Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Mar 24, 2019 10:38:13 GMT -8
The problem I have with the man caused climate change narrative is that it then allows for the license to assert immediate remedies, often associated with additional government oversight, to counteract the impending disaster of the oceans rising a couple inches.
|
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Mar 24, 2019 12:01:41 GMT -8
I spoke with a thirty-something the other day in a non-heated manner about climate change. What I found interesting was he said "the good thing about the consensus of scientists supporting it is then I don't have to know much about it to be correct" ("it" being man-made climate change). This is an intelligent young man, but his youth and trust show a lack of wisdom & skepticism. Further, it showed a bit of intellectual laziness, to just take others at their word based on their position in society as opposed to digging into the manner and garnering information for oneself.
This particular position puts believing in made made climate change an act of faith, where blind trust in those who are giving you information & the conclusions that must be drawn from said information, is tantamount.
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Mar 26, 2019 13:13:35 GMT -8
Dems don't even believe their own propaganda on the Green New Deal.
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Mar 26, 2019 13:54:07 GMT -8
Dems don't even believe their own propaganda on the Green New Deal. Exactly like their lord, Schumer, commanded them to do. freaking spineless lemmings... and what a terrible thing to say about lemmings.
|
|
duke
Statesman
Posts: 681
|
Post by duke on Mar 26, 2019 14:39:48 GMT -8
The Left lying to all Americans, fully supported by most of the media, on Trump and Russian collusion is a true lesson which can be applied to climate change. If a person can't see what the Left will do and say to shove their agenda on all of us over the last 2.5 years, you're not thinking rationally. As my son told me, when he finally got his brother to see the truth about Russian collusion, " Once you see it, you can't unsee it" ( Referring to how the Left and the Media coordinate their narratives). To me, manmade climate change falls into the same category.
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Mar 27, 2019 9:48:35 GMT -8
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,815
|
Post by MDDad on Mar 27, 2019 9:57:08 GMT -8
It's only a matter of time before Kevin Costner posts a youtube video on how to carve gills into your neck.
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Mar 27, 2019 10:42:14 GMT -8
...and Dennis Hopper drives around throwing cigarettes out of the car. Did you happen to notice the name of that ship? Pretty funny.
|
|
not4u13
Active Contributor
Posts: 74
|
Post by not4u13 on Mar 31, 2019 8:02:01 GMT -8
I spoke with a thirty-something the other day in a non-heated manner about climate change. What I found interesting was he said "the good thing about the consensus of scientists supporting it is then I don't have to know much about it to be correct" ("it" being man-made climate change). This is an intelligent young man, but his youth and trust show a lack of wisdom & skepticism. Further, it showed a bit of intellectual laziness, to just take others at their word based on their position in society as opposed to digging into the manner and garnering information for oneself. This particular position puts believing in made made climate change an act of faith, where blind trust in those who are giving you information & the conclusions that must be drawn from said information, is tantamount. Interesting thought. It's a balance between trusting experts who really DO know a lot more than any of us can (or will) and questioning for ourselves. We should all question what we read/hear/see. It's healthy skepticism that's important. When you wholly dismiss an entire body of science because there isn't enough proof, perhaps it's time to rethink what you think you know. I'm an IT guy and I often find it amusing when someone who has never spent time working in IT suddenly declares themselves an expert on how the Internet works. They set up this "cool" in home network, read a few articles on network security and suddenly believe they know how a business should operate it's IT shop, what technology they should adopt, etc. Same is true with climate science. Who am I to say I can know enough to even have an intelligent debate on the subject? I don't so I won't. I think that's what this thirty-something was trying to say. We are now seeing a significant mass of consensus among the scientific community. We can either dismiss them all as following a political agenda or we can sit up and take notice.
|
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,376
|
Post by SK80 on Mar 31, 2019 8:47:44 GMT -8
Honestly why is everyone freaking out about water levels in our oceans... believe it or not all you scientists we are the "WATER PLANET"! I Mo' wants a bit more ocean she will do so....
