

So the fact that people are hypocrites proves that they don't believe in climate change? It's impossible to be hypocritical about your beliefs? Is that now your new claim? Appeal to hypocrisy
That is a logical fallacy if I've ever seen one.

It certainly doesnt give them much credibility, does it?
Its like a parent yelling at a kid about smoking cigs while puffing on one at the same time. The kid is going to make fun of them in their mind.

No, it actually doesn't speak to their credibility at all. Hence the logical fallacy. Everyone is a hypocrite to some extent or another. You claimed intellectual dishonesty a couple of posts ago, when being yourself intellectually dishonest. It's human.
By the way Harley, I don't want to claim that you are a liar, stupid or any of the sort. But I, just like I believe you, are trying to let the strength of the argument speak for itself. And I don't believe your arguments are at all strong at the moment. You don't believe in man made climate change, fine. But you don't seem to have a better reasoning for the increase in global temperature that fits the available information. You also fly in the face of almost the entire scientific community, people who are trained to gather and analyze that information without bias.

Not for nothing, doesn't it worry you, that in order to be a climate change denier people have someone with no relevant degree come out with a FAKE gallup poll. I mean if the case was strong by itself, why don't you have climatologists coming out of the woodwork posting peer reviewed articles that destroys the entire thing. Not saying nobody is publishing on the subjects but the basic premise of man made climate change isn't being seriously disputed.

Maybe because it isnt seriously a debate?
Just like what you are doing.. "come up with something better or you are dumb"

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Another article showing yet another poll showing global warming is not a concern.

Watts Up With That?

Global warming is not people’s most pressing concern

August 1, 2018

Guest opinion by Tom Harris

Selected Excerpt:

"We often hear claims that man-made climate change is our greatest threat. But according to a recent Gallup poll, very few people in the United States actually believe it is. Indeed, even the United Nations own polling reveals that respondents across the world rate climate change last among issues they would like the UN and governments to focus on. No matter how long the list, climate change is always last."

LINK

Oh and by the way. Even if all of this wasn't true. How do people's OPINIONS have any relations with FACTS. If people don't deem something important does that by default mean it isn't? Pretty sure people don't think lightning hitting them is a major issue. I don't think that opinion allows them to play with a kite in a thunderstorm though.

Are you saying there are FACTS that support the agw theory?

Sure there are. The question is are you willing to accept facts when they are presented?

How many nuclear power plants should we build, to reduce our CO2 output?

 

[forkup]

Even AGW scientists dont really believe in it
"ok folks, my speech is over with. Hope you enjoyed the conference on how meat will destroy Earth! Now excuse me while i fly away in my personal jet and eat a 21 ounce t-bone to go to another conference to complain about shit i cant actually prove!"

So the fact that people are hypocrites proves that they don't believe in climate change? It's impossible to be hypocritical about your beliefs? Is that now your new claim? Appeal to hypocrisy
That is a logical fallacy if I've ever seen one.

It certainly doesnt give them much credibility, does it?
Its like a parent yelling at a kid about smoking cigs while puffing on one at the same time. The kid is going to make fun of them in their mind.

No, it actually doesn't speak to their credibility at all. Hence the logical fallacy. Everyone is a hypocrite to some extent or another. You claimed intellectual dishonesty a couple of posts ago, when being yourself intellectually dishonest. It's human.
By the way Harley, I don't want to claim that you are a liar, stupid or any of the sort. But I, just like I believe you, are trying to let the strength of the argument speak for itself. And I don't believe your arguments are at all strong at the moment. You don't believe in man made climate change, fine. But you don't seem to have a better reasoning for the increase in global temperature that fits the available information. You also fly in the face of almost the entire scientific community, people who are trained to gather and analyze that information without bias.

Why cant something just not be explained? Why does there ALWAYS have to be a reason?
It reminds me of people in the ancient world that had to use Gods to explain everything. Man just cant wait for the facts.
Maybe one day we will progress past that

There is plenty of stuff that can't be explained. What you are doing is rejecting an explanation when given. There are facts, you just aren't accepting them. You bring up God. Do you realize you are using the same logic as a religious person? "I don't wan't to believe that climate change is true so I reject all evidence that proves it." It's the same as a Young Earth creationist rejecting basically the nature of the world because he believes the Earth is 6000 year old.

 

[forkup]

Even AGW scientists dont really believe in it
"ok folks, my speech is over with. Hope you enjoyed the conference on how meat will destroy Earth! Now excuse me while i fly away in my personal jet and eat a 21 ounce t-bone to go to another conference to complain about shit i cant actually prove!"

So the fact that people are hypocrites proves that they don't believe in climate change? It's impossible to be hypocritical about your beliefs? Is that now your new claim? Appeal to hypocrisy
That is a logical fallacy if I've ever seen one.

