Survey: Conservatives are less likely to accept the norms of science

Strathos

No one important
Dec 11, 2012
12,661
6,511
God's Earth
✟246,931.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
It’s because conservatives know what corrupt liars politicians are, so when they push catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, for example, we do some research and find out it’s baloney, and reject the propaganda.

I didn't know scientists and politicians were the same now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0

Danthemailman

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2017
3,395
2,587
Midwest
✟237,639.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I wonder how many Christians have converted to Atheism with posts like this.
Those who 'claim' to be Christians but later convert to atheism demonstrate they were 'pseudo' Christians all along and that their faith was never firmly rooted and established from the start. There are genuine Christians and there are "nominal" Christians. There are genuine believers and there are make believers.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0

SelfSim

A non "-ist"
Jun 23, 2014
5,380
1,730
✟142,184.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
Those who 'claim' to be Christians but later convert to atheism demonstrate they were 'pseudo' Christians all along and that their faith was never firmly rooted and established from the start. There are genuine Christians and there are "nominal" Christians. There are genuine believers and there are make believers.
I think therein lies the problem with glorifying the practice of belief in the first place .. (ie: the 'Holier than thou' syndrome takes hold and sets the basis for exclusionism going forward?)
 
  • Like
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0

Danthemailman

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2017
3,395
2,587
Midwest
✟237,639.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think therein lies the problem with glorifying the practice of belief in the first place .. (ie: the 'Holier than thou' syndrome takes hold and sets the basis for exclusionism going forward?)
It's about glorifying the OBJECT of our belief and that is Jesus Christ. (John 3:16; 10:9; 14:6; Acts 10:43; Romans 4:5 etc..) The 'holier than thou' syndrome stems from glorifying self and one's performance. (Isaiah 65:5; Proverbs 30:12; Matthew 5:20; Luke 18:9-14)
 
Upvote 0

chad kincham

Well-Known Member
Mar 4, 2009
2,773
1,004
✟54,530.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I didn't know scientists and politicians were the same now.
The catastrophic anthropogenic global warming scam came from the politician Al Gore, and it’s being pushed as hard as possible by corrupt politicians worldwide to enrich themselves from the hundreds of billions of dollars in carbon taxes, and to increase their control over economies and they do manipulate science and scientists as part of the scam, via the huge amounts of grant and research money given to those who propagate the scam, and other types of pressure they exert.

But there are fortunately those climatologists, researchers, professors and scientists out there, who speak the truth and counter the ridiculous scam.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0

Strathos

No one important
Dec 11, 2012
12,661
6,511
God's Earth
✟246,931.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The catastrophic anthropogenic global warming scam came from the politician Al Gore

No it didn't. Global warming was a concern far before he spoke up about it. Please do some research.
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
3,639
2,920
✟205,396.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The catastrophic anthropogenic global warming scam came from the politician Al Gore, and it’s being pushed as hard as possible by corrupt politicians worldwide to enrich themselves from the hundreds of billions of dollars in carbon taxes, and to increase their control over economies and they do manipulate science and scientists as part of the scam, via the huge amounts of grant and research money given to those who propagate the scam, and other types of pressure they exert.

But there are fortunately those climatologists, researchers, professors and scientists out there, who speak the truth and counter the ridiculous scam.

cliamte-change-685x368.jpg
 
Upvote 0

SelfSim

A non "-ist"
Jun 23, 2014
5,380
1,730
✟142,184.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
It's about glorifying the OBJECT of our belief and that is Jesus Christ. (John 3:16; 10:9; 14:6; Acts 10:43; Romans 4:5 etc..) The 'holier than thou' syndrome stems from glorifying self and one's performance. (Isaiah 65:5; Proverbs 30:12; Matthew 5:20; Luke 18:9-14)
Glorifying what an object represents, still requires believing in its virtues.
The more glorification, the more virtuous the believer .. for some odd reason.
 
Upvote 0

chad kincham

Well-Known Member
Mar 4, 2009
2,773
1,004
✟54,530.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
When investigating the claim of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, the empirical evidence completely falsifies the claim that mankind’s CO2 emissions are responsible.

Global warming is real - it’s a real cycle of warming and cooling that has occurred at least 24 times in the Eemian period.

In the movie by the politician Al Gore that began the global warming propaganda, he made the correct claim that there’s a correlation between CO2 levels and change of the earth’s temperature - but he failed to inform us that the correlation is backwards.

The temperature increases first, followed by a proven lag time of 200 years in increase of CO2 levels.

That temperature increase causes change in carbon dioxide levels, and not vice-versa, completely falsifies the claim that CO2 increase drives temperature increase.

