Official Thread for Denial of GreenHouse Effect and Radiative Physics.

[flacaltenn]

Too many threads are ending up with the same 20 page discussion between a small fraction of the members that read Enviro topics.. Every rule and design of USMB moderation is there to get UNIQUE TOPICAL discussion of specific events and topics as laid out in the Opening Posts. No one wants to wade thru the same fillibustering arguments that atmospheric physics and the GHouse effect is all wrong.. And they violate the "on-topic" rules at USMB..

That's what this thread is for.. CONTAIN those rodeos in THIS thread or start your own threads on whatever you deny.... DON'T hijack other specific topics.. Members and visitors will appreciate your cooperation...

Go have your sideline debates about this topic HERE.. The topic is clearly spelled out in the title of this thread...

 

[emilynghiem]

Thank you. I would like to see more people reach an agreement
that natural activities such as volcanic eruptions, and even man made
production issues that are necessary such as agricultural for feeding
the world's population, produce more of the emissions affecting the planet.

There's still plenty of room for improvement and for arguing about
the crisis and urgent necessity in stopping pollution and waste.

We don't need to make a "test" or "condition" out of believing certain
arguments, data or proof of what is causing levels of damage.

There is plenty of proof we all benefit from cleaning up pollution and damage
without arguing about "what the science proves or doesn't prove."

We can focus on cleaner energy, healthier food sources and means of production, etc.
without arguing or attacking anyone for what they believe or don't believe is the priority.

I hope we get past this stage of trying to demonize and discredit
one group or approach or another. And just focus on the reforms
we CAN agree on which is plenty to work on for sustainable living!

 

[petro]

To be honest I never considered myself a climate change denier.

More of a climate change encourager. I fully encourage the appearance of Palm Trees in Duluth. Being tommorows forecast calls for snow in the area, I am completely discouraged about the current rate of warming.

 

[flacaltenn]

Thank you. I would like to see more people reach an agreement
that natural activities such as volcanic eruptions, and even man made
production issues that are necessary such as agricultural for feeding
the world's population, produce more of the emissions affecting the planet.

There's still plenty of room for improvement and for arguing about
the crisis and urgent necessity in stopping pollution and waste.

We don't need to make a "test" or "condition" out of believing certain
arguments, data or proof of what is causing levels of damage.

There is plenty of proof we all benefit from cleaning up pollution and damage
without arguing about "what the science proves or doesn't prove."

We can focus on cleaner energy, healthier food sources and means of production, etc.
without arguing or attacking anyone for what they believe or don't believe is the priority.

I hope we get past this stage of trying to demonize and discredit
one group or approach or another. And just focus on the reforms
we CAN agree on which is plenty to work on for sustainable living!

There's a sliding scale on what is considered to be "GWarming denial".. It's an abusive, term meant to stoke discord and polarization.. But in reality, "denial" ranges from "I accept GW -- I just don't accept the CATASTROPHIC predictions that have been pounded by media/politicians based on MISREPRESENTATION of the actual science" ----- to the folks that will be using this thread that fall into to "I not only reject GWarming totally and IN ADDITION I don't believe in the physics and chemistry behind how the basic GreenHouse theory works"....

I'm a "denier" of the first kind". Relatively not an extremist on the topic. THIS thread is for the folks in that latter category who are just fillibustering EVERY GW thread with their "alternative science".... It's OK TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS.. But they have to contained to threads where THAT IS the actual topic...

 

[Oddball]

I'm a "denier" of the 4th kind...The warmers are lying sacks of Malthusian declinist shit.

The doomsayers have always ended up being proven wrong over time.

Get a new hobby.

 

[petro]

The notion that conservatives hate the environment is a bald faced lie. Many of us live rural, have private wells, hunt and fish producing license fees and revenue directly to benefit natural resources, spend more time in the wild than city dwellers.
What we are against is signing on to aggrements that are punitive to America while giving so called developing nations a free pass to pollute, while all along we are reducing emissions. The Paris Accord was a farce. The hypocrites of the Green movement who live lavishly with the carbon footprint of an elephant lecturing those with a footprint of an ant in comparison make the whole issue a literal joke. They do not help real environmental concerns.

The doom and gloom I have heard all my life. We passed some smart legislation which cleaned up our environment after things looked a little bleak during the 1970's. Now I see more wildlife than ever before, especially raptor species since the ban on DDT.

Now regarding all that trash I see in urban areas along the highway...
I can't believe for one second that all that was generated by conservatives.

 

[cnm]

Now that's the sort of denial this thread was created for. Kudos.

 

[Olde Europe]

Too many threads are ending up with the same 20 page discussion between a small fraction of the members that read Enviro topics.. Every rule and design of USMB moderation is there to get UNIQUE TOPICAL discussion of specific events and topics as laid out in the Opening Posts. No one wants to wade thru the same fillibustering arguments that atmospheric physics and the GHouse effect is all wrong.. And they violate the "on-topic" rules at USMB..

That's what this thread is for.. CONTAIN those rodeos in THIS thread or start your own threads on whatever you deny.... DON'T hijack other specific topics.. Members and visitors will appreciate your cooperation...

Go have your sideline debates about this topic HERE.. The topic is clearly spelled out in the title of this thread...

Thanks. Let me express my hope this will be rigorously enforced, and what came rightly to be known as "Same Shit Different Day" will be safely quarantined in here, no longer to infest the reasonable world outside. Thanks, again.

 

[sparky]

That's what this thread is for.. CONTAIN those rodeos in THIS thread

here we go again.....

THIS thread is for the folks in that latter category who are just fillibustering EVERY GW thread with their "alternative science"

what do you consider 'alt science'......??

~S~

 

[Wuwei]

That's what this thread is for.. CONTAIN those rodeos in THIS thread

here we go again.....

