Originally Posted By: canvasback
Originally Posted By: nca225

Thats pretty telling too since most of the threads I respond too here are of a political nature. I can tell you have politics much to the right of mine and now I can tell that your politics doesn't leave room for other's differing opinions. You can miss a lot if your view is to narrow.

I admit I am culpable of that as well.


NCA225, without disavowing any of my political viewpoints, I'll point out that I have been rather explicit in this thread about the reasons for my suspicions about the evidence of man made climate change.

And none of them are based either on religious grounds as cpa thought, or political grounds as you are suggesting. Unless you feel that lying and manipulating and suppressing data are uniquely political.

In fact what I think I have seen is a strong argument in favour of a radical political/social agenda combined with a self serving financial agenda (read Al Gore et al) that uses man made climate change as the trojan horse. Can't find another plausible rational for the scientific subterfuge. Would love to hear one.

As far as missing things go, I try not to, but, like everyone I've ever met, I'm far from perfect.

I do try to separate opinion - man is in the process of creating a climate disaster - from fact - the earth's historical record, as much as we can understand it at this point, indicates substatial changes in climate, some of which have been quite sudden and some have taken many thousands of years to become apparent.


Canvas, as you have pointed out, words are important. I have not once suggested you hold your beliefs on climate changed based on your politics. I did point out that you seem to be judging me based on my posts not only on this thread but in what I have posted on threads concerning politics. I am unaware of similar behavior on my part directed towards you, here or in any other thread.

I think my point is clear and sound. As a whole, we cant even start a discussion on how to solve the issue, because an entrenched opposition to the science of climate change as manipulated by man made activities. The discussion does not even get off the ground, because of established talking points about the burden this would create on world economies and overregulation.

I will point out though that your skepticism seems to end with the IPCC science without questioning the motives of the "science" of the opposition. Who has the most to loose with addressing climate change? Its not governments, its the energy industry, whom as a whole is not beyond buying scientific results to keep their interests intact.


Forum: a medium of discussion/expression of ideas. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/forum