Global Warming Discussion (32 Viewers)

[satfootball]

no rain in iran. temperature has increased from summer and winter isnot cold.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Dino_mk]

Ok, I thought it might be. I guess YouTube experts and conspiracist sites sound more attractive when the reality isn't very nice and cause people an amount of inconvenience.

They are good enough to win Nobel prize but if they dare to say something against the popular flow, same scientists turn into YouTube experts and conspiracy theorists. Gottchya!

 

[Seven]

It's not corect that severe climate changes only occur in thousands of years. For example there is well documented period in medieval Europe where mini ice age occurred causing failure of crops and food production for couple of years followed by great hunger all over the continent.

And that "scientific consensus" is bullshit promoted by politicians, journalists, government authorities and influencers-environmentalists. There are more than two thousands scientists who oppose the reasons or if climate change should be called crisis.

I don't claim any of the sides is absolutely right or wrong. I just want to have opposite arguments and discussion.
Somehow closing the cow farms in Nederland, Denmark, UK etc. doesn't appear to me like right solution for stopping the climate change!

What do they gain by lying?

 

[Raphaël]

There were 3 snowflakes today in Lyon.

 

[Lion]

What do they gain by lying?

gain? they are losing money and jobs! but hey the government is out to get u!

 

[Dino_mk]

What do they gain by lying?

Money, I guess.

 

[JuveJay]

They are good enough to win Nobel prize but if they dare to say something against the popular flow, same scientists turn into YouTube experts and conspiracy theorists. Gottchya!

You mean like John Clauser, the theoretical physicist, I presume? I wonder what Barack Obama or Henry Kissinger said about global warming.

I think a lot of this is down to the media especially in the West giving more coverage to skeptics (in many fields) than they do to scientists, simply because it's more entertaining and sparking of debate, to feel like goverment, big pharma, oil companies etc are all out for us. The concensus isn't that interesting.

 

[JuveJay]

There were 3 snowflakes today in Lyon.

Didn't know the Allegriphiles were in France today.

 

[Post Ironic]

Money, I guess.

And you think big corporations aren’t funding the few “experts” you bring up that are arguing against man-made climate change? Lol

 

[Seven]

Money, I guess.

How?

 

[campionesidd]

Money, I guess.

Give me a fucking break.
The climate change deniers are the ones who are being backed by big money. The fossil fuel industry is worth multiple trillions of dollars.

 

[Dino_mk]

And you think big corporations aren’t funding the few “experts” you bring up that are arguing against man-made climate change? Lol

I never said that, I only want to be able to hear both sides.

I think a lot of this is down to the media especially in the West giving more coverage to skeptics (in many fields) than they do to scientists, simply because it's more entertaining and sparking of debate, to feel like goverment, big pharma, oil companies etc are all out for us. The concensus isn't that interesting.

Maybe you are right and debate should be sparked.

 

[Dino_mk]

How?

Taxpayers money should be spent somewhere. Carbon emission tax also.

 

[icemaη]

And you think big corporations aren’t funding the few “experts” you bring up that are arguing against man-made climate change? Lol

The CO2 Coalition

 

[U Picciriddu]

You mean like John Clauser, the theoretical physicist, I presume? I wonder what Barack Obama or Henry Kissinger said about global warming.

I think a lot of this is down to the media especially in the West giving more coverage to skeptics (in many fields) than they do to scientists, simply because it's more entertaining and sparking of debate, to feel like goverment, big pharma, oil companies etc are all out for us. The concensus isn't that interesting.

Honestly it’s very much the opposite. Very little room for different voices. If I look to themes that dominated the political debate last years; Covid, LGBTQ and climate there was little room for people going against measurements. If you see someone going against it you usually get the rhetorics you used a comment or 6 ago; the conspiracy card or being ridiculed.

 

[Post Ironic]

Honestly it’s very much the opposite. Very little room for different voices. If I look to themes that dominated the political debate last years; Covid, LGBTQ and climate there was little room for people going against measurements. If you see someone going against it you usually get the rhetorics you used a comment or 6 ago; the conspiracy card or being ridiculed.

Aside from the fact that in the US Fox News is the most watched news channel out there and has been banging on the Covid fake, vaccines bad, climate change is a hoax, LGBTQ agenda is evil, etc.

And it’s the same here in Canada with the Postmedia group, which owns like all the major newspapers in the country, and with National Post online news as well. We call them Fox News North.

 

[U Picciriddu]

Aside from the fact that in the US Fox News is the most watched news channel out there and has been banging on the Covid fake, vaccines bad, climate change is a hoax, LGBTQ agenda is evil, etc.

And it’s the same here in Canada with the Postmedia group, which owns like all the major newspapers in the country, and with National Post online news as well. We call them Fox News North.

I really can’t speak for your part of the world. Here there’s a more right oriented program everyday between 8 and 10 (when everyone is working), after diner there are two consecutive left oriented programs. It’s been a topic of discussion.

 

[Dostoevsky]

Turns out all threads are more interesting than Juve matches.

 

[campionesidd]

You can’t have a debate with someone who says 1 plus 1 equals 3.

Show the evidence or prove it and then we’ll have a conversation.

 

[Lion]

so wait the logic here is that governments invented climate hoax to charge more money on taxes, when they could simply accept more billions of dollars of easily developed existing fuel companies?

is this the logic here, they want less money when they could have easily made more money on current easily producable fuel?