Why is climate science political?

[Truthmatters]

When the left hijacked the environmental movement to obtain political goals. They made it political. Watermelon men, the whole whacked out bunch of 'em.

deluded little rich girl with a washed brain

 

[skookerasbil]

Yo Frank.............how much fun is it to kick the k00ks square in the balls? Of course, no skin off their nose..........fuckers are in their own little world.........some kind of benign autism. But to the few who stumble in here checking out the scene...........looking for a compass on this climate change stuff, we do the public humiliation thing rather well, would you say?


Like this Truthmatters idiot..........reads my last long post above and heads to the kitchen for another 1/2 dozen donuts!!! 50,000 posts..........holy shit...........might see her dwelling on one of those cable shows some day.

 

[hjmick]

big fat hunks of money is the only reason

Ah **** me sideways, twice in one day...



TM is right.




Damn, I may need to log off.

 

[Liability]

Why is climate science political?

Because it isn't science; it's science FICTION.

And the "proposals" to "address" the fictional AGW are -- in actuality -- barely disguised economic expressions of purely political philosophy.

 

[Flopper]

I don't see science as being a political issue.

Good governance should be about acting on accurate scientific data - not about distorting the truth, hiding from it, or pretending the facts are not what they are.

While I think the use of nuclear vs renewables is a political issue around the world, only in the US (and to a lesser extent, Australia) does climate change seem to be political.

The Conservative parties of the UK, France, Germany, Finland, Denmark, New Zealand and host of others ALL accept that human acitivty may be playing a role in climate change, and have developed policies to suit.

In many cases, this means nuclear.

But why do some Americans seem to think climate change is left wing conspiracy, when most conservatives around the world are saying the opposite?

Science becomes political when it challenges strongly held beliefs. Before climate science researchers became concerned about global warming, the only interest politicians had, was the accuracy of the weather forecast for their next outdoor fund raiser.

 

[Zander]

I don't see science as being a political issue.

Good governance should be about acting on accurate scientific data - not about distorting the truth, hiding from it, or pretending the facts are not what they are.

While I think the use of nuclear vs renewables is a political issue around the world, only in the US (and to a lesser extent, Australia) does climate change seem to be political.

The Conservative parties of the UK, France, Germany, Finland, Denmark, New Zealand and host of others ALL accept that human acitivty may be playing a role in climate change, and have developed policies to suit.

In many cases, this means nuclear.

But why do some Americans seem to think climate change is left wing conspiracy, when most conservatives around the world are saying the opposite?

It is political because "Climate Science" is to real science as Astrology is to Astronomy.

 

[skookerasbil]

I don't see science as being a political issue.

Good governance should be about acting on accurate scientific data - not about distorting the truth, hiding from it, or pretending the facts are not what they are.

While I think the use of nuclear vs renewables is a political issue around the world, only in the US (and to a lesser extent, Australia) does climate change seem to be political.

The Conservative parties of the UK, France, Germany, Finland, Denmark, New Zealand and host of others ALL accept that human acitivty may be playing a role in climate change, and have developed policies to suit.

In many cases, this means nuclear.

But why do some Americans seem to think climate change is left wing conspiracy, when most conservatives around the world are saying the opposite?

It is political because "Climate Science" is to real science as Astrology is to Astronomy.

 

[Flopper]

It was inevitable that climate scientists would be attacked since their research indicated that we need to make major changes that effect every nation and particular the US because we're the largest economy in the world.

It's interesting that an Internet cottage industry of global warming deniers and defenders has developed, each twisting the facts as needed to make their point. What they pass off as real science is actually political science.

 

[tigerbob]

It was inevitable that climate scientists would be attacked since their research indicated that we need to make major changes that effect every nation and particular the US because we're the largest economy in the world.

It's interesting that an Internet cottage industry of global warming deniers and defenders has developed, each twisting the facts as needed to make their point. What they pass off as real science is actually political science.

It's interesting that you choose to damn one side for doing what both sides habitually do.

 

[Oddball]

An oldie but goodie, from the grooveyard....

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAlMomLvu_4]Censoring The Decrease in Global Temperatures - YouTube[/ame]

 

[rdean]

Republicans see ALL science as "political". What do you expect from people who believe "education is for snobs"?

Santorum: Obama "A Snob" For Wanting Everyone To Go To College - YouTube

Oh, rdean

Not really. You can't have a meaningful discussion about science with people who believe science is a faith, evolution a lie and climate change a conspiracy. Remember Michelle Bachmann saying vaccines cause autism? Boy, did she tear into doctors. And we know what right wingers think of scientists, even while insisting that more than 6% of scientists are Republican. Most right wingers don't even know much about the Bible either. They just "don't know" and "don't want to know".

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's the Great CO2 Glacier Eating Spaghetti Monster, Charlie Brown!

 

[code1211]

Why is climate science political?

Because the IPCC is political.

Because "peer review" is political.

Because all of its "researchers" require continued funding from the political class.

Because all of its "solutions" are political.

And you just kinda decided all this, right?

