why was this forum determined to be the bastion of the ignoramus and ignoble comments? one can't make valid points without having laughable formulas applied to them. for example....
insert fake and stupid before each noun and belief and you've got yourself a debunked idea. make a point about the sky being blue and somehow that disproves that man has any relation to his air quality. friggin nuts and these people get chains of monkeys to link arms and throw feces. very popular tactic i admit but god damn it we are human beings and we ought to act like it.
the doubt about climate change has been manufactured by billions of dollars. the bottom line wins....but as i've pointed out
elsewhere, nike, coke and others are recognizing climate change as a hazard to business. once business is on board for the sake of profits, then we will see skeptics peter out. we need unity, not hate.
You haven't made a single point, valid or invalid, in this thread. All you have done is spouted nonsense, and heaped scorn on me for not believing it. The facts are pretty simple, the Earth is coming out of an ice age. This, believe it or not, is a good thing.
Another fact, there is some evidence that humans are contributing to an acceleration of that process. There is a number of people that want you to believe that this is a bad thing, even though they can't actually supply any evidence of why it is bad. The weird thing is that, even if we assume a worst case scenario, there is absolute proof that it has been worst in the past.
What we have then is scientific evidence that climate change is occurring, that humans are accelerating it, but we have absolutely no proof that the result will be the "End of life as we know it." Even if it is, we have no proof that is a bad thing.
Yet people want you to believe that, if we don't do
SOMETHING the planet will die. What they don't want you to do is ask how the something they want you to do is going to work. Why should we spend trillions of dollars, destroy the world economy, and do something, even though we don't know it will work, or if it is necessary.
On top of that we have the fact that humans are damned good at adapting to their environment, and finding solutions to problems when given time. Scott Adams has a rule he uses to explain this, he calls it the law of slow moving disasters. I actually pointed out one of the examples he uses sarcastically earlier, but you skipped right over thinking about it.
When I was a kid, it was generally assumed that the world would be destroyed by a global nuclear war. The world has been close to nuclear disaster a few times, but so far we've avoided all-out nuclear war.
The world was supposed to run out of oil by now, but instead we keep finding new ways to extract it from the ground. The United States has unexpectedly become a net provider of energy.
The debt problem in the United States was supposed to destroy the economy. Instead, the deficit is shrinking, the stock market is surging, and the price of gold is plummeting.
Social security was supposed to go broke. It might have some dents and scratches, but it looks as if it will be fine.
Offshoring was supposed to suck the last bit of manufacturing DNA out of the United States. Instead, robotics and other market forces have caused the trend to reverse.
Illegal immigrants from Mexico were supposed to overrun the United States with crime, steal American jobs and burden the social systems. Instead, the economy of Mexico started improving and immigration reversed.
Scott Adams Blog: Fact Checking: Adams Law of Slow-Moving Disasters 04/15/2013
Chill out, we will survive.
If we don't, then we don't deserve to, and the universe will find someone else to solve the problems.
