Crick
Gold Member
- May 10, 2014
- 28,772
- 5,563
Morning Carl. Do you believe Dr Peterson when he says there are more fat poor people than thin poor people?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
ProbablySo I guess we can conclude that you've never taken Probability and Statistics 101.
So, most everyone says that humans contribute CO2! That’s fking it. Warmers take that and run! Doesn’t mean anything more than, yep humans breathe! Now get to the question if humans cause warming and 75 of 77!There is a well known myth called the 97 percent myth that falsely claims 97 percent of climate scientists put the blame on the backs of humans for climate changing.
We call bullshit on that claim.
Putting the 'con' in consensus; Not only is there no 97 per cent consensus among climate scientists, many misunderstand core issues: op-ed
In the lead-up to the Paris climate summit, massive activist pressure is on all governments, especially Canada’s, to fall in line with the global warming agenda and accept emission targets that could seriously harm our economy.www.fraserinstitute.org
Appeared in the Financial Post, May 2015
In the lead-up to the Paris climate summit, massive activist pressure is on all governments, especially Canada’s, to fall in line with the global warming agenda and accept emission targets that could seriously harm our economy. One of the most powerful rhetorical weapons being deployed is the claim that 97 per cent of the world’s scientists agree what the problem is and what we have to do about it. In the face of such near-unanimity, it would be understandable if Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Canadian government were simply to capitulate and throw Canada’s economy under the climate change bandwagon. But it would be a tragedy because the 97 per cent claim is a fabrication.
Like so much else in the climate change debate, one needs to check the numbers. First of all, on what exactly are 97 per cent of experts supposed to agree? In 2013, U.S. President Barack Obama sent out a tweet claiming 97 per cent of climate experts believe global warming is “real, man-made and dangerous.” As it turns out, the survey he was referring to didn’t ask that question, so he was basically making it up. At a recent debate in New Orleans, I heard climate activist Bill McKibben claim there was a consensus that greenhouse gases are “a grave danger.” But when challenged for the source of his claim, he promptly withdrew it.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change asserts the conclusion that most (more than 50 per cent) of the post-1950 global warming is due to human activity, chiefly greenhouse gas emissions and land use change. But it does not survey its own contributors, let alone anyone else, so we do not know how many experts agree with it. And the statement, even if true, does not imply that we face a crisis requiring massive restructuring of the worldwide economy. In fact, it is consistent with the view that the benefits of fossil fuel use greatly outweigh the climate-related costs.
One commonly cited survey asked if carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and human activities contribute to climate change. But these are trivial statements that even many IPCC skeptics agree with. And again, both statements are consistent with the view that climate change is harmless. So there are no policy implications of such surveys, regardless of the level of agreement.
I want to believe that we humans as we breathe out Carbon Dioxide, we did not create it, we breathed it in and then moments after back out.So, most everyone says that humans contribute CO2! That’s fking it. Warmers take that and run! Doesn’t mean anything more than, yep humans breathe! Now get to the question if humans cause warming and 75 of 77!
Eh? All animal life uses oxygen from the air to metabolize a compound called adenosine triphosphate. That provides energy and produces carbon dioxide as a waste product.I want to believe that we humans as we breathe out Carbon Dioxide, we did not create it, we breathed it in and then moments after back out.
And any carbon dioxide we inhaled to filter the oxygen. You know that right?Eh? All animal life uses oxygen from the air to metabolize a compound called adenosine triphosphate. That provides energy and produces carbon dioxide as a waste product.
We inhale the air, our lungs absorb oxygen and release carbon dioxide. We exhale and remove the carbon dioxide from our body.
Thanks for confirming what I was talking about.Eh? All animal life uses oxygen from the air to metabolize a compound called adenosine triphosphate. That provides energy and produces carbon dioxide as a waste product.
We inhale the air, our lungs absorb oxygen and release carbon dioxide. We exhale and remove the carbon dioxide from our body.
What do you think is meant when people use the term "air"?And any carbon dioxide we inhaled to filter the oxygen. You know that right?
Your post didn’t make senseWhat do you think is meant when people use the term "air"?
Right? Not sure his point other than to suggest all we breathe in is oxygen! That’s how I read itThanks for confirming what I was talking about.
Yup and breathe out Carbon Dioxide. We must be assholes to do this. I want to laugh. But his kind blame man and it makes me sad he is so anti human about climate.Right? Not sure his point other than to suggest all we breathe in is oxygen! That’s how I read it
I'm sorry I used too many big words. Get a fucking education.
Say, is that what you mean by insulting posters?I'm sorry I used too many big words. Get a fucking education.
Those that deserve such comments, yes.Say, is that what you mean by insulting posters?
I will honestly tell you that though I respect engineers, for many reasons, my time spent here is not trying to insult even the hard core left. Aren't you hard core left?Those that deserve such comments, yes.
You didn't use big words, you engaged in the fallacy of excessive verbosity.I'm sorry I used too many big words. Get a fucking education.
Crick, to help you understand, check out this PHD who teaches at a university.Those that deserve such comments, yes.
Why don't you look up Prager University and see why you should not be relying on them as a reference source.Crick, to help you understand, check out this PHD who teaches at a university.
Dr. Matthew Wielicki: I Refuse to Stay Silent about Climate Change | PragerU
When Dr. Matthew Wielicki refused to stay silent about climate change and earth science, he became a professor-in-exile. Even though members of the…www.prageru.com