Is climate change just another religion?

[BowmanMike]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

This is the most revealing statement about the left's climate change agenda.

Forget about fossil fuels, recycling and aerosol cans.  This is what every environmental activist will tell you is the major problem facing the environment.  The more people on earth, the more pollution in the atmosphere.

It is a factual belief, I admit, but the solutions preferred are not being discussed.  Abortion is supported by most climate change activists.  I would expect that.  But, I have also been told voluntary euthanasia has become the #6th leading killer of people in Canada today.  Apparently people who have reached a certain old age are not being treated for certain diseases like cancer, because they are not expected to survive cancer.  Also, people who feel life isn't worth living for chronic medical issues, or even financial insecurity can opt for it.

A Canadian Forces veteran seeking treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder and a traumatic brain injury was "inappropriately" offered medical assistance in dying, spurring an investigation.

The federal government says the MAID program -- first passed in 2016 following a 2015 ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada -- is intended for people with a "grievous and irremediable condition." Mental illnesses are currently excluded, patients must be at least 18 years old and two independent health professionals have to approve the request after receiving informed consent.

Bill C-7, which received royal assent in March 2021, expanded access to MAID by repealing an eligibility provision that required "a person's natural death be reasonably foreseeable." This led to an influx of participants; the program's third annual report found "10,064 MAID provisions reported in Canada, accounting for 3.3% of all deaths in Canada" in 2021.

So, with this type of thing becoming normal, how can we not see the desire for population control?  That makes it an agenda of death inside the climate change agenda.  Can you imagine what the consequences of allowing the government to control the population could be?

Remember when they laughed at those who said ObamaCare would have "Death Panels"?  Guess it wasn't such an off the wall belief after all.

That is great. We show that kindness to dogs,but not to people. The amount of people taking that route is not even going to put a dent in the population numbers. Covid didn't either. 

At some point there will be some major events that will lower numbers drastically. It won't be anything planned or coordinated I am pretty sure about that.

[Grouse]

You mean like COVID-19 did?  What makes you so sure it wasn't planned?  Just because the worldwide leftist propaganda machine keeps saying it wasn't, doesn't mean it wasn't.

I'm pretty sure abortion is planned.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Grouse

[Five Seasons]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

You mean like COVID-19 did?  What makes you so sure it wasn't planned?  Just because the worldwide leftist propaganda machine keeps saying it wasn't, doesn't mean it wasn't.

I'm pretty sure abortion is planned.

at least you're not denying that covid wasn't real. 

Again, we can discuss how we should react to climate change. That's a healthy topic. Electric cars, solar, wind, hydro all have issues. And of course what is china doing etc. Great topics. Similar to covid19. Ok it's real, but what should we do about it then? What's the governments role? Who caused it; bats or people? Great discussion. 

Just stop pretending it doesn't exist.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Belo

[Grouse]

I don't think anyone ever said the climate isn't changing.  I think they were saying man isn't causing the change and the ideas presented won't stop it.

To me, the biggest problem in this whole issue is, they love to talk about the advantages of green energy, but refuse to discuss all of the disadvantages.  An intelligent decision is arrived at when you correctly identify the problem in the first place.  Then look at all of the possible solutions.  Then look at all the advantages and disadvantages of each possible solution.

If your not looking at any of the disadvantages, you're either not qualified to be making the decisions, or you're forcing bad decisions on everyone to satisfy your personal agenda.

[Shoots100]

12 hours ago, Belo said:

You lost me when you stated that a meteorologist and a climate scientist was the same profession.

Thank you for proving my point on ignorance. I could go on and on about how measuring of carbon in our atmosphere and historical data trends are vastly different from predicting which cloud will go where, but I doubt it would matter to you.

If you'd like to have a discussion, I'd be interested in your profession and education first and then we can continue.

toodles 

I can't have a discussion with someone who judges people by their profession and education.

I can assume from your responses that your an expert on everything and not open to a real discussion.

Maybe you can enlighten us on the reliability and accuracy of carbon dating tests ?

Even with all of their knowledge, they still can't predict the future.

In the end, their Ivy league educated predictions are only guesses.

Unfortunately those guesses are deemed gospel by Al Gores climate change cult.

The only green he's worried about, is the green money in his bank account.

Edited September 2, 2022 by Shoots100

[Five Seasons]

9 hours ago, Shoots100 said:

I can't have a discussion with someone who judges people by their profession and education.

I can assume from your responses that your an expert on everything and not open to a real discussion.

Maybe you can enlighten us on the reliability and accuracy of carbon dating tests ?

Even with all of their knowledge, they still can't predict the future.

In the end, their Ivy league educated predictions are only guesses.

Unfortunately those guesses are deemed gospel by Al Gores climate change cult.

The only green he's worried about, is the green money in his bank account.

