Deep South Deep Freeze

[Galaxiom]

George Carlin was a smug idiot as is often the case with so called comedians.

Basically what he is saying is that it doesn't matter what a couple of generations of humans do to make the planet uninhabitable for those who follow. Its all fucked in the long term anyway so we shouldn't care.

Great though that he has left that video for prosperity. I doubt anyone will see the humour later this century. He will be among the legitimately vilified. I would encourage any of you who who agree with him to put down your thoughts in some long lasting way too, so your great grandchildren will give your memory the respect it deserves.

 

[AccessBlaster]

George Carlin was a smug idiot as is often the case with so called comedians.

George Carlin was a comedic genius and an American icon. He had his finger on the pulse of the American psyche long before Al Gore or Governor Jerry Brown.

 

[Galaxiom]

George Carlin was a smug idiot as is often the case with so called comedians.

George Carlin was a comedic genius and an American icon.

Of course "Smug idiot" and "American icon" are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Brianwarnock]

Of course "Smug idiot" and "American icon" are not mutually exclusive.

LOL I thought for a moment that Colin was on.

Brian

 

[AccessBlaster]

I guess that George Carlin video struck a nerve. Happens sometimes when arrogant pseudo scientist clash with common sense.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Oh, hell, I might as well drop in another outboard motor to this cesspool. Pardon me while I start the engines...

https://www.heartland.org/multimedi...te-in-physics-global-warming-is-pseudoscience

https://www.heartland.org/multimedi...al-warming-the-greatest-scam-in-world-history

https://www.heartland.org/multimedi...sts-disagree-about-global-warming-joseph-bast

https://www.heartland.org/multimedi...o2-emissions-from-the-burning-of-fossil-fuels

People accuse me of various kinds of mopery and dopery regarding global warming. As I have said, I have no problem in suggesting that we should control various kinds of pollution due to health reasons, but that I have doubts about the cause-and-effect attitude that people take on global climate effects as a man-made situation. Here are some but not all of the articles that leave me feeling skeptical on that topic. Those of you who have accused me of not thinking clearly should perhaps set aside some time to see if perhaps I might have a reason for my attitude.

You know me from other posts. You know I can be opinionated. You know I can be irreverent. But I do not take this subject lightly. I knew about the George Carlin post, but I also knew he was not a scientist. So I didn't post it, though I admit I was tempted. But since his post made it here anyway, I thought I would toss in something a bit more serious.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Just so you don't accuse me of single-source thinking (heartland.org), here are a couple of other items that also contribute to my skepticism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GujLcfdovE8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C35pasCr6KI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00Y9EZDdpUw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3hHi4sylxE

Again, my skepticism (not outright denial) is that the man-made global climate change science is result-driven - based on the result or getting grants, not on actually finding irrefutable science.

I know some of the forum dwellers will want to go ballistic on me, I understand that for some this topic is nearly a religious belief. But then, my stance on religion is also well known. I respectfully submit for consideration that questions remain on the topic of whether Man has created - or merely discovered and economically exploited - global climate change.

 

[AccessBlaster]

I knew about the George Carlin post, but I also knew he was not a scientist.

Neither is Bill Nye or Al Gore or other countless wannabe's.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Neither is Bill Nye or Al Gore or other countless wannabe's.

Good thing there are a CRAPLOAD of actual scientists whose research has helped prove that climate change is happening and is doing so as a result of human activity.

I mean, seriously, if we had to tell the rest of the world that we're listening to comedians and 'common sense' instead of published and peer-reviewed facts, observations, and experimental data, man would we look stupid.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

And the problem with a crapload of environmental scientists is that some people believe their science IS a load of crap, written in a way to get government grants from Liberals.

I have never denied that climate change IS happening. I have merely expressed serious skepticism on why. I have also clearly stated I want polluting companies to clean up their acts anyway, for medical reasons.

And of course, Al Gore IS a scientist. Didn't he invent the Internet?

 

[AccessBlaster]

Well again nobody, not even Carlin is saying its not happening. The question what do we do about it. You can spare me the details its rhetorical.

 

[Galaxiom]

Well again nobody, not even Carlin is saying its not happening.

Some people denied climate change was happening for a long time until it became ludicrous to do so. Now some have even begun abandoning the notion that it isn't caused by humans and started claiming it will be an improvement.

The question what do we do about it. You can spare me the details its rhetorical.

You wouldn't pesky facts to get in the way of your ill-informed prejudices, would you?

 

[Galaxiom]

https://www.heartland.org/multimedi...te-in-physics-global-warming-is-pseudoscience

https://www.heartland.org/multimedi...al-warming-the-greatest-scam-in-world-history

https://www.heartland.org/multimedi...sts-disagree-about-global-warming-joseph-bast

https://www.heartland.org/multimedi...o2-emissions-from-the-burning-of-fossil-fuels

As I have said, I have no problem in suggesting that we should control various kinds of pollution due to health reasons, but that I have doubts about the cause-and-effect attitude that people take on global climate effects as a man-made situation. Here are some but not all of the articles that leave me feeling skeptical on that topic.

Well perhaps you should stop linking to heartland.org publications if you believe pollution to be a problem.

Along with denying Climate Change they are campaigning against environmental controls. Basically they are advocates for Anarcho-Capitalism.

They also deny the link between tobacco smoke and cancer. Until they stopped revealing their funding sources it can could be seen they were substantially funded by fossil fuel and tobacco companies.

 

[Frothingslosh]

And the problem with a crapload of environmental scientists is that some people believe their science IS a load of crap, written in a way to get government grants from Liberals.

Some people also believe that lizard-people from Rigel are secretly running the world.

I have never denied that climate change IS happening. I have merely expressed serious skepticism on why. I have also clearly stated I want polluting companies to clean up their acts anyway, for medical reasons.

