Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

What drives climate change?

damn_registrars (1103043) writes | about 10 months ago

User Journal 22

Turns out, the sun hasn't had much to do with it since at least 1900. Who can I count on to come over first and tell me this is just a leftist conspiracy?Turns out, the sun hasn't had much to do with it since at least 1900. Who can I count on to come over first and tell me this is just a leftist conspiracy?

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I'm not sure (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#45771193)

You have only produced a link; are you saying that all URLs are leftist conspiracies?

"If only there were some [ace.mu.nu] ...natural mechanism by which to explain variations in global temperature. It would have to be massive, though. On the scale of our own Sun."

My personal favorite angle is that, after years of ManBearPiggery, the term has been reduced to "Climate Change". How are you going to gainsay that? Who would contend that climate is constant, and seasons do not exist? I stand in awe of the rhetorical genius on display. Anyone disagreeing with "Climate Change" is clearly engaging in a "homophobic rant", no?

Re:I'm not sure (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about 10 months ago | (#45771329)

"If only there were some...natural mechanism by which to explain variations in global temperature. It would have to be massive, though. On the scale of our own Sun."

Did you pay even the slightest bit of attention to what I linked to? They have evaluated actual data and found that the variations in temperature are beyond what we have seen from the sun. They have looked at one thousand years of climate data and found that the past 100 have been well outside the variance that could be attributed to the sun.

Who would contend that climate is constant, and seasons do not exist?

You appear to be confusing climate with weather here. That might be part of your problem.

Anyone disagreeing with "Climate Change" is clearly engaging in a "homophobic rant", no?

Perhaps if they said that homosexuals were "all full of climate change". Otherwise, no.

Re:I'm not sure (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#45774257)

You appear to be confusing climate with weather here.

In the immortal words of Instapundit [pjmedia.com] : "I'll believe it's a crisis when the people telling me it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis."
Until then, as with so much of your output, it's just another wall the bulls hit.

Re:I'm not sure (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#45771773)

From his comment: They have looked at one thousand years of climate data and found that the past 100 have been well outside the variance that could be attributed to the sun.

Welp, there ya go... Wilson... The man rules from the grave

Re:I'm not sure (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#45774271)

Tell me this: ObamaCare; was it ever not going to fail? I guess the naïve hope was that the Information Age was going to be the end of scams.
But here's a litmus test for you: anybody that wants to impart wisdom does it via appeal to intellect, not fear & guilt.

Re:I'm not sure (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#45775485)

'ObamaCare' is bullshit, a continuation of ancient themes, obvious since the very beginning. And your tea party wackos did an excellent job of discrediting all the opposition. Hired provocateurs, it looks like to me. ...anybody that wants to impart wisdom does it via appeal to intellect, not fear & guilt.

Yes, they don't blame dead people from the past, or other things that don't even exist, for the events of today. But fear and guilt are what prop up your systems of protection for the privileged few. Certain.. er.. 'phobias', for example :-)

Re:I'm not sure (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#45779129)

And your tea party wackos did an excellent job of discrediting all the opposition.

Can you be less specific? You were far too close to communicating a point there.

Re:I'm not sure (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#45785733)

Can you be less specific?

Yes. I'll include your extremist Christians who want to bring us this [news24.com]

Re:I'm not sure (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#45786951)

I agree, as does St. Paul in the Roman epistle. The possessive in your reply is in error.

Re:I'm not sure (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#45788271)

Again you are wrong. It is Americans who are pushing for this. When things get a little rough here, they pick up and move to another corner.

As the song goes:

'Cause if my baby don't love me no more,
I know her sister will!

Re:I'm not sure (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#45789823)

It is Americans who are pushing for this.

Which explains why Phil Robertson was completely hung out to dry by Duck Dynasty fans.
Less snarkily, we're both in better shape if we eschew making claims about what Americans are pushing for.
(a) we all do what we do individually, collectivism be damned, and
(b) saying there is any one thing we're all pushing for is just specious.

Re:I'm not sure (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#45793595)

Ah, so sorry... What I meant to say is that all Islamists are terrorists

Re:I'm not sure (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#45795111)

But you didn't define "Islamist", so you probably don't mean any of the Muslims I've ever worked with.

Re:I'm not sure (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#45795667)

Ah yes, some of my best friends are Muslim... Did you hoe cotton with them? Were they singing (not the blues, of course) and happy?

Re:I'm not sure (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#45800037)

No, they were all: "Afghanistan sucks; we're only here for the money."

Re:I'm not sure (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#45800859)

Well waddya know, just like us... Or, they like Zappa too.

Re:I'm not sure (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about 10 months ago | (#45775709)

Tell me this: ObamaCare; was it ever not going to fail?

The last time that what became the Health Insurance Industry Bailout Act of 2010 had any chance of reforming health care for the better or even not generally sucking was when there was still going to be a single payer option in it. President Lawnchair torpedoed that himself by striking it out and caving to the demands of the Heritage Foundation. The then shot himself in the foot again afterwards by encouraging the conservative bill to go forward so that he could place something on his presidential record as having been enacted to help reform health care. He realized early in the process that the republicans were simply not going to vote for any health care related legislative proposal during his administration - he should have used that as an opportunity to rally the troops and get a meaningful bill through with only democrat support.

Instead he pushed a conservative bill through with only democrat support. To give credit where credit is due, this was brilliant political maneuvering - by the conservatives. This has pretty well completely destroyed any chance of real reform for at least a decade if not more. I can only imagine what the Christmas parties are like this year at Blue Cross / Blue Shield, Kaiser Permanente, and the like. If they weren't private companies we'd probably be seeing investigations reminiscent of Tailhook in 2014.

Oh no, we're going to have real reform (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#45778991)

It's been made inevitable now. The left-handed news is that the mind-numbing idiocy on display is such that the notion of the government being directly involved with the market, instead of merely undertaking minimal regulator functions, has been (hopefully) discredited.
These days, we have a government telling use we're entitled to everything, modulo the basic life, liberty & pursuit of happiness. Because these must be "managed", you understand. Because "fairness".
We could regain consciousness after all. I didn't need the 50-gallon anodized trash can, but, hey: that's what we elected.

Re:I'm not sure (1)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | about 10 months ago | (#45772667)

My personal favorite angle is that, after years of ManBearPiggery, the term has been reduced to "Climate Change".

"Global warming" and "climate change" refer to related but distinct phenomena, and climatologists have always used both terms with precise meanings. Here [skepticalscience.com] is a concise explanation. As a rule, it's a good idea to pay attention to the way scientists talk about things instead of the distorted version that gets filtered through the popular press.

Re:I'm not sure (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#45774281)

The level of Orwellian hooey associated with this topic is such that I can't hold back the laughter. See also my replies up-thread.

Re:I'm not sure (1)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | about 10 months ago | (#45776073)

Using precise terms to describe specific concepts is "Orwellian"? Riiight. Someone in this conversation is practicing the "black is white, war is peace, freedom is slavery" mentality, but I'm pretty sure it's not me.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?