Dark Winter.....climate change

[D2Cat]

Has anyone read this book? https://www.amazon.com/dp/1630060356/?tag=cattletoday00-20

I was looking on line to find a copy of Us News And World Report and Time magazines that were published in the '70's. Both had articles about how in , I think it was 30 years but may have been 50 years, it would be too cold to live as we know it.

Maybe all the ruckus started with Al Gore, the UN and political control, the articles were removed from the internet?

 

[TennesseeTuxedo]

Global "cooling" was all the rage in the late 70's.

 

[wbvs58]

Science always comes up with the results that they think will attract more funding to keep them in their sheltered workshops in the universities.

Ken

 

[Jogeephus]

After the fall of the soviet union scores of soviet weather stations were closed and data no longer added to the data pool. This isn't mentioned often of course if you were peddling global cooling I think it would be headline news.

 

[boondocks]

Science always comes up with the results that they think will attract more funding to keep them in their sheltered workshops in the universities.

Ken

With all due respect, I have to say I'm a bit bummed to hear someone with your background bashing science and scientists (even if it is the vogue). Are we even half that skeptical of, say, preachers who use the fear of G-d to keep parishioners in their seats and the tithes flowing? Or advertising folks who work mighty hard to convince us we must have the new widget? Or politicians who swear they can build massive new infrastructure while also lowering taxes and paying off the national debt?

I certainly don't think scientists are perfect but I'd trust them over any of the above individuals any day of the week.

 

[True Grit Farms]

Science always comes up with the results that they think will attract more funding to keep them in their sheltered workshops in the universities.

Ken

With all due respect, I have to say I'm a bit bummed to hear someone with your background bashing science and scientists (even if it is the vogue). Are we even half that skeptical of, say, preachers who use the fear of G-d to keep parishioners in their seats and the tithes flowing? Or advertising folks who work mighty hard to convince us we must have the new widget? Or politicians who swear they can build massive new infrastructure while also lowering taxes and paying off the national debt?

I certainly don't think scientists are perfect but I'd trust them over any of the above individuals any day of the week.

The large majority of scientists are liberals and will lie and cheat to attain the results they want. Then when you add money into the equation "don't believe nothing you hear, and only half of what you see" rings very true.
No one makes you support the preachers, churches you give not taxed. The government needs to cut spending in R&D, let the private sector spend the money and buy the technology back from them. You know something like the drug and technology companies are doing now.
Why are liberals so ignorant? Cutting spending works way better than increasing taxes. The fact is our new POTUS will leave office with less than HE started with. The last two dumocrats came out very wealthy, WHY?

 

[jedstivers]

Science always comes up with the results that they think will attract more funding to keep them in their sheltered workshops in the universities.

Ken

With all due respect, I have to say I'm a bit bummed to hear someone with your background bashing science and scientists (even if it is the vogue). Are we even half that skeptical of, say, preachers who use the fear of G-d to keep parishioners in their seats and the tithes flowing? Or advertising folks who work mighty hard to convince us we must have the new widget? Or politicians who swear they can build massive new infrastructure while also lowering taxes and paying off the national debt?

I certainly don't think scientists are perfect but I'd trust them over any of the above individuals any day of the week.

You need to study a little more boondocks. Do a little research on the researchers.

 

[Caustic Burno]

There is a segment of the scientific community that thinks we are headed for another little ice age. That train of thought does flow with the political leanings of those in control of the news.
The irony to me is they can't predict the weather and the masses cling to every utterance on climate for the next century.
The only job you can be 100% wrong and keep it is a weatherman

 

[alisonb]

The large majority of scientists are liberals and will lie and cheat to attain the results they want.

Why are liberals so ignorant?

One only shows their own ignorance by making wide sweeping statements like these.

 

[pdfangus]

it is a fact that a lot university research today is funded by entities with an interest in the outcome....

most universities today are more driven by profit centers than they are by the principles of education and learning...

In our state the extension service is being given lip service as it is slowly being dismantled....

 

[TexasBred]

Science always comes up with the results that they think will attract more funding to keep them in their sheltered workshops in the universities.

Ken

With all due respect, I have to say I'm a bit bummed to hear someone with your background bashing science and scientists (even if it is the vogue). Are we even half that skeptical of, say, preachers who use the fear of G-d to keep parishioners in their seats and the tithes flowing? Or advertising folks who work mighty hard to convince us we must have the new widget? Or politicians who swear they can build massive new infrastructure while also lowering taxes and paying off the national debt?

I certainly don't think scientists are perfect but I'd trust them over any of the above individuals any day of the week.

The problem is when these "so called scientist" forget about science and begin to preach conjecture. They lose all credibility.,

 

[greybeard]

I never really believed in Global Warming till I noticed all the snowflakes had begun melting back in early November..

 

[Caustic Burno]

I never really believed in Global Warming till I noticed all the snowflakes had begun melting back in early November..

That was good.

 

[boondocks]

Science always comes up with the results that they think will attract more funding to keep them in their sheltered workshops in the universities.

Ken

With all due respect, I have to say I'm a bit bummed to hear someone with your background bashing science and scientists (even if it is the vogue). Are we even half that skeptical of, say, preachers who use the fear of G-d to keep parishioners in their seats and the tithes flowing? Or advertising folks who work mighty hard to convince us we must have the new widget? Or politicians who swear they can build massive new infrastructure while also lowering taxes and paying off the national debt?

