Why do so many people deny climate change

[itfitzme]

To what someone did I attribute any statements?

I used a vague group of people, the warming wackos. That alone should have been a clue that I was not being literal. If I wanted to quote someone I would not have used such an inclusive and therefore ambiguous term.

As I said those who live by literals should not be questioning the intelligence of others

If you don't know who you were attributing it to the you have some real serious issues.

Why don't you tell me who I attributed it to then. Other than a very vague and amorphous group of wackos that is.

Exactly, a vauge group that you call "wackos". A strawman group, a strawman argument.

If you are going to talk about science, you need to learn to be specific, precise and accurate. This is what science is about, counting physical attributes and attending to them with precision and accuracy. Science is all about literals.

 

[SSDD]

Compare the graph "that's been floating around here" to the graph that the IPCC used prior to mann's fraud.

It's been pointed out to you before how you're spouting a crazy falsehood there. Meaning you can't use ignorance as an excuse. You're deliberately lying now.

Nobody except members of the RightWingDingDong cult try to claim anymore that the MWP was warmer than today, because it's such a crazy claim, one so overwhelmingly disproved by the data. If you see someone make such a claim, it's a red flag that you're dealing with a person who regards loyalty to a political cult as being more important than honesty.

Is lying just your mode of communication I have provided no less than 45 or50 published papers showing that the mwp was warmer than the present and global. You guys have produced one.

 

[Spiderman]

If you don't know who you were attributing it to the you have some real serious issues.

Why don't you tell me who I attributed it to then. Other than a very vague and amorphous group of wackos that is.

Exactly, a vauge group that you call "wackos". A strawman group, a strawman argument.

If you are going to talk about science, you need to learn to be specific, precise and accurate. This is what science is about, counting physical attributes and attending to them with precision and accuracy.

Where was I "Talking science" ?

I did not cite any sources.

If you can't tell the difference between using a group's well known hyperbole as a starting point for an opposing opinion and someone presenting scientific fact then that's your deficiency.

 

[itfitzme]

All you have to do is listen to the warming wackos.

"Millions will die." " We have to "save the planet" Floods, drought "extreme" weather yada yada etc etc ad nauseum.

"the world will end"

That is your statement.

The population of the planet is 7 Billion. Millions is 1000 times less than a Billion. So, if millions die, that isn't the end of the world.

Flood and extreme drought are also not "the end of the world".

You can count beyond four, right?

Excuse the fuck out of me Mr Literal.

BTW those that live by literals shouldn't be questioning the intelligence of anyone.

Droughts:

China: 1876 – 1879 (Also known as the Great Famine). This drought caused rivers to run dry and LITERALLY killed 9 million people.

Africa: 1981 – 1984. During the crisis, an astounding 20 nations of Africa were under severe drought. Entire rivers and lakes completely dried up. Up to 20,000 people LITERALLY starved to death each month. Although the total number of people who perished is not completely known, it is estimated that over 1 million people LITERALLY died as a direct result of the drought.

1988
Summer, central and eastern U.S.: a severe drought and heat wave LITERALLY killed an estimated 5,000–10,000 people, including heat stress-related deaths. Damages reached $40 billion.

 

[itfitzme]

Why don't you tell me who I attributed it to then. Other than a very vague and amorphous group of wackos that is.

Exactly, a vauge group that you call "wackos". A strawman group, a strawman argument.

If you are going to talk about science, you need to learn to be specific, precise and accurate. This is what science is about, counting physical attributes and attending to them with precision and accuracy.

Where was I "Talking science" ?

I did not cite any sources.

If you can't tell the difference between using a group's well known hyperbole as a starting point for an opposing opinion and someone presenting scientific fact then that's your deficiency.

Last I looked, climate change is a topic of science as is environment.

You are welcome to post all the bullshit you like, but don't be so surprise when I point out that it is literally bullshit. Because, the is no group and no opinion that the world will come to an end.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You are playing stupid, ignorant word games.

You're ignorant and uneducated; you really can't blame people for mocking you.....

 

[itfitzme]

You are playing stupid, ignorant word games.

You're ignorant and uneducated; you really can't blame people for mocking you.....

Your proof being what?

That one million isn't 1000 times less than one billion?

Present anything except your uneducated and vague opinion.

Because, on a point by point basis, I am sure that my education far exceeds yours.

