A question for those of you on the right.

bbfreeburn

Active Member
Why is it that when a scientist comes out and says, "there will be an eclipse of the sun on such and such a date, visible during these hours, with x% totality," you believe them. BUt when a scientist says, "humans are at least in part responsible for the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere," it's a blatant left wing lie?
 

Djarum300

Addicted Member
Why is it that when a scientist comes out and says, "there will be an eclipse of the sun on such and such a date, visible during these hours, with x% totality," you believe them. BUt when a scientist says, "humans are at least in part responsible for the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere," it's a blatant left wing lie?
I don't know about blatant left wing lie. Fundamentally though, it's a tough sell since we've only been tracking CO2 levels for some time. It's like saying it's the most active hurricane season. We don't know what the hurricane season in Florida was like in 750 AD.
 

Good Times Good Times

Active Member
Why is it that when a scientist comes out and says, "there will be an eclipse of the sun on such and such a date, visible during these hours, with x% totality," you believe them. BUt when a scientist says, "humans are at least in part responsible for the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere," it's a blatant left wing lie?
Dude......there are people that believe dinosaurs walked with people and the universe is 6000 years old, Earth before the Sun etc..........
 

Djarum300

Addicted Member
I'd argue that it's not as much about how much we are putting into the air vs the amount of rain forest deforestation.
 

Greg T.

The Jizz Slinger
Let's take a look back and see how the Earth performed before man. Well, at least 4 or so ice ages, periods of warmth that could be described as balmy when the reptiles ruled, quite cool shortly thereafter, moving up to modern man there was a LARGE warming trend in the 1300 to 1500s range, scientists were worried about cooling and a possible ice age in the mid 70s to mid 80s, and now we're supposed to believe we're doing damage? We KNOW one thing. When someone says there's an eclipse coming, we watch it.
 

9andaWiggle

Addicted Member
Why is it that when a scientist comes out and says, "there will be an eclipse of the sun on such and such a date, visible during these hours, with x% totality," you believe them. BUt when a scientist says, "humans are at least in part responsible for the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere," it's a blatant left wing lie?
Part of it is that in your scenario, there's no opposing opinion. Scientists across the board agree on the eclipse and the timing. With other scientific research, we are more calloused... how many scientists paid by RJ Reynolds denied for years there were any significant health risks from smoking? How many paid scientists from Monsanto say modified foods are anything but perfectly safe? How about scientists and sugar / fat? Sugar scientists won out, fat was deemed evil, sugar went into everything, and now everybody is fat and diabetic.

Now with global warming, again there are dissenting opinions depending on who is paying for the "research", or what political party affiliation is behind publishing which results.

I'm with Greg. The earth has been heating and cooling for many cycles, long before man or the evil internal combustion engine was in the scene. I'm inclined to think most of it is due to a natural cycle and not man. That said, I'm open to the possibility that man is possibly accelerating the cycle. To what degree I'm not certain - although I'm skeptical it is anything too significant (for once, no doomsday theory from me! ;) ).
 

Greg T.

The Jizz Slinger
Part of it is that in your scenario, there's no opposing opinion. Scientists across the board agree on the eclipse and the timing. With other scientific research, we are more calloused... how many scientists paid by RJ Reynolds denied for years there were any significant health risks from smoking? How many paid scientists from Monsanto say modified foods are anything but perfectly safe? How about scientists and sugar / fat? Sugar scientists won out, fat was deemed evil, sugar went into everything, and now everybody is fat and diabetic.

Now with global warming, again there are dissenting opinions depending on who is paying for the "research", or what political party affiliation is behind publishing which results.

I'm with Greg. The earth has been heating and cooling for many cycles, long before man or the evil internal combustion engine was in the scene. I'm inclined to think most of it is due to a natural cycle and not man. That said, I'm open to the possibility that man is possibly accelerating the cycle. To what degree I'm not certain - although I'm skeptical it is anything too significant (for once, no doomsday theory from me! ;) ).
Sun spot activity is also a contributing factor. Solar flares and sun spots affect the amount of radiation with which the earth is bombarded. That radiation can warm the earth. More sun spots will cool the Earth because sun spots are cool areas that emit less radiation. In times of low sun spot activity the earth is bombarded with MORE radiation which warms the planet. These sun spots seem to run in 11 year minor cycles and 40 to 50 year major cycles. That's why back in the 80s people were actually claiming an ice age was coming.
 
Last edited:

9andaWiggle

Addicted Member
Hey now! The scientists I pay to research this have found that sheep farts and velcro mittens are actually healthy for the environment! ;)
 

Djarum300

Addicted Member
While I think CO2 production is up for debate, the amount of plant life due to deforestation is not. If the forests were left alone, we could have historical low CO2 levels.
 
Top