EPA's own research expert 'shut up' on climate change

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by XXL TideFan, Jun 25, 2009.

  1. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    again, the ipcc is a united nations group. i think we both know that means you cant believe a word of it. there were plenty of dissenters with the ipcc as well, they were ignored or quit or misrepresented.

    of course not, his organization told him they were politically inconvenient and had to be shut out. they didnt say his conclusions were not accurate.


    yeah lets stop pretending you read it.

    apparently not subject to challenge, dismissed immediately for political expediency.

    sounds good, amigo.

    also, red, do you support the cap and trade policies in this bill that just passed the house?
     
  2. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Nonsense. The IPCC is a UN-sponsored international program, not a UN agency with UN employees. The scientists come from everywhere and represent their universities or companies or nations. Their scientific reputations are on the line, not the UN's.

    You still don't understand scientific consensus do you?

    Some day you too may have a real job in a giant company or agency. Then you will understand that you don't get to set your company's/agency's policy just because you disagree with it.

    I did read it. Days ago. Unlike you, I actually bother to do some basic and obvious research, like read the actual memo, instead of taking some right-wing bloggers word for what it says.

    Your characterization, not the EPA's. Come on martin, there isn't a single piece of original research in the memo. The guy cherrypicks data from a dozen published papers that seem to support his conclusions, but he ignores many, many more that do not. Furthermore he bypasses the scientific journals where his notions would be subject to challenge. It's an old writer's ploy that rarely survives critical review by peers and editors.

    I haven't read it it, got a link?

    What? You haven't read it either? :grin:
     
  3. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    i dont need to read it. i oppose it in principle.

    you should read about it and tell us if you support or oppose it. and by read about it i mean read the polls and see if everyone else favors it so you can decide.
     
  4. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    "I don't know what I'm talking abouit, but I'm agin' it!" :lol:

    Ahhhh, your usual resignation. When you see checkmate coming, change the subject to a personal criticism of your opponent. :dis:
     
  5. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    i know what cap and trade is. if there were a bill favoring communism i would oppose that also, without reading it. i have these guiding "principles". these "principles" allow me to know what i favor and oppose.


    do you favor or oppose the current bill? yunno it is important that we protect the environment.

    hey that is great. so do you favor or oppose this current bill?

    red, the unfortunate thing here is that you cannot pretend i am not giving you enough specifics for you to decide. there is an actual bill, that one you could in theory have an actual position about. i know that sounds terrifying, but give it a try.
     
  6. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    I have a guiding principle that I don't make declarative statements about something I know nothing about.

    Still waiting for the link. Unlike you, I'm not going to imagine what it says and then argue about it.

    No, the ridiculous thing here is that you don't care about the bill and have never read it. You just want me to argue against your, uhhh . . . "principles". Sorry martin, I just don't give a chit about your quaint notions of how the world ought to work.

    But if you would link the document that you oppose, read it and tell me what you dislike about it, I will be happy to read it and perhaps agree or disagree with you. I might even have a third position. Or I still may not give a chit. But you will have to do better than expect me to argue with you about something you don't even care enough about to actually read.

    Forgotten all about Carlin, have you? :grin:
     
  7. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    of course not.

    [qoute]Still waiting for the link. Unlike you, I'm not going to imagine what it says and then argue about it.[/quote]

    i am sure with your researching skills you can uncover it. then you can let us know if you favor or oppose it. good citizens educate themselves about what their government is doing, that is the pragmatic and reasonable way.

    interestingly, greenpeace opposes the bill. they say it is a huge corporate gieaway. i am sure they are right. republicans oppose the bill because it is a big government boondoggle. i am sure they are right as well. how can i know this without reading the thousand-page bill? magic.

    i oppose governmet management in general. i know how these things work. ethanol is a great example. huge waste of money, corrupt and counterproductive.

    and i know this may be hard for you to understand, but i actually know enough about cap and trade to oppose it. i know it is an impossibility for you to ever know enough about anything to decide.

    thats nice. but i am curious about your notions about how things should work. do you favor or oppose the recent climate bill?

    try .gov websites.

    no chance you would agree or disagree. you have no principles and refuse to take a position until you find out what is politically safest.


    dont worry. pretty soon the polls will come out and americans will either approve or oppose the effects of the bill. then you will know where you stand.

    i am not asking you to argue anything. i am simply asking you, do you favor or oppose this bill?
     
  8. Hawker45

    Hawker45 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,779
    Likes Received:
    440
     
  9. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    which is the same thing i am saying. it is a big corporate giveaway that accomplishes nothing, according to greenpeace:

    "It’s been resoundingly panned both by groups on the left, such as Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace, who see it as an enormous corporate giveaway,"

    http://www.businessweek.com/blogs/money_politics/archives/2009/06/house_passes_ca.html

    like your link says:

    "House Democrats have worked extensively with the coal industry"

    even if you favor helping the environment or some other pointless bull****, the bill is bad. it is a big government boondoggle, that will filter money from regular folks into the big businesses that obama favors.
     
  10. PURPLE TIGER

    PURPLE TIGER HOPE is not a strategy!

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,186
    Likes Received:
    395

    Are you suggesting that the Democrats would lie to the American people so they could eliminate jobs in businesses that favor Republicans to create jobs that would favor Democrats? :hihi:

    Ding, ding, ding, ding!

    If the climate is rising, I'm guessing it's from the hot air coming from the likes of the Al Gores of the world.

    Here's a factual picture from Roswell. :grin:

    [​IMG]

    Keep the world safe and clean but stop the hoax!
     
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page