I certainly don't think scientists are perfect but I'd trust them over any of the above individuals any day of the week.

The problem is when these "so called scientist" forget about science and begin to preach conjecture. They lose all credibility.,

Science is about hypothesis, testing the hypothesis, analyzing the results and seeing whether they support the hypothesis, or not. It's not about faith, or preaching. Sometimes new facts, new discoveries, or new research tools expand the scope of what we know, to an extent that changes in scientific theory are warranted. I'm currently reading about the new CRISPR technology, or gene editing, with equal degree of fascination and fear.
In my several years of study, as well as following this area, it's become clear that science more often goes off track to chase profit than to chase ideology, and that this is most prevalent in the area of pharmaceutical and medical devices.
Honestly, think about the changes that science and technology have brought in the past 100 years, and where we would be without those. If you need to re-discover your sense of "faith" about science, watch October Sky, Never Cry Wolf, or the great new movie Hidden Figures.
We would be saluting Putin today* if not for science's contribution to the cold war.
*some say we are, but that's another story and I don't want to get this locked

 

[boondocks]

I never really believed in Global Warming till I noticed all the snowflakes had begun melting back in early November..

That was good.

Huh. Saw some pics Sat. of a pretty good blizzard. :cboy:

 

[greybeard]

Looked like an ice queen convention to me.

 

[TexasBred]

With all due respect, I have to say I'm a bit bummed to hear someone with your background bashing science and scientists (even if it is the vogue). Are we even half that skeptical of, say, preachers who use the fear of G-d to keep parishioners in their seats and the tithes flowing? Or advertising folks who work mighty hard to convince us we must have the new widget? Or politicians who swear they can build massive new infrastructure while also lowering taxes and paying off the national debt?

I certainly don't think scientists are perfect but I'd trust them over any of the above individuals any day of the week.

The problem is when these "so called scientist" forget about science and begin to preach conjecture. They lose all credibility.,

Science is about hypothesis, testing the hypothesis, analyzing the results and seeing whether they support the hypothesis, or not. It's not about faith, or preaching. Sometimes new facts, new discoveries, or new research tools expand the scope of what we know, to an extent that changes in scientific theory are warranted. I'm currently reading about the new CRISPR technology, or gene editing, with equal degree of fascination and fear.
In my several years of study, as well as following this area, it's become clear that science more often goes off track to chase profit than to chase ideology, and that this is most prevalent in the area of pharmaceutical and medical devices.
Honestly, think about the changes that science and technology have brought in the past 100 years, and where we would be without those. If you need to re-discover your sense of "faith" about science, watch October Sky, Never Cry Wolf, or the great new movie Hidden Figures.
We would be saluting Putin today* if not for science's contribution to the cold war.
*some say we are, but that's another story and I don't want to get this locked

I'm fully aware of what "science" is and do date little science has been used in the global warming BS. The entire premise is based on computer models which do not contain enough historical data to even be remotely reliable.

 

[pdfangus]

WE MUST ALSO FACTOR IN

over the last quarter century at least.....maybe longer

the decline in journalism...
and the corresponding uptick in sensationalism and market and ideological driven agendas in media.

truth be hanged....what will sell the most ads and generate the most hype and get us the best ratings or who best represents our media views....

 

[M-5]

The problem is when these "so called scientist" forget about science and begin to preach conjecture. They lose all credibility.,

Science is about hypothesis, testing the hypothesis, analyzing the results and seeing whether they support the hypothesis, or not. It's not about faith, or preaching. Sometimes new facts, new discoveries, or new research tools expand the scope of what we know, to an extent that changes in scientific theory are warranted. I'm currently reading about the new CRISPR technology, or gene editing, with equal degree of fascination and fear.
In my several years of study, as well as following this area, it's become clear that science more often goes off track to chase profit than to chase ideology, and that this is most prevalent in the area of pharmaceutical and medical devices.
Honestly, think about the changes that science and technology have brought in the past 100 years, and where we would be without those. If you need to re-discover your sense of "faith" about science, watch October Sky, Never Cry Wolf, or the great new movie Hidden Figures.
We would be saluting Putin today* if not for science's contribution to the cold war.
*some say we are, but that's another story and I don't want to get this locked

I'm fully aware of what "science" is and do date little science has been used in the global warming BS. The entire premise is based on computer models which do not contain enough historical data to even be remotely reliable.

I would really like to say what I think about climate change and these retarded loons that buy the crap. But I'll be nice

 

[pdfangus]

oh I think the climate changes.
there is evidence of several ices ages over time
there is evidence of significant warm periods between the ice ages.
I think we are somewhere the scale of an inter ice age warm spell now.
what causes the ice ages? I dunno
some theories are meteor strikes changing the earth....I dunno but it is plausible.
will it happen again...can't rule it out...might be today.
will we survive....liberal answer is not with Trump as president.
real answer is probably not.
Is human kind actions enough to influence the climate....
I dunno....I think we should all act responsibly and do our best not to make things worse....
but there is the law of unintended consequences to every action.
within conservation it is generally an accepted fact that poor farming practices added to the ten year drought exacerbated the dust bowl days....
but I have seen mother nature do more damage in a 24 hour rain fall than any farmer could do in 20 years...
have photos of tropical storm Gaston damage from a few years back.
all people like to think they know it all and are smarter than xyz....dam few are...
me....I am a backsliding dumbass and I know it...