Climate change has run it's course...

Rob Allen

Active Member
#92
1. If all your solutions affect other peoples life and liberty which is far more important than the health of the planet then your solutions are worthless and you need to quit telling people what they need to be doing.

2. I am glad some people are passionate and doing what they can, fact is everyone on the planet is passionate about something and they are doing things to promote that cause. The cause for most people is themselves and those are the problems they are trying to solve and that is the way we must allow it to be in order to ensure liberty. Yes people have the right to be selfish idiots and that right MUST be protected because if we don't well then we lose all our freedom.

3. I agree that the term hero is tossed around far too much. I define a hero as someone who puts their own life in immediate danger in order to save another life who is also in imminent danger. Lots of people who are generally thought of as heroes are NOT! For instance there is no such thing as a sports hero there is certainly no such thing as a scientific hero. Examples of Heroes Bob Pardo and Dan Hampton. I can only think of one religious hero. Problems have their best solutions when people passionate about the issue are free to try to solve them. and to that end there are no issues with this in America right now. No one is prevented by the government from pursuing their dreams. What is a problem is when you start forcing the government to pay for your passion. As soon as the government gets involved things get screwed up.

4. I am not denying the problem. I am denying that anyone has a right to force me to worry about the problem or to tell me how to live in light of the problem.

5. the scientific community is not united that has been demonstrated time and time again. The fact that you don't like the people who are skeptical of the majority viewpoint does not allow you the opportunity to throw them out of the scientific community. While we are at it here is how climate change science became so wide spread. It was taught as fact in our universities for 20 years so all of the scientists who have graduated in that time were taught climate change as fact and that those who skeptical of it aren't real scientists. same with the theory of evolution it has been taught as fact for 50 years in-spite of it only being a theory with only circumstantial evidence.

5. ahh there you just did it you completely discounted the dissenting viewpoint without even considering the fact that you might be wrong.

6. i also bought the most fuel efficient car that i could because i believe that whether climate change is real or not whether it's man made or not, whether it's catastrophic or not, it's a good idea to burn less gas.
 

plaegreid

Saved by the buoyancy of citrus
#93
If all your solutions affect other peoples life and liberty which is far more important than the health of the planet then your solutions are worthless and you need to quit telling people what they need to be doing.
None of the things I listed affect anyone's liberty, nor are they forcing anything on anyone. Also, by your logic, if I wanted to dump poison into the Seattle water supply, I should be able to, because the laws against it are ruining my way of life and my liberty to do whatever the hell I want.
The health of the planet IS more important than some liberties, because without our planet there won't be any people.
 

Old Man

Just an Old Man
#95
Climate Change. I sure wish us here in Montana had a chance at a change in the weather. While you are all cooking in the heat we have had 8 days of rain and 45 to 50 degree weather. Still more rain in site. It's coming out of Canada. I sure with like hell that it would just stay up there. I would like a little sun and some dryness so I could mow my wheat
field. Grass is starting to get a little long.
 

Rob Allen

Active Member
#96
None of the things I listed affect anyone's liberty, nor are they forcing anything on anyone. Also, by your logic, if I wanted to dump poison into the Seattle water supply, I should be able to, because the laws against it are ruining my way of life and my liberty to do whatever the hell I want.
The health of the planet IS more important than some liberties, because without our planet there won't be any people.
Well i don't know where the Seattle water supply is but by the condition of the sound the people of the Puget Sound area are dumping poison into the water system.
I agree that limits on liberty exist and all of them are fully addressed by current law and have been for decades if not longer.

One of the biggest things brought up in conversation with climate change proponents is the population of the earth.
Trying to control that is a gross violation of personal liberty. Just one of many examples.
 

Rob Allen

Active Member
#98
None of the things I listed affect anyone's liberty, nor are they forcing anything on anyone. Also, by your logic, if I wanted to dump poison into the Seattle water supply, I should be able to, because the laws against it are ruining my way of life and my liberty to do whatever the hell I want.
The health of the planet IS more important than some liberties, because without our planet there won't be any people.