Tell me, Doc, when someone who clearly doesn't know a thing about Access tells you that you're doing something wrong because it isn't the way they THINK it should work, do you decide they must be right or do you stick with what the facts have shown?

Then why do you disregard any and all experimental evidence and observational results that don't meet your preconceived notions? It baffles me that you were able to earn a doctorate with that kind of behavior. The entire point of modern science is that the theories are modified to take the evidence into account. The evidence is NOT thrown out simply because it disagrees with our existing beliefs.

Perhaps you should call up Jerry Taylor and explain to him he was wrong to give up climate change denial after taking a long look at the actual data.

And of course, Al Gore IS a scientist. Didn't he invent the Internet?

Too bad he never actually claimed that.

During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country’s economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.
-Al Gore, 1999 CNN Interview with Wolf Blitzer

To anyone not trying to score points by deliberately misrepresenting what he said, it's obvious he's talking about fostering its growth via legislatives and economic initiatives. In fact, in 2000, Vinton Cerf (nicknamed 'The Father of the Internet') said that:

“Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development”

and

“No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution [to the Internet] over a longer period of time”:

But again, you can't let something as trivial as the truth interfere with your prejudices, can you?

 

[AccessBlaster]

You wouldn't pesky facts to get in the way of your ill-informed prejudices, would you?

Again, put down your popular science magazine for a moment. Global warming or climate change has always been with us and always will be. Its the way nature works. Its called cycles. Sometime its hotter other times its cooler. At some point this planet will die and become a cold dark marble floating through space.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Smallpox has always been with us and always will be. Its the way nature works. It's called disease. Sometimes you're healthy, sometimes you're not. At some point you will die, so there's no point doing anything about it.

Pollution has always been with us and always will be. It's the way technology works. It's called progress. Sometimes it makes the environment toxic, and sometimes it doesn't. At some point this planet will die, so it doesn't matter.

AB, your statement merely shows that you don't know the first thing about climate change and its causes. If you did, you would know that the RATE of change has accelerated to thousands of times faster than it has in the last couple billion years, and has done so only since we started burning hydrocarbons.

Saying 'the earth has always had temperature cycles' is quite literally plugging your ears and screaming 'LA LA LA LA LA' as someone tries to explain something to you.

 

[Vassago]

Smallpox has always been with us and always will be. Its the way nature works. It's called disease. Sometimes you're healthy, sometimes you're not. At some point you will die, so there's no point doing anything about it.

But vaccines don't work! In fact, the entire industry is a scam. Jenny McCarthy said so, so it must be true.

No matter how much science supports a theory, people will still throw doubt into the mix. I'm just waiting for the day that we finally treat doubters as Conspiracy theorists. That's really what they are.

And yes, there are people who actually believe that Climate Change is fake and not actually happening, man-influenced or not.

 

[Mike375]

But vaccines don't work! In fact, the entire industry is a scam. Jenny McCarthy said so, so it must be true.

No matter how much science supports a theory, people will still throw doubt into the mix. I'm just waiting for the day that we finally treat doubters as Conspiracy theorists. That's really what they are.

And yes, there are people who actually believe that Climate Change is fake and not actually happening, man-influenced or not.

I don't think many people deny climate change as it has been happening for billions of years. It is the man made issue where doubt is cast and I think for a couple of reasons.

One reason is it is strongly associated with the political left and especially the far left.

Another reason, at least for me, is I think man made carbon dioxide is 3% and thus if we eliminate all man made carbon dioxide then we reduce CO2 in the air by 3%. Off had can you think of anything where 3% makes a difference unless you are already at a threshold.

Then there are the piles of bullshit from the left and lefty media. Australia is one of the largest exporters of coal but what difference does it make if that coal is burnt in Australia as opposed to India and China but the left are all on about Australia reducing our coal burning. Maybe it is not "global"

 

[Vassago]

I don't think many people deny climate change as it has been happening for billions of years. It is the man made issue where doubt is cast and I think for a couple of reasons.

One reason is it is strongly associated with the political left and especially the far left.

Another reason, at least for me, is I think man made carbon dioxide is 3% and thus if we eliminate all man made carbon dioxide then we reduce CO2 in the air by 3%. Off had can you think of anything where 3% makes a difference unless you are already at a threshold.

Then there are the piles of bullshit from the left and lefty media. Australia is one of the largest exporters of coal but what difference does it make if that coal is burnt in Australia as opposed to India and China but the left are all on about Australia reducing our coal burning. Maybe it is not "global"

The science community is overwhelmingly in support of man's influence on climate change. I don't think it's a political argument when you consider these facts.

And that 3% number is a farce. It doesn't consider the amount produced in nature because of man. For example, cattle for meat predominately has a very significant impact on the "natural" level because we are herding them at unprecedented levels.

And again, even if you don't support that man has influenced climate change despite the scientific community overwhelmingly agreeing that we do, can we agree that polluting the Earth is probably a bad idea and that clean alternatives can help make the world a better place for future generations, regardless of climate change?

Saying something isn't true simply because it's sourced and often spoken by political affiliations you don't typically agree is foolhardy just like believing everything that comes from your desired political affiliations. They are just politicians, most of them don't know a damn thing about the science behind this stuff and only care about corporate interests, evidence be damned.

 

[Mike375]

But why is Australia subsidising windmills while exporting huge amounts of coal?

We continually get rammed down our throat the climate change deal and the Paris agreement and while we subsidise windmills in Australia we flood China and India etc. with coal? Something not right here.

If the CO2 problem is global then shouldn't Australia cease to export coal? What possible good comes from Gov't subsidised windmills in Australia when our coal is still being burnt in record amounts. In short if Australia went 100% wind and solar it will make zero difference as our coal is still burnt.

Maybe it is not a global problem?