It certainly doesnt give them much credibility, does it?
Its like a parent yelling at a kid about smoking cigs while puffing on one at the same time. The kid is going to make fun of them in their mind.

No, it actually doesn't speak to their credibility at all. Hence the logical fallacy. Everyone is a hypocrite to some extent or another. You claimed intellectual dishonesty a couple of posts ago, when being yourself intellectually dishonest. It's human.
By the way Harley, I don't want to claim that you are a liar, stupid or any of the sort. But I, just like I believe you, are trying to let the strength of the argument speak for itself. And I don't believe your arguments are at all strong at the moment. You don't believe in man made climate change, fine. But you don't seem to have a better reasoning for the increase in global temperature that fits the available information. You also fly in the face of almost the entire scientific community, people who are trained to gather and analyze that information without bias.

Not for nothing, doesn't it worry you, that in order to be a climate change denier people have someone with no relevant degree come out with a FAKE gallup poll. I mean if the case was strong by itself, why don't you have climatologists coming out of the woodwork posting peer reviewed articles that destroys the entire thing. Not saying nobody is publishing on the subjects but the basic premise of man made climate change isn't being seriously disputed.

Maybe because it isnt seriously a debate?
Just like what you are doing.. "come up with something better or you are dumb"

The scientific method is nothing more then people coming up with better explanations. Dumb has nothing to do with it. Einstein came up with a better way to look at the universe then Newton. Newton wasn't dumber then Einstein. That's how science literally works. Again I don't mind you denying man made climate change. I mind you denying man made climate change even when provided with proof, without being able to show an alternative explanation for that proof. This doesn't mean that I'm right, what it does mean is that it's so far the best explanation.

 

[forkup]

Even AGW scientists dont really believe in it
"ok folks, my speech is over with. Hope you enjoyed the conference on how meat will destroy Earth! Now excuse me while i fly away in my personal jet and eat a 21 ounce t-bone to go to another conference to complain about shit i cant actually prove!"

So the fact that people are hypocrites proves that they don't believe in climate change? It's impossible to be hypocritical about your beliefs? Is that now your new claim? Appeal to hypocrisy
That is a logical fallacy if I've ever seen one.

It certainly doesnt give them much credibility, does it?
Its like a parent yelling at a kid about smoking cigs while puffing on one at the same time. The kid is going to make fun of them in their mind.

No, it actually doesn't speak to their credibility at all. Hence the logical fallacy. Everyone is a hypocrite to some extent or another. You claimed intellectual dishonesty a couple of posts ago, when being yourself intellectually dishonest. It's human.
By the way Harley, I don't want to claim that you are a liar, stupid or any of the sort. But I, just like I believe you, are trying to let the strength of the argument speak for itself. And I don't believe your arguments are at all strong at the moment. You don't believe in man made climate change, fine. But you don't seem to have a better reasoning for the increase in global temperature that fits the available information. You also fly in the face of almost the entire scientific community, people who are trained to gather and analyze that information without bias.

Why cant something just not be explained? Why does there ALWAYS have to be a reason?
It reminds me of people in the ancient world that had to use Gods to explain everything. Man just cant wait for the facts.
Maybe one day we will progress past that

There is plenty of stuff that can't be explained. What you are doing is rejecting an explanation when given. There are facts, you just aren't accepting them. You bring up God. Do you realize you are using the same logic as a religious person? "I don't wan't to believe that climate change is true so I reject all evidence that proves it." It's the same as a Young Earth creationist rejecting basically the nature of the world because he believes the Earth is 6000 year old.

Not saying being a climate change denier is as irrational as a young earth creationist by the way. Just that the basic mechanism is the same.

 

[TNHarley]

Even AGW scientists dont really believe in it
"ok folks, my speech is over with. Hope you enjoyed the conference on how meat will destroy Earth! Now excuse me while i fly away in my personal jet and eat a 21 ounce t-bone to go to another conference to complain about shit i cant actually prove!"

So the fact that people are hypocrites proves that they don't believe in climate change? It's impossible to be hypocritical about your beliefs? Is that now your new claim? Appeal to hypocrisy
That is a logical fallacy if I've ever seen one.

It certainly doesnt give them much credibility, does it?
Its like a parent yelling at a kid about smoking cigs while puffing on one at the same time. The kid is going to make fun of them in their mind.

No, it actually doesn't speak to their credibility at all. Hence the logical fallacy. Everyone is a hypocrite to some extent or another. You claimed intellectual dishonesty a couple of posts ago, when being yourself intellectually dishonest. It's human.
By the way Harley, I don't want to claim that you are a liar, stupid or any of the sort. But I, just like I believe you, are trying to let the strength of the argument speak for itself. And I don't believe your arguments are at all strong at the moment. You don't believe in man made climate change, fine. But you don't seem to have a better reasoning for the increase in global temperature that fits the available information. You also fly in the face of almost the entire scientific community, people who are trained to gather and analyze that information without bias.

