Has the left become emotionally attached to climate change theory?

[justoffal]

Not irrelevant at all...

Regardless of the trends of the past 200 years collected data, if it is to be believed unquestionably shows clearly that none of our current numbers are unique. Ergo even with Anthropogenic contributions which are sure to be minimal at best and ceding that some of them may even be present in temperature measurement in no way dictates that the climate can or will be controlled by those factors alone.

In short Climate change and not just climate change but CATASTROPHIC Climate change is something common to our planet and its climate. Why would we expect that is would be suspended or even interrupted by our miniscule contributions? The argument is at its very inception weak and at its strongest points still largely unconvincing. Guesswork....all guesswork.

Have the high priests of AGW measured a miniscule effect caused by man? So what if they have? It remains rather unimpressive and meaningless in the larger picture of what is very obviously a longstanding pattern of change.


JO

 

[bripat9643]

The foundation of the left is that of emotion.

It's always emotional with the left. They went from praising science and facts, to emotionalism full of tears and whining. What happened?

I mean it's really freaking annoying.

Anyone who argues against climate change, would argue gravity plays no role in plane crashes.

That's how ridiculous your argument is.

Only a total doofus would claim the two things are even remotely related. We can predict the orbit of the planet Pluto to a precision of 99.9999%. How well can climate science predict the temperature 10 years from now?

 

[bripat9643]

I've seen the "evidence" for climate change and it's not convincing.

Do the world a favor and go sky diving without a parachute. Thanks in advance.

Climate change is not a debatable issue.

It's time to embrace the horror.

If it's not debatable, then why are we debating it?

 

[Crackerjaxon]

The foundation of the left is that of emotion.

It's always emotional with the left. They went from praising science and facts, to emotionalism full of tears and whining. What happened?

I mean it's really freaking annoying.

Anyone who argues against climate change, would argue gravity plays no role in plane crashes.

That's how ridiculous your argument is.

Anyone who thinks legislation will change the climate would argue that Obama can stop rain from falling by repealing the law of gravity.

That's how ridiculous climate alarmists are.

 

[Osomir]

Not sure about them, but I tend to be more attached to it on the basis of science. No emotion needed.

 

[konradv]

Not irrelevant at all...

Regardless of the trends of the past 200 years collected data, if it is to be believed unquestionably shows clearly that none of our current numbers are unique. Ergo even with Anthropogenic contributions which are sure to be minimal at best and ceding that some of them may even be present in temperature measurement in no way dictates that the climate can or will be controlled by those factors alone.

In short Climate change and not just climate change but CATASTROPHIC Climate change is something common to our planet and its climate. Why would we expect that is would be suspended or even interrupted by our miniscule contributions? The argument is at its very inception weak and at its strongest points still largely unconvincing. Guesswork....all guesswork.

Have the high priests of AGW measured a miniscule effect caused by man? So what if they have? It remains rather unimpressive and meaningless in the larger picture of what is very obviously a longstanding pattern of change.

How can you consider a 30-40% increase in CO2 to be miniscule? The amount emitted in DAYS by humans is more than all the volcanoes on earth emit in a normal year. It's your argument that's weak, because you choose to ignore the time issue, you won't give an alternate explanation of where the CO2 is coming from and you misrepresent the human contribution to the overall condition of earth. What's your explanation for all this, merely a lame comment about "high priests"!!! Sorry but that doesn't cut it as an argument. I hold my opinion based on my knowledge of science and the facts about the increase in GHGs since the advent of the Industrial Revolution, not someone else's say so.