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.
The US ratified the 1992 UNFCCC convention, including Annexes I and II, on October 15th, 1992. This was the 'Earth Summit' in Rio, not Kyoto.
God are you stupid
Sent from my VS985 4G using USMessageBoard.com mobile app
You are familiar with scientific research on AGW? Please explain why all those scientists from around the world are involved in such a hoax?Global Warming is the biggest hoax since the Jack The Ripper Diary hoax.
I believe China made some empty promise that they would START complying with the rules in 2020.Still laboring under the assumption that this money hemorrhage has something to do with the environment?
Still laboring under the assumption that your liars' cult isn't held in open contempt by most of the planet?
We are being strangled while China and India and the Pacific Rim emits with impunity. < that is your "climate change agreement" in Paris.
China signed on to the treaty. So did every other nation.
Damn, you're stupid.
So, how does your 'tard conspiracy theory work that in?
I've never encountered a global warming denier who wasn't a profoundly stupid human being. Without exception, they all seem to have, as a child, consumed lead paint chips by the bucket load. A shame. If environmental laws had been tougher, they could have been spared the dain bramage.
You are familiar with scientific research on AGW? Please explain why all those scientists from around the world are involved in such a hoax?Global Warming is the biggest hoax since the Jack The Ripper Diary hoax.
It's called a paycheck.You are familiar with scientific research on AGW? Please explain why all those scientists from around the world are involved in such a hoax?Global Warming is the biggest hoax since the Jack The Ripper Diary hoax.
Scientists that get a paycheck from different employers are involved with elaborate international hoaxes?It's called a paycheck.You are familiar with scientific research on AGW? Please explain why all those scientists from around the world are involved in such a hoax?Global Warming is the biggest hoax since the Jack The Ripper Diary hoax.
Scientists that get a paycheck from different employers are involved with elaborate international hoaxes?It's called a paycheck.You are familiar with scientific research on AGW? Please explain why all those scientists from around the world are involved in such a hoax?Global Warming is the biggest hoax since the Jack The Ripper Diary hoax.
It would be less stupid to say that everyone working under one nation's President (Trump) is involved in a "Make America Great" hoax, because they get a partisan paycheck.
He can't. Not legally. It's part a treaty. The president can't simply nullify a treaty.
Not that he or his followers care about the law.
You are familiar with scientific research on AGW? Please explain why all those scientists from around the world are involved in such a hoax?Global Warming is the biggest hoax since the Jack The Ripper Diary hoax.
Trump has made the conspiracy cultists bold, and it's now 100% conspiracy nuttery from the deniers. They no longer see the need to pretend they care about the science. This is the Trump post-truth world, and the cultists believe reality is whatever the cult says it is.
Rational people see things otherwise, of course. Which is why it's so difficult to find a conservative/libertarian scientist in any field. Superstition and science just don't mix.
Carl Sagan called it, in 1995. It just happened quicker than he imagined.
“I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness...
The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance”
― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
Sagan's baloney detection kit comes in handy here. He says to check if something is falsifiable, and apply Occam's Razor, and see if they depend on logical fallacies. Denialism fails all those tests, while mainstream climate science passes with flying colors.
If any deniers disagree, they should answer the one question they've always run from, which is "What data would falsify the theory of denialism"?
Try that on Global Warming...err...Climate Change...err...Climate Disruption.
....ever seen a more pronounced case of denial in your life? Tell me these people aren't bubble dwellers?
Try that on Global Warming...err...Climate Change...err...Climate Disruption.
That's been done over and over. Climate science passes all tests with flying colors. It's falsifiable in many ways. It is the simplest explanation for the observed data, hence it passes the Occam's Razor test. And it relies on no logical fallacies.
Denialism?
Can't be falsified. Hence, pseudoscience.
Fails the Occam's Razor test, as it posits an insanely complicated globe-spanning secret conspiracy involving millions of people, none of who will spill the beans.
And it relies entirely on logical fallacies.
Try that on Global Warming...err...Climate Change...err...Climate Disruption.
That's been done over and over. Climate science passes all tests with flying colors. It's falsifiable in many ways. It is the simplest explanation for the observed data, hence it passes the Occam's Razor test. And it relies on no logical fallacies.
Denialism?
Can't be falsified. Hence, pseudoscience.
Fails the Occam's Razor test, as it posits an insanely complicated globe-spanning secret conspiracy involving millions of people, none of who will spill the beans.
And it relies entirely on logical fallacies.
Climate science passes all tests with flying colors.
Who said anything about Climate Science?
Try that on Global Warming...err...Climate Change...err...Climate Disruption.
It's falsifiable in many ways.
Great. List a couple of ways.
Great. List a couple of ways.
Great. List a couple of ways.
A lack of warming temperatures over the long term.
A lack of sea level rise over the long term.
Cooling stratospheric temperatures.
A lack of increase in backradiation.
A lack of decrease in outgoing longwave in the greenhouse gas bands.
A lack of increase in CO2 levels.
Now, your turn. What observed data could falsify denialism?
Those things would falsify Climate Change?
Can you point to a period in Earth's history when Climate Change did not occur?
How much must we spend on wind and solar to ensure the climate never changes?
How will we know that the climate has stopped changing?
Those things would falsify Climate Change?
No. Tell us what observable data would falsify the denier belief that global warming is a hoax.
Can you point to a period in Earth's history when Climate Change did not occur?
I'm asking you for observable data now that would disprove denialism, not a logical fallacy.
How much must we spend on wind and solar to ensure the climate never changes?
I'm still not seeing something observable that would disprove denialism.
How will we know that the climate has stopped changing?
And still not seeing it.
That's because there is no such thing. In the minds of deniers, denialism is not falsifiable.
