Humanity is ‘cutting down the tree of life’, warn scientists

[Truth Detector]

It's really a bummer that protecting the environment became such a right/left thing. It should be in everyone's interest - but conservatives just oppose anything as a knee-jerk response now, because they perceive all of it as some sort of "fringe lefty" cause...

There you go again bloviating strawman lies again. Yep, it idiot land, Conservatives hate the climate, hate trees, hate little kids, babies and especially minorities and women! STFU, seriously.

[Truth Detector]

That's the issue - I am not talking about AGW. Every single discussion of the environment or of protecting the environment is now framed around AGW. There are other aspects to the debate than AGW.

I'm not an AGW guy, and I abandoned that line of reasoning ages ago. I don't care about false doomsday predictions or the IPCC. I care about the fact that we don't adequately plan for sustainability or understand the nature of finite resources, and that we still pollute with abandon. I care that habitat is disappearing, as well as species, at an alarming rate.

Idiot translation:

[tinfoil]

It's impossible to prove either way, no matter how sure either side sounds or how much "consensus" there is. It's a total distraction at this point, imo.

It's not science if you can't disprove it. You're supposed to try to disprove your theory from every angle to show that it must be the correct solution. Instead, we get models of models built on models. It's models all the way down. Never is there any falsification attempted. It's not science.

[Truth Detector]

It's not science if you can't disprove it. You're supposed to try to disprove your theory from every angle to show that it must be the correct solution. Instead, we get models of models built on models. It's models all the way down. Never is there any falsification attempted. It's not science.

It is a political agenda; nothing to do with science.

[Cancel 2020.1]

It's not science if you can't disprove it. You're supposed to try to disprove your theory from every angle to show that it must be the correct solution. Instead, we get models of models built on models. It's models all the way down. Never is there any falsification attempted. It's not science.

Um, okay.

[tinfoil]

Um, okay.

You said it's impossible to prove either way. Science doesn't work that way. You either disprove the null hypothesis or it's the explanation instead of your hypothesis.

[Cancel 2020.1]

You said it's impossible to prove either way. Science doesn't work that way. You either disprove the null hypothesis or it's the explanation instead of your hypothesis.

Yes, I did say that.

[Cancel 2020.1]

Tinfoil - please go re-read what I originally wrote about AGW.

[tinfoil]

Tinfoil - please go re-read what I originally wrote about AGW.

Dude, I understand, and in fact it's one of the biggest reason I have respect for you and consider you an asset to this site. Sorry if I say some nasty shit once in a while. I've been ill for about a week with a persistent bug and it's made me cranky. The smugness of the alarmists and liberals in general has become gratingly intolerable. I know it's stupid, but I allow myself to be stupid once in a while. It's a character flaw, I know.

[moon]

Dude, I understand, and in fact it's one of the biggest reason I have respect for you and consider you an asset to this site. Sorry if I say some nasty shit once in a while. I've been ill for about a week with a persistent bug and it's made me cranky. The smugness of the alarmists and liberals in general has become gratingly intolerable. I know it's stupid, but I allow myself to be stupid once in a while. It's a character flaw, I know.

There cannot be flaws in that which doesn't exist.
You're deceiving yourself.

[PoliTalker]

STFU with your "you don't grasp" bullshit. I have taken the time to learn all the science involved. I have a complete understanding of what the predictions entail, and the fact that they are based on a feedback equation which attributes the natural response of the entire CO2 effect to humans, who are only responsible for 5% of the total of the naturally occurring gas. It was not a mistake by climate modelers. The entire climate scare is built on faulty math. From the feedback equation, the model predicts 30% more forcing than is seen in the climate record. Yet you alarmists continue to believe the silly predictions when the skeptics have narrowed the transient climate response to about 1.5 degrees/doubling ....half of which we have already seen.


I'm sorry you're a dunning kruger allstar and think everyone who doesn't agree with you is stupid.


BTW, James Hansen predicted NYC would be under sea water by 2000

Look it up, alarmist!

NYC Subways Flooding from Tropical Storm Sandy:

[PoliTalker]

Hello tinfoil,

Dude, I understand, and in fact it's one of the biggest reason I have respect for you and consider you an asset to this site. Sorry if I say some nasty shit once in a while. I've been ill for about a week with a persistent bug and it's made me cranky. The smugness of the alarmists and liberals in general has become gratingly intolerable. I know it's stupid, but I allow myself to be stupid once in a while. It's a character flaw, I know.

Smugness is pretty difficult to avoid when you look at some of what we liberals are up against. You're one of the better posters here and you're greatly appreciated. Here's hoping your condition undergoes a rapid improvement and you feel excellent again pronto!