Why cant something just not be explained? Why does there ALWAYS have to be a reason?
It reminds me of people in the ancient world that had to use Gods to explain everything. Man just cant wait for the facts.
Maybe one day we will progress past that

There is plenty of stuff that can't be explained. What you are doing is rejecting an explanation when given. There are facts, you just aren't accepting them. You bring up God. Do you realize you are using the same logic as a religious person? "I don't wan't to believe that climate change is true so I reject all evidence that proves it." It's the same as a Young Earth creationist rejecting basically the nature of the world because he believes the Earth is 6000 year old.

Explanations arent facts. I would like FACTS when my sovereignty and all ways of life are threatened.
I wont throw my life away for what ifs. Thats retarded.
So we are both thinking like a religious person.. hmm

 

[skookerasbil]

Another article showing yet another poll showing global warming is not a concern.

Watts Up With That?

Global warming is not people’s most pressing concern

August 1, 2018

Guest opinion by Tom Harris

Selected Excerpt:

"We often hear claims that man-made climate change is our greatest threat. But according to a recent Gallup poll, very few people in the United States actually believe it is. Indeed, even the United Nations own polling reveals that respondents across the world rate climate change last among issues they would like the UN and governments to focus on. No matter how long the list, climate change is always last."

LINK

Oh and by the way. Even if all of this wasn't true. How do people's OPINIONS have any relations with FACTS. If people don't deem something important does that by default mean it isn't? Pretty sure people don't think lightning hitting them is a major issue. I don't think that opinion allows them to play with a kite in a thunderstorm though.

Are you saying there are FACTS that support the agw theory?

Sure there are. The question is are you willing to accept facts when they are presented?

Hmmm by facts do you mean models and filling in holes with assumption, like our 2000 year old savage ancestors did with God?

No, with facts I mean facts. Like for instance the FACT that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. The FACT that humans have been pumping that greenhouse gas into the air at a higher and higher rate. The FACT that the average global temperature is rising. You know FACTS.

But the only facts that matter s0n is that nobody is giving a shit about climate change in 2018. Everything else is nothing more than internet banter for sites like this.

Please post up for me a poll on voter concerns that doesnt have global warming near the bottom. Links please btw!

Climate change is a banner/billboard that progressives stand in front of and take bows. But it's not mattering in the real world. None of the "decided science" transcends beyond the tiny realm of climate science. In other words, it's not adding up to dick!. If it were, the Paris Treaty wouldn't be dead and Congress would give a shit.

@www.whosnotwinning.com

 

[forkup]

So the fact that people are hypocrites proves that they don't believe in climate change? It's impossible to be hypocritical about your beliefs? Is that now your new claim? Appeal to hypocrisy
That is a logical fallacy if I've ever seen one.

It certainly doesnt give them much credibility, does it?
Its like a parent yelling at a kid about smoking cigs while puffing on one at the same time. The kid is going to make fun of them in their mind.

No, it actually doesn't speak to their credibility at all. Hence the logical fallacy. Everyone is a hypocrite to some extent or another. You claimed intellectual dishonesty a couple of posts ago, when being yourself intellectually dishonest. It's human.
By the way Harley, I don't want to claim that you are a liar, stupid or any of the sort. But I, just like I believe you, are trying to let the strength of the argument speak for itself. And I don't believe your arguments are at all strong at the moment. You don't believe in man made climate change, fine. But you don't seem to have a better reasoning for the increase in global temperature that fits the available information. You also fly in the face of almost the entire scientific community, people who are trained to gather and analyze that information without bias.

Why cant something just not be explained? Why does there ALWAYS have to be a reason?
It reminds me of people in the ancient world that had to use Gods to explain everything. Man just cant wait for the facts.
Maybe one day we will progress past that

There is plenty of stuff that can't be explained. What you are doing is rejecting an explanation when given. There are facts, you just aren't accepting them. You bring up God. Do you realize you are using the same logic as a religious person? "I don't wan't to believe that climate change is true so I reject all evidence that proves it." It's the same as a Young Earth creationist rejecting basically the nature of the world because he believes the Earth is 6000 year old.

Explanations arent facts. I would like FACTS when my sovereignty and all ways of life are threatened.
I wont throw my life away for what ifs. Thats retarded.
So we are both thinking like a religious person.. hmm

-Nope, see a religious person rejects evidence, or explanations in this case. I ask for them. That's the whole point. You reject everything that doesn't fit your belief. I'm offering you time and time again the chance to give me an explanation.
-As to the second part. How is believing in climate change throwing away your life? At the very worst the most that's being asked is a change in lifestyle? Ever heard of the concept of low risk, high consequence events? At best I'm wrong and climate change isn't happening. We are all out some money and have learned to recycle (oversimplification I know)
At worst, well we all better learn how to swim.
Your willing to bet on me being wrong and risk not having learned how to swim ( figuratively speaking)?

