Home | Be a Christian | Devotionals | Join Us! | Forums | Rules | F.A.Q.


Go Back   Christian Forums > Society > Society > Politics > American Politics
Register BlogsPrayersJobsArcade Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

American Politics Forum for political discussion that applies specifically to the United States.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 14th April 2009, 12:40 PM
Baggins's Avatar
Senior Veteran

45 Gender: Male Married Faith: Humanist Party: UK-Labour Country: Wales Member For 3 Years
 
Join Date: 8th March 2006
Location: At Sea
Posts: 4,821
Blessings: 35,115
My Mood Cynical
Reps: 440,924,714,569 (power: 440,924,722)
Baggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond repute
Baggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by chestertonrules View Post
What lie are you referring to?
That there is a cooling trend in the Earth's climate.

Since you are a secular leftist, you clearly are biased and not likely to be a credible source of information.
I am a scientist and therefore way more credible than a scientific illiterate like you.

However, if you think you can refute the data in the OP, feel free to make the attempt
Done:

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-re...r4-wg1-spm.pdf

Although I doubt you will understand what it says and will continue to follow sheep like the right wing bloggers you parrot.

where as I can read and understand a scientific report, I am also intelligent enough to realise that there are experts who know far more about this subject than I do and that when they reach a consensus it is worth taking them seriously.

As I pointed out you don't have the scientific knowledge to reject this report for scientific reasons, therefore you reject it because you don't like the policy formulated to deal with the problem. By rejecting well founded science instead of coming up with your own political solutions you show you politics to be moribund- devoid of ideas and therefore pointless in teh modern world
__________________
A scientist, it's official

" The result, therefore, of this physical enquiry is that we find no vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an end" James Hutton, from his 1788 paper to the Royal Society of Edinburgh on the principles of geology
Reply With Quote
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!

  #32  
Old 14th April 2009, 12:40 PM
kermit's Avatar
Contributor

35 Gender: Male Married Faith: Christian Party: US-Democrat Country: United States Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 14th November 2003
Posts: 8,717
Blessings: 53,121
My Mood Fine
Reps: 522,642,395,829 (power: 522,642,410)
kermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond repute
kermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond reputekermit has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Steve Petersen View Post
A thousand years ago, Greenland was, well...green.
Greenland was never green. At least not in human history.

Green Myth-Busting: Greenland was Once Green : jeffmcintirestrasburg - Green Options

To get a green Greenland you have to go back well before the dawn of Man, about a half a million years.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 14th April 2009, 12:43 PM
chestertonrules's Avatar
Veteran

44 Gender: Male Married Faith: Catholic Party: US-Republican Country: United States Member For 1 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 18th December 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,679
Blessings: 96,061
My Mood Amused
Reps: 2,230,019,382 (power: 2,230,026)
chestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond repute
chestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Baggins View Post
That there is a cooling trend in the Earth's climate.



I am a scientist and therefore way more credible than a scientific illiterate like you.



Done:

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-re...r4-wg1-spm.pdf

Although I doubt you will understand what it says and will continue to follow sheep like the right wing bloggers you parrot.

where as I can read and understand a scientific report, I am also intelligent enough to realise that there are experts who know far more about this subject than I do and that when they reach a consensus it is worth taking them seriously.

As I pointed out you don't have the scientific knowledge to reject this report for scientific reasons, therefore you reject it because you don't like the policy formulated to deal with the problem. By rejecting well founded science instead of coming up with your own political solutions you show you politics to be moribund- devoid of ideas and therefore pointless in teh modern world

The IPCC is a political organization.

If you have a point to make, feel free. I'm not going to read an entire report from a group of leftist bureaucrats.

I provided data, you provided political evasions.

That appears to be the trend!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 14th April 2009, 12:44 PM
Grizzly's Avatar
Enemy of Christmas

43 Gender: Male Married Faith: Atheist Party: US-Democrat Country: United States Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 6th July 2002
Location: Tallahassee
Posts: 8,817
Blessings: 1,513
My Mood Amused
Reps: 1,462,447,108,143 (power: 1,462,447,124)
Grizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond repute
Grizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond reputeGrizzly has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by kermit View Post
Greenland was never green. At least not in human history.

Green Myth-Busting: Greenland was Once Green : jeffmcintirestrasburg - Green Options

To get a green Greenland you have to go back well before the dawn of Man, about a half a million years.
But the earth is only 6,000 years old? This is crazy talk.
__________________
"So here we are, wallowing in our dysfunction. Governed -- if you listen to the rabble rousers -- by a black nationalist from Kenya smuggled into the United States to kill Sarah Palin's baby. " Bill Moyers.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 14th April 2009, 12:45 PM
Senior Veteran

42 Gender: Male Married Faith: Christian Party: US-Republican Country: United States Member For 3 Years
 
Join Date: 14th December 2005
Posts: 5,534
Blessings: 58,817
Reps: 3,119,568,154,123 (power: 3,119,568,163)
chaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond repute
chaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by kermit View Post
Greenland was never green. At least not in human history.

Green Myth-Busting: Greenland was Once Green : jeffmcintirestrasburg - Green Options

To get a green Greenland you have to go back well before the dawn of Man, about a half a million years.
Doe sit really matter when it was, the fact remains that there have been time periods during which the Earth was MUCH warmer than it is now and said warming periods were most definitely not man caused.

The fact that the Earth is arguably warmer now than at any time in human history is hardly proof that humans are the primary cause of warming, especially since the beginning of anything resembling decent climate records was an abnormally cool time.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 14th April 2009, 12:46 PM
chestertonrules's Avatar
Veteran

44 Gender: Male Married Faith: Catholic Party: US-Republican Country: United States Member For 1 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 18th December 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,679
Blessings: 96,061
My Mood Amused
Reps: 2,230,019,382 (power: 2,230,026)
chestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond repute
chestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by kermit View Post
Greenland was never green. At least not in human history.