There is absolutely no evidence at all of any of this....I just laugh when I here people say research is political, I really do. (My wife is a PhD researcher)

I suspect at any moment we'll here the Illuminati are behind climate change research.

Which letter in IPCC stands for science?

 

[code1211]

See, this is the key point. The data "proving" Anthropogenic Climate Change/Global Warming/It's man's fault dammit" is NOT accurate data. There are tons of problems with the theory... and that's what it is... a theory, that Mankind is the prime mover behind every change in climate. It flies against basic logic, and the mechanisms chose to be hyped as the methodology in which it happens can be shown to be flawed by 8th grade Earth Science data. Their tools and models have been shown to be either accidentally or deliberately corrupted to find pre-chosen results and essentially discredited. Even normally trustworthy tools have discovered to have 'slipped' or deliberately altered to get the results.

The green movement is not scientific. It is a political movement to global ecofascism where an oligarchy of like minded Malthusian Luddites control what lives people can have in some arrogant vainglorious attempt of believing Man is all-powerful over the Earth and must 'save' it from us as well as 'save' ourselves from ourselves.
.

Right....the green movement is not scientific, and yet the National Academies of 30 odd countries, and at least another 30 major scientific bodies all people humans play a role in the climate.

I don't know about you guys, but if I was going to say that the National Academy of Physicists and the Royal Academy of Sciences were wrong - I'd want a lot of science on my side.

Instead what I see are strings of accusations with very little science.

It reminds me a bit of Holocaudt Denial (no offense intended, it's only an analogy) in that it is easy to say the Holocaust never happened - but difficult to explain where the 6 million Jews went.

I voted in the last election so I played a role in putting Obama in office.

I did not appoint him and I cannot remove him.

This is the same role that all of humanity plays in Climate Change.

 

[code1211]

When the left hijacked the environmental movement to obtain political goals. They made it political. Watermelon men, the whole whacked out bunch of 'em.

Try reading the thread again - most conservative parties in the world are not in your camp.

To clarify this: You are supporting your claim that this is not a political issue by citing its support by political parties?

 

[Old Rocks]

if peer (pal) review wasnt political to some extent then how do you explain Mann being able to get away with using the upsidedown Tiljander cores? why hasnt outside science come down hard on this and demanded a retraction?

I'm not sure how much you know about peer review, but it is a brutal and exacting process. It's well worth going to watch a dissertation defense to get an idea of how it works. (They are usually open to the public to help ensure transparency).

Wen the peer review is all based upon the original work (which, oh by the way, has been destroyed) of charlatans and frauds, then you don't have a popcorn fart.

Any links to credible sources? Didn't think so.

 

[code1211]

So, gullible Brits want to embrace economic ruin in order to try and change the weather... So what?

So do the French, the Germans, The Finns, The Kiwis, the Swedes, the Belgians, the Dutch.....

There is a point when you surely have to ask yourself - why do so many conservative parties not agree with you on this?

I mean....it IS all political, right?

If everyone else is wrong, do I need to be wrong, too? I should think they would be happy to watch the ol' USA stray down the wrong road again while they have the right answer.

How many of these countries have unilaterally imposed the Kyoto Accords?

 

[saveliberty]

So, gullible Brits want to embrace economic ruin in order to try and change the weather... So what?

So do the French, the Germans, The Finns, The Kiwis, the Swedes, the Belgians, the Dutch.....

There is a point when you surely have to ask yourself - why do so many conservative parties not agree with you on this?

I mean....it IS all political, right?

If everyone else is wrong, do I need to be wrong, too? I should think they would be happy to watch the ol' USA stray down the wrong road again while they have the right answer.

How many of these countries have unilaterally imposed the Kyoto Accords?

You mean the Accord they all break at will?

 

[code1211]

It was inevitable that climate scientists would be attacked since their research indicated that we need to make major changes that effect every nation and particular the US because we're the largest economy in the world.

It's interesting that an Internet cottage industry of global warming deniers and defenders has developed, each twisting the facts as needed to make their point. What they pass off as real science is actually political science.

It's interesting that you choose to damn one side for doing what both sides habitually do.

The difference is that one side wants to change the world and eliminate cheap, portable available energy and replace it with burning pig dung.

The other wants to wait and see what is really happening and not run around like Chicken Little.

 

[code1211]

Republicans see ALL science as "political". What do you expect from people who believe "education is for snobs"?

Santorum: Obama "A Snob" For Wanting Everyone To Go To College - YouTube

Oh, rdean

Not really. You can't have a meaningful discussion about science with people who believe science is a faith, evolution a lie and climate change a conspiracy. Remember Michelle Bachmann saying vaccines cause autism? Boy, did she tear into doctors. And we know what right wingers think of scientists, even while insisting that more than 6% of scientists are Republican. Most right wingers don't even know much about the Bible either. They just "don't know" and "don't want to know".

There's an easy way to end the debate. Present the irrefutable proof. there is no argument about gravity.

End the argument about AGW. You know all of the scientists personally. Present the best case.