Bad Science Almost Imposing Restrictive Laws

[Darkstar]

You see, scientifically ignorant people will see intelligent design theory and the theory of evolution and somehow think they are equal when evolution is a scientific theory, which has a very high amount of evidence required before it can be labelled as such, whereas the intelligent design "theory" would fail even as a hypothesis because it is unfalsifiable.

[Minimalist]

http://ph.news.yahoo.com/us-experts-see-...07516.html

Global temperatures were above average for the 36th straight year in 2012 and the planet is likely to chalk up more record warm highs over the coming decade, US scientists said Tuesday.

The year 2012 marked the ninth or 10th warmest on record, depending on the measurement. Space agency NASA put the average temperature at 14.6 Celsius (58.3 Fahrenheit), 0.6 degrees Celsius higher than in the 20th century.

Perhaps you are 200 years old and 36 years is insufficient to constitute a "trend" for you? For the rest of, 36 is quite sufficient.

[Sciworks]

Yeh - blah blah Global Warming blah blah Climate Change blah blah......

But not one mention about the original post!

[KichigaiNeko]

You mean..

Background

The brief version is that this began several years ago when a state agency, the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC), selected a 20± member “science panel” to do a scientific assessment of the NC SLR situation through 2100. This could have been a very useful project if there had been balance in the personnel selections, and the panel’s assessment adhered to scientific standards. Regrettably, neither happened and the project soon jumped the rails, landing in the political agenda ditch.

And ....

… and Backlash

Not surprisingly, the backlash was immediate. These evangelists are used to getting their way, and for legislators to actually stand up against their religion was an unexpected development.

In their anguish they lashed out to anyone they could blame for this roadblock in their crusade — including yours truly. There were numerous rants (some national) lamenting how “good science” was being thwarted by ignorant legislators. Even the Colbert Report had fun with it.

or....

UPDATE: On 6/12/12 the NC Senate voted FOR this bill 35 to 12. The NC House will vote in the next day or so.

Some predict that this measure will pass the legislature and then be vetoed by our lame-duck Governor. As an optimist, I’m hoping that since the Governor no longer needs to cater to the green constituency, that instead she can send a message that real science should be the basis of the state’s technical policies. That would give her legacy a major positive boost.

Yes I agree. AGW, Environmentalism, Animal Activism and "Greenieism" are turning into right royal religious pains in the butt and stopping the science getting out in favour of some political outcome/ agenda. It is getting to the point here in Oz that the bad science has just made the population desensitized to immobility when ever a "Greenie" takes centre stage. unfortunately the backlash may just well be inaction.

[The Grand Nudger]

My sentiments exactly Kichi. You get a guy who brings you some data and says:

"Here's our problem, we can do this, this, and this"
-Okay sounds reasonable, lets do that.

Then you get another

"No, no, no, it's twice as bad and then some, let's transitioning to so-and-so"
-Okay, sounds like a good idea in the long run regardless...but I'm not sure we're there yet - so in the meantime lets go with what guy number 1 suggested while we look into your proposal.

Then, my favorite

"The sky is fucking falling, it's to late, bend over and kiss your ass goodbye, in the meantime pass these laws"
-Go fuck yourself.

I cant imagine a more suitable breeding ground for inaction than this.

[KichigaiNeko]

I also notice that Carbon Credits (Stock market price under $2.00 US a tonne) has done nothing to stop pollution globally.

As for Carbon Price...it is like declaring the leaf legal tender...

As for Doha... one perspective.

http://www.themoralliberal.com/2013/01/1...oney-tree/

Moreover, many observers believe the decision to extend the Protocol was primarily the result of countries not having the courage to stop or scuttle it outright, and not actually knowing what to do next. So the easy way out was to just extend Kyoto and also promise the developing world lots and lots of dollars for “climate mitigation,” which is a sort of apology from the first world for having allegedly messed up the planet in the first place with their fossil fuels and economic development.

Whether the billions of promised aid dollars will really materialize is another matter. But a lot of people have already gotten rich – including Al Gore, hundreds of climate scientists, and thousands of environmental activists and government bureaucrats – and others are trying to cash in.

[Cyberman]

I cant imagine a more suitable breeding ground for inaction than this.

In politics, it's known as the Four-Stage Strategy:

• Stage 1: "Nothing is going to happen."
  
• Stage 2: "Something may be about to happen, but we should do nothing about it."
  
• Stage 3: "Maybe we should do something about it, but there's nothing we can do."
  
• Stage 4: "Maybe there was something we could have done, but it's far too late now."

---

© 1986 BBC and Anthony Jay & Jonathan Lynn.

---

[Aractus]

Oh dear...

We shouldn't be called skeptics or deniers, those are just labels religious groups use for heretics.

Firstly, it has nothing to do with religion. I don't mind being called an AGW sceptic, that's different from "climate change denier", and I'm more than happy to call myself an AGW sceptic. If that "label" makes you uncomfortable, maybe it's you who holds the extreme view.

It's like calling someone a religious skeptic, that may have worked in the 1800s but now most people think religious believers are just gullible.

Again, no it isn't, science is different to religion, they cannot be approached the same way. Climate denial is typically associated with conspiracy theories, not with religion.

If it wasn't for the amount of gullible people, the governments wouldn't be able to push AGW.

Wrong again. If it wasn't for the IPCC and climate scientists who are alarmists and take their message over the top, there would be no cause for alarm. If it wasn't that being a climate scientist is most profitable to you when you produce positive results, and that people have agendas to push, it wouldn't be cause for alarm.

The climate scientists should be labelled Climate Priests or Bad Scientists :-)

Absolutely wrong.

Most climate scientists are moderate, normal, everyday hard working honest scientists. You have a few like Mann who are clearly alarmists. You have other so-called scientists who are not climate-scientists who are also alarmists, like say Tim Flannery. Then you have political people who are alarmists, the most obvious example of this is he that profits the most for Global Warming Alarmism, and that would be Al Gore.

AGW is as widely held and accepted among scientists (and I know this because I know scientists) as the theory of Evolution and the Big Bang theory. So denying AGW is as "extreme" as denying Evolution or the BB. I myself do not deny AGW - I'm a sceptic. The increased level of CO2 is partially attributable to human activity, and anthropogenic CO2, methane, and black carbon levels should have some effect on the environment. But I don't believe the effect would be measurable, and that it only amounts to a small fraction of current climate change.

---

---

---

Min, that's a poor example. Melting ice tells you nothing to do with climate trends (even local ones), all they tell you is that the present climate is unable to sustain what some distant past climate was; and that would take you back to the mini-ice age. In other words, should our climate remain completely steady for the next 100 years, we'd expect a certain amount of ice at Greenland to melt away. We'd only expect it to stay the same if climate cooling occurred and produced a climate over Greenland able to sustain its present ice levels.

---

Yeh - blah blah Global Warming blah blah Climate Change blah blah......

Yeah as if you know anything.

Do me a favour and distance yourself from me and the rest of the intelligent sceptics, thanks.

But not one mention about the original post!

Sea level rise doesn't correlate, at all, to climate change. Everyone knows this, end of discussion. Happy now?

It's about the only thing you've said that isn't total bullshit.

[KichigaiNeko]

And still Daniel, not one mention of the OP.

No one cares about your opinion nor are they trying to stop you from having it....



Good Grief! Get a grip!

[Aractus]

Oh right and you did?