A great example of the 200 year lag in temperature change and CO2 levels, is found in the time period between 1940 and 1975, when CO2 levels increased steadily for 35 years, at the same time temperature levels were steadily decreasing.

But we’re not supposed to know that fact, as it’s an inconvenient truth, to take a line from Al Gore’s propaganda movie.

Then there’s the fact that the Medieval Warm period and the Holocene maximum period are two time periods when the earth’s temperature was - not just slightly - but markedly warmer for long periods of time, yet with no catastrophic flooding whatsoever from rising ocean levels due to melting polar ice.

During the Holocene maximum, the temperature of the earth was four degrees warmer than today for 3,000 years - far exceeding the global alarmist predicted warming of today, that they so frantically want to stop from happening.

And the final nail in the coffin of anthropogenic catastrophic global warming is the time period when CO2 levels were an astounding TEN TIMES higher than today, yet without the earth burning up in flames, followed by a deluge of global flooding, as the alarmists claim is imminent due to a (much less) predicted increase in temperature from a much lower level of carbon dioxide levels than existed in the past.

We’ve all seen the graph that shows temperature regularly increasing on an upward slope from the time of the industrial revolution - but what they deliberately do not show is that the graph shows the same increase in temperature, on the same slope, for over a century before the beginning of the industrial revolution.

They don’t want us to see that portion of the graph. I wonder why? Hmmm...

The earth was coming out of a mini ice age, and that was why temperature was steadily increasing then - and not because we started emitting carbon dioxide during the industrial revolution.

These facts so thoroughly falsify man-caused global warming, (at a catastrophic level, or at any level), that no amount of spin and scientific double-speak jargon about feedback loops - or anything else - that magically causes our CO2 emissions to raise the earth’s temperature despite the fact it always lags behind increase in temperature, is bogus.

The incontrovertible empirical evidence is that it doesn’t cause global warming.

What causes the natural cycles of global warming and cooling that ice core data show has been ongoing for the 160,000 years that have been analyzed?

The sun.

Sun cycles of higher and lower output during solar maximums and minimums causes corresponding change in the earth’s temperature, with a 200 year lag.

The oceans, which are very big and very deep, increase their CO2 output when increased sun output warms them, but with a delay in cause and effect.

Because of that lag, pointing out that the sun is currently in a solar minimum yet temperature is increasing, is irrelevant - because it’s what the sun’s output was 2 centuries ago, that affects the rise or fall of the temperature today.

That the sun’s increased output during solar maximums is what increases planet temperature explains why Mars has polar ice melting concurrent with earth polar ice melting.

Why does this conservative reject the “science” of anthropogenic global warming?

Because it’s fake science.

Here’s a very well done documentary of interviews with climatologists, scientists, professors and researchers that gives the real facts about global warming and the science:

 
  • Informative
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
3,639
2,920
✟205,396.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
When investigating the claim of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, the empirical evidence completely falsifies the claim that mankind’s CO2 emissions are responsible.

Global warming is real - it’s a real cycle of warming and cooling that has occurred at least 24 times in the Eemian period.

In the movie by the politician Al Gore that began the global warming propaganda, he made the correct claim that there’s a correlation between CO2 levels and change of the earth’s temperature - but he failed to inform us that the correlation is backwards.

The temperature increases first, followed by a proven lag time of 200 years in increase of CO2 levels.

That temperature increase causes change in carbon dioxide levels, and not vice-versa, completely falsifies the claim that CO2 increase drives temperature increase.

A great example of the 200 year lag in temperature change and CO2 levels, is found in the time period between 1940 and 1975, when CO2 levels increased steadily for 35 years, at the same time temperature levels were steadily decreasing.

But we’re not supposed to know that fact, as it’s an inconvenient truth, to take a line from Al Gore’s propaganda movie.

Then there’s the fact that the Medieval Warm period and the Holocene maximum period are two time periods when the earth’s temperature was - not just slightly - but markedly warmer for long periods of time, yet with no catastrophic flooding whatsoever from rising ocean levels due to melting polar ice.

During the Holocene maximum, the temperature of the earth was four degrees warmer than today for 3,000 years - far exceeding the global alarmist predicted warming of today, that they so frantically want to stop from happening.

And the final nail in the coffin of anthropogenic catastrophic global warming is the time period when CO2 levels were an astounding TEN TIMES higher than today, yet without the earth burning up in flames, followed by a deluge of global flooding, as the alarmists claim is imminent due to a (much less) predicted increase in temperature from a much lower level of carbon dioxide levels than existed in the past.

