Politics Climate Change Paradox (cont in part 2)

Should we act now, or wait for a unified global approach


  • Total voters
    362

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd be keen to hear your thoughts on what our climate crisis is, how it's effecting humans and what can be done to stop the crisis.

Is it even a "crisis"? I suppose it depends on your definition of the word.

There's certainly no strong sober scientific data to support any crisis in my view.

1) The planet has gone through a "slight" warming phase that commenced ~21,000 years ago.
2) CO2 was not the "cause".
3) There's arguments that CO2 exacerbates warming, and arguments that it doesn't. I defer moderately to the first argument.
4) The arctic ice cap has diminished and this affects Albedo factors.
5) Long range computer climate prediction models aren't worth a pinch of shit.
6) The opinions of politicians are not worth a pinch of shit.
7) The opinions of bureaucrats are not worth a pinch of shit.
8) The opinions of journalists are not worth a pinch of shit.

See, the thing about science training is that when you "don't know".................you literally "don't know".

Ask yourself, how many politicians, bureaucrats and journalists are capable of such intellectual rigor?

..how it's effecting humans...

See points 6, 7 & 8 above.

and what can be done to stop the crisis.

Planting trees and going nuclear + renewable will certainly remove any CO2 doubts within a generation.

Removing the tongues & keyboards from points 6, 7 & 8, would definitely alleviate the hysteria, and speed up the process.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Last edited:
Plus a Masters in Science and a PhD in a scientific field.

Do you ever tell the truth?
So if I hve a masters and PHD in mathematical science does that totally make me qualified to state stuff on areas like Biology, Zoology, physics, chemistry, anatomy, climate etc?
 
Got a better place to get information about the size of bushfires historically?

I wouldn't utilize anything older than 30 years as a data set in the first place & I would certainly be deferring to the botanists and forensic & analytical chemists to gain the best understanding of the phenomena involved.
 
This is why we have a climate crisis situation in the first place.

After 3 decades of brainwashing school kids, there's just too many votes invested for the parasites to leave it in the hands of the capable now. The entire field is ****ed.
Is it even a "crisis"? I suppose it depends on your definition of the word.

There's certainly no strong sober scientific data to support any crisis in my view.
.
Now you've just confused me.
 
So if I hve a masters and PHD in mathematical science does that totally make me qualified to state stuff on areas like Biology, Zoology, physics, chemistry, anatomy, climate etc?

Snake tried to characterise Tim Flannery as not having a Science background. That is a lie. Snake Baker is a liar.

Snake also claimed to be a scientist. He has refused to answer which area.

Obviously Science is a broad field. The days of being a polymath are probably over. But there are plenty of examples of scientists starting off in one discipline, then bringing that expertise with them as they move to a new discipline.
Many big advances have been made that way.
 
Now you've just confused me.

A "crisis" as in my belief of the impending doom of man kind and the planet due to "climate change".

There's no worthy evidence that I can find. There just isn't enough solid evidence.

Nuclear holocaust is still our number one major threat.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Snake tried to characterise Tim Flannery as not having a Science background. That is a lie. Snake Baker is a liar.

Snake also claimed to be a scientist. He has refused to answer which area.

Obviously Science is a broad field. The days of being a polymath are probably over. But there are plenty of examples of scientists starting off in one discipline, then bringing that expertise with them as they move to a new discipline.
Many big advances have been made that way.

Anyone who bases their opinion of me because of your comments, is not a person I would want to converse with in the first place.

You're just wasting time and looking ridiculous.
 
The president of the VFFA is a member of a Greens bashing political party. If that gives you any insight to his impartiality.
Yeah he’s from the SFF party, I have no explicit objection to the SFF, but their opposition to National Parks being locked up is entirely predicated on them wanting to clear land and graze their stock on it (as well as hunting), which is fundamentally in opposition to the purpose of a National Park.

I can definitely see the conservative response to this being the reduction of National Parks, and enabling land clearing and logging in National Parks. Trees can’t burn if we’ve chopped them all down!
 
A "crisis" as in my belief of the impending doom of man kind and the planet due to "climate change".

There's no worthy evidence that I can find. There just isn't enough solid evidence.

Nuclear holocaust is still our number one major threat.

There is plenty of evidence. You discount everything you see based on your preconceptions. That’s not science, that’s dogma.
If you are paid anything to be a scientist, you are overpaid.
 
There is plenty of evidence. You discount everything you see based on your preconceptions. That’s not science, that’s dogma.
If you are paid anything to be a scientist, you are overpaid.
Hey, he's a centrist. A Mark Latham, Sky News quoting centrist.
 
What type of scientist are you?

What would it matter to you? You're incapable of proper reasoning in the first place.

Please, don't waste either of our time attempting to converse any further. You will be ignored.

Hey, he's a centrist. A Mark Latham, Sky News quoting centrist.

.........with a Hitler moustache?
 
Just making sure the record is clear on your posts.

What type of scientist are you?
Who cares. Claiming to be a scientist so you know about science is like saying you work at a hospital so you're informed about disease when in actuality you're an orderly changing bed pans.

Anyone who works in a research profession, which actually does what one assumes a scientist would do, would never introduce themself as "a scientist".
 
Who cares. Claiming to be a scientist so you know about science is like saying you work at a hospital so you're informed about disease when in actuality you're an orderly changing bed pans.

Yeah, that's what it is.

What does that make politicians, bureaucrats, journalists and "Nuggs Bunny"? Street sweepers, ditch diggers, fruit pickers and a certified moron?

If faced with those choices, I think I'll defer to the opinion of the bed pan cleaner.
 
Yeah, that's what it is.

What does that make politicians, bureaucrats, journalists and "Nuggs Bunny"? Street sweepers, ditch diggers, fruit pickers and a certified moron?

If faced with those choices, I think I'll defer to the opinion of the bed pan cleaner.
Nah I went to a real university and got an actual degree. You went to what might have been play school and printed out a certificate. I am better than you and always will be.
 
Nah I went to a real university and got an actual degree. You went to what might have been play school and printed out a certificate. I am better than you and always will be.

Lemme guess, Gender Studies at Swinburne Tech?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top