 

[forkup]

Oh and by the way. Even if all of this wasn't true. How do people's OPINIONS have any relations with FACTS. If people don't deem something important does that by default mean it isn't? Pretty sure people don't think lightning hitting them is a major issue. I don't think that opinion allows them to play with a kite in a thunderstorm though.

Are you saying there are FACTS that support the agw theory?

Sure there are. The question is are you willing to accept facts when they are presented?

Hmmm by facts do you mean models and filling in holes with assumption, like our 2000 year old savage ancestors did with God?

No, with facts I mean facts. Like for instance the FACT that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. The FACT that humans have been pumping that greenhouse gas into the air at a higher and higher rate. The FACT that the average global temperature is rising. You know FACTS.

But the only facts that matter s0n is that nobody is giving a shit about climate change in 2018. Everything else is nothing more than internet banter for sites like this.

Please post up for me a poll on voter concerns that doesnt have global warming near the bottom. Links please btw!

Climate change is a banner/billboard that progressives stand in front of and take bows. But it's not mattering in the real world. None of the "decided science" transcends beyond the tiny realm of climate science. In other words, it's not adding up to dick!. If it were, the Paris Treaty wouldn't be dead and Congress would give a shit.

@www.whosnotwinning.com

First reply to the original poster. Gallup poll. Knock yourself out.
Oh and there is this

Oh and by the way. Even if all of this wasn't true. How do people's OPINIONS have any relations with FACTS. If people don't deem something important does that by default mean it isn't? Pretty sure people don't think lightning hitting them is a major issue. I don't think that opinion allows them to play with a kite in a thunderstorm though.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It certainly doesnt give them much credibility, does it?
Its like a parent yelling at a kid about smoking cigs while puffing on one at the same time. The kid is going to make fun of them in their mind.

No, it actually doesn't speak to their credibility at all. Hence the logical fallacy. Everyone is a hypocrite to some extent or another. You claimed intellectual dishonesty a couple of posts ago, when being yourself intellectually dishonest. It's human.
By the way Harley, I don't want to claim that you are a liar, stupid or any of the sort. But I, just like I believe you, are trying to let the strength of the argument speak for itself. And I don't believe your arguments are at all strong at the moment. You don't believe in man made climate change, fine. But you don't seem to have a better reasoning for the increase in global temperature that fits the available information. You also fly in the face of almost the entire scientific community, people who are trained to gather and analyze that information without bias.

Why cant something just not be explained? Why does there ALWAYS have to be a reason?
It reminds me of people in the ancient world that had to use Gods to explain everything. Man just cant wait for the facts.
Maybe one day we will progress past that

There is plenty of stuff that can't be explained. What you are doing is rejecting an explanation when given. There are facts, you just aren't accepting them. You bring up God. Do you realize you are using the same logic as a religious person? "I don't wan't to believe that climate change is true so I reject all evidence that proves it." It's the same as a Young Earth creationist rejecting basically the nature of the world because he believes the Earth is 6000 year old.

Explanations arent facts. I would like FACTS when my sovereignty and all ways of life are threatened.
I wont throw my life away for what ifs. Thats retarded.
So we are both thinking like a religious person.. hmm

-Nope, see a religious person rejects evidence, or explanations in this case. I ask for them. That's the whole point. You reject everything that doesn't fit your belief. I'm offering you time and time again to give me an explanation.
-As to the second part. How is believing in climate change throwing away your life? At the very worst the most that's being asked is a change in lifestyle? Ever heard of the concept of low risk, high consequence events? At best I'm wrong and climate change isn't happening. We are all out some money and have learned to recycle (oversimplification I know)
At worst, well we all better learn how to swim.
Your willing to bet on me being wrong and risk not having learned how to swim ( figuratively speaking)?

Ever heard of the concept of low risk, high consequence events? At best I'm wrong and climate change isn't happening. We are all out some money and have learned to recycle

Wasting trillions on "green energy" is not a low consequence action.

 

[skookerasbil]

It's pretty much decided that progressives will never get how this all works. It doesnt matter what the scientists say.....it only matters if the voters care what they say. And after 20 years of bomb lobbing, the public still doesnt give a shit. The term climate action might be the most classic oxymoron of all time. For Christsakes, it still hasn't been a topic at one single presidential debate ever! But the k00ks still parade their banner around triumphantly!

Progressives have always struggled with your basic connect the dots exercises. Climate change is a striking illustration of that.