Just to push it to the extreme. A world full of slaves is not preferable to no world at all.
Neither is anything close to likely therefore we must meet in the middle and i would argue that we have already passed the point at which diminishing liberty is tolerable. So if you want to fix ANY issue at all you must do it without further restrictions on liberty.
 

jamma

Active Member
#99
1. If all your solutions affect other peoples life and liberty which is far more important than the health of the planet then your solutions are worthless and you need to quit telling people what they need to be doing.

2. I am glad some people are passionate and doing what they can, fact is everyone on the planet is passionate about something and they are doing things to promote that cause. The cause for most people is themselves and those are the problems they are trying to solve and that is the way we must allow it to be in order to ensure liberty. Yes people have the right to be selfish idiots and that right MUST be protected because if we don't well then we lose all our freedom.

3. I agree that the term hero is tossed around far too much. I define a hero as someone who puts their own life in immediate danger in order to save another life who is also in imminent danger. Lots of people who are generally thought of as heroes are NOT! For instance there is no such thing as a sports hero there is certainly no such thing as a scientific hero. Examples of Heroes Bob Pardo and Dan Hampton. I can only think of one religious hero. Problems have their best solutions when people passionate about the issue are free to try to solve them. and to that end there are no issues with this in America right now. No one is prevented by the government from pursuing their dreams. What is a problem is when you start forcing the government to pay for your passion. As soon as the government gets involved things get screwed up.

4. I am not denying the problem. I am denying that anyone has a right to force me to worry about the problem or to tell me how to live in light of the problem.

5. the scientific community is not united that has been demonstrated time and time again. The fact that you don't like the people who are skeptical of the majority viewpoint does not allow you the opportunity to throw them out of the scientific community. While we are at it here is how climate change science became so wide spread. It was taught as fact in our universities for 20 years so all of the scientists who have graduated in that time were taught climate change as fact and that those who skeptical of it aren't real scientists. same with the theory of evolution it has been taught as fact for 50 years in-spite of it only being a theory with only circumstantial evidence.

5. ahh there you just did it you completely discounted the dissenting viewpoint without even considering the fact that you might be wrong.

6. i also bought the most fuel efficient car that i could because i believe that whether climate change is real or not whether it's man made or not, whether it's catastrophic or not, it's a good idea to burn less gas.
I'm going to respond to this,not because I think I can change your mind,just to throw some light on the shade that's being dispensed here.Here goes:

1.The idea that you think your right to whatever you consider your personal freedom trumps my right to life is scary,to say the least.Does this absolve Timothy McVeigh's decision to slaughter and maim people,including children,who had nothing to do with Waco?Do you not comprehend that every law on the books is derived from someone who failed to understand the limits of their personal freedom when it comes to rights of other's?And there are limits.

2.I would not deny the right of anyone to be a selfish idiot except in cases where it interferes with someone's decision not to be one.Knock yourself out.

3.Everyone's right to choose their heroes is clearly subjective.Can scientists be heroes?Obviously yes.The guy who invented modern sewer systems is a god to me.My other heroes are doctors,caregivers,teachers and first responders.Also engineers who save us from killing our stupid asses every day.

4.I never told anyone what to do.I merely pointed out that an important factor in some people's decision to not get involved is their ignorance in understanding the gravity of the situation.

5a.Not complaining here,but you did have two number fives.As far as the scientific community is involved,I have seen,read,or heard many places that 98% of the scientific community acknowledges global warming,and that includes scientists from all disciplines,not just climatologists.You claim this is not true yet offer no sources or even any proof whatsoever of this.I also might point out that the post that started this discussion came from the....Wall Street Journal?When did they become a scientific publication? Oh...right....never.I did try to read the article but the WSJ wouldn't let me without buying a subscription.But isn't that their focus?What I was able to read and your general attitude toward scientists leads me believe that you are completely ignorant as to how real science works.

5b.What leads you to believe I did not consider all sides of the issue?Real science looks at every aspect and welcomes dissension.My views derive from looking at the response to opposing views and gauging that response.I recently read a quote from a scientist who stated"If you can't explain it so everyone can understand it,you don't understand it."In light of the overwhelming evidence,I have made my choices.No,if anyone's not weighing both sides of issue,it is you,sir.Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...

