1. 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!

Trump thinks scientists are split on global warming

Discussion in 'The Green Room' started by David T, Oct 22, 2018.

  1. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,533
    Ratings:
    +2,806
    Trump thinks scientists are split on climate change. So do most Americans | Dana Nuccitelli

    One scientist said we are more sure about the effects of greenhouse gases effect, than ciggarettes cause cancer. So i am pretty sure that arou d 97% or so scientists say "we have a serious problem," really cant be argued. But hey this is RF.

    i dont see any easy solutions and the ones i hace seen dont really hange things much. The demands are outgrowing any real solution. Thoughts?
     
  2. lioncub1503

    lioncub1503 Seven ate nine

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2018
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +26
    Religion:
    Jehovah’s Wittness
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Personally, I think that Trump just wants as much money as he can get, and acknowledging global warming would be costly.
     
  3. Nakosis

    Nakosis crystal soldier
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    12,383
    Ratings:
    +4,585
    Religion:
    Atheist Libertarian
    Should science find a way out of this? Or should we just get man destroy himself. If man is bad for the planet, should man sacrifice himself, by doing nothing I suppose, for the sake of the earth?

    If science comes up with a solution or if we are simply able to adapt, it means man will continue to tap the earth's resources.

    I suppose the solution would be for man to destroy himself. For us to succeed means more of the same.
     
  4. Windwalker

    Windwalker Integralist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    8,009
    Ratings:
    +3,983
    Religion:
    Love, Light, and Life
    No. Our humanity should.

    The earth will do just fine without us. It did just fine before. All we are doing is killing ourselves, and various other lifeforms that adapted to what we had recently. I personally think we are killing ourselves deliberately, a.k.a., suicide. We can't handle self-awareness. The why of that is a whole topic in itself.

    Science is just a tool. The will to live, comes from somewhere else.

    Not if we wake up enough to pull the gun out of our mouths we have stuck in there by electing folks like Trump in order to pull the trigger for us. Let's see if we want to live instead. Should find out in a couple weeks here. The collective will to live is what will bring about true change. Only that.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. joe1776

    joe1776 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2017
    Messages:
    2,566
    Ratings:
    +911
    Religion:
    None
    Well 97 to 3 qualifies as a "split." Doesn't it?:D
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Nakosis

    Nakosis crystal soldier
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    12,383
    Ratings:
    +4,585
    Religion:
    Atheist Libertarian
    No disagreement with the rest of your post.

    I don't think there is a collective will to live. I mean I believe individually there is a will to live, just not universally as a means to unite people.

    Trump is IMO irrelevant. Trump is temporary. I don't believe there is a political solution for this. I would not depend on the federal government. It has it's own concerns. Obama was in the White House for 8 years, where was any real solutions?

    Humanity is the problem, I doubt we can change who we are and the reality is it is already too late. However if it makes you feel better to get someone else in the White House, I suppose that can be accomplished.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. osgart

    osgart Nothing my eye, Something for sure

    Joined:
    May 1, 2017
    Messages:
    2,513
    Ratings:
    +1,001
    Religion:
    No Religion. I Sense The Higher Power.
    I dont think leaving the problem to the economy will solve it. Ya gotta impose clean energy solutions on the people.

    If the short term and long term incentives to do it are there, people will make it happen.

    So how do you discipline entire peoples to get effective clean energy laws?

    Trump is a cancer to the cause. He loves the coal industry. Ack, suicide.

    Perhaps the structure of our governments isnt built to handle the problem. We cant agree inside government what the role of government should be.

    Political power in the United States over time - Wikipedia

    https://www.americanprogress.org/is...435281/americas-clean-energy-success-numbers/
     
    #7 osgart, Oct 22, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2018
  8. Audie

    Audie Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    12,335
    Ratings:
    +5,875
    Religion:
    None
    You"ve got some eyes if you can see manmade
    global warming in those photos.
     
  9. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,533
    Ratings:
    +2,806
    nakosis you must be really wierd... Because i like your posts. . They tend to not be zombie like and i think thats generally a forum violation.. Lol

    Ok enough funny. I am here becsuse i am interested in the spiritual dimension of this problem. I will leave that term spiritual open rather than trying to box it in. I have posted here that the whole anthropocene epoch issue is about 99% generated by science. That gets panties all bunched up with some. I find that interesting!

    I understand the anthropocene epoch being generated by science and observed by science. I dont blame grannies mis reading bronze age esoteric text. There is no "how to" that i am aware of in the bible. Infact it is remarkably devoid of how to!!!

    So to put it in summary we have a serious issue with how we understand nature and ourselves. And no amount of al gore power point talks is going to correct that. This is a culture with no one speaking as the landscape but lots of people talking and debating about the landscape. But i have hope that person eventually emerges when appropriate.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  10. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,533
    Ratings:
    +2,806
    Usually 90 10 is the split say with topics like we are a lost alien race that crash landed here and forgot , flat earth, etc. So 97- 3 split is like unheard of on about any topic!!!! Its probably a 96-4 split on cigarettes can cause cancer.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Kangaroo Feathers

    Kangaroo Feathers Hardline moderate

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    8,897
    Ratings:
    +6,391
    Religion:
    Catholic
    VHEMT
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,533
    Ratings:
    +2,806
    Oh i have been on that totally. Totally involuntary!!!! But i can pretend i am a monk.
     
  13. wellwisher

    wellwisher Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2018
    Messages:
    539
    Ratings:
    +206
    Religion:
    Catholic
    The main problem with manmade climate change consensus is everyone is leaving out a key variable. Is everyone aware that the core of the earth rotates faster than the surface of the earth? This was discovered in 2005, yet science is not yet integrating this variable into earth and climate sciences.