And, that you don't like something has never been a qualification for objective evidence.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What the f are you talking about? Do you have any idea? Cuz no one else does

Unless you're talking about a negative number, nothing is more than 1 times less than. Idiot.

You are playing stupid, ignorant word games.

"A is x Times Less Than B"


Nonsense.

Or x times fewer than something, or x times smaller than something, x times shorter / slower / cheaper / thinner / weaker – All nonsense!

Think about it:
•"times" is a multiplier, as in: 3 times 2 is 6.
•"smaller than", "less than" etc. indicate subtraction, as in: 2 less than 10 is 8.

With that in mind, let's look at a few examples:


John worked 200 hours last month. Bill was on vacation most of that time, so he worked 10 times less than John.

If Bill worked 1 hour less than John, he would have worked 200 - 1 = 199 hours.

But Bill worked "10 times" less than John. What is "10 times" in hours? Ten times the amount of John's work is 10 x 200 = 2,000 hours.

Great! Now let's use that:
Bill worked 2,000 hours less than John. In other words Bill worked 200 - 2,000 = -1,800 hours.

Huh ???

Bill worked a negative 1,800 hours last month? I think not. See now how this is nonsense?


Times Less Than

 

[Spiderman]

"the world will end"

That is your statement.

The population of the planet is 7 Billion. Millions is 1000 times less than a Billion. So, if millions die, that isn't the end of the world.

Flood and extreme drought are also not "the end of the world".

You can count beyond four, right?

Excuse the fuck out of me Mr Literal.

BTW those that live by literals shouldn't be questioning the intelligence of anyone.

Droughts:

China: 1876 – 1879 (Also known as the Great Famine). This drought caused rivers to run dry and LITERALLY killed 9 million people.

Africa: 1981 – 1984. During the crisis, an astounding 20 nations of Africa were under severe drought. Entire rivers and lakes completely dried up. Up to 20,000 people LITERALLY starved to death each month. Although the total number of people who perished is not completely known, it is estimated that over 1 million people LITERALLY died as a direct result of the drought.

1988
Summer, central and eastern U.S.: a severe drought and heat wave LITERALLY killed an estimated 5,000–10,000 people, including heat stress-related deaths. Damages reached $40 billion.

So the drought of 1876 was caused by man made global warming?

As I said climate changes all the time. The only constant is change. Do people affect climate? Certainly. Will a slight rise in temperature cause millions of deaths in addition to those that already happen because of weather or natural disaster?

I highly doubt it.

Can you tell me how many people will die in addition to those that already would have if the average temp of the earth rises 2 degrees C?

No you can't.

 

[Spiderman]

Exactly, a vauge group that you call "wackos". A strawman group, a strawman argument.

If you are going to talk about science, you need to learn to be specific, precise and accurate. This is what science is about, counting physical attributes and attending to them with precision and accuracy.

Where was I "Talking science" ?

I did not cite any sources.

If you can't tell the difference between using a group's well known hyperbole as a starting point for an opposing opinion and someone presenting scientific fact then that's your deficiency.

Last I looked, climate change is a topic of science as is environment.

You are welcome to post all the bullshit you like, but don't be so surprise when I point out that it is literally bullshit. Because, the is no group and no opinion that the world will come to an end.

No just that millions will die blah blah blah

It's all hyperbole since no one can predict how much warmer the earth will actually get no one can predict that millions of people will die that wouldn't already die in droughts floods or what have you.

As i said I do not refute that the earth is slightly warmer or that it will be slightly more warm than it is today. I do not refute that people and their actions especially on the scale we have now affect climate.

I am not falling for the dire predictions.

If you're dumb enough to that's your problem.

 

[itfitzme]

Excuse the fuck out of me Mr Literal.

BTW those that live by literals shouldn't be questioning the intelligence of anyone.

Droughts:

China: 1876 – 1879 (Also known as the Great Famine). This drought caused rivers to run dry and LITERALLY killed 9 million people.

Africa: 1981 – 1984. During the crisis, an astounding 20 nations of Africa were under severe drought. Entire rivers and lakes completely dried up. Up to 20,000 people LITERALLY starved to death each month. Although the total number of people who perished is not completely known, it is estimated that over 1 million people LITERALLY died as a direct result of the drought.

1988
Summer, central and eastern U.S.: a severe drought and heat wave LITERALLY killed an estimated 5,000–10,000 people, including heat stress-related deaths. Damages reached $40 billion.

