Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Actually, debating with someone who holds different beliefs than you, makes people become further entrenched in their held viewpoints.

The thing is this was a thread about people being hopeful about Obama's second term, but somehow got hijacked along the way, I'm all for civil debates, but as I see it, most of what passes for economics debate this day is nothing but confirmation bias and fear mongering tactics.

It's like global warming part 2, the facts are there, but people think that it has to do with their belief system or their ideology and they can somehow magically change the world by believing hard enough.

Anyhow, people believe what they want to believe, regardless of the facts or the truth.  :P

Quote from: monica.soto on February 12, 2013, 10:15:09 AM
Actually, debating with someone who holds different beliefs than you, makes people become further entrenched in their held viewpoints.

The thing is this was a thread about people being hopeful about Obama's second term, but somehow got hijacked along the way, I'm all for civil debates, but as I see it, most of what passes for economics debate this day is nothing but confirmation bias and fear mongering tactics.

It's like global warming part 2, the facts are there, but people think that it has to do with their belief system or their ideology and they can somehow magically change the world by believing hard enough.

Anyhow, people believe what they want to believe, regardless of the facts or the truth.  :P

Monica, I am glad you made that point.  Let's look at what the data say about "global warming" over the past 65 million years

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjonova.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fgraphs%2Flappi%2F65_Myr_Climate_Change_Rev.jpg&hash=91184349c868f839945e9fb0f32a59d9a1cc403b)

Or let's just look at the last 5 million years (Pliocene, Pleistocene, and Holocene)

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjonova.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fgraphs%2Flappi%2FFive_Myr_Climate_Change_Rev.jpg&hash=b507f705a11e5c2e4abd236392d156a81f4f3cc7)

Quote from: Pleasingly Plump Jamie D on February 12, 2013, 09:39:53 PM
Monica, I am glad you made that point.  Let's look at what the data say about "global warning" over the past 65 million years

ugh, this is the worst topic ever... the ONLY argument i will ever make on this is

what is the most unpredictable thing we experience as human beings?  the weather... the weather(person) messes up ALL the time ~ no fault to them 
so for people to BLAME people for the weather changing is a little narcissistic?  am i saying global warming climate change doesn't exist? no, i don't know how you would ever tell... ill give it a MAYBE? its most likely you could go tit for tat on facts regarding this situation... not my cup of tea to argue for or against it ~ it just gets a BIG "I DON'T KNOW", and i think for anybody to definitively say we caused the climate to change to the point of disaster is a little naive.  its OK to say "I DON'T KNOW" :) but that's just my opinion

i find it worry some that politicians sell us Problems and Solutions all packaged into a neat little thing called taxes.  Or you could just go a step further and say, if the government can scare you, or guilt trip you into believing something... they can tax you...  this time called the Carbon Tax

but even if we did cause climate change.  what do we do about it?  stop driving cars?  feel guilty? invest in green energies that don't seem practical on a massive scale?  tax us?  i mean there isn't really a solution so to point fingers is just playing into the political game of US vs YOU

that's just my opinion

Quote from: oZma on February 12, 2013, 09:46:37 PM
ugh, this is the worst topic ever... the ONLY argument i will ever make on this is

what is the most unpredictable thing we experience as human beings?  the weather... the weather(person) messes up ALL the time! 
so for people to BLAME people for the weather changing is a little narcissistic?  am i saying global warming climate change doesn't exist? no, i don't know how you would ever tell... ill give it a MAYBE? its most likely you could go tit for tat on facts regarding this situation... not my cup of tea to argue for or against it.

i find it worry some that politicians sell us Problems and Solutions all packaged into a neat little thing called taxes.  Or you could just go a step further and say, if the government can scare you into believing something... they can tax you... 

but even if we did cause climate change.  what do we do about it?  stop driving cars?  invest in green energies that don't seem to work on a massive scale?  tax us?  i mean there isn't really a solution so to point fingers is just playing into the political game of US vs YOU

that's just my opinion

If what you are saying is there is no such thing as climate equilibrium, then you are absolutely right.

And back to the point, people always think their views are correct, even when presented with the data to the contrary.

I think, regarding climate change, that maybe we should just try to be nicer to the planet, regardless of data or scientists or lobbyists or Michael Chricton?  It's our home.

Quote from: kkut on February 12, 2013, 10:07:56 PM
I propose we all reduce our carbon emmissions to those of Al Gore the father of global warming prevention.

