The neoliberal way of the big corporations: a) "Nope, no such thing as climate change" - b) "Nope those scientists don't know shit / contradict each other / are paid by the global hippie conspiracy" [climate change becomes an undeniable fact] c) "We can't do jack to improve anything, we must invest in preparing for the consequences which must be paid by consumers and helped and funded by the government we're so eagerly hiding our money from" - d) "Only hippie knowitalls would even consider to cut down on anything, thats not fucking american, they are the problem, we have the solution, now pay us, peasants". Business as usual.
As to the links: don't right click and copy the address from the google results, go to the very page and then copy the link. Or extract from the 2nd. http to the first &, that should work.
There is One study saying there is growth to two sections of the Antarctic, the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica. The overall melting rate isn't as bad as feared but it could and will get worse if things don't change. Glaciers themselves are melting, but at a slower rate than feared.
There is more than one study. One study cannot cover two places (Arctic and Antarctic). How about the fact that a group went to Antarctica a couple years ago to document the shrinking ice and got their boat trapped in all the ice that wasn't supposed to be there? How about the fact that every prediction of doom and gloom has never happened? According to several supposed smart scientists in the 80's and 90's we were supposed to be pretty much dead by now. Nothing they said would happen has happened.
NASA contradicts itself with every study. I'm too busy to look right now but I'm quite sure you can just as easily find studies and news releases that say the opposite. I say I'm sure because I have seen them.
Saving the planet from global warming and pollution isn't just about polar bears and ice caps. This is about clean drinking water, endangered species, wildlife habit, and natural resource depletion, one thing alone might not seem too bad right now. We're not the creatures that's dieing out yet and we still have so much luxury. Wait until we don't have clean drinking water, in countries that have been so privileged for decades. Wait until we have massive food shortages. A misconception about how global warming might work is everything heating and not stopping. How would you like a new ice age instead? No place to grow food, no proper shelter, watching billions of people die and all we can try to do is keep ourselves alive. We had a mini ice age once, right after the black plague. The human race could certainly live through it again, but it doesn't make it preferable.
Neither do I. But I've actually heard people say that since it still snows in Canada and Greenland ect than how can there possible be a global warming problem.
That's weird. I checked the links when I posted them. Maybe something is up with FS?
Anyway, we could trade articles from now until the next ice age. I'm sure there is one that says one thing for every one that says the other. Chances are I could show you video of these climatologists doctoring the data and you would still cling to your beliefs. Global warming is a religion for all intents. I mean no offense, and I doubt you are unintelligent; you simply have been lied to.
Nope. Theres not nearly as many saying the one thing, as there are saying the other. That's part of your general problem with basic logic. Only because there are two opinions, doesn't make it a 50/50 probability. Especially when there is an academic, peer reviewed total majority for one opinion, Your laziness to read for more than 1,5 minutes in a row doesn't help either.
It's pretty bad this guestwho seems to be the only one with any fucking sense here. You're being lied to people. Why in hell do you people only ever want to believe the absolute worst, but you choose to ignore any good news or truth you are given? Not knowing something because you were never taught it is excusable, but you make a conscious decision to refuse to even think about the possibility that your happy little memes might be wrong. That is inexcusable. That is stupidity.
And this funsubstanceuser fucker, you are nothing but a childish asshole. You do nothing on these posts but call people names and try to stir shit up. Grow the fuck up and shut the fuck up.
Yeah I know but I don't take him seriously, I'm just having a little fun. I believe in free speech and everyone is entitled to their opinion so I guess @funsubstanceuser can go on about whatever he wants.
Wow, I'm totally convinced that wasn't you posing as guest to pat yourself on the back. Absolutely nothing at all would indicate that. How would I even get that idea?
.
.
.
.
Seriously kiddo, you need your sleep. And don't do that shit you're doing. It keeps you awake and it makes you sort of hysterical. And crazy.
Oh, wait, what... these articles have really changed everything. I mean, its on the internet, right? Thanks for enlightening me, I never knew I was lied to by those hippies.
.
You REALLY don't get it, do you? Look, theres many opinions and factual statements on the internet. Some say this, some say something else. Some say, the earth is flat, other say we live on the inside of a hollow ball, some say its round and we're on the outside. Not all of that can be true, you understand that? So here's an idea: stick to - tadah - science. Listen to what a huge majority of those people think to be true, who have studied a certain topic, and who present their findings to a peer review of other experts. And if a very close to 100% majority shares one opinion, its very, very likely to be as true, as can be determined. Of course you're free to do it differently. Why not google just as long as some short view intro fits your agenda and then proudly post it somewhere to make a point. Whatever...
