| There are 37 comments on this blog. This blog is locked and no further comments are permitted. |
|
|
LOTS of research is funded by the government? Are you suggesting it's all bogus? Or just the research that irks you?
|
|
|
Unfortunately, you do have to be careful that the research is truly independent and not influenced by the funding party
|
|
|
Yes, such as the anti-climate change reporting "scientists" who turned out to be oil company lackeys. 
|
|
|
And the left wing wack jobs whose predictions back in the 1970 and 1980s have all NOT come true
|
|
|
Why would anyone take their information from "left wing wack jobs?" -- that's just silly.
Why not get your information from the EPA, NASA, NOAA and the world's climate scientists, who confirm that climate change is man-made, and is a real issue.
|
|
|
Protecting the environment is a no lose situation. Just because we got lucky doesn't mean we should continue wasting water in California. We live in the desert.
|
|
|
Exactly
|
|
|
more like Wack Ass Jazz!
Instead of blogging stupid shit, you need to go wash your dirty ass, BITCH!
|
|
|
Hey, Blackout...since when did you see my ass.....
Have you been sneaking into my bathroom and looking up my toilet....
Who made YOU keeper of the blog comments.
Loki popped off about some people who he questioned about their objectivity.
I was merely setting the record straight....we have had dozens of people, who are very well intentioned, who have made crazy predictions about our climate and environment....We all need to be careful who we believe.....
|
|
|
@ Sndwoody how dare you inject facts into this blog discussion! So uncivilized.
|
|
|
SOME of the predictors came true....but there was a lot of bullshit, just like there is now....
Global warming does exist...but maybe not in the magnitudes of some of the more 'zealous' scientists...
|
|
|
Prolly some fake news shit
|
|
|
2000 late
|
|
|
That's crazy talk lol
|
|
|
LOL at the "scientific" sources Jazz posted, thinking they're "news" sites.
|
|
|
It explains alot
|
|
|
Here's one that's a bit more reliable as a reporting source, citing NASA, the NOAA, EPA and the USA:
https://www.epa.gov/climatechange/climate-change-facts-answers-common-questions
"Queston: Is there a scientific consensus on climate change?
Answer: Yes. All major scientific agencies of the United States—including the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)—agree that climate change is occurring and that humans are contributing to it. In the 2014 National Climate Assessment, the Global Change Research Program concluded that "global climate is changing and this is apparent across the United States in a wide range of observations. The global warming of the past 50 years is primarily due to human activities, predominantly the burning of fossil fuels."[1] Hundreds of independent and governmental scientific organizations have released similar statements, both in the United States and worldwide.[1][2][3] Multiple analyses of peer-reviewed science literature have repeatedly shown that more than 97 percent of scientists in the field agree that the world is unequivocally warming, and that human activity is the primary cause.[3]
This broad consensus that climate change is happening and is caused primarily by excess greenhouse gases from human activities is based on multiple lines of evidence, from basic physics to the patterns of change through the climate system (including the atmosphere, oceans, land, biosphere, and cryosphere). However, this doesn't necessarily mean that every scientist agrees on every component of the climate change problem. Scientists are still researching a number of important questions, including exactly how sensitive Earth's climate is to human emissions of various heat-trapping gases, what the consequences of warming will be in specific regions of the world, and how other future changes in oceans and clouds will affect climate change. Scientists continue to research these questions so society can be better informed about how to plan for a changing climate. However, enough certainty exists about basic causes and effects of climate change to justify taking actions that reduce risks."
Jazz, Eliteviews, Jack, you guys are excused from reading since you don't trust or believe in physics, science, education, doctorate-level science achievement or the writings of those who've achieved that. 
Cue the following flatheads' predictable comments refuting doctoral-level science achievement in favor of their favorite conspiracy site.
|
|
|
Wow, many scientists here 
|
|
|
I believe in science.
|
|
|
I wouldn't have been an astronaut, in another life
|
|
|
I want to be a proton in my next life. 
|
|
|
Read the information. It shows the predictions that didn't happen. Those are NOT scientific sources. They are quoting prediction. You can then decide...was it true or bullshit?
|
|
|
Frog rocker....whose is the name caller now??????
|
|
|
Actually the predictions of the 70's was global cooling. Then in the 90's it was global warming. The truth is we have been in global warming since the end of the ice age. The main reason is due to solar flares. Now I'm not saying we are not polluting the planet. With over 7 billion people on this rock that is inevitable. And remember plastic bags were designed to help the environment. I was born in the mid 50's and there was 2 billion people on the planet. Now there are over 7 billion. That is the problem. If we all farted at the same time we would all die.
|
|
|
Ur information is bullshit jazz
|
|
|
I could sort of understand how the uneducated masses opposed scientific evidence of animal and plant evolution. It makes them uncomfortable about confronting the validity of claims from their holy books. But the zealous contempt for other science is bizarre. I don't see what laymen have to lose by considering the possibility that people who dedicate their lives to understanding, and spend decades researching, a specific set of questions might know more than them.
|
|
|
I blame bad tupeas
|
|
|
However u spell it
|
|
|
I'll chime in again. I'll give you an example 30 plus years ago there were studies that showed if you watch TV more than 6 or 8 hours a day it would lead to hear disease. Now fast forward today there are studies that show if you stay on the internet more than 8 hrs a day it will lead to heart disease. The message is the same if you don't exercise you're going have problems. This government will fund a lot of research that is bullshit.
|
|
|
Never hear of it
|
|
|
"The message is the same if you don't exercise you're going have problems. This government will fund a lot of research that is bullshit."
I'm confused. Are you saying that it's bullshit to claim exercise is healthy?
|
|
|
Lol just lol
|
|
|
No the message has already been said years ago. Probably before you were even born.
|
|
|
The ability to replicate previous findings ads to the validity of those findings. It's not a total waste.
|
|
|
It's redundancy. You ever heard that caffeine is good for you in moderate amounts and then caffeine is bad for you. It's about funding. Mark Twain said there are lies, damned lies, then there are statistics. Read my original statement we have BEEN in global warming since the end of the ICE AGE. That is fact. What caused that is that the evidence points to solar flares. What else could have caused the end of the ice age. Think about it. Mother earth will survive but will mankind? There are too many people on this planet. Something is going to break and it won't be the earth.
|
|
|
"Read my original statement "
You might want to objectively reread your statements. They sound sort of like loony conspiracy theories. Statistics are all wrong? The government is lying. Scientists are lying. They're all somehow profiting off their lies. C'mon. Wtf
|
|
|
I'm a scientist. None of you know what you are talking about!
|
| There are 37 comments on this blog. This blog is locked and no further comments are permitted. |