    Earth's Core Rotates Faster than Surface, Study Confirms

    Nobody anticipated that the core was rotating faster than the surface. This observation changes everything in terms of how the earth works. Science has not figured out how to integrate this and prefers to maintain the status quo, which is no longer correct.

    The "new" earth has more internal heat than was thought before. There is viscoelastic friction between the rotating solid iron core and outer core.mantle as the core drags the surface with it. This means a huge source of energy and heat that is not in any computer model.
     
  14. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,499
    Ratings:
    +11,955
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    Einstein said that his definition of "insanity" was doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results.

    We know we've largely created this climate change problem, so doing nothing to change what we're doing well fits into Einstein's definition.
     
  15. Audie

    Audie Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    12,335
    Ratings:
    +5,875
    Religion:
    None
    Einstein did not say that, and he of all people
    would know better.
     
  16. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,499
    Ratings:
    +11,955
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    I stand corrected as I thought he did say it, but when I googled it i found that you're correct. Thanks for the heads-up on this.
     
  17. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    11,076
    Ratings:
    +4,838
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    From: Unparalleled warmth is changing the Arctic and affecting weather in US, Europe - CNN

    Unparalleled warmth is changing the Arctic and affecting weather in US, Europe

    (CNN)The Arctic is experiencing a multi-year stretch of unparalleled warmth "that is unlike any period on record," according to the 2018 Arctic Report Card, a peer-reviewed report released Tuesday morning from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, an agency within the United States Department of Commerce.

    The report states that human-caused climate change is transforming the Arctic, both physically through the reduction of sea ice, and biologically through reductions in wildlife populations and introduction of marine toxins and algae.

    The report is yet another study from part of the US government indicating that climate change is real and having a profound impact, despite denials from the President and senior members of his Administration.

    The year 2018 was the Arctic's second-warmest year on record behind 2016. The top five warmest years have all occurred since 2014.

    Temperatures in the Arctic are warming more than twice as fast as the overall planet's average temperature, with temperatures this year in the highest latitudes (above 60 degrees north) coming in 1.7 degrees Celsius (3.1 degrees Fahrenheit) above the 1981-2010 average. These were the second warmest (behind 2016) air temperatures ever recorded during the Arctic year, which runs from October through September to avoid splitting the winter season.

    The five years since 2014 have been warmer than any other years in the historical record, which goes back to 1900. Although Arctic temperatures have been subject to wild swings back and forth through the decades due to natural variability, they have been consistently warmer than average since 2000 and at or near record since 2014, the report states.

    "The changes we are witnessing in the Arctic are sufficiently rapid that they cannot be explained without considering our impacts on the chemistry of the atmosphere," Thomas Mote, a research scientist at the University of Georgia who authored part of the report, told CNN in an email.
    Mote expressed than any natural cycle or mechanism that would lead to the amount of warming and ice loss that has been observed would take much longer than the few years over which we have seen these drastic changes.
     
  18. wellwisher

    wellwisher Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2018
    Messages:
    539
    Ratings:
    +206
    Religion:
    Catholic
    I believe in global warming as well as short term climate change, however, I am not convinced of the man made assumption for the change. This consensus conclusion appears to be a data magic trick, which I can demonstrate, with an example that can done at home.

    To set the stage for this data magic trick, I will recruit a class of science students from the local high school to help me collect data. We will go to the largest local park, with all the students bringing their cell phone cameras. We will break up in pairs to cover the park, and over a weekend, we will photograph every bird we can see, with each picture having a time and GPS stamp to make it official.

    When all the data is collected and compiled, I will make the claim that were more birds recorded in that park, during that weekend, than ever in the history of the park! This statement is all about data semantics.

    This does not mean that in the entire history of the park there were never more birds in the park. What I am saying there has never been more bird recorded in an official way. The main reason there were never more birds recorded, is nobody bothered to do this with so many helpers. At the same time, eye witness testimony, from the past, of there being more birds, would be considered anecdotal evidence since it lacks the same level of photographic data vigor we displayed. That weekend we recorded the most birds ever on record. I could get a consensus of scientists, who are by the book, to support me in my data claim.

    With my record breaking data claim in place, the local university decided to reproduce my results since the study was intriguing. Since the biology department has birds experts, as well as state of the art data collection equipment and skilled technicians, they work for a weekend and record even more birds.

    The new record is mostly due to better funding and better expertise, but not necessarily more birds. However, the conclusion we all reach is they have now recorded the most birds on record, and based on our two data sets, there is a trend of more and more birds flocking to this park, placing extra stress on the park's eco-system. That would follow logically, too.

    When climate scientists say the hottesy year on record, this only covers 100 or so years out of billions of years. Before we started to officially record data, early claims would be considered antidotal or inference evidence and would cary less weight than direct data. On record does not mean for all time, but it only means since we though it important enough to record the data in an official way. The hype created by the doom and gloom, has made more and more resources available for climate science. The money has also made more tools available, such as new satellite equipment. This allows details, never recorded before, to become recorded, and part of the new record of birds seen.

    How about for one year we only look at climate using the same techniques that look at the distant past. For example, we can do ice cores samples and read tree rings. Both of these techniques average data, and would make the data so it looks less busy and not as fast paced as the detailed data. It was a good trick that fooled the consensus into a semantics chorus.
     
  19. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,499
    Ratings:
    +11,955
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    The trouble with the OP is that it assumes that "Trump thinks".
     
Loading...