Lol..  hard to argue with.

http://www.icr.org/article/evidence-for-global-warming/ (http://www.icr.org/article/evidence-for-global-warming/)

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ (http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/)


Some very simple articles on global warming. If you have the passwords, go to database websites. I can't give you my school's passwords, or our privileges would be revoked and I could get suspended.  :-\

I'm not going to argue on global warming, because that's a whole new hell-box ready to explode. However, I'm with Jen and think that regardless of the data, Earth is our home, and if you won't let your house go to crap, then you should do the same for your planet. You don't have to stop driving cars (but you can ride a bike for the occasional short trip, maybe save money and get some exercise :P), yet you can support some fuel-efficient technology.

Plus, I don't care for Al Gore being considered the representative of global warming prevention. We that know of global warming don't have a leader.  :laugh:

Quote from: DianaP on February 12, 2013, 10:17:51 PM
You don't have to stop driving cars (but you can ride a bike for the occasional short trip, maybe save money and get some exercise :P), yet you can support some fuel-efficient technology.

i ride my bike to work! but for selfish reasons of exercise, convenience and saving money lol

Quote
I'm not going to argue on global warming, because that's a whole new hell-box ready to explode.

and ya'll, lets stop thinking that we are arguing! let's just think we are having discussions :)

Quote from: kkut on February 12, 2013, 11:34:48 PM
Here's a WSJ article on those revealing emails suggesting data manipulation of global warming.

That article is actually in relation to the 2009 "climategate" controversy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climategate). This incidence has been investigated by a number of sources (The British House of Commons, Penn State University, Anglia University, the EPA, and even the National Scientific Foundation) all of which concluded that "no evidence of scientific or academic dishonesty could be found among the e-mails."

ETA: The source of the controversy is that the emails were illegally hacked and taken out of context. Various right wing news sources, the WSJ included, and climate skeptics then ran with the story without really looking into the validity of the claims.

The degrees of magnetic declination from true north have changed dramatically over the last decade. In layman's terms it means the earth has tilted on it's axis more than it was ten years ago which would easily account for climactic changes. Archaeologists studying fossil remains found that stone age aborigines in what is now northeastern US had left at the onset of the last ice age and moved toward what is now the desert southwest as a matter of survival. There is every indication that climate change is a cyclical event that reoccurs over eons. Humankind hasn't been here long enough to record even a partial cycle. What changes have taken place so far has given rise to a whole plethora of human reactions ranging from "Henny Penny the Sky is Falling Down" to let's use this as an opportunity to place blame and plunder the fortunes of the world's manufacturing moguls. On August 27, 1883. the most violent volcanic eruption in recorded history took place on the island of Krakatoa. Four cubic miles of rock and carboniferous materials were pulverized to dust and thrown 17 miles into the atmosphere. Since that time there have been innumerable volcanic events which all told have exceeded all of the pollution that mankind has ever generated since the dawn of time, and yet the earth has survived rather well without human assistance. In light of that we can conclude that the idea that human beings can in any way affect the ongoing survival of planet earth is ludicrously arrogant!

Quote from: Shantel on February 13, 2013, 08:19:34 AM
The degrees of magnetic declination from true north have changed dramatically over the last decade. In layman's terms it means the earth has tilted on it's axis more than it was ten years ago which would easily account for climactic changes. Archaeologists studying fossil remains found that stone age aborigines in what is now northeastern US had left at the onset of the last ice age and moved toward what is now the desert southwest as a matter of survival. There is every indication that climate change is a cyclical event that reoccurs over eons. Humankind hasn't been here long enough to record even a partial cycle. What changes have taken place so far has given rise to a whole plethora of human reactions ranging from "Henny Penny the Sky is Falling Down" to let's use this as an opportunity to place blame and plunder the fortunes of the world's manufacturing moguls. On August 27, 1883. the most violent volcanic eruption in recorded history took place on the island of Krakatoa. Four cubic miles of rock and carboniferous materials were pulverized to dust and thrown 17 miles into the atmosphere. Since that time there have been innumerable volcanic events which all told have exceeded all of the pollution that mankind has ever generated since the dawn of time, and yet the earth has survived rather well without human assistance. In light of that we can conclude that the idea that human beings can in any way affect the ongoing survival of planet earth is ludicrously arrogant!