THIS thread is for the folks in that latter category who are just fillibustering EVERY GW thread with their "alternative science"

what do you consider 'alt science'......??

I'm one of those guilty of carrying on against "alt-science" in the various threads FLACALTENN is referring to.

There are several posters demanding that some of the laws of physics are not what have been promoted by scientists, textbooks, and lectures for the last 150 years. They have an alternate view of several thermodynamic laws which, to scientists, are dead wrong and lead to self-contradictions.

I wouldn't even call it alt-science. It's simply wrong. It's obvious that alt-science is solely constructed to deny that the greenhouse effect exists. My view is that you don't really have to bastardize science to try to force your viewpoint that you disagree with global warming, or the catastrophic aspect. Those who promote alt-science are actually giving a bad name to others who have more honest questions about global warming.

.

 

[sparky]

So alt science is merely more propagandized science

thanks for clearing that up Wu

~S~

 

[SSDD]

Well, it was bound to happen sooner or later...even luke warmers prefer to shut down the conversation rather than be continually asked for evidence that doesn't exist.

Whether or not the radiative greenhouse hypothesis is accurate or not is the crux of the discussion...if simply believing were good enough for me, maybe I would want to shut down the conversation as well...

 

[SSDD]

There is plenty of proof we all benefit from cleaning up pollution and damage
without arguing about "what the science proves or doesn't prove."

Yes..there are plenty of actual environmental issues that need to be addressed...unfortunately, none are being addressed so long as the AGW scam is sucking all of the air out of the room and all the treasure out of the coffers.

AGW has been the environmental topic of discussion now for a couple of decades at least...which serious environmental issues have been addressed and dealt with in that time? The AGW issue has only made the problems worse with the environmental disaster that renewables is turning out to be...heavy metals...toxic waste, driving raptors, bats and migratory birds to extinction...

Great work on the part of environmentalists...

 

[SSDD]

The notion that conservatives hate the environment is a bald faced lie. Many of us live rural, have private wells, hunt and fish producing license fees and revenue directly to benefit natural resources, spend more time in the wild than city dwellers.
What we are against is signing on to aggrements that are punitive to America while giving so called developing nations a free pass to pollute, while all along we are reducing emissions. The Paris Accord was a farce. The hypocrites of the Green movement who live lavishly with the carbon footprint of an elephant lecturing those with a footprint of an ant in comparison make the whole issue a literal joke. They do not help real environmental concerns.

The doom and gloom I have heard all my life. We passed some smart legislation which cleaned up our environment after things looked a little bleak during the 1970's. Now I see more wildlife than ever before, especially raptor species since the ban on DDT.

Now regarding all that trash I see in urban areas along the highway...
I can't believe for one second that all that was generated by conservatives.

Conservatives tend to be conservationists which is a philosophy that actually conserves the environment rather than having a hands off attitude which is why california is such a disaster... Preserving the environment requires that we take action and be involved...environmentalists don't get it and never will...conservation is to much work for a liberal to ever get involved...they just want to feel good...doing good is for someone else.

 

[SSDD]

Too many threads are ending up with the same 20 page discussion between a small fraction of the members that read Enviro topics.. Every rule and design of USMB moderation is there to get UNIQUE TOPICAL discussion of specific events and topics as laid out in the Opening Posts. No one wants to wade thru the same fillibustering arguments that atmospheric physics and the GHouse effect is all wrong.. And they violate the "on-topic" rules at USMB..

That's what this thread is for.. CONTAIN those rodeos in THIS thread or start your own threads on whatever you deny.... DON'T hijack other specific topics.. Members and visitors will appreciate your cooperation...

Go have your sideline debates about this topic HERE.. The topic is clearly spelled out in the title of this thread...

Thanks. Let me express my hope this will be rigorously enforced, and what came rightly to be known as "Same Shit Different Day" will be safely quarantined in here, no longer to infest the reasonable world outside. Thanks, again.

Typical warmer...can't defend your belief so naturally you would favor shutting down the conversation...

 

[SSDD]

That's what this thread is for.. CONTAIN those rodeos in THIS thread

here we go again.....

THIS thread is for the folks in that latter category who are just fillibustering EVERY GW thread with their "alternative science"

what do you consider 'alt science'......??

~S~

Anything that questions his belief in unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable models...

 

[SSDD]

So alt science is merely more propagandized science

thanks for clearing that up Wu

~S~

alt.science is a request for actual observed, measured evidence to support a position...those who believe in models over reality can't provide such evidence and it is a constant irritant...best to shut down the conversation rather than endlessly try to explain why there is no actual evidence to support the position.

 

[Wuwei]

..best to shut down the conversation rather than endlessly try to explain why there is no actual evidence to support the position.

The conversation isn't being shut down. It's simply being moved here.

.

 

[SSDD]

..best to shut down the conversation rather than endlessly try to explain why there is no actual evidence to support the position.

The conversation isn't being shut down. It's simply being moved here.

.

The topic has been removed from the general discussion and relegated to a place where believers don’t have to experience the discomfort of being asked for evidence that they cannot produce.

It is censorship, it is being done for a specific reason, and it does effectively silence skeptics...

 

[IanC]

..best to shut down the conversation rather than endlessly try to explain why there is no actual evidence to support the position.

The conversation isn't being shut down. It's simply being moved here.

.

The topic has been removed from the general discussion and relegated to a place where believers don’t have to experience the discomfort of being asked for evidence that they cannot produce.

It is censorship, it is being done for a specific reason, and it does effectively silence skeptics...

Personally I like having you around and I don't think you should be censored.

That said, you do spam a lot of threads that aren't relevant to your comments.

Also, you demand proof from others but are unwilling to produce any yourself.