 

[forkup]

No, it actually doesn't speak to their credibility at all. Hence the logical fallacy. Everyone is a hypocrite to some extent or another. You claimed intellectual dishonesty a couple of posts ago, when being yourself intellectually dishonest. It's human.
By the way Harley, I don't want to claim that you are a liar, stupid or any of the sort. But I, just like I believe you, are trying to let the strength of the argument speak for itself. And I don't believe your arguments are at all strong at the moment. You don't believe in man made climate change, fine. But you don't seem to have a better reasoning for the increase in global temperature that fits the available information. You also fly in the face of almost the entire scientific community, people who are trained to gather and analyze that information without bias.

Why cant something just not be explained? Why does there ALWAYS have to be a reason?
It reminds me of people in the ancient world that had to use Gods to explain everything. Man just cant wait for the facts.
Maybe one day we will progress past that

There is plenty of stuff that can't be explained. What you are doing is rejecting an explanation when given. There are facts, you just aren't accepting them. You bring up God. Do you realize you are using the same logic as a religious person? "I don't wan't to believe that climate change is true so I reject all evidence that proves it." It's the same as a Young Earth creationist rejecting basically the nature of the world because he believes the Earth is 6000 year old.

Explanations arent facts. I would like FACTS when my sovereignty and all ways of life are threatened.
I wont throw my life away for what ifs. Thats retarded.
So we are both thinking like a religious person.. hmm

-Nope, see a religious person rejects evidence, or explanations in this case. I ask for them. That's the whole point. You reject everything that doesn't fit your belief. I'm offering you time and time again to give me an explanation.
-As to the second part. How is believing in climate change throwing away your life? At the very worst the most that's being asked is a change in lifestyle? Ever heard of the concept of low risk, high consequence events? At best I'm wrong and climate change isn't happening. We are all out some money and have learned to recycle (oversimplification I know)
At worst, well we all better learn how to swim.
Your willing to bet on me being wrong and risk not having learned how to swim ( figuratively speaking)?

Ever heard of the concept of low risk, high consequence events? At best I'm wrong and climate change isn't happening. We are all out some money and have learned to recycle

Wasting trillions on "green energy" is not a low consequence action.

How do you know it's trillions? How is the cost offset by an entirely new sector of business being created? And most importantly how many trillions would it cost if the coastline shifts miles inland?

 

[skookerasbil]

Are you saying there are FACTS that support the agw theory?

Sure there are. The question is are you willing to accept facts when they are presented?

Hmmm by facts do you mean models and filling in holes with assumption, like our 2000 year old savage ancestors did with God?

No, with facts I mean facts. Like for instance the FACT that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. The FACT that humans have been pumping that greenhouse gas into the air at a higher and higher rate. The FACT that the average global temperature is rising. You know FACTS.

But the only facts that matter s0n is that nobody is giving a shit about climate change in 2018. Everything else is nothing more than internet banter for sites like this.

Please post up for me a poll on voter concerns that doesnt have global warming near the bottom. Links please btw!

Climate change is a banner/billboard that progressives stand in front of and take bows. But it's not mattering in the real world. None of the "decided science" transcends beyond the tiny realm of climate science. In other words, it's not adding up to dick!. If it were, the Paris Treaty wouldn't be dead and Congress would give a shit.

@www.whosnotwinning.com

First reply to the original poster. Gallup poll. Knock yourself out.
Oh and there is this

Oh and by the way. Even if all of this wasn't true. How do people's OPINIONS have any relations with FACTS. If people don't deem something important does that by default mean it isn't? Pretty sure people don't think lightning hitting them is a major issue. I don't think that opinion allows them to play with a kite in a thunderstorm though.

Nah....how about we leave it to the curious checking into this thread to decide who's winning and who's....not winning!

You know s0n when you don't have any real responsibilities in life you really have no concept about what people worry about and what they don't. Trust me nobody out there is worried about 3 mm rise in sea level compared to a billion other things they have more worries about. Get some real responsibilities in life and maybe you will get it.

 

[TNHarley]

It certainly doesnt give them much credibility, does it?
Its like a parent yelling at a kid about smoking cigs while puffing on one at the same time. The kid is going to make fun of them in their mind.

No, it actually doesn't speak to their credibility at all. Hence the logical fallacy. Everyone is a hypocrite to some extent or another. You claimed intellectual dishonesty a couple of posts ago, when being yourself intellectually dishonest. It's human.
By the way Harley, I don't want to claim that you are a liar, stupid or any of the sort. But I, just like I believe you, are trying to let the strength of the argument speak for itself. And I don't believe your arguments are at all strong at the moment. You don't believe in man made climate change, fine. But you don't seem to have a better reasoning for the increase in global temperature that fits the available information. You also fly in the face of almost the entire scientific community, people who are trained to gather and analyze that information without bias.

