Changing the conversation from whether or not global warming is exacerbated by human activity to what kind of energy sources we use is a red herring.
I donāt mind. Iām not bothered when Daffy Ducks bill spins around when he gets whacked in the head either.
1 Like
You do not understand the link? You think a discussion of the primary cause of climate change is a diversion?
I mean no insult, Iām just confused. What do you think this is all about?
Anyway, lest this become acrimonious, Iāll bow out of the conversation. One knows beforehand the futility of these threads, and stillā¦
Good luck to you all.
You assume that there is a link.
I say prove it.
You claim that is an unreasonable standard, then try to switch the conversation to game theory and preferable energy sources.
I call it a red herring, because it is.
Its not a matter of āwhatās the worst that can happenā, its a matter of operating under the guise of science then glossing over a lack of evidence when the questions get too hard.
An impossibility, unfortunately. Iām afraid the closest we can get to āproofā in empirical matters is expert consensus.
In that case Iām going to start a consensus building campaign to blame global warming on argon concentrations.
It has much more going for it as undesirable atmospheric gasses go. That stuff holds heat like nothing else.
In that case, I shall refer to your consensus as SkyzykS and the Argonauts.
1 Like
To be a greenhouse gas, a molecule must absorb IR energy. Argon is a single atom, and is not IR active. It has no molecular vibration with an accompanying change in its dipole.
Hey! Wanna go to a convention? Nice location, all expenses paid by your uni?
All you have to do isā¦
Just for the hell of it, what would the conclusive proof be in your mind? Because we can argue about predictive modeling, model risk and probability distributions of model outputs all day long, but I have a hunch the goalposts will moveā¦
1 Like
I presume itās a gigantic conspiracy by ruthless, amoral communist nerds against the lone dissenting voice of the plucky underogs that are the Big Coal?
1 Like
Something slightly more precise than Bill Nye saying āGlobal Warming is real. Deal with it.ā Followed by a bunch of kids that actually believe he is a real science guy saying āYeah! Deal with it!ā.
Maybe something that actually predicts that if we continue to load the atmosphere with quantity X of co2 for time period Y it will result in temperature change Z.
Something simple, so people like me can just hang their hats on a solid hook and say " Okey Dokey! Thatās what the scientists said, so it must be true.".
You know how scientific debate and dissent confuses us simple folk.
Classy. Dancing on the graves of millions of people.
Playing the āYou so-called elites think youāre so much smarter than the rest of usā card?
Thatās awful Trumpy.
A personality that is slightly less arrogant and insulting? Consider getting one. I used to think you were handsome and nice even.
Surely Iām still handsome, albeit in an arrogant, insulting way?
The biggest problem with debating climate change is everyone wants to bring it back to the science, instead of how you deal with the issue, which is not science.
You say you want to do nothing about it - a valid option - youāre a science denier.
You say you want 100% renewables - another valid option - the science is bunk.
Anyway, I have a 30 year bet (currently 8 years in), for $10,000 that the population of the world wont be fewer than 1 million people.
Not because I donāt believe the science (I have zero idea and I accept the advice of the scientists) but because people get very emotional about this stuff.
And when I see someone is thinking with their heart and not their head, I like to exploit it for my personal advantage 
Dude. If world population is 1 million people in 30 years. Statistically speaking neither you nor your buddy will be there to collect/pay. That is a mass die-out scenario right there.
What do you know???!!!
The left reacts to GMOs the way the right reacts to global warming. Overwhelming scientific consensus that GMOs are safe, yet lefties freak out over them. Science deniers.
Itās not really possible for me to lose out in this one - other than being dead of course. But Iāll get to keep my $10,000, so jokeās on him.
Given the rate of inflation since 1971, by 2040 $10k might get you a happy mealā¦ maybe.