So the drought of 1876 was caused by man made global warming?

As I said climate changes all the time. The only constant is change. Do people affect climate? Certainly. Will a slight rise in temperature cause millions of deaths in addition to those that already happen because of weather or natural disaster?

I highly doubt it.

Can you tell me how many people will die in addition to those that already would have if the average temp of the earth rises 2 degrees C?

No you can't.

No, idiot. I made no such statement here or anywhere else.

I am just presenting some numbers of people that can LITERALLY die due to drought.

There-in lies your problem, and inability to grasp the concepts of "literal", "specific", "accurate", and "precise".

Clearly, as I pointed it out in bold, a number of times, I am literally showing you what literal means.

 

[Spiderman]

Droughts:

China: 1876 – 1879 (Also known as the Great Famine). This drought caused rivers to run dry and LITERALLY killed 9 million people.

Africa: 1981 – 1984. During the crisis, an astounding 20 nations of Africa were under severe drought. Entire rivers and lakes completely dried up. Up to 20,000 people LITERALLY starved to death each month. Although the total number of people who perished is not completely known, it is estimated that over 1 million people LITERALLY died as a direct result of the drought.

1988
Summer, central and eastern U.S.: a severe drought and heat wave LITERALLY killed an estimated 5,000–10,000 people, including heat stress-related deaths. Damages reached $40 billion.

So the drought of 1876 was caused by man made global warming?

As I said climate changes all the time. The only constant is change. Do people affect climate? Certainly. Will a slight rise in temperature cause millions of deaths in addition to those that already happen because of weather or natural disaster?

I highly doubt it.

Can you tell me how many people will die in addition to those that already would have if the average temp of the earth rises 2 degrees C?

No you can't.

No, idiot. I made no such statement here or anywhere else.

I am just presenting some numbers of people that can LITERALLY die due to drought.

There-in lies your problem, and inability to grasp the concepts of "literal", "specific", "accurate", and "precise".

Clearly, as I pointed it out in bold, a number of times, I am literally showing you what literal means.

People can and do die from all kinds of things.

But can you tell me that a 2 degree C rise in temp will cause more people to die than already would have?

NO

So all the dire predictions of the disasters coming due to warming are bullshit.
But that you can't seem to understand my posts isn't your fault it's mine. I'm not used to conversing with people who can't think beyond the words on a page.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Your proof being what?

That one million isn't 1000 times less than one billion?

Present anything except your uneducated and vague opinion.

Because, on a point by point basis, I am sure that my education far exceeds yours.

And, that you don't like something has never been a qualification for objective evidence.

On the interwebz, you're an academic star!

 

[PMZ]

Excuse the fuck out of me Mr Literal.

BTW those that live by literals shouldn't be questioning the intelligence of anyone.

Droughts:

China: 1876 – 1879 (Also known as the Great Famine). This drought caused rivers to run dry and LITERALLY killed 9 million people.

Africa: 1981 – 1984. During the crisis, an astounding 20 nations of Africa were under severe drought. Entire rivers and lakes completely dried up. Up to 20,000 people LITERALLY starved to death each month. Although the total number of people who perished is not completely known, it is estimated that over 1 million people LITERALLY died as a direct result of the drought.

1988
Summer, central and eastern U.S.: a severe drought and heat wave LITERALLY killed an estimated 5,000–10,000 people, including heat stress-related deaths. Damages reached $40 billion.

So the drought of 1876 was caused by man made global warming?

As I said climate changes all the time. The only constant is change. Do people affect climate? Certainly. Will a slight rise in temperature cause millions of deaths in addition to those that already happen because of weather or natural disaster?

I highly doubt it.

Can you tell me how many people will die in addition to those that already would have if the average temp of the earth rises 2 degrees C?

No you can't.

What is the evidence that causes your doubt?

That, like the cause that science attributes AGW to, the effect either has never happened before, or the effect has, but due to other causes?

That the science predicted effects are inconvenient?

That you have a plan to mitigate the cause before the effect gets as destructive as the prediction.

That, as you won't be attending the future, it doesn't matter to you?

That you plan to be here in the future but your plan is to enjoy now at the expense of your future?
That you don't believe that evidence is a more likely predictor of effects than random guesses?

Fill us in.

 

[Politico]

OMG it started raining. Why is my climate changing?

 

[PMZ]

OMG it started raining. Why is my climate changing?