6.Good for you,and us.
 

jamma

Active Member
Oh,I wanted to add to the reply to the first statement,specifically the last part;I suggest following your own advise and quit telling me what to do.I'm sure everyone can get a good laugh out of the irony of that.

I am also stating these will be my last words on this subject.Have a good life,everyone.
 
I'm going to respond to this,not because I think I can change your mind,just to throw some light on the shade that's being dispensed here.Here goes:

1.The idea that you think your right to whatever you consider your personal freedom trumps my right to life is scary,to say the least.Does this absolve Timothy McVeigh's decision to slaughter and maim people,including children,who had nothing to do with Waco?Do you not comprehend that every law on the books is derived from someone who failed to understand the limits of their personal freedom when it comes to rights of other's?And there are limits.

2.I would not deny the right of anyone to be a selfish idiot except in cases where it interferes with someone's decision not to be one.Knock yourself out.

3.Everyone's right to choose their heroes is clearly subjective.Can scientists be heroes?Obviously yes.The guy who invented modern sewer systems is a god to me.My other heroes are doctors,caregivers,teachers and first responders.Also engineers who save us from killing our stupid asses every day.

4.I never told anyone what to do.I merely pointed out that an important factor in some people's decision to not get involved is their ignorance in understanding the gravity of the situation.

5a.Not complaining here,but you did have two number fives.As far as the scientific community is involved,I have seen,read,or heard many places that 98% of the scientific community acknowledges global warming,and that includes scientists from all disciplines,not just climatologists.You claim this is not true yet offer no sources or even any proof whatsoever of this.I also might point out that the post that started this discussion came from the....Wall Street Journal?When did they become a scientific publication? Oh...right....never.I did try to read the article but the WSJ wouldn't let me without buying a subscription.But isn't that their focus?What I was able to read and your general attitude toward scientists leads me believe that you are completely ignorant as to how real science works.

5b.What leads you to believe I did not consider all sides of the issue?Real science looks at every aspect and welcomes dissension.My views derive from looking at the response to opposing views and gauging that response.I recently read a quote from a scientist who stated"If you can't explain it so everyone can understand it,you don't understand it."In light of the overwhelming evidence,I have made my choices.No,if anyone's not weighing both sides of issue,it is you,sir.Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...

6.Good for you,and us.
1. Someones right to liberty is not violating your right to life. global warming is NOT taking your life.
2. no ones right to idiocy keeps you from not being one
3. I don't think what a hero is or is not is all that subjective. if you didn't put your life in danger to save the life of another you didn't do much heroic. Beatrice Shilling probably saved the lives of lots of spitfire pilots and she should be remembered as a great scientists and race car driver but not a hero. hero's go above and beyond not just their best.
4. When laws get passed that further control peoples behavior you are telling them what to do. The scientific community has not presented sufficient data suggesting that this is a grave situation. So far everything that has been predicted has been wrong.
5. not all scientists are qualified to look into this issue only climate scientists are. and since no one has ever experienced a warming planet no one is qualified to make predictions about what might and might not happen. and the 98% is a debatable number some scientists say that that is wrong. and the reason that so many scientists believe climate change is real and man made and catastrophic is because that is what they were taught at a university. not because they studied it themselves and came to their own conclusions.
5s if real science looks at every side of the issue then real science does not exist climate science debate absolutely does NOT tolerate any dissent this forum is a perfect example. quite frankly this isn't just science it's everywhere these days if you speak out against any of the very far lefts pet issues you get shouted down and called names. especially at universities. and invariably those doing the shouting cannot debate the issue because facts are not on their side.

global warming= a debatable issue. so leave people alone. quit using the issue to beat people into submission. for example by labeling people as idiots or ignorant.
 

quilbilly

Big Time Hater
Calling someone an idiot, who is an idiot, is both appropriate and in these days, necessary....idiots get away with too much when their bullshit is allowed to stand unchallenged....

As an idiot, I can see where you'd be unable to grasp that Rob, but I'll throw it out there anyways.

The rest of the non idiot world gets it.
 

Latest posts