I will have a conversation with you if you let me know what qualifications you have to debate climate science. I gave you mine. I am far from an expert on most things. Climate change and the environment though are areas I'm well versed in. I went to school for it and have spent my entire professional career in the field. 

If you're a plumber, that's awesome and it's not my intent to talk down to you. But if you and I were at a BBQ drinking beers I would not dispute your opinion that shark bite hardware is shit, even if I thought it was great. That's my point. I know my lane.

And again, you're confusing predicting the future of a cloud in the sky with historical proven temperature data that is measured and recorded. You've also again confused carbon dating in the earth with CO2 levels in the atmosphere. C02 of course being carbon dioxide. 

I've said my piece. I'm happy to discuss how we handle global warming, you might find we're probably more aligned there. I will not have a discussion on whether it is real or not. 

I apologize again if I came across is belittling, my intent was only to mention my credentials in a discussion about something I'm passionate about. I'd hope most hunters would be passionate about the environment so that our kids kids can also enjoy what we do... but maybe I'm wrong. 

[Grouse]

Classic case of virtue signalling there Belo.  Ever wonder whether people who educated you on climate change knew what they were talking about?

The fact you put a laughing emoji on my post about the analytical thinking process, which is well understood by professionals in any area of problem solving, seems to indicate you don't understand it.  If so, you shouldn't be making any suggestions about solving any climate issues, especially if you don't think it's important to look at the disadvantages decisions may come with.

If this leftist government keeps moving in the direction it's going, not only will climate oppression cause a total economic meltdown, but it will probably outlaw hunting for all future generations, due to the "environmental damage" hunters cause when they enter the woods and shoot game.  That is a major disadvantage to supporting ecofascists and envirowackos that don't care about any consequences of their decisions.

[Splitear]

[Five Seasons]

32 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Classic case of virtue signalling there Belo.  Ever wonder whether people who educated you on climate change knew what they were talking about?

The fact you put a laughing emoji on my post about the analytical thinking process, which is well understood by professionals in any area of problem solving, seems to indicate you don't understand it.  If so, you shouldn't be making any suggestions about solving any climate issues, especially if you don't think it's important to look at the disadvantages decisions may come with.

If this leftist government keeps moving in the direction it's going, not only will climate oppression cause a total economic meltdown, but it will probably outlaw hunting for all future generations, due to the "environmental damage" hunters cause when they enter the woods and shoot game.  That is a major disadvantage to supporting ecofascists and envirowackos that don't care about any consequences of their decisions.

I'm not a sheep. I've questioned everything that has been taught to me by looking at the data and facts and coming to my own conclusions. Engineers are taught to be analytical thinkers, it's literally what we do and how our brains work. I want data and facts, not opinion. It's why I'm a republican but don't believe and follow every party line. I think for myself and formulate my own opinions and conclusion based on what's presented to me, and you're right in that sometimes we're fed some bs. Covid is a good example, but I'm not a virologist or even and MD so I'm not going to spout off on it like I'm preaching the truth. But I do have a degree and career in the environmental field, so I damn sure will here.

Lets clarify some stuff. An opinion could be that abortion is bad for society. 

A fact could be that the earth is warming at a rapid rate do to increased emissions in the atmosphere. 

Some have too hard of a time separating the 2 and just regurgitate whatever they read online or watch on TV. What is worse is that people like to hear what they think they want to hear (both the left and right, but mostly the left). They don't like AOC or the green new deal (neither do I btw, but some of it is good), so they tune into a source that confirms how they feel. Every polarized media outlet knows this and feed on it for views and click... to you know... make money.

You want to know what? Sometimes Breitbart is right. Sometimes even Alex Jones was right. Sometimes CNN and the New York Times is right too. Stop living in a world of all or nothing.

You said earlier that you weren't denying climate change, so not even sure what your point is here. 

I'm out for the day, going to work on treestands. See yall tuesday. 

[Grouse]

You don't know what my point is?  Why did you put a laughing emoji on a post about the analytical thinking process being used in decision making?  If you think that process is funny, especially when used to make decisions on how to address climate change, your credibility on the subject is questionable.

[mattypotpie8S]

Arguments from authority have way less credibility these days & for good reason. Not saying anyone is right or wrong here, but I'm skeptical of todays "experts".

Edited September 3, 2022 by mattypotpie8S

[Five Seasons]

On 9/2/2022 at 3:14 PM, Grouse said:

You don't know what my point is?  Why did you put a laughing emoji on a post about the analytical thinking process being used in decision making?  If you think that process is funny, especially when used to make decisions on how to address climate change, your credibility on the subject is questionable.

