nytimes.com/games/connections
- ScottFromWyoming - Sep 21, 2023 - 7:48am
Wordle - daily game
- rgio - Sep 21, 2023 - 7:48am
Radio Paradise Comments
- sunybuny - Sep 21, 2023 - 7:46am
Fox Spews
- kcar - Sep 21, 2023 - 7:35am
New Music
- rexi - Sep 21, 2023 - 7:34am
What Makes You Laugh?
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Sep 21, 2023 - 7:24am
Things You Thought Today
- oldviolin - Sep 21, 2023 - 6:13am
Trump
- kcar - Sep 21, 2023 - 6:06am
Anti-War
- Red_Dragon - Sep 20, 2023 - 9:12pm
Happy Halloween Yall!
- Red_Dragon - Sep 20, 2023 - 8:55pm
Mixtape Culture Club
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Sep 20, 2023 - 8:43pm
Children and the Future
- R_P - Sep 20, 2023 - 7:35pm
Unresearched Conspiracy Theories
- Red_Dragon - Sep 20, 2023 - 4:56pm
Ukraine
- haresfur - Sep 20, 2023 - 4:24pm
USA! USA! USA!
- westslope - Sep 20, 2023 - 3:45pm
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- jarro - Sep 20, 2023 - 12:18pm
Rock Movies/Documentaries
- thisbody - Sep 20, 2023 - 11:16am
Today in History
- Red_Dragon - Sep 20, 2023 - 10:41am
Song about digging up bodies to deal with loneliness?
- ScottFromWyoming - Sep 20, 2023 - 10:14am
Baseball, anyone?
- ScottFromWyoming - Sep 20, 2023 - 10:02am
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group
- GeneP59 - Sep 20, 2023 - 9:09am
Great Old Songs You Rarely Hear Anymore
- ptooey - Sep 20, 2023 - 6:37am
Outstanding Covers
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Sep 20, 2023 - 4:24am
Climate Change
- haresfur - Sep 20, 2023 - 12:33am
YouTube: Music-Videos
- kurtster - Sep 19, 2023 - 11:54pm
::odd but intriguing::
- Manbird - Sep 19, 2023 - 8:04pm
Guns
- Red_Dragon - Sep 19, 2023 - 7:59pm
Good Deals !!!
- Steely_D - Sep 19, 2023 - 7:34pm
New announcer?
- vandys - Sep 19, 2023 - 4:52pm
Strange signs, marquees, billboards, etc.
- Red_Dragon - Sep 19, 2023 - 4:31pm
Plugin RP for Volumio
- NeilBlanchard - Sep 19, 2023 - 2:13pm
Music Requests
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Sep 19, 2023 - 5:08am
Website Changes
- miamizsun - Sep 19, 2023 - 4:31am
What the hell OV?
- miamizsun - Sep 19, 2023 - 4:18am
Bad Poetry
- oldviolin - Sep 18, 2023 - 5:15pm
~ Have a good joke you can post? ~
- DaveInSaoMiguel - Sep 18, 2023 - 2:21pm
Download Manager IPhone problems
- RPnate1 - Sep 18, 2023 - 1:51pm
Tagline thought
- Steely_D - Sep 18, 2023 - 10:32am
Nature's Creatures
- Beez - Sep 18, 2023 - 10:30am
Is there any DOG news out there?
- Beez - Sep 18, 2023 - 10:15am
Things that piss me off
- GeneP59 - Sep 18, 2023 - 9:48am
Name My Band
- DaveInSaoMiguel - Sep 18, 2023 - 9:41am
Reviews and Pix from your concerts and shows you couldn't...
- oldviolin - Sep 18, 2023 - 9:37am
Are you ready for some football?
- black321 - Sep 18, 2023 - 8:59am
September 2023 Photo Theme - CONTRAST
- fractalv - Sep 18, 2023 - 7:53am
COVID-19
- R_P - Sep 17, 2023 - 2:32pm
Movie Recommendation
- Steely_D - Sep 17, 2023 - 1:28pm
RightWingNutZ
- Lazy8 - Sep 17, 2023 - 9:18am
260,000 Posts in one thread?
- GeneP59 - Sep 17, 2023 - 8:56am
Joe Biden
- Steely_D - Sep 16, 2023 - 9:14pm
Germany
- haresfur - Sep 16, 2023 - 7:22pm
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •
- oldviolin - Sep 16, 2023 - 12:47pm
Poetry Forum
- ScottN - Sep 16, 2023 - 5:26am
Counting with Pictures
- ScottN - Sep 16, 2023 - 5:25am
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Sep 15, 2023 - 8:55pm
Country Up The Bumpkin
- oldviolin - Sep 15, 2023 - 1:48pm
For a Limited Time Only - Sales and Bargains
- black321 - Sep 15, 2023 - 10:14am
sad music
- lily34 - Sep 15, 2023 - 7:59am
What makes you smile?
- Antigone - Sep 15, 2023 - 7:24am
Vinyl Only Spin List
- lily34 - Sep 15, 2023 - 6:15am
Manbird's Episiotomy Stitch Licking Clinic - KEEP OUT
- miamizsun - Sep 15, 2023 - 6:14am
R.I.P. Lou Reed
- Proclivities - Sep 15, 2023 - 4:04am
Favorite Quotes
- black321 - Sep 14, 2023 - 9:57pm
Russia
- R_P - Sep 14, 2023 - 2:26pm
Favorite Movie Quote Conversation
- Proclivities - Sep 14, 2023 - 11:34am
Lyrics That Remind You of Someone
- oldviolin - Sep 14, 2023 - 11:11am
Get the Quote
- Proclivities - Sep 14, 2023 - 9:09am
RadioParadise FAQ List Submission
- John_Carter - Sep 14, 2023 - 8:00am
what the hell, miamizsun?
- miamizsun - Sep 14, 2023 - 6:29am
What is the meaning of this?
- miamizsun - Sep 14, 2023 - 5:52am
Einstein quote of the day
- Manbird - Sep 13, 2023 - 6:24pm
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum
- GeneP59 - Sep 13, 2023 - 9:54am
Questions.
- Beaker - Sep 13, 2023 - 8:57am
Marijuana: Baked News.
- kurtster - Sep 12, 2023 - 12:51pm
Play the Blues
- oldviolin - Sep 12, 2023 - 12:03pm
|
Index »
Radio Paradise/General »
General Discussion »
Climate Chaos
|
Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11 Next |
R_P