http://news.discovery.com/earth/weather-extreme-events/volcanoes-co2-people-emissions-climate-110627.htm (http://news.discovery.com/earth/weather-extreme-events/volcanoes-co2-people-emissions-climate-110627.htm)

http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/archive/2007/07_02_15.html (http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/archive/2007/07_02_15.html)
"This seems like a huge amount of CO2, but a visit to the U.S. Department of Energy's Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) website (http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ (http://cdiac.ornl.gov/)) helps anyone armed with a handheld calculator and a high school chemistry text put the volcanic CO2 tally into perspective. Because while 200 million tonnes of CO2 is large, the global fossil fuel CO2 emissions for 2003 tipped the scales at 26.8 billion tonnes. Thus, not only does volcanic CO2 not dwarf that of human activity, it actually comprises less than 1 percent of that value. "

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11638-climate-myths-human-co2-emissions-are-too-tiny-to-matter.html (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11638-climate-myths-human-co2-emissions-are-too-tiny-to-matter.html)
"Finally, claims that volcanoes emit more CO2 than human activities are simply not true. In the very distant past, there have been volcanic eruptions so massive that they covered vast areas in lava more than a kilometre thick and appear to have released enough CO2 to warm the planet after the initial cooling caused by the dust (see Wipeout). But even with such gigantic eruptions, most of subsequent warming may have been due to methane released when lava heated coal deposits, rather than from CO2 from the volcanoes (see also Did the North Atlantic's 'birth' warm the world?).

Measurements of CO2 levels over the past 50 years do not show any significant rises after eruptions. Total emissions from volcanoes on land are estimated to average just 0.3 Gt of CO2 each year - about a hundredth of human emissions (pdf document)."

Plus, if humans, in their 100,000+ years, haven't seen even a glimpse of the climate change cycle, then why have global temperatures risen significantly over the time since the industrial revolution, a mere glimmer of the human existence, which you say is a mere glimmer of the climate change cycle? Even if human activity doesn't lead to climate change, you can be sure as heck that it's responsible for accelerating it.

I'm sorry. I know I said I would stay out, but your arguments are the same ones I've heard many times. There are a lot of people out there who claim that volcanoes dwarf human CO2 emissions, yet they never have a volcanologist to back them up. If you were told that volcanoes exceed human CO2 emissions from breathing, then you may have a point. However, total human CO2 emissions, natural and the result of combustion, make volcanoes look like ants.

this thread has bored me to death... ughhh facts and statistics? 67% of statistics are made up anyway :-)

Quote from: oZma on February 13, 2013, 05:47:58 PM
67% of statistics are made up anyway :-)

I see what you did there. Funny.  :laugh:

Quote from: oZma on February 13, 2013, 05:47:58 PM
this thread has bored me to death... ughhh facts and statistics? 67% of statistics are made up anyway :-)

And the rest are just lies. :)

OMG! Climate change denial?

Lol, I have nothing left to say.

Except, do you peeps also deny evolution?

hehe

Quote from: Jen on February 13, 2013, 09:19:37 PM
And the rest are just lies. :)

exactly! lol

Quote from: monica.soto on February 13, 2013, 10:24:39 PM
OMG! Climate change denial?

Lol, I have nothing left to say.

Except, do you peeps also deny evolution?

i never said deny! but i didn't agree either...

this topic gets a big I DON'T KNOW! it's ok to say that you know right gals??

As for climate change and our effect on it, it shouldn't matter. We have a responsibility to limit our impact as much as possible on this planet. If we can develop cleaner alternatives, then we have a responsibility to do so, if we can reduce fossil fuel use, we should, just because we are polluting the air.

Quote from: DianaP on February 12, 2013, 10:17:51 PM
http://www.icr.org/article/evidence-for-global-warming/ (http://www.icr.org/article/evidence-for-global-warming/)

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ (http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/)


Some very simple articles on global warming. If you have the passwords, go to database websites. I can't give you my school's passwords, or our privileges would be revoked and I could get suspended.  :-\

I'm not going to argue on global warming, because that's a whole new hell-box ready to explode. However, I'm with Jen and think that regardless of the data, Earth is our home, and if you won't let your house go to crap, then you should do the same for your planet. You don't have to stop driving cars (but you can ride a bike for the occasional short trip, maybe save money and get some exercise :P), yet you can support some fuel-efficient technology.