Green Myth-Busting: Greenland was Once Green : jeffmcintirestrasburg - Green Options

To get a green Greenland you have to go back well before the dawn of Man, about a half a million years.

Data from ice cores indicate that between AD 800 and 1300 the regions around the fjords of southern Greenland experienced a mild climate, with trees and herbaceous plants growing and livestock being farmed.[citation needed]
These Icelandic settlements vanished during the 14th and 15th centuries, likely due to famine and increasing conflicts with the Inuit.[8] The condition of human bones from this period indicates that the Norse population was malnourished, probably because of soil erosion resulting from the Norsemen's destruction of natural ve
Data from ice cores indicate that between AD 800 and 1300 the regions around the fjords of southern Greenland experienced a mild climate, with trees and herbaceous plants growing and livestock being farmed.[citation needed]
These Icelandic settlements vanished during the 14th and 15th centuries, likely due to famine and increasing conflicts with the Inuit.[8] The condition of human bones from this period indicates that the Norse population was malnourished, probably because of soil erosion resulting from the Norsemen's destruction of natural vegetation to allow for farming, turf-cutting, and wood-cutting, because of a decline in temperatures during the Little Ice Age, and because of armed conflicts with the Inuit.[7] getation to allow for farming, turf-cutting, and wood-cutting, because of a decline in temperatures during the Little Ice Age, and because of armed conflicts with the Inuit.[7]

Greenland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 14th April 2009, 12:47 PM
Senior Veteran

42 Gender: Male Married Faith: Christian Party: US-Republican Country: United States Member For 3 Years
 
Join Date: 14th December 2005
Posts: 5,534
Blessings: 58,817
Reps: 3,119,568,154,123 (power: 3,119,568,163)
chaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond repute
chaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond reputechaz345 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Grizzly View Post
But the earth is only 6,000 years old? This is crazy talk.
If you think that all or even a majority of those of us that believe in creationism believe that the Earth is around that age, you are sadly mistaken.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 14th April 2009, 12:52 PM
Baggins's Avatar
Senior Veteran

45 Gender: Male Married Faith: Humanist Party: UK-Labour Country: Wales Member For 3 Years
 
Join Date: 8th March 2006
Location: At Sea
Posts: 4,821
Blessings: 35,115
My Mood Cynical
Reps: 440,924,714,569 (power: 440,924,722)
Baggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond repute
Baggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by chestertonrules View Post
They can't.

Unfortunately, they can vote!
Another irony meter bites the dust as someone with zero scientific credibility and education complains of others being uneducated
__________________
A scientist, it's official

" The result, therefore, of this physical enquiry is that we find no vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an end" James Hutton, from his 1788 paper to the Royal Society of Edinburgh on the principles of geology
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 14th April 2009, 01:00 PM
Baggins's Avatar
Senior Veteran

45 Gender: Male Married Faith: Humanist Party: UK-Labour Country: Wales Member For 3 Years
 
Join Date: 8th March 2006
Location: At Sea
Posts: 4,821
Blessings: 35,115
My Mood Cynical
Reps: 440,924,714,569 (power: 440,924,722)
Baggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond repute
Baggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond reputeBaggins has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by chestertonrules View Post
Not that it matters, but I have a BS in Chemistry and and an MBA.

Even a high school grad should be able to read a graph, however.

You are so indoctrinated that you can't accept facts that expose your opinions as flawed.


Where did you get your education?

Someone with a BSc should have the basic scientific education to understand climatology, and yet you show absolutely no understanding of it whatsoever.

I'd be ashamed to be a trained scientist and come out with the stuff that you parrot straight off right wing blogs.

Have you ever thought of putting all that education to some use and thinking for yourself?

Someone with an high school education in science and the basic facts should be able to understand why the graph you show is fraudulent, it has also been explained to you a number of times.

Your inability to grasp that shows that either your "education" was a waste of time or your hatred of anything you perceive to be left wing - although how climatology can be left wing is beyond me - is so all consuming it has clouded any scientific judgement you ever had.
__________________
A scientist, it's official

" The result, therefore, of this physical enquiry is that we find no vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an end" James Hutton, from his 1788 paper to the Royal Society of Edinburgh on the principles of geology
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 14th April 2009, 01:01 PM
chestertonrules's Avatar
Veteran

44 Gender: Male Married Faith: Catholic Party: US-Republican Country: United States Member For 1 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 18th December 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,679
Blessings: 96,061
My Mood Amused
Reps: 2,230,019,382 (power: 2,230,026)
chestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond repute
chestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond reputechestertonrules has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Baggins View Post


Where did you get your education?

Someone with a BSc should have the basic scientific education to understand climatology, and yet you show absolutely no understanding of it whatsoever.

I'd be ashamed to be a trained scientist and come out with the stuff that you parrot straight off right wing blogs.

Have you ever thought of putting all that education to some use and thinking for yourself?

Someone with an high school education in science and the basic facts should be able to understand why the graph you show is fraudulent, it has also been explained to you a number of times.

Your inability to grasp that shows that either your "education" was a waste of time or your hatred of anything you perceive to be left wing - although how climatology can be left wing is beyond me - is so all consuming it has clouded any scientific judgement you ever had.

Your ignorance is only surpassed by your arrogance.

The graphs I've provided are accurate and sourced. Feel free to explain why the data is irrelevant.

You have yet to refute a single point I've made.

Why?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Return to American Politics

Thread Tools
Display Modes



 
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:00 PM.


vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007 - 2008, PixelFX Studios