|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 5:01pm |
|
Rinse, repeat...(...) Yesterday, Roy Spencer took to his blog, writing a post entitled "Time to push back against the global warming Nazis". The ensuing Godwinian rant was apparently triggered by somebody calling contrarians like Spencer "deniers." Personally I tend to avoid use of the term, simply because it inevitably causes the ensuing discussion to degenerate into an argument about whether "denier" refers to Holocaust denial. Obviously that misinterpretation of the term is exactly what "pushed {Spencer's} button," as he put it. However, this misinterpretation has no basis in reality. The term "denier" merely refers to "a person who denies" something, and originated some 600 years ago, long before the Holocaust occurred. Moreover, as the National Center for Science Education and Peter Gleick at Forbes have documented, many climate contrarians (including the aforementioned Richard Lindzen) prefer to be called "deniers." "I actually like 'denier.' That's closer than skeptic," says MIT's Richard Lindzen, one of the most prominent deniers. Steve Milloy, the operator of the climate change denial website JunkScience.com, told Popular Science, "Me, I just stick with denier ... I'm happy to be a denier." Minnesotans for Global Warming and other major denier groups go so far as to sing, "I'm a Denier!".
Spencer is also on the advisory board of the Cornwall Alliance, a group with 'An Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming' claiming that "Earth and its ecosystems—created by God's intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence —are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory." The declaration also has a section on "What We Deny," and Spencer recently wrote in The Christian Post, ...we deny "that most {current climate change} is human-caused, and that it is a threat to future generations that must be addressed by the global community."
Thus it's rather hypocritical of Spencer to complain about the use of a word meaning "a person who denies" when he has expressly admitted to denying these climate positions. (...)
|
|
kurtster

Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 4:51pm |
|
steeler wrote: Uh-huh.
It seems to me that there are those who deny that there is any significant climate change that is occurring. I'll summarize: You have stated that you do not deny that climate change is occurring, ,but contend that there is little or nothing that can or should be done to try to mitigate it. The cartoon, in my view, goes to the former. Even if you were to dispute that characterization of mine, it seems to me that one post or even one person labeling those who hold a position similar to yours as "deniers" does not equate, as you seem to suggest, with the almost the entire forum being intolerant of your views. Again, I have seen a bunch of comments in this thread — Climate Chaos —responding to your views, taking them seriously, and debating the merits.
Its been great, too. Kinda how I hoped it would go. But backscroll in that thread I linked to. It seems that every other word in there is denier. Pardon the hyperbole, but the usage of the term is overwhelming in there.
|
|
steeler

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth 
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 4:27pm |
|
DaveInVA wrote: Does that trump calling those on the other side of the debate "deniers?"
|
|
DaveInSaoMiguel

Location: No longer in a hovel in effluent Damnville, VA Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 4:16pm |
|
|
|
steeler

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth 
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 3:50pm |
|
kurtster wrote: Uh-huh. It seems to me that there are those who deny that there is any significant climate change that is occurring. I'll summarize: You have stated that you do not deny that climate change is occurring, ,but contend that there is little or nothing that can or should be done to try to mitigate it. The cartoon, in my view, goes to the former. Even if you were to dispute that characterization of mine, it seems to me that one post or even one person labeling those who hold a position similar to yours as "deniers" does not equate, as you seem to suggest, with the almost the entire forum being intolerant of your views. Again, I have seen a bunch of comments in this thread — Climate Chaos —responding to your views, taking them seriously, and debating the merits.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming

Location: Powell Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 3:16pm |
|
kurtster wrote: Hey, I didn't say that fracking was safe regarding groundwater. I said the the EPA says it is safe. Big difference. You just confused the crap out of me. Did you not just say you're in favor of fracking? edit: Sorry, fell into the sarcasm hole.
|
|
kurtster

Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 3:13pm |
|
steeler wrote:
You seem to have received a lot of reactions here today regarding your views and I do not see a single one where you have been labeled a denier. And — before you say it — it has nothing to do with whether the thread is titled Climate Change or Climate Chaos.
Oh yeah ?
|
|
R_P


|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 3:11pm |
|
kurtster wrote:Yes, its gets old, especially when you try and mention natural causes to climate change and the only reaction you get is denier. Some of the responses provided were solid references to real science that show how those "natural causes", i.e. causes not of an anthropogenic nature, do not match up with observations (like the often-used canard that it's the sun that's causing all of it), and thus cannot decently explain what's going on. It's not hard then to see where the responsibility lies for the choice to ignore/deny those references in favour of a chauvinistic status quo mindset, and to repeat the same nonsense once more... Proverbially, one can lead a horse (that likes to paint itself as a victim with oppressed/suppressed opinions) to the water, but one can't make it think drink...
|
|
kurtster

Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 3:08pm |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote: Hey, I didn't say that fracking was safe regarding groundwater. I said the the EPA says it is safe. Big difference. Isn't the EPA the darling of the global warming crowd and the primary means of implementing its policy ? So this case began 6 years ago and now 6 years later ... what has the EPA done other than investigate endlessly ? Yep the groundwater is contaminated, most likely from drilling and the EPA is doing nothing about it other than talk about it and spend money investigating it. A typical federal bureaucracy more interested in perpetuating itself than the citizens it is supposed to serve. Yes, I wish the EPA would be abolished and replaced with a new approach.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming