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,815
|
Post by MDDad on Mar 31, 2019 9:28:08 GMT -8
Can't we just summarize the whole climate change/ocean levels issue as follows:
1. The climate is changing. It always has and it always will. 2. The polar ice caps and glaciers are growing or shrinking. They always have and they always will. 3. As a result of #2, the ocean levels are rising or falling. They always have and they always will. 4. Mankind is probably contributing to the current changes. 5. We have no clue how much or how little.
|
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Mar 31, 2019 11:11:11 GMT -8
...I'm an IT guy and I often find it amusing when someone who has never spent time working in IT suddenly declares themselves an expert on how the Internet works. They set up this "cool" in home network, read a few articles on network security and suddenly believe they know how a business should operate it's IT shop, what technology they should adopt, etc. Same is true with climate science. Who am I to say I can know enough to even have an intelligent debate on the subject? I don't so I won't. I think that's what this thirty-something was trying to say. We are now seeing a significant mass of consensus among the scientific community. We can either dismiss them all as following a political agenda or we can sit up and take notice... I hear you on the "expert" level many people put themselves at. I own a Home Theater company and the people I meet socially fall into 2 groups. The first group is curious and have questions, the second group tells me what they believe to be the truth. Some in the 2nd group have a handle on what they know, many just have confirmation bias and want to feel good about the system they purchased & put together themselves. Many people rely on experts, in my field it is not uncommon for a person to walk into a Best Buy and feel they are getting expert advise. Yes, those salespeople have knowledge and can tell you about specifications of products, but what they are lacking is real world experience. In other words, they may have sold hundreds of TV's & A/V receivers, but most have never installed a system other than the one in their home. They are "book smart" and know what should work, but lack the knowledge gained when you actually are out in the field doing the work. I look at other fields the same way. There are many folks who may be considered experts in these fields, people who are intelligent and have "book smarts". However, these people are just regurgitating information given to them by others, they have no hands on experience that allow them to know why things occur and what can be done in reality, not theory, to change course or correct an issue. That is why the "significant mass of consensus among the scientific community" doesn't mean so much when you realize that many of those in the mass are as much of an expert as a Best Buy TV salesman and that their area of expertise is not real world solutions. All one has to do is look back at the predictions made in the early 2000's as to the consequences of global warming or climate change to see that while this mass consensus may have identified something as occurring, they were just guessing as to the what the impact would be to our world and what solutions, if any, should be enacted. Sometimes the best solution is a minor correction, not a major overhaul.
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,815
|
Post by MDDad on Mar 31, 2019 11:41:44 GMT -8
"All one has to do is look back at the predictions made in the early 2000's as to the consequences of global warming or climate change to see that while this mass consensus may have identified something as occurring, they were just guessing as to the what the impact would be to our world and what solutions, if any, should be enacted. Sometimes the best solution is a minor correction, not a major overhaul."
I agree completely. While identifying something as occurring is either original science (a minority of the studies) or copycat plagiarism (a majority), guessing as to what should be done to counter the problem is too easily influenced by the political agendas of those writing the studies, or of those who finance the studies. Furthermore, if the current climate changes are primarily caused by normal random or cyclical variations, or by solar activity, and mankind's contribution is only peripheral, neither a minor correction nor a major overhaul is likely to have much effect. That's why I keep harping on the need to quantify man's overall impact before we go crazy with man-made solutions that won't work.
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorFate on Mar 31, 2019 12:10:56 GMT -8
Honestly why is everyone freaking out about water levels in our oceans... believe it or not all you scientists we are the "WATER PLANET"! I Mo' wants a bit more ocean she will do so.... Exactly, and I've always said that even if there is global warming (or climate change as they now refer to it), it is bad for some areas and good for others. For those that built their homes and businesses too close to sea level, it's bad. (Maybe why the blue coastal states are so anxious about this). But think how much nicer Northern Canada, Siberia and Greenland will become.
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Mar 31, 2019 13:30:22 GMT -8
Exactly, and I've always said that even if there is global warming (or climate change as they now refer to it), it is bad for some areas and good for others. For those that built their homes and businesses too close to sea level, it's bad. (Maybe why the blue coastal states are so anxious about this). But think how much nicer Northern Canada, Siberia and Greenland will become. And let's not forget about the now extinct rodent from the island in the south pacific. Have you ever heard of some new species the comes into existence as a result of climate change? Each year, new species of plants and animals are discovered. For fun, do a search for "new found species". It's pretty exciting stuff. Here's an example of one of the links on the first page. Not a single negative slanted link on the first page www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2018/december/over-270-new-species-discovered-in-2018.htmlThen do a search for "new found species as a result of climate change". Excitement has left the building, only to be replaced by doom and gloom. Here's an example of what's on THAT first page. EVERY link is negatively slanted! To your point, Prof, the Smithsonian link at least mentions the growing seasons are longer in what used to be colder climates. Interesting how no one brings that aspect up when discussing the catastrophe of climate change. Any thoughts on how that is impacting the food supply? www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/how-climate-change-is-helping-invasive-species-take-over-180947630/insideclimatenews.org/news/13032018/climate-change-species-at-risk-biodiversity-plants-animal-migration-global-warming
|
|