Plus, I don't care for Al Gore being considered the representative of global warming prevention. We that know of global warming don't have a leader.  :laugh:

I don't think that anyone disagrees that the earth is in a warming phase at the moment.  We are, after all, coming out of an ice age that peaked some 21,000 years ago (maximum ice), and have been in an interglacial period for the past 10,000 years.

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhigheredbcs.wiley.com%2Flegacy%2Fcollege%2Flevin%2F0471697435%2Fchap_tut%2Fimages%2Fnw0352-nn.jpg&hash=4c65a62465e365b6722ef534d55573934a0d1c0c)

In north America, the last glacial period was know as the "Wisconsin glaciation," in Central Europe, the "Wurm glaciation."

Given, that there is no such thing as climate equilibrium, and from simple observation of global ambient temperature int he past 65 million years, let me ask you two questions:

1) What evidence exists that the current interglacial is anything but a blip in a 65 million year temperature slide?

2) Even if current climate change is "anthropogenic," who is to say that is it deleterious?

is it science or religion?

part1
John Stossel - is Global Warming Science or Religion pt.1 of 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiYX09H4Q6k#)

part2
John Stossel - is Global Warming Science or Religion pt.2 of 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRiapFd5Uyo#)

When I was a teenager global warming was called pollution and what was thought to be the cause was muscle cars and 2 stroke bikes.The manufacturers stopped making them and the pollution stayed!

Now you're just trolling me Ozma ;p !

Quote from: monica.soto on February 14, 2013, 06:42:10 AM
Now you're just trolling me Ozma ;p !

huh? in what way? I'm just trying to make a point that climate change is only seen in hindsight, in the rear view mirror... to predict the future? I think you have to say 'I don't know'.  it's entirely possible global temp decreases the next 20 years! we don't know! all claims (specifically about the dangers of climate change) we make are in theory, and there is nothing wrong with that... until you start treating it as fact, ridicule those are sceptical, and demand action... I think it would be better if we suggested action, that we teach people to care :-) don't legislate, educate! and if people don't care? you can't force them to! don't use coercion and violence to force us to invest in clean energy, to cut emissions... if people don't care, they don't care... is it sad? sure, but that means you should work harder to convince people of your cause! without coercion, guilt, or fear.  play of positive emotions, not negative ones.

does that mean we affect climate? maybe... but to make that claim with absolute certainty? ugh... reminds me of the apocalypse/rapture trend... people are so narcissistic that they imagine the world will end in their lifetime? that Jesus will come save them? I mean in the course how long the planet has existed... we are less than a blink of an eye. to think our existence is any more important than others? narcissism.

again... I'm not denying or agreeing... just trying to let everyone know that its OK to say 'I don't know' as a position on this topic.  that doesn't mean you shouldn't encourage people to bike, or encourage them to litter...

plus, anytime people start pointing fingers, especially the federal gov... it throws a red flag for me.  I mean who really benefits the most, politically, from human climate change being real? our rulers and masters known as politicians who will punish us for it!

and one last point... CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION!

I thought you were replying the evolution question with the "I don't know". I may come off a little dismissive and I do admit sometimes I can be rude, but in no way do I not think you are a smart woman. Your dabbling into politics, philosophy and science is the sign of  an inquisitive mind who doesn't take anything for granted and for what it's worth I really admire that in a person.

Yes you're allowed to be skeptical,  and being skeptical is a good quality to have, but the thing is, my dear Ozma, that most of what passes as climate change denial science is bunk, financed by corporations whose bottom line depends on stricter pollution laws and carbon emission taxes not going into effect.

You make an excellent point on the solution is education and not legislation. let me share some up to date links:

http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/11/15/why-climate-deniers-have-no-credibility-science-one-pie-chart (http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/11/15/why-climate-deniers-have-no-credibility-science-one-pie-chart)

So there it is, The science behind the denial is fake, either it is not serious and/or ethically compromised because it is financed by big corporations whose bottom line depends on stricter regulations not being passed.

The thing is it's worse than what was reported at first:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/01/27/nicholas_stern_says_he_underestimated_risks_of_climate_change.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/01/27/nicholas_stern_says_he_underestimated_risks_of_climate_change.html)

That's Nicholas Stern, from the London School of economics, hardly a left wing hippie eco-terrorist.