We’ve all seen the graph that shows temperature regularly increasing on an upward slope from the time of the industrial revolution - but what they deliberately do not show is that the graph shows the same increase in temperature, on the same slope, for over a century before the beginning of the industrial revolution.

They don’t want us to see that portion of the graph. I wonder why? Hmmm...

The earth was coming out of a mini ice age, and that was why temperature was steadily increasing then - and not because we started emitting carbon dioxide during the industrial revolution.

These facts so thoroughly falsify man-caused global warming, (at a catastrophic level, or at any level), that no amount of spin and scientific double-speak jargon about feedback loops - or anything else - that magically causes our CO2 emissions to raise the earth’s temperature despite the fact it always lags behind increase in temperature, is bogus.

The incontrovertible empirical evidence is that it doesn’t cause global warming.

What causes the natural cycles of global warming and cooling that ice core data show has been ongoing for the 160,000 years that have been analyzed?

The sun.

Sun cycles of higher and lower output during solar maximums and minimums causes corresponding change in the earth’s temperature, with a 200 year lag.

The oceans, which are very big and very deep, increase their CO2 output when increased sun output warms them, but with a delay in cause and effect.

Because of that lag, pointing out that the sun is currently in a solar minimum yet temperature is increasing, is irrelevant - because it’s what the sun’s output was 2 centuries ago, that affects the rise or fall of the temperature today.

That the sun’s increased output during solar maximums is what increases planet temperature explains why Mars has polar ice melting concurrent with earth polar ice melting.

Why does this conservative reject the “science” of anthropogenic global warming?

Because it’s fake science.

Here’s a very well done documentary of interviews with climatologists, scientists, professors and researchers that gives the real facts about global warming and the science:

Here we ago again.

Here is the data which shows that while the troposphere is warming up the lower stratosphere has been cooling.
This is the characteristic signature of AGW and cannot be explained by changes in solar activity.
If solar activity is sole mechanism for global warming both the troposphere and lower stratosphere would be in phase and the temperature would increase in both.

global_upper_air.png

Here is the 1967 paper which predicted the lower stratosphere would cool due to human action decades before AGW became topical let alone politicized.
Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Given Distribution of Relative Humidity in: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences Volume 24 Issue 3 (1967)

Here is a simplified explanation (minus the thermodynamics) of how AGW causes the lower stratosphere to cool.
Global Warming Denial: Is there a good argument?
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
14,893
7,869
✟300,655.00
Faith
Atheist
Here we ago again.

Here is the data which shows that while the troposphere is warming up the lower stratosphere has been cooling.
This is the characteristic signature of AGW and cannot be explained by changes in solar activity.
If solar activity is sole mechanism for global warming both the troposphere and lower stratosphere would be in phase and the temperature would increase in both.

global_upper_air.png

Here is the 1967 paper which predicted the lower stratosphere would cool due to human action decades before AGW became topical let alone politicized.
Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Given Distribution of Relative Humidity in: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences Volume 24 Issue 3 (1967)

Here is a simplified explanation (minus the thermodynamics) of how AGW causes the lower stratosphere to cool.
Global Warming Denial: Is there a good argument?
I suspect you're wasting your time - he's so far down the conspiracy rabbit hole he's unreachable.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
14,893
7,869
✟300,655.00
Faith
Atheist
When investigating the claim of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, the empirical evidence completely falsifies the claim that mankind’s CO2 emissions are responsible.

Global warming is real - it’s a real cycle of warming and cooling that has occurred at least 24 times in the Eemian period.

In the movie by the politician Al Gore that began the global warming propaganda, he made the correct claim that there’s a correlation between CO2 levels and change of the earth’s temperature - but he failed to inform us that the correlation is backwards.

The temperature increases first, followed by a proven lag time of 200 years in increase of CO2 levels.

That temperature increase causes change in carbon dioxide levels, and not vice-versa, completely falsifies the claim that CO2 increase drives temperature increase.

A great example of the 200 year lag in temperature change and CO2 levels, is found in the time period between 1940 and 1975, when CO2 levels increased steadily for 35 years, at the same time temperature levels were steadily decreasing.

But we’re not supposed to know that fact, as it’s an inconvenient truth, to take a line from Al Gore’s propaganda movie.

Then there’s the fact that the Medieval Warm period and the Holocene maximum period are two time periods when the earth’s temperature was - not just slightly - but markedly warmer for long periods of time, yet with no catastrophic flooding whatsoever from rising ocean levels due to melting polar ice.

