Acknowledging Climate Science Doesn’t Make You A Liberal
by Paul Douglas, I’m going to tell you something that my Republican friends are loath to admit out loud: climate change is real. I am a moderate Republican, fiscally conservative; a fan of small government, accountability, self-empowerment, and sound science. I am not a climate scientist. I’m a meteorologist, and the weather maps I’m staring at are making me uncomfortable. No, you’re not imagining it: we’ve clicked into a new and almost foreign weather pattern. To complicate matters, I’m in a small, frustrated and endangered minority: a Republican deeply concerned about the environmental sacrifices some are asking us to make to keep our economy powered-up, long-term. It’s ironic.
Republican, Richard Nixon, launched the EPA. Now some in my party believe the EPA and all those silly “global warming alarmists” are going to get in the way of drilling and mining our way to prosperity. Well, we have good reason to be alarmed.
6,895 records in the last week – some towns 30 to 45 degrees warmer than average; off-the-scale, freakishly warm. 13,393 daily records for heat since March 1 – 16 times more warm records than cold records. The scope, intensity and duration of this early heat wave are historic and unprecedented. And yes, climate change is probably spiking our weather.
My climate epiphany wasn’t overnight, and it had nothing to do with Al Gore. In the mid-90s I noticed gradual changes in the weather patterns floating over Minnesota. Curious, I began investigating climate science, and, over time, began to see the thumbprint of climate change, along with 97% of published, peer-reviewed PhD’s, who link a 40% spike in greenhouse gases with a warmer, stormier atmosphere.
For those interested in actual science... read his entire piece...
for the "science deniers" on the board... don't bother.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Ahhh...Democratic Science...A new phenomenon. Enviornmentalism is truely "political science".
Cicero joins his science denier Conservatives to deny reality... sad but true, the ranks of Anti Science Conservatives is growing, while the rest of America believes the facts.
Quoted Text
STUDY: MORE CONSERVATIVES THAN EVER DISTRUST SCIENCE Just 35 percent of self-identified conservatives said they had a “great deal of trust in science” in 2010, a new report published in the journal American Sociological Review reveals. The finding marks a 28 percent decline since the first survey taken in 1974, “when 48 percent of conservatives—about the same percentage as liberals—trusted science.” According to the report, support for science has remained relatively flat amongst liberals and moderates.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Cicero joins his science denier Conservatives to deny reality... sad but true, the ranks of Anti Science Conservatives is growing, while the rest of America believes the facts.
Nah...I'm part of the science skeptics, which all scientist are - skeptics. I am of the old school of science when a hypothesis had to be proven with indisputable facts. The FACT there are many accredited in the science community that have evidence disputing the theory that humans cause climate change, I will continue to view climate change as a THEORY, a theory among many. Todays science, especially climate change science is now considered proven based on who is running the better propaganda campaign and winning the battle of public opinion. Box's argument always hinge on some pubic opinion poll to try to win his argument.
The global warming crowd is becoming more and more like a cult. A cult that demagogues everybody that remains skeptical about the cause of climate change as "anti-science". The environmentalists blind faith in an unproven theory is no less radical than fundamentalist religious zealots and an unproven existence of God.
I don't know how many times I have to repeat it, science isn't democratic, stop confusing science with politics. Winning the battle of pubic opinion does not make something factual.
Nah...I'm part of the science skeptics, which all scientist are - skeptics. I am of the old school of science when a hypothesis had to be proven with indisputable facts. The FACT there are many accredited in the science community that have evidence disputing the theory that humans cause climate change, I will continue to view climate change as a THEORY, a theory among many. Todays science, especially climate change science is now considered proven based on who is running the better propaganda campaign and winning the battle of public opinion. Box's argument always hinge on some pubic opinion poll to try to win his argument.
The global warming crowd is becoming more and more like a cult. A cult that demagogues everybody that remains skeptical about the cause of climate change as "anti-science". The environmentalists blind faith in an unproven theory is no less radical than fundamentalist religious zealots and an unproven existence of God.
I don't know how many times I have to repeat it, science isn't democratic, stop confusing science with politics. Winning the battle of pubic opinion does not make something factual.
This discussion has on one side... Republican funded "scientists", on the opposing side... 97% of the scientists of the world.
When the oceans rise and the lifeboats are filling... Cicero will be the fist in the boat, elbowing out old ladies and kids... and probably those scientists who told Cicero when he refused to listen.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
There goes box again. Throwing out arbitrary statistics, and end of the world fear mongering to support a scientific theory. Box, you give science a bad name.
Posting in (yet) another thread about global warming climate change.
"Approval ratings go up and down for various reasons... An example is the high post 911 support for GWB even though he could be said to be responsible for the event." --- Box A Rox '9/11 Truther'
Melania is a bimbo... she is there to look at, not to listen to. --- Box A Rox and his 'War on Women'
The climate changes all the time, and has through recorded history. It is changing now, and always has. Even the most rabid climate change believers will admit that there have been periods in the earths history were temperatures have been warmer than this. The debate is whether THIS period of warming is caused by man.