Why cant something just not be explained? Why does there ALWAYS have to be a reason?
It reminds me of people in the ancient world that had to use Gods to explain everything. Man just cant wait for the facts.
Maybe one day we will progress past that

There is plenty of stuff that can't be explained. What you are doing is rejecting an explanation when given. There are facts, you just aren't accepting them. You bring up God. Do you realize you are using the same logic as a religious person? "I don't wan't to believe that climate change is true so I reject all evidence that proves it." It's the same as a Young Earth creationist rejecting basically the nature of the world because he believes the Earth is 6000 year old.

Explanations arent facts. I would like FACTS when my sovereignty and all ways of life are threatened.
I wont throw my life away for what ifs. Thats retarded.
So we are both thinking like a religious person.. hmm

-Nope, see a religious person rejects evidence, or explanations in this case. I ask for them. That's the whole point. You reject everything that doesn't fit your belief. I'm offering you time and time again to give me an explanation.
-As to the second part. How is believing in climate change throwing away your life? At the very worst the most that's being asked is a change in lifestyle? Ever heard of the concept of low risk, high consequence events? At best I'm wrong and climate change isn't happening. We are all out some money and have learned to recycle (oversimplification I know)
At worst, well we all better learn how to swim.
Your willing to bet on me being wrong and risk not having learned how to swim ( figuratively speaking)?

You just fill in stuff so you can "understand" it like they did.
"whats that bright light coming from the sky and striking the ground? Hmmm god must be pissed! What else could it be?"
How is that not what you are doing?
You both fill in holes without knowing the FACTS.
Again, im not rejecting carbon is a greenhouse and we release it. I doubt we are changing the natural evolution of Earth. That takes some pretty hard facts for me. Sorry.

 

[forkup]

No, it actually doesn't speak to their credibility at all. Hence the logical fallacy. Everyone is a hypocrite to some extent or another. You claimed intellectual dishonesty a couple of posts ago, when being yourself intellectually dishonest. It's human.
By the way Harley, I don't want to claim that you are a liar, stupid or any of the sort. But I, just like I believe you, are trying to let the strength of the argument speak for itself. And I don't believe your arguments are at all strong at the moment. You don't believe in man made climate change, fine. But you don't seem to have a better reasoning for the increase in global temperature that fits the available information. You also fly in the face of almost the entire scientific community, people who are trained to gather and analyze that information without bias.

Why cant something just not be explained? Why does there ALWAYS have to be a reason?
It reminds me of people in the ancient world that had to use Gods to explain everything. Man just cant wait for the facts.
Maybe one day we will progress past that

There is plenty of stuff that can't be explained. What you are doing is rejecting an explanation when given. There are facts, you just aren't accepting them. You bring up God. Do you realize you are using the same logic as a religious person? "I don't wan't to believe that climate change is true so I reject all evidence that proves it." It's the same as a Young Earth creationist rejecting basically the nature of the world because he believes the Earth is 6000 year old.

Explanations arent facts. I would like FACTS when my sovereignty and all ways of life are threatened.
I wont throw my life away for what ifs. Thats retarded.
So we are both thinking like a religious person.. hmm

-Nope, see a religious person rejects evidence, or explanations in this case. I ask for them. That's the whole point. You reject everything that doesn't fit your belief. I'm offering you time and time again to give me an explanation.
-As to the second part. How is believing in climate change throwing away your life? At the very worst the most that's being asked is a change in lifestyle? Ever heard of the concept of low risk, high consequence events? At best I'm wrong and climate change isn't happening. We are all out some money and have learned to recycle (oversimplification I know)
At worst, well we all better learn how to swim.
Your willing to bet on me being wrong and risk not having learned how to swim ( figuratively speaking)?

You just fill in stuff so you can "understand" it like they did.
"whats that bright light coming from the sky and striking the ground? Hmmm god must be pissed! What else could it be?"
How is that not what you are doing?
You both fill in holes without knowing the FACTS.
Again, im not rejecting carbon is a greenhouse and we release it. I doubt we are changing the natural evolution of Earth. That takes some pretty hard facts for me. Sorry.

If it was a belief, firstly it wouldn't have facts supporting it. If it was a belief I would reject any other explanation. It can't be more fundamentally different then that. If tomorrow some climatologist would publish a better alternative explanation. An explanation that his peers couldn't dispute. I would change what I belief. For instance, when I started on this board, I strongly believed that having guns in the house was irresponsible. Until I had a discussion on here with Ray From Cleveland. During that conversation I was making a point, to make that point I did some research and found that that research didn't support my assertion. Instead of dismissing what I found I conceded, linked what I found and changed my position that handguns in the house are not necessarily irresponsible. Instead of holding on to what I believed I let facts, not beliefs inform my view. It's never fun to admit that your wrong, especially in a place like this, but I rather be wrong then irrational.