Because you come across as one of the most polarizing, entrenched and narrow minded individuals I've ever had witness of interacting with. You post on nothing but politics and mostly did the same under your old name. I bet you couldn't say a nice word about a liberal/democratic stance if you tried. It's all of nothing for you, which leads me to believe you're not analytical in your thinking at all. 

On 9/2/2022 at 8:49 PM, mattypotpie8S said:

Arguments from authority have way less credibility these days & for good reason. Not saying anyone is right or wrong here, but I'm skeptical of todays "experts".

Except that 99% of scientists have agreed that global warming is real and man made and this has been the thinking for decades. Why are you arguing? Because you don't like that it's happening and the thought of it being our fault troubles you? That doesn't make it not real. Because some government officials have abused power? That doesn't mean that decades of independent research is wrong because of covid. These are not correlated. 

[9jNYstarkOH]

4 minutes ago, Belo said:

Because you come across as one of the most polarizing, entrenched and narrow minded individuals I've ever had witness of interacting with. You post on nothing but politics and mostly did the same under your old name. I bet you couldn't say a nice word about a liberal/democratic stance if you tried. It's all of nothing for you, which leads me to believe you're not analytical in your thinking at all. 

Except that 99% of scientists have agreed that global warming is real and man made and this has been the thinking for decades. Why are you arguing? Because you don't like that it's happening and the thought of it being our fault troubles you? That doesn't make it not real. Because some government officials have abused power? That doesn't mean that decades of independent research is wrong because of covid. These are not correlated. 

Honest question who is funding the independent research what percentage is government funded? I am not saying that all studies paid for by the government are always bias but some do seem to be. Again I do believe that humans do cause some climate change.

[Grouse]

15 minutes ago, Belo said:

Because you come across as one of the most polarizing, entrenched and narrow minded individuals I've ever had witness of interacting with. You post on nothing but politics and mostly did the same under your old name. I bet you couldn't say a nice word about a liberal/democratic stance if you tried. It's all of nothing for you, which leads me to believe you're not analytical in your thinking at all.

I really don't care what others think of me, especially if they are leftists or clueless low info voters.  People get mad when they cannot refute what I post and prove me wrong.  It offends their fantasy view of the world.  Yet, all of the things I've been saying here from day one have proven to be correct and have come to pass.

If there is ever a Democrat stance that improves the country, I'll support it, but I have yet to see one.

I believe I've said this before.  I have a lot of patience for stupidity in people, but not with those who are proud of it.

 

Edited September 6, 2022 by Grouse

[ADK Native]

On 9/2/2022 at 8:49 PM, mattypotpie8S said:

Arguments from authority have way less credibility these days & for good reason. Not saying anyone is right or wrong here, but I'm skeptical of todays "experts".

Excellent point.  But it is not just today's experts.  

I remember as a teenager being told by the “experts” we need to fight communism.  So I enlisted for a very unpopular war while others became rich selling to the Pentagon.

So here are some examples of the actions of the “experts” that led to the unnecessary deaths and injuries to my brothers and sisters:

Did not matter that the South Vietnamese had a less than enthusiastic spirit to fight for their own freedom, they compounded that fact by many of them serving with the Viet Cong.  Lots of people got rich without a scratch.

Fast forward to the War on Terror where we had to go into Afghanistan to bring Bin Laden out.  He was found in Pakistan where he was probably since September 12, 2001 living the good life.  Even after he was reportedly killed by the “experts” in 2013, that useless war went on for another nine years!  We had to go into Iraq for the weapons of mass destruction that had already be moved out to Iran or Syria or Hell, but the “experts” wanted another money making war.  Again, lots of people got rich without a scratch.

 

[Five Seasons]

21 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I really don't care what others think of me, especially if they are leftists or clueless low info voters.  People get mad when they cannot refute what I post and prove me wrong.  It offends their fantasy view of the world.  Yet, all of the things I've been saying here from day one have proven to be correct and have come to pass.

If there is ever a Democrat stance that improves the country, I'll support it, but I have yet to see one.

I believe I've said this before.  I have a lot of patience for stupidity in people, but not with those who are proud of it.

 

Except when we were making 10's of thousands off the stock market 3 or 4 years ago and you were saying we should all be investing in can goods for our bunkers.

Not one single policy though? 

[Five Seasons]

5 minutes ago, ADK Native said:

Excellent point.  But it is not just today's experts.  

I remember as a teenager being told by the “experts” we need to fight communism.  So I enlisted for a very unpopular war while others became rich selling to the Pentagon.

So here are some examples of the actions of the “experts” that led to the unnecessary deaths and injuries to my brothers and sisters:

Did not matter that the South Vietnamese had a less than enthusiastic spirit to fight for their own freedom, they compounded that fact by many of them serving with the Viet Cong.  Lots of people got rich without a scratch.