You have to realize climate change is as much a political and economic movement as a environmental movement. There is MUCH money to made and political power to be won if man can be tagged to be the cause for this period of warming. If you notice the ones pushing things like the global carbon tax and world-body rule trumping country sovereignty are the "developing" countries. Also notice when they talk about climate change, they also talk about wealth transfer..... From industrialized countries to developing ones. People like Al Gore have MASSIVE amounts of money invested in Green technologies, they can't turn back now. When questioned about climate change and what we can really do about it, most scientists say we can only slow it down slightly.....not prevent it. Then why all the outcry? The answer is easy to understand when you realize this movement is MUCH more than just the earth warming and eroding coastline.
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
The climate changes all the time, and has through recorded history. It is changing now, and always has. Even the most rabid climate change believers will admit that there have been periods in the earths history were temperatures have been warmer than this. The debate is whether THIS period of warming is caused by man.
You have to realize climate change is as much a political and economic movement as a environmental movement. There is MUCH money to made and political power to be won if man can be tagged to be the cause for this period of warming. If you notice the ones pushing things like the global carbon tax and world-body rule trumping country sovereignty are the "developing" countries. Also notice when they talk about climate change, they also talk about wealth transfer..... From industrialized countries to developing ones. People like Al Gore have MASSIVE amounts of money invested in Green technologies, they can't turn back now. When questioned about climate change and what we can really do about it, most scientists say we can only slow it down slightly.....not prevent it. Then why all the outcry? The answer is easy to understand when you realize this movement is MUCH more than just the earth warming and eroding coastline.
There were those who were absolutely sure that the earth was flat. There was no possible way that the earth could be round. That was a majority position among the population, but science at the time had already come to the conclusion that the earth was round hundreds of years earlier.
A few hundred years ago, Science knew that the earth was NOT the center of the solar system, but the leaders of the time condemned that view, to the point of arresting anyone who told the scientific truth of that fact. Science deniers are nothing new.
The vast majority of Scientists today know that Climate change is happening, and a majority view is that it's man made.
If I needed surgery, I'd consult a Medical Scientist (a doctor) , not a politician. I wonder how many sheeple Conservatives will consult a politician if they need surgery and ignore the science?
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
If I needed surgery, I'd consult a Medical Scientist (a doctor) , not a politician. I wonder how many sheeple Conservatives will consult a politician if they need surgery and ignore the science?
Then why does the title of your thread refer to a republican meteorologist to prove your science? Would you consult a democrat doctor?
Then why does the title of your thread refer to a republican meteorologist to prove your science? Would you consult a democrat doctor?
As usual, Cicero is confused.
My example is of a REPUBLICAN skeptic. A true Fiscal Conservative, a fan of small government and of SCIENCE. He doubted 'climate change' until the reality of FACTS overwhelmed his skepticism. Always a "science believer" he was a reluctant convert to climate change... but had no other option in face of the FACTS. As his post clearly states: ~ "My climate epiphany wasn’t overnight, and it had nothing to do with Al Gore. In the mid-90s I noticed gradual changes in the weather patterns floating over Minnesota. Curious, I began investigating climate science, and, over time, began to see the thumbprint of climate change, along with 97% of published, peer-reviewed PhD’s" ~
Politics didn't bring him to be a believer... SCIENCE DID!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics
Growing Number of Scientists Convert to Skeptics After Reviewing New Research
Following the U.S. Senate's vote today on a global warming measure (see today's AP article: Senate Defeats Climate Change Measure,) it is an opportune time to examine the recent and quite remarkable momentum shift taking place in climate science. Many former believers in catastrophic man-made global warming have recently reversed themselves and are now climate skeptics. The names included below are just a sampling of the prominent scientists who have spoken out recently to oppose former Vice President Al Gore, the United Nations, and the media driven “consensus” on man-made global warming.
The list below is just the tip of the iceberg. A more detailed and comprehensive sampling of scientists who have only recently spoken out against climate hysteria will be forthcoming in a soon to be released U.S. Senate report. Please stay tuned to this website, as this new government report is set to redefine the current climate debate.
In the meantime, please review the list of scientists below and ask yourself why the media is missing one of the biggest stories in climate of 2007. Feel free to distribute the partial list of scientists who recently converted to skeptics to your local schools and universities. The voices of rank and file scientists opposing climate doomsayers can serve as a counter to the alarmism that children are being exposed to on a daily basis. (See Washington Post April 16, 2007 article about kids fearing of a “climactic Armageddon” ) http://epw.senate.gov/public/i.....on_id=&Issue_id=
The old adage, " Politics makes strange bedfellows" must certainly apply here.
Shadow is now backing a FRENCH, (remember 'freedom fries) Scientist who also happens to be the former head of the FRENCH SOCIALIST PARTY! WOW! Shadow promoting a Socialist!
I wonder if Dr. Claude Allegre change of heart on climate change had anything to do with a new job... as the next French Environment Minister in President Nicolas Sarkozy's administration.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