 

[TNHarley]

Why cant something just not be explained? Why does there ALWAYS have to be a reason?
It reminds me of people in the ancient world that had to use Gods to explain everything. Man just cant wait for the facts.
Maybe one day we will progress past that

There is plenty of stuff that can't be explained. What you are doing is rejecting an explanation when given. There are facts, you just aren't accepting them. You bring up God. Do you realize you are using the same logic as a religious person? "I don't wan't to believe that climate change is true so I reject all evidence that proves it." It's the same as a Young Earth creationist rejecting basically the nature of the world because he believes the Earth is 6000 year old.

Explanations arent facts. I would like FACTS when my sovereignty and all ways of life are threatened.
I wont throw my life away for what ifs. Thats retarded.
So we are both thinking like a religious person.. hmm

-Nope, see a religious person rejects evidence, or explanations in this case. I ask for them. That's the whole point. You reject everything that doesn't fit your belief. I'm offering you time and time again to give me an explanation.
-As to the second part. How is believing in climate change throwing away your life? At the very worst the most that's being asked is a change in lifestyle? Ever heard of the concept of low risk, high consequence events? At best I'm wrong and climate change isn't happening. We are all out some money and have learned to recycle (oversimplification I know)
At worst, well we all better learn how to swim.
Your willing to bet on me being wrong and risk not having learned how to swim ( figuratively speaking)?

You just fill in stuff so you can "understand" it like they did.
"whats that bright light coming from the sky and striking the ground? Hmmm god must be pissed! What else could it be?"
How is that not what you are doing?
You both fill in holes without knowing the FACTS.
Again, im not rejecting carbon is a greenhouse and we release it. I doubt we are changing the natural evolution of Earth. That takes some pretty hard facts for me. Sorry.

If it was a belief, firstly it wouldn't have facts supporting it. If it was a belief I would reject any other explanation. It can't be more fundamentally different then that. If tomorrow some climatologist would publish a better alternative explanation. An explanation that his peers couldn't dispute. I would change what I belief. For instance, when I started on this board, I strongly believed that having guns in the house was irresponsible. Until I had a discussion on here with Ray From Cleveland. During that conversation I was making a point, to make that point I did some research and found that that research didn't support my assertion. Instead of dismissing what I found I conceded, linked what I found and changed my position that handguns in the house are not necessarily irresponsible. Instead of holding on to what I believed I let facts, not beliefs inform my view. It's never fun to admit that your wrong, especially in a place like this, but I rather be wrong then irrational.

I dont mind admitting i am wrong. Self improvement is the way to go!
Buuuut i have nothing to admit, here. There are no facts showing me man is changing the evolution of this planet. None.

 

[forkup]

There is plenty of stuff that can't be explained. What you are doing is rejecting an explanation when given. There are facts, you just aren't accepting them. You bring up God. Do you realize you are using the same logic as a religious person? "I don't wan't to believe that climate change is true so I reject all evidence that proves it." It's the same as a Young Earth creationist rejecting basically the nature of the world because he believes the Earth is 6000 year old.

Explanations arent facts. I would like FACTS when my sovereignty and all ways of life are threatened.
I wont throw my life away for what ifs. Thats retarded.
So we are both thinking like a religious person.. hmm

-Nope, see a religious person rejects evidence, or explanations in this case. I ask for them. That's the whole point. You reject everything that doesn't fit your belief. I'm offering you time and time again to give me an explanation.
-As to the second part. How is believing in climate change throwing away your life? At the very worst the most that's being asked is a change in lifestyle? Ever heard of the concept of low risk, high consequence events? At best I'm wrong and climate change isn't happening. We are all out some money and have learned to recycle (oversimplification I know)
At worst, well we all better learn how to swim.
Your willing to bet on me being wrong and risk not having learned how to swim ( figuratively speaking)?

You just fill in stuff so you can "understand" it like they did.
"whats that bright light coming from the sky and striking the ground? Hmmm god must be pissed! What else could it be?"
How is that not what you are doing?
You both fill in holes without knowing the FACTS.
Again, im not rejecting carbon is a greenhouse and we release it. I doubt we are changing the natural evolution of Earth. That takes some pretty hard facts for me. Sorry.

If it was a belief, firstly it wouldn't have facts supporting it. If it was a belief I would reject any other explanation. It can't be more fundamentally different then that. If tomorrow some climatologist would publish a better alternative explanation. An explanation that his peers couldn't dispute. I would change what I belief. For instance, when I started on this board, I strongly believed that having guns in the house was irresponsible. Until I had a discussion on here with Ray From Cleveland. During that conversation I was making a point, to make that point I did some research and found that that research didn't support my assertion. Instead of dismissing what I found I conceded, linked what I found and changed my position that handguns in the house are not necessarily irresponsible. Instead of holding on to what I believed I let facts, not beliefs inform my view. It's never fun to admit that your wrong, especially in a place like this, but I rather be wrong then irrational.