Your climate isn't changing. Your weather is.

 

[Politico]

Shit you mean I just bought that bunker for nothing?

 

[PMZ]

AGW and sustainable energy will enrich many capitalists. And impoverish others. And kill still others. On the average, humanity, less the people killed, will continue with less.

There is no alternative to any of this. It's underway and will continue for quite awhile to worsen.

Science, and other agents of change are formulating evidence based plans to minimize the average cost to humanity.

Conservatives are trying to minimize their personal costs at the expense of the average.

 

[Spiderman]

Droughts:

China: 1876 – 1879 (Also known as the Great Famine). This drought caused rivers to run dry and LITERALLY killed 9 million people.

Africa: 1981 – 1984. During the crisis, an astounding 20 nations of Africa were under severe drought. Entire rivers and lakes completely dried up. Up to 20,000 people LITERALLY starved to death each month. Although the total number of people who perished is not completely known, it is estimated that over 1 million people LITERALLY died as a direct result of the drought.

1988
Summer, central and eastern U.S.: a severe drought and heat wave LITERALLY killed an estimated 5,000–10,000 people, including heat stress-related deaths. Damages reached $40 billion.

So the drought of 1876 was caused by man made global warming?

As I said climate changes all the time. The only constant is change. Do people affect climate? Certainly. Will a slight rise in temperature cause millions of deaths in addition to those that already happen because of weather or natural disaster?

I highly doubt it.

Can you tell me how many people will die in addition to those that already would have if the average temp of the earth rises 2 degrees C?

No you can't.

What is the evidence that causes your doubt?

The fact that political machinations are part of the game not just the science.

That, like the cause that science attributes AGW to, the effect either has never happened before, or the effect has, but due to other causes?

There are too many unknowns to make predictions that can be believable. No one know how warm the earth will get. No one knows if there will be a desensitization to additional CO2.

That the science predicted effects are inconvenient?

No it's that questionable predictions are presented as inevitable

That you have a plan to mitigate the cause before the effect gets as destructive as the prediction

.

We have already cut emissions in this country significantly. How you are going to get other major developing countries to do the same is the real question now isn't it?

That, as you won't be attending the future, it doesn't matter to you?

It really won't matter to anyone who is alive today as not too many of us will be around in a century to see if the predictions will be true or false. I'll bet on false.

That you plan to be here in the future but your plan is to enjoy now at the expense of your future?

You seem to think that I alone, one man can have such an effect as to threaten the future.

I daresay I probably have a smaller footprint than most of you as far as GH emissions are concerned. I do it because that's how I want to live but I refuse to tell others how they should live.

That you don't believe that evidence is a more likely predictor of effects than random guesses?

Fill us in.

Predictions of disaster have one goal; to instill fear in the public so as to control them.

That's how politics works and you cannot divorce politics from the science here.

 

[itfitzme]

So the drought of 1876 was caused by man made global warming?

As I said climate changes all the time. The only constant is change. Do people affect climate? Certainly. Will a slight rise in temperature cause millions of deaths in addition to those that already happen because of weather or natural disaster?

I highly doubt it.

Can you tell me how many people will die in addition to those that already would have if the average temp of the earth rises 2 degrees C?

No you can't.

What is the evidence that causes your doubt?

The fact that political machinations are part of the game not just the science.


There are too many unknowns to make predictions that can be believable. No one know how warm the earth will get. No one knows if there will be a desensitization to additional CO2.




No it's that questionable predictions are presented as inevitable

.

We have already cut emissions in this country significantly. How you are going to get other major developing countries to do the same is the real question now isn't it?



It really won't matter to anyone who is alive today as not too many of us will be around in a century to see if the predictions will be true or false. I'll bet on false.

That you plan to be here in the future but your plan is to enjoy now at the expense of your future?

You seem to think that I alone, one man can have such an effect as to threaten the future.

I daresay I probably have a smaller footprint than most of you as far as GH emissions are concerned. I do it because that's how I want to live but I refuse to tell others how they should live.

That you don't believe that evidence is a more likely predictor of effects than random guesses?

Fill us in.

Predictions of disaster have one goal; to instill fear in the public so as to control them.

That's how politics works and you cannot divorce politics from the science here.

Yeah, that is it. Mind control, black helicoptors and the CIA beaming microwaves into your room at night.

I met a guy at McDonald's, yesterday, just like you.