Location: Powell Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 2:48pm |
|
kurtster wrote:I am all for fracking and drilling. According to the EPA (which I loathe) fracking is safe and there are no instances of it causing any pollution or contamination of underground water. Not a one. lol lol lol You loathe them but will cite them when it suits you? Here's one that's close to home.
|
|
steeler

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth 
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 2:45pm |
|
kurtster wrote: Yes, its gets old, especially when you try and mention natural causes to climate change and the only reaction you get is denier.
You seem to have received a lot of reactions here today regarding your views and I do not see a single one where you have been labeled a denier. And — before you say it — it has nothing to do with whether the thread is titled Climate Change or Climate Chaos.
|
|
kurtster

Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 2:39pm |
|
steeler wrote:
This whole "contrary views are not welcome" shtick got old a long time ago.
Yes, its gets old, especially when you try and mention natural causes to climate change and the only reaction you get is denier.
|
|
kurtster

Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 2:37pm |
|
black321 wrote: I get that; nevertheless, the arguments to do nothing, or that climate change is just the latest bugaboo aren't very compelling. Even if there were no climate change, I would still argue for alternative investments in new, cleaner energy. Not many are actually saying throw away your car and gas/oil furnace, but let's move things in a different direction rather invest in more cheap (excluding the environmental cost) fracking/drilling. Regardless, it may very well be too late to reverse the damage, as some say...time will tell.
I'm not advocating doing nothing. One of the points I am trying to make is the sheer futility of what is being promoted as the solutions. We have one nation, China who giving them the benefit of the doubt, produces as much GHG as the US and EU combined and is set to increase there output 5 fold more by the year 2050. No one can compensate for that. They are building their infrastructure. Making steel, concrete and asphalt and producing the energy needed is dirty business. There is no way around that. On a good note, China and Russia just signed a deal for Russia to provide China with nat gas for the next 30 years. This is breaking news. That alone should help tremendously with China's output of GHG. How is setting up a commodity exchange for pollution going to solve that problem (cap and trade) ? The only thing its going to do is make a whole new set or an existing set of middlemen wealthy(er). I am all for fracking and drilling. According to the EPA (which I loathe) fracking is safe and there are no instances of it causing any pollution or contamination of underground water. Not a one. On the other hand there seem to be questions regarding earth movement. That remains to be sorted out. We will always or for decades to come, need petrochemicals for uses other than fuel. We need it for plastics, fertilizers and drugs to mention a few off road uses. In addition, there are natural causes to climate change that need to be considered. The jury advocating government intervention and cap and trade ignores even the possibility of natural causes and as soon as one tries to mention natural causes they are automatically dismissed as a denier. Why are they afraid to discuss natural causes ?
|
|
steeler

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth 
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 12:51pm |
|
kurtster wrote: I have no idea.
I just started this cuz I was fed up with being called a denier in the other two threads devoted to this subject.
The purpose here being to introduce things that are left out in the group think rush to judgment and the potential bankruptcy of the US.if those demanding action are wrong.
What you posted below about Kerry is the kind of stuff that I hoped would come to this thread. Things that question this rush to judgment are welcome in here unlike the other two threads.
I am trying to find out who amongst us really believes that there is a real crisis that warrants what Kerry is trying to equivocate in your post below.
No one has yet been willing to say that there is a genuine crisis calling for drastic and immediate measures to prevent the end of life as we know it now, which the drumbeat of those like Kerry seems to imply.
This whole "contrary views are not welcome" shtick got old a long time ago.
|
|
black321

Location: An earth without maps Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 12:35pm |
|
kurtster wrote:touche'  I'm just trying to look at this from a different angle and make a place that is receptive to it. Indeed we have been hearing about this all of our lives. And now all of a sudden, we need to act or its curtains. I get that; nevertheless, the arguments to do nothing, or that climate change is just the latest bugaboo aren't very compelling. Even if there were no climate change, I would still argue for alternative investments in new, cleaner energy. Not many are actually saying throw away your car and gas/oil furnace, but let's move things in a different direction rather invest in more cheap (excluding the environmental cost) fracking/drilling. Regardless, it may very well be too late to reverse the damage, as some say...time will tell.
|
|
kurtster

Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 12:04pm |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote: Do you really think this will stick? You and I are old farts and have been hearing about this for our entire lives. I suppose, on a glacial time scale, it's quite rushed. touche'  I'm just trying to look at this from a different angle and make a place that is receptive to it. Indeed we have been hearing about this all of our lives. And now all of a sudden, we need to act or its curtains. Or that's the drift I am getting. On a personal level, my thought is to make the most efficient use of the energy we already have readily available. LED's and better building materials, more efficient heating and cooling and cars that get 50 mpg on the open road. We need these things regardless of the energy source. Save our money to develop this kind of technology so we can survive in the inevitable new hostile environment. Just using less energy is a real good start. Cheap stable energy is the key for a better way of life regardless the weather. Thanks for getting my drift.
|
|
black321

Location: An earth without maps Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 11:12am |
|
kurtster wrote: I have no idea.
I just started this cuz I was fed up with being called a denier in the other two threads devoted to this subject.
The purpose here being to introduce things that are left out in the group think rush to judgment and the potential bankruptcy of the US.if those demanding action are wrong.
What you posted below about Kerry is the kind of stuff that I hoped would come to this thread. Things that question this rush to judgment are welcome in here unlike the other two threads.
I am trying to find out who amongst us really believes that there is a real crisis that warrants what Kerry is trying to equivocate in your post below.
No one has yet been willing to say that there is a genuine crisis calling for drastic and immediate measures to prevent the end of life as we know it now, which the drumbeat of those like Kerry seems to imply.
doubt any of us on this site are smart enough to really know...but from what I've read and heard from reputable sources, there is a very real "risk" of major changes to climate and sea levels...over the next 100 years. The word risk implies a certain probability and negative impact during a future period...of course no one has a crystal ball, but the risk, probability and impact, appears high enough to have a significantly negative effect on humans and other species (the earth will survive fine). So taking action is akin to buying health insurance. I don't know if I'll get sick in the future, or simply just die one day. But to deal with the financial risk of dealing with a potential future health issue, I buy insurance. Of course its financially a drain to my current resources while I'm healthy, but it could potentially avert a future disaster.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming

Location: Powell Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 10:54am |
|
kurtster wrote:rush to judgment  Do you really think this will stick? You and I are old farts and have been hearing about this for our entire lives. I suppose, on a glacial time scale, it's quite rushed.
|
|
kurtster

Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 10:48am |
|
black321 wrote:Any ideas if this debate is as active in other countries, or just here in these United States?
I have no idea. I just started this cuz I was fed up with being called a denier in the other two threads devoted to this subject. The purpose here being to introduce things that are left out in the group think rush to judgment and the potential bankruptcy of the US.if those demanding action are wrong. What you posted below about Kerry is the kind of stuff that I hoped would come to this thread. Things that question this rush to judgment are welcome in here unlike the other two threads. I am trying to find out who amongst us really believes that there is a real crisis that warrants what Kerry is trying to equivocate in your post below. No one has yet been willing to say that there is a genuine crisis calling for drastic and immediate measures to prevent the end of life as we know it now, which the drumbeat of those like Kerry seems to imply.
|
|
kurtster

Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:  
|
Posted:
May 21, 2014 - 10:30am |
|
NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote: You are contradicting yourself. a. you get all huffily about China being given a pass (which implies you think there must be a problem otherwise why get upset?) then b. you say there is no crisis, or at least not such a severe one that merits any action by the US.
You can't have it both ways. If you think China needs to respond to the crisis then logically the US must too. By any measure, historical, per capita, total emissions or whatever, both the US and China are way up there amongst the world's biggest polluters.
No I am not. a) I am still trying to find who thinks there is a problem large enough to call it a crisis. b) yes No one will respond to the question. Crisis or no crisis ? Why is it so hard to declare a position ?
|
|
|