wealth leads to happiness. fartng leads to contentment.
Major Climate Change Rules the Trump Administration Is Reversing
- Thread starter mfb99
- Start date
- Status
Dunning Kruger
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 9, 2019
- Messages
- 567
They ar
Climate refugees? Get real. They are refugees of their own disastrous liberal policies. Theyre not fleeing climate change. What theyre fleeing... and theyd never admit it... is all of their wonderful "cultural diversity" and the crime and filth that goes along with it. Theyre moving to the whitest areas they can find. Thats not a coincidence.
Last edited:
BuzzH
Well-known member
A solid contender for "asshat of the year" with that post.
Nice work Dunning!
Nice work Dunning!
elkduds
Well-known member
In order to stay on the topic of this thread, I am limiting my response to Kruger to liking the Buzz H post above.
Dunning Kruger
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 9, 2019
- Messages
- 567
But am i wrong? No. Im not. I pointed out an uncomfortable truth. The fact that your only rebuttal is name calling just shows im right. Whats more, it shows you know it.
no. your not wrong.
climate change is simply the new word for global warming, it was changed because intelligent folks figured out it was a hoax. look back at the last hundred years and see how many sky is falling predictions that never came to pass, we've had from those who are supposedly "in the know."
we never got our ice age.
we're not under water yet.
california never sank into the ocean.(I was pulling for that one)
I guess , ozone thy healed itself.
there is not a doubt in my mind the world will not end in 7 years , with "climate change" either.
is it any wonder that scientists can't be taken seriously????????????????
Last edited:
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
The field of scientists as a whole does NOT subscribe to the doom & gloom prediction of the worlds imminent end. However, there is climate change, as there has been forever. But now there is broad consensus that human actions, systems, and practices are adversely impacting the earth's surface (land & oceans) and atmospheric conditions, including climate. To what extent, in what exact ways, and what can be done to mitigate are the real questions.
IMO the denial of man's impacts and the argument that the world will "not end in 7 years" is not positive nor constructive.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
What ever the climate refugees true motivations are, reality just bit some of them in the ass.
From Discover on Google
From Discover on Google
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Do you think the media and the left leaning politicians using this young lady to promote their agenda is positive and constructive S. A.?
What ever the climate refugees true motivations are, reality just bit some of them in the ass.
That is amazing. Isn't Browning right next to Glacier National Park? Maybe this will rebuild all the glaciers that have been lost in the last 150 years and are expected to be gone in 10 to 50 year (USGS and not some "climatologist" looking our a window). We got a crap load of snow in Havre as well. Get this, it even got below 30 for a bit. I know, crazy.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
I don't concur with the assertion phrasing of your question. I will refrain from responding to a question based on a conspiracy theory.
BuzzH
Well-known member
I'm sure your perceptions of "facts" and "truth" are quite popular at the klan rallies...
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
BigHornRam
Well-known member
"Unprecedented" according to Bullock and NPR.
Up To 4 Feet Of Snow: Montana Hit By 'Unprecedented' Winter Storm
Despite coming in September, the amount of snow that just fell over two days in Great Falls is second to only one other two-day total in the city, in any month.
www.npr.org
sapperJ24
Well-known member
It may be too late for this thread (and I realize I don't have any clout on this forum), but for those that believe that climate change is a hoax, is there any data set, graph, chart, etc. that would change your perspective or belief on climate change?
I don't ask as an attack, but as an honest and genuine question.
I am a biologist and and I want to repair the trust that some of the public has with the science community.
I want to avoid things like "is it any wonder that scientists can't be taken seriously???????????????? "
I want to avoid spending years conducting research, only to have the work turned into a misleading synopsis used by both sides of the political spectrum to further their agendas.
Rick Mace and his work on grizzly bears and road density comes to mind. His work has been summed up as 'bears don't cross roads' which has been used to try to remove all roads and logging on the national forests and used to discredit science as being extreme and political. edit: This is not what his work stated. I'll leave that for a different discussion.
I don't ask as an attack, but as an honest and genuine question.
I am a biologist and and I want to repair the trust that some of the public has with the science community.
I want to avoid things like "is it any wonder that scientists can't be taken seriously???????????????? "
I want to avoid spending years conducting research, only to have the work turned into a misleading synopsis used by both sides of the political spectrum to further their agendas.
Rick Mace and his work on grizzly bears and road density comes to mind. His work has been summed up as 'bears don't cross roads' which has been used to try to remove all roads and logging on the national forests and used to discredit science as being extreme and political. edit: This is not what his work stated. I'll leave that for a different discussion.
Last edited:
BigHornRam
Well-known member
I was discussing Ben's climate refugee comments and the impact this storm might have on their decision making to move to Montana, is all Craig. Just a fun observation to counter Ben's entertaining claims. Lighten up a little.
If your home is under water or facing extreme drought & pestilence, a snowstorm in Montana won't change your resolve to move to someplace more temperate.
This is a very good example of having an opinion about something that you don't know much about. Way to provide a teaching moment, Paul.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Interesting comments. Not really sure how you keep politics out of science, because scientists are humans and all humans have bias.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
'Must have missed that 4th grade science class when the teacher explained the Scientific Method. That is to what SapperJ is referring ... not the ideologically tainted science skewing the "facts" and "truths" espoused by many here and by many politically motivated "scientists".
- Status