Advanced: because scientists are philosophers in the very meaning of the word, and because of advanced methods, what they find to be true can change. But thats not contradiction, not when you apply a time frame. So maybe a majority of scientists have another opinion today, than a majority of scientists 40 years ago. This is NOT scientists contradicting themselves, ist science in effect. But I guess I already lost you long ago. So keep on googling and present your self as the clever guy you are. After all, its called FUNsubstance. Oh, and don't forget to get more sleep, liquid and vitamins.
Climate scientists do not adjust their theories to fit the facts; they adjust the facts to fit their theories. When their predictions fail to come true they simply ignore it and make new predictions, and the answer is always more taxes and government control.
The fact that you reference "opinion" in your defense of pseudo-science proves my point much more than yours. Science is empirical:
"em·pir·i·cal
əmˈpirik(ə)l/
adjective
based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic."
Real scientists are absolutely not philosophers.
Real science changes only when the research shows new facts.
Yes science uses theory, but to explain facts not to establish them. Theories change when they are not borne out by research. Research has failed to prove global warming exists.
Ever heard of the concept of current opinion in specific sciences? And did you know the translation of philosophy is "love of wisdom" (including knowledge in general), which is THE major motivation of every dedicated scientist? No? Then why are you trying to lecture anyone, when it's so obvious how much you know of what you're talking about?
.
And how exactly does one "adjust facts"? That's what you find in those web presences of tabloid fishwrapper, neocapitalistic magazines and wacko-shacks you're linking here. Oh the irony...
Usually it would be your responsibilty to prove that we can.
http://m.earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/PolarIce/polar_ice2.php
Here's something science has shown us:https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum&ved=0ahUKEwjurOik8K_LAhVMzGMKHYdUD5YQFggmMAI&usg=AFQjCNEMfwLnXvo727ZL-_owOKMNOih74A&sig2=DGZtOfLEwH_IOpBolyfkXg
Here's another to dispute:https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://m.theregister.co.uk/2015/09/16/arctic_ice_hits_fourth_lowest_area_on_record_records_go_back_cough_34_years/&ved=0ahUKEwjurOik8K_LAhVMzGMKHYdUD5YQFgg5MAg&usg=AFQjCNH7RKHs_FxXYEx4ZKrnjLC9zR98vg&sig2=uSzRzCOp4CTHJHuPA2b2pA
The Earth's climate is cyclical. We get warmer and cooler naturally. Do you really think the dinosaurs did something to cause the previous ice ages, or could have done something to prevent them?
Anyway, we could trade articles from now until the next ice age. I'm sure there is one that says one thing for every one that says the other. Chances are I could show you video of these climatologists doctoring the data and you would still cling to your beliefs. Global warming is a religion for all intents. I mean no offense, and I doubt you are unintelligent; you simply have been lied to.
And this funsubstanceuser fucker, you are nothing but a childish asshole. You do nothing on these posts but call people names and try to stir shit up. Grow the fuck up and shut the fuck up.
.
.
.
.
Seriously kiddo, you need your sleep. And don't do that shit you're doing. It keeps you awake and it makes you sort of hysterical. And crazy.
http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/225798861/Newsweek-s-Global-Cooling-Article-From-April-28-1975
.
You REALLY don't get it, do you? Look, theres many opinions and factual statements on the internet. Some say this, some say something else. Some say, the earth is flat, other say we live on the inside of a hollow ball, some say its round and we're on the outside. Not all of that can be true, you understand that? So here's an idea: stick to - tadah - science. Listen to what a huge majority of those people think to be true, who have studied a certain topic, and who present their findings to a peer review of other experts. And if a very close to 100% majority shares one opinion, its very, very likely to be as true, as can be determined. Of course you're free to do it differently. Why not google just as long as some short view intro fits your agenda and then proudly post it somewhere to make a point. Whatever...
The fact that you reference "opinion" in your defense of pseudo-science proves my point much more than yours. Science is empirical:
"em·pir·i·cal
əmˈpirik(ə)l/
adjective
based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic."
Real scientists are absolutely not philosophers.
Real science changes only when the research shows new facts.
Yes science uses theory, but to explain facts not to establish them. Theories change when they are not borne out by research. Research has failed to prove global warming exists.
.
And how exactly does one "adjust facts"? That's what you find in those web presences of tabloid fishwrapper, neocapitalistic magazines and wacko-shacks you're linking here. Oh the irony...