Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Are you now, or have you ever been, a denier of AGW?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Whiskey_Clear" data-source="post: 143865" data-attributes="member: 735"><p>Its a little comical to me when the problems with skeptics models "prove" the skeptics wrong. But on the other hand the problems with alarmists models are shrugged off. There is no accurate model, not to date, by either side. </p><p></p><p>Yet policy makers are willing, some are desiring, to shut down the use of fossil fuels based on these shoddy models. A move that would have severe consequences for our economy.</p><p></p><p>There are some loons on both sides of the debate. There is arguable science used by both sides. There is a majority opinion on the debate but the science isn't settled on AGW, it's still just a theory. The science is pretty settled on the possibility of a runaway greenhouse effect....that ain't close to happening. </p><p></p><p>The economy MIGHT be harmed if the alarmists are correct.</p><p>The economy WILL be harmed if the alarmists are successful in enacting their restrictions on fossil fuel consumption.</p><p></p><p>And proponents of AGW do little to sway my opinion on the matter when they refuse to argue the science of the opposition and instead attack the character of those on the other side of the debate. "If you can't debate them...just try and discredit them."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Whiskey_Clear, post: 143865, member: 735"] Its a little comical to me when the problems with skeptics models "prove" the skeptics wrong. But on the other hand the problems with alarmists models are shrugged off. There is no accurate model, not to date, by either side. Yet policy makers are willing, some are desiring, to shut down the use of fossil fuels based on these shoddy models. A move that would have severe consequences for our economy. There are some loons on both sides of the debate. There is arguable science used by both sides. There is a majority opinion on the debate but the science isn't settled on AGW, it's still just a theory. The science is pretty settled on the possibility of a runaway greenhouse effect....that ain't close to happening. The economy MIGHT be harmed if the alarmists are correct. The economy WILL be harmed if the alarmists are successful in enacting their restrictions on fossil fuel consumption. And proponents of AGW do little to sway my opinion on the matter when they refuse to argue the science of the opposition and instead attack the character of those on the other side of the debate. "If you can't debate them...just try and discredit them." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What's the good word?
Post reply
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Are you now, or have you ever been, a denier of AGW?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top