No worries, deniers, Elon and I also believe it is a coincidence. 
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
September 2016 Warmest on Record
- Thread starter Quetzal
- Start date
Damn, I wish I could believe that. I just can't. One of the major parties in my country still routinely denies global climate change and the human responsibility for it. It shouldn't even be a partisan issue. The policies we implement to do (or not do) something about it is what should be the partisan issues.
To those who trumpet such a 1-month confirmation of GW, I ask.....No worries, deniers, Elon and I also believe it is a coincidence.
If this month were lowest on record, would it debunk GW?
I think it's a bad idea to make such a minor data point
critical to GW's cromulence. Why? Because GW cannot
prevent unexpected variation. There's no need to create
a house of cards which might dissuade those on the fence.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
The earth has always had climate change, records that are only around 100 years is only a drop in the ocean.
MD
qualiaphile
Both Democrats and Repubs do major business with polluters like China. Business overrides party politics, in the end they're not so different from each other.
But it isn't so this is a moot point.
It is important for you to make the distinction that we are talking about climate change. This encompasses many different climate issues we are facing, which includes fluctuation in temperature that is scaling up at an alarming rate. Further, this is not a minor data point, want to know why? Because it is not an isolated data point. It is one of many, many many many other data points that illustrate a theory and yet people still downplay it with nothing to offer to the contrary except "NU UH!".
Did you even look at the chart? You know what the bottom axis represents, right? "Thousands of years before today". That is a strange way to spell a hundred but whatever plays into your narrative. Who cares about data, right?
psychoslice
Veteran Member
A thousand years, bull dust.
I'd argue....but I'm too lazy, & my point needs no elaboration.
So instead, I'll post a pic of someone I don't want to lose to a warmer Earth.....
If you say so. I have my doubts you have anything of substance to offer or any evidence to support it.I'd argue....but I'm too lazy, & my point needs no elaboration.
So instead, I'll post a pic of someone I don't want to lose to a warmer Earth.....
Well, when you gather your own dataset you can present it. I can't help blissful ignorance.
Because it's not about evidence.
It's about how best to handle deniers.
I have yet to hear a rational argument against climate change in the face of evidence. You can't convince morons do stop being morons.
Yes, one can.
But one must understand them, find common ground, & avoid claims which might be vulnerable to counter-example.
Besides, climate change denial does not mean they're morons....just a little ill informed....like socialists, conspiracy theorists, Democrats, communists, Republicans, feminists, the faithful, & lottery players.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
So who was keeping records over all these years, and what parts of the world, yes you are certainly ignorant.
And here is the fundamental problem is that you don't have enough of an understanding of the topic to even participate. Here is something to get you started.So who was keeping records over all these years, and what parts of the world, yes you are certainly ignorant.
http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/climate/CDcourses_investigate_climate.html
How do you inform someone who believes the data is not valid? I mean, what else do they want? What else is there? If they toss out scientific data what do they even find valid? The information can't come from the government or any agency that is affiliated. Scientists are clearly out. I mean, what do you do? How do you deal with someone who throws it all out with such arrogance to proclaim that they know better?
I do this regularly IRL.
First, one must understand the denier.
What views do I & the other have in common?
That determines the starting point for conversation.
I like to point out observations which are very concrete,
eg, lack of ice for polar bears & people who depend upon it.
I find this more powerful than statistics (which they've good reason to distrust).
Once they're open to GW, then I discuss AGW, but not as an advocate.
I simply address how anthropogenic & natural causes would both be at work, & that
the proportion of each is difficult to determine because climate models are immature.
Now they're considering what they once opposed.
It's a start.
Note that I don't claim to understand the GW & AGW debate.
I'm a gearhead...not a climatologist.
I don't have the truth.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Forget it, with your attitude and being a big know it all, I'm not interested in discussing anything with you. .