Fast forward to the War on Terror where we had to go into Afghanistan to bring Bin Laden out.  He was found in Pakistan where he was probably since September 12, 2001 living the good life.  Even after he was reportedly killed by the “experts” in 2013, that useless war went on for another nine years!  We had to go into Iraq for the weapons of mass destruction that had already be moved out to Iran or Syria or Hell, but the “experts” wanted another money making war.  Again, lots of people got rich without a scratch.

 

again, you're confusing facts with opinions. 

Fact - Water in the ocean is salty

Opinion - Communisim is bad

You were asked to fight a war based on the opinions of experts and a select niche of experts with a very strong agenda. What we're talking about with global warming is a consensus fact across all countries and independent experts (including China).

Please guys, learn to separate the two

[Grouse]

4 minutes ago, Belo said:

Except when we were making 10's of thousands off the stock market 3 or 4 years ago and you were saying we should all be investing in can goods for our bunkers.

Not one single policy though? 

You have me confused with someone else.  I predicted a stock fall if Biden was installed in the White House.

I find it pointless to debate certain people anymore.  They're insignificant.

[Grouse]

Consensus fact??  Now there's an oxymoron I've not heard before.

[Five Seasons]

24 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Consensus fact??  Now there's an oxymoron I've not heard before.

then we agree that this is a waste of time.

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

[ADK Native]

29 minutes ago, Belo said:

Opinion - Communism is bad

You were asked to fight a war based on the opinions of experts.

Fact - Communism is bad, it is not some opinion.  How any people are immigrating to communist countries?  Is the standard of living in communist countries better than the standard of living in democratic countries?  Would you move to a communist country?

"You were asked to fight a war based on the opinions of experts."  Opinions of experts you say?  Are you saying that there are global warming experts like Al Gore who proclaim to be subject matter experts who really only have opinions? 

[ADK Native]

Okay, here is a global warming fact.  Is planet Earth getting warmer?  Yes, it should be.

Let’s review our Astronomy 101 studies.  The Earth is part of a solar system that orbits around a star named the Sun.  As stars age, they become hotter.  So then as the Sun gets older every day, it gets hotter.  Now the real question is how fast is the Sun aging and how much older must the Sun get before it kills all human life on Earth?  This is the question I ask of the global warming experts.

[BowmanMike]

1 minute ago, ADK Native said:

Fact - Communism is bad, it is not some opinion.  How any people are immigrating to communist countries?  Is the standard of living in communist countries better than the standard of living in democratic countries?  Would you move to a communist country?

"You were asked to fight a war based on the opinions of experts."  Opinions of experts you say?  Are you saying that there are global warming experts like Al Gore who proclaim to be subject matter experts who really only have opinions? 

Not a fact. Communism sounds pretty good on paper,so does a free market. It is always the greed of some that messes things up for the rest of us. You will find that in any system.

[BowmanMike]

1 minute ago, ADK Native said:

Okay, here is a global warming fact.  Is planet Earth getting warmer?  Yes, it should be.

Let’s review our Astronomy 101 studies.  The Earth is part of a solar system that orbits around a star named the Sun.  As stars age, they become hotter.  So then as the Sun gets older every day, it gets hotter.  Now the real question is how fast is the Sun aging and how much older must the Sun get before it kills all human life on Earth?  This is the question I ask of the global warming experts.

I got question for you. How does burning fossil fuels that took millions of years to be created in a short 150 years not affect anything? The earth is a closed system and we have been doing our best to put all that carbon back into the atmosphere. 

[Five Seasons]

14 minutes ago, ADK Native said:

Fact - Communism is bad, it is not some opinion.  How any people are immigrating to communist countries?  Is the standard of living in communist countries better than the standard of living in democratic countries?  Would you move to a communist country?

"You were asked to fight a war based on the opinions of experts."  Opinions of experts you say?  Are you saying that there are global warming experts like Al Gore who proclaim to be subject matter experts who really only have opinions? 

sigh.

As we both would agree, communism is bad. There are millions, billions (if you include china) that would disagree. Entire empires. It's a social construct that is hard to prove good or bad, unlike say the pH of this drink is 7.2. It cannot be empirically measured.

Al Gore is a politician who used data fed to him by scientists. He is not an expert, but those who work for NASA are and you can read about it in the link I posted above... but I doubt you will.

But go ahead, poke holes in global warming, I'm all ears. 

on second thought, I've said my piece and nobody has come back with anything to show that global warming isn't real. What we have so far is a general distrust for science and authority and that's ok. In fact, that's a good thing. We should question everything, but after you've questioned it, heard the arguments and feel educated about it then it's time to accept or push back. I once pushed back as an undergrad. Heck even out of school and working I had some reservations on global warming, but I don't any longer. 

All I'm asking is that you don't use uncorrelated experiences and examples to refute something unrelated. 

happy hunting