About green energy, Germany has economic incentives for solar energy, people pay more for electrical energy ( I think it's a matter of public education and no fear mongers financed by corporations) and you know what? The country's economy is growing and things are more or less good. Why wouldn't green energy work better in the US than in Germany, seeing as the USA receives more solar radiation in the summer than does Germany during the whole year?

Sometimes legislation is required to kick the butts of non compliers into order, the US clean water act is one of the country's finest ecological laws which has greatly benefitted the majority of the population.

So forget Señor Stossel and Fox news, this isn't something that's an ideological or party issue, it's a fact of life.

Also your correlation is not causation quote, check this out:

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/10/correlation_does_not_imply_causation_how_the_internet_fell_in_love_with_a_stats_class_clich_.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/10/correlation_does_not_imply_causation_how_the_internet_fell_in_love_with_a_stats_class_clich_.html)

Slate is not a reputable source of information under any stretch of the imagination. Nothing that comes across the Internet is really credible, and most certainly the media is out to lunch on most everything as you can count on it as having been skewed one way or another. I saw a movie years ago about some mid-eastern terror cult, they chanted in unison, "Nothing is true, all is a lie!" My sixty nine years on the big rock seems to indicate that there is a lot of truth to their words.

@Monica, cause I don't want to quote that big box... it's hard to delete big sections of text on a phone!

what's the energy usage of USA vs Germany? I mean we are much bigger and no doubt consume a lot more right?

that article was nice... correlation does not imply causation, but gives a hint!

and for all those stats lovers... ill still argue 73% of all stats are made up!


for using the gov to invest in green energy... how do you decided which companies to invest? why this one over that one? I think it's probably chosen through political means... meaning they pick their friends companies first which does no good for us :-( id rather the gov let the people pick! with their own money! they'll be much safer, demand results and be highly critical so they can get their money back.

just throwing money at something and saying MAKE GREEN ENERGY! won't work... as proven by throwing money at education and getting zero results.  we need to be more careful with money, not so reckless... nobody spend their money as safely as yourself... its easy to spend other peoples money
..

.(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-mdu356WGDA4%2FTknR6JaiMYI%2FAAAAAAAAECk%2F0aNrymveUiM%2Fs400%2Feducation%2Bspending%2Bvs%2Btest%2Bscores.jpg&hash=a852388a312d1dd1c8a4d4eac8993163470d65dd)

The Great Green Con no. 1: The hard proof that finally shows global warming forecasts that are costing you billions were WRONG all along (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green-1-The-hard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billions-WRONG-along.html)

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2013%2F03%2F16%2Farticle-2294560-18B8846F000005DC-184_634x427.jpg&hash=04ded8ef10f3d1bd0663df4f2b32c29d883fd678)

Without stacking numbers and citing references (there's only so much time in a day, and I don't have the time to become an instant expert on climate change), I can't imagine that anyone can, in good faith, state that we are benefiting the planet with our fossil-fuel emissions... and that there aren't bound to be negative consequences of our doing so.

If it's debatable - let's hold the debate in the garage with the car running.

I also don't believe that a global-warming "myth" is being perpetuated by economic interests (read: greed): that makes little-to-no sense when you compare it to the economic interests of the oil companies.

Where's the money in it?

The global warming alarmists are almost all funded by tax-payers' monies.  The economic interest is to keep the funding gravy train going.

this whole thread is just one huge facepalm. It's not hard to test the effects of emissions on a smale scale. It's proven they affect temperature. And as already stated, why pollute and kill ourselves via asphyxiation when we don't have to? It sucks when you have asthma like me.

Living ideology and faith aside, and to-be in line with the spirit of the OP, the following facts are scientifically undeniable

1. Earth's temperature changes in cycles and the impact generated by human activity is at best negligible

2. Ozone destruction by human-generated pollution is deleterious for the biosphere

3. Earth pollution and environmental degradation by human-activity is not only bad for the environment but also for the health of humans4

4. human overpopulation is the real problem

Quote from: peky on March 18, 2013, 07:10:40 AM
4. human overpopulation is the real problem

I wish I could stick that in my IRA! Imagine the dividends!

Quote from: peky on March 18, 2013, 07:10:40 AM
Living ideology and faith aside, and to-be in line with the spirit of the OP, the following facts are scientifically undeniable

human overpopulation is the real problem

Not for long, there will inevitably be a world wide pandemic or CBR warfare that will resolve that problem soon enough!