Posted on 04/19/2015 9:28:05 AM PDT by rktman
The problem with global warming is that eventually it must meet reality. Either the globe is warming up at horrific rates as the models have promised, or it isn’t. And if it isn’t, then those still calling themselves “scientists,” and meaning it, must admit failure and move on.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
“must admit failure and move on.”
Yeah, right.
If glowbull warming should pose a lack of evidence problem, they’ll just switch to Anthropomorphic Cataclysmic Glowbull Climate Sameness as the big problem.
In real science, when the data doesn’t support the theory, you change the theory.In climate science, when the data hasn’t matched the theory, they’ve altered the data.
When warming didn’t happen they switched to Climate Change (a master stroke I might add).
Because weather and climate are always changing.
I’m convinced the typical high school senior knows far more about climate change than the US Constitution.
I used to favor burning tires and turning all the lights on for Earth Day; now I will have to find some gross consumption made possible by advanced civilization to protest the latest totalitarian idiocy.
[[I’m convinced the typical high school senior knows far more about climate change than the US Constitution.]]
Corre3ction- they know far more about what their agenda driven teachers feed them concerning global warming than they do about constitution
Whenever I hear the word “sustainability” I picture Professor Henry Hill.
what exactly do they mean ‘sustainability’? If we don’t ‘act’ the climate will what? Get warmer? Get cooler? Something it has ALWAYS done? Are they claiming they can sustain a certain temperature “IF ONLY” we throw tons of money at it? The article was not well written and didn’t explain it very well-
BTW- there was just a report out stating how these first 3 months of 2015 were the ‘warmest on record’ an that ‘we’re on track, if things remain the way they are, to being the hottest year on record’
They haven’t admitted defeat to anything- They are still going full steam ahead with their lie
Like algore?
Ding, ding, ding - we have a thread winnah!
We are so screwed.
LOL! “On record” is the key. Anything that occurred prior to record keeping doesn’t count I guess. Again the warmunist head over pressure list of questions for them to answer:
1. Define the “correct” temperature range for the planet.
2. Define the “correct” humidity range for the planet.
3. Define the “correct” mean sea level for the planet’
4. Define the “correct” amount of precipitation for the planet.
5. Define the “correct” makeup of the atmosphere.
6. Define the “correct” amount of sea ice at the N/S poles.
7. Define/explain past glaciation and subsequent warming without any input from humans.
Glazed eyes, lack of response other than to call you racist. Or something.
Well put. I’d add that it’s not a “failure” when a scientist disproves a theory — even one that he once believed was valid. OTOH, continuing to support a theory, in the face of evidence falsifying it, is a failure.
Good. Let’s talk about what is and isn’t sustainable. Let’s start with progressivism and its political, economic and social policies.
This crapola started in the 1970s with science fraud Paul R. Ehrlich’s “Population Bomb” hysteria. Importantly, proposing almost identical ‘solutions’ to MMGW. These people only care about money and control. Anything else is just means to those ends.
This being said, there is something that conservatives can do to throw light on the cockroach covered floor. Pure showmanship, mind you, but in this case, the scoundrels are terrified of being identified as such.
Hold a mass mock trial. Film it and propagate it on the Internet and on DVDs.
Start with “indictments” for science fraud. Accusations of scientific corruption and political and financial skullduggery.
James Hansen and Michael Mann should be at the head of the list. But the indictment, trial, and conviction should also include an appropriate criminal sentence for each.
Showing them as having committed criminal fraud, for which they would face years in prison, will do much to persuade many of their comrades that they had better be far more cautious with their radicalism, or they might possibly face *real* time in prison.
They do it all the time. However, since the Anthropogenic Global Warming Theory is not science, it won’t happen.
Most of the crap spewed by the old hippies now in government started there. They say they're "progressive," but they spend most of their time pushing 40-year-old causes.
Half our society adopts the premise of Cain that they are their brother’s keeper. The extension of that is that the best and brightest Ivy League minds should tell those of us not so smart how to live our lives.
But look at what the best and brightest in the US do.
They mandate a light bulb that pollutes more than what it replaces. The market does not buy it for obvious reasons and moves toward the evil profit motivated LED light.
Look at Vietnam or Iraq. Those wars were engineered by the best and brightest. Yet the decision makers in those wars made teribble strategic and tactical mistakes.
Look at Urban Planning. (Atlanta. But same is true of Chicago and most planned areas.) Urban Planners built a mass transit system with the intention that people would leave their cars for mass transit. But they intentionally located the Braves old baseball stadium far from mass transit because the urban planners saw baseball fans and sports fans in general as low life that should not be encouraged.
At the intersection of the N-S and E-W rapid transit lines is the logical place to put high rise office buildings so employees could take mass transit to work rather than drive those polluting fossil fuel burners. But the best and the brightest saw high rise office buildings as evil. They intentionally planned for OPEN SPACE with no jobs around the rapid transit hub. The result is that few ride the MARTA and it has to be subsidized.
Repeatedly the best and the brightest do not make the best decisions. Repeatedly the stupid masses make the best decision in the marketplace.
I'm sure it will go beyond just issues of climate.
Unless we can prove that some resource will never run out, then use of such resource becomes "unsustainable" and should be prohibited.
Similarly, we must not create ANYTHING that is not one-hundred-percent recyclable. No "waste" of any kind will be tolerated.
The Chinese one-child policy will be the model for all other human activities. One car, one computer, one dish, one book, etc. Having two of anything will be considered the height of irresponsibility. After all, shouldn't people be able to survive with just "ONE"?
Having two shoes will require proof that one cannot survive by hopping around on one foot.
The national motto will become "E Pluribus One-um" or "Strength Through One-ity". Life would be one Orwellian nightmare after another.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.