During the Holocene maximum, the temperature of the earth was four degrees warmer than today for 3,000 years - far exceeding the global alarmist predicted warming of today, that they so frantically want to stop from happening.

And the final nail in the coffin of anthropogenic catastrophic global warming is the time period when CO2 levels were an astounding TEN TIMES higher than today, yet without the earth burning up in flames, followed by a deluge of global flooding, as the alarmists claim is imminent due to a (much less) predicted increase in temperature from a much lower level of carbon dioxide levels than existed in the past.

We’ve all seen the graph that shows temperature regularly increasing on an upward slope from the time of the industrial revolution - but what they deliberately do not show is that the graph shows the same increase in temperature, on the same slope, for over a century before the beginning of the industrial revolution.

They don’t want us to see that portion of the graph. I wonder why? Hmmm...

The earth was coming out of a mini ice age, and that was why temperature was steadily increasing then - and not because we started emitting carbon dioxide during the industrial revolution.

These facts so thoroughly falsify man-caused global warming, (at a catastrophic level, or at any level), that no amount of spin and scientific double-speak jargon about feedback loops - or anything else - that magically causes our CO2 emissions to raise the earth’s temperature despite the fact it always lags behind increase in temperature, is bogus.

The incontrovertible empirical evidence is that it doesn’t cause global warming.

What causes the natural cycles of global warming and cooling that ice core data show has been ongoing for the 160,000 years that have been analyzed?

The sun.

Sun cycles of higher and lower output during solar maximums and minimums causes corresponding change in the earth’s temperature, with a 200 year lag.

The oceans, which are very big and very deep, increase their CO2 output when increased sun output warms them, but with a delay in cause and effect.

Because of that lag, pointing out that the sun is currently in a solar minimum yet temperature is increasing, is irrelevant - because it’s what the sun’s output was 2 centuries ago, that affects the rise or fall of the temperature today.

That the sun’s increased output during solar maximums is what increases planet temperature explains why Mars has polar ice melting concurrent with earth polar ice melting.

Why does this conservative reject the “science” of anthropogenic global warming?

Because it’s fake science.

Here’s a very well done documentary of interviews with climatologists, scientists, professors and researchers that gives the real facts about global warming and the science:

This belongs in the Conspiracy Theories forum.
 
Upvote 0

Estrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
6,878
2,341
38
Hong Kong
✟87,776.00
Country
Hong Kong
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Those who 'claim' to be Christians but later convert to atheism demonstrate they were 'pseudo' Christians all along and that their faith was never firmly rooted and established from the start. There are genuine Christians and there are "nominal" Christians. There are genuine believers and there are make believers.
Interesting.

I figure "atheists" who convert to Christianity
( usually return to ) never actually were
atheists, just having a teenage rebellion or the like.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
20,850
13,163
Colorado
✟345,498.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Those who 'claim' to be Christians but later convert to atheism demonstrate they were 'pseudo' Christians all along and that their faith was never firmly rooted and established from the start. There are genuine Christians and there are "nominal" Christians. There are genuine believers and there are make believers.
I guess all those Christians who go through a period of doubt arent actually Christians.
 
Upvote 0

Danthemailman

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2017
3,395
2,587
Midwest
✟237,639.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I guess all those Christians who go through a period of doubt arent actually Christians.
Christians can go through periods of doubt and have weak moments just like the apostle Peter did when he denied Jesus three times yet converting to atheism is not the final outcome.
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
3,639
2,920
✟205,396.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Here we ago again.

Here is the data which shows that while the troposphere is warming up the lower stratosphere has been cooling.
This is the characteristic signature of AGW and cannot be explained by changes in solar activity.
If solar activity is sole mechanism for global warming both the troposphere and lower stratosphere would be in phase and the temperature would increase in both.

global_upper_air.png

Here is the 1967 paper which predicted the lower stratosphere would cool due to human action decades before AGW became topical let alone politicized.
Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Given Distribution of Relative Humidity in: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences Volume 24 Issue 3 (1967)

Here is a simplified explanation (minus the thermodynamics) of how AGW causes the lower stratosphere to cool.
Global Warming Denial: Is there a good argument?
A consequence of lower stratospheric cooling is our atmosphere is shrinking.
If global greenhouse-gas emissions continue at their current level or increase, a new study suggests the stratosphere will shrink by about 1.3 km by 2080 – about a 4% decrease from its average thickness between 1980 and 2018.
This thinning could eventually mess with GPS navigational systems, radio communications and the trajectories of orbiting satellites where atmospheric drag is a factor.
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/abfe2b

strat_thick.jpg
It adds a whole new perspective to the saying "The sky is falling!"
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0