I dont mind admitting i am wrong. Self improvement is the way to go!
Buuuut i have nothing to admit, here. There are no facts showing me man is changing the evolution of this planet. None.

Well I gave the relevant facts already and we aren't going to go understand each other any better by repeating them. So I'll just wish you a good night Harley.

 

[TNHarley]

Explanations arent facts. I would like FACTS when my sovereignty and all ways of life are threatened.
I wont throw my life away for what ifs. Thats retarded.
So we are both thinking like a religious person.. hmm

-Nope, see a religious person rejects evidence, or explanations in this case. I ask for them. That's the whole point. You reject everything that doesn't fit your belief. I'm offering you time and time again to give me an explanation.
-As to the second part. How is believing in climate change throwing away your life? At the very worst the most that's being asked is a change in lifestyle? Ever heard of the concept of low risk, high consequence events? At best I'm wrong and climate change isn't happening. We are all out some money and have learned to recycle (oversimplification I know)
At worst, well we all better learn how to swim.
Your willing to bet on me being wrong and risk not having learned how to swim ( figuratively speaking)?

You just fill in stuff so you can "understand" it like they did.
"whats that bright light coming from the sky and striking the ground? Hmmm god must be pissed! What else could it be?"
How is that not what you are doing?
You both fill in holes without knowing the FACTS.
Again, im not rejecting carbon is a greenhouse and we release it. I doubt we are changing the natural evolution of Earth. That takes some pretty hard facts for me. Sorry.

If it was a belief, firstly it wouldn't have facts supporting it. If it was a belief I would reject any other explanation. It can't be more fundamentally different then that. If tomorrow some climatologist would publish a better alternative explanation. An explanation that his peers couldn't dispute. I would change what I belief. For instance, when I started on this board, I strongly believed that having guns in the house was irresponsible. Until I had a discussion on here with Ray From Cleveland. During that conversation I was making a point, to make that point I did some research and found that that research didn't support my assertion. Instead of dismissing what I found I conceded, linked what I found and changed my position that handguns in the house are not necessarily irresponsible. Instead of holding on to what I believed I let facts, not beliefs inform my view. It's never fun to admit that your wrong, especially in a place like this, but I rather be wrong then irrational.

I dont mind admitting i am wrong. Self improvement is the way to go!
Buuuut i have nothing to admit, here. There are no facts showing me man is changing the evolution of this planet. None.

Well I gave the relevant facts already and we aren't going to go understand each other any better by repeating them. So I'll just wish you a good night Harley.

Yes, you gave facts but that doesnt even come close to implying man is disrupting earth evolution.
Good night to you as well, fork!

 

[Sunsettommy]

Another article showing yet another poll showing global warming is not a concern.

Watts Up With That?

Global warming is not people’s most pressing concern

August 1, 2018

Guest opinion by Tom Harris

Selected Excerpt:

"We often hear claims that man-made climate change is our greatest threat. But according to a recent Gallup poll, very few people in the United States actually believe it is. Indeed, even the United Nations own polling reveals that respondents across the world rate climate change last among issues they would like the UN and governments to focus on. No matter how long the list, climate change is always last."

LINK

Couple of things. Tom Harris the author is besides someone who works as a climate denier also a mechanical engineer. Not anyone with what would be a relevant degree.
The link provided is a dedicated climate denier website. that in itself doesn't have to be a problem, if the claims made are sourced, which they aren't. Still not a problem if I could find the relevant polls. Here we do have a problem. Global Warming Concern Steady Despite Some Partisan Shifts This is the latest gallup poll on climate. I do not find the relevant polling data and nothing to suggest that only 2 percent find climate not a pressing concern. the actual number stands at around 50 percent. So not only does your link starts from a bias, and doesn't source. When the claims are checked with the claimed source they appear to be false.

Forkup, manage to post several fallacies, lies and name calling that doesn't support his claims at all. Forkup LIED about what Gallup poll said as shown in THIS GALLUP link that Mr. Harris posted. He also LIED about what United Nations showed as well, since it is indeed in LAST PLACE as Mr. Harris pointed out.

Here is the question Gallop asked,

"What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today? [OPEN-ENDED]"

That was the question Mr. Harris pointed out which Gallup actually posed, it was OPEN ENDED which allows any replies on any particular concern the respondent could bring up. There was NO climate change/global warming response at all, just the a tiny response to Environment concerns which was just 2%

You are off to a poor start fella!