Registered On: September 7, 2015
Just had a titter reading Bucks’s posts on Blast Furnace.
Re: SST’s Poll, he suddenly thinks the data it provides should be taken seriously.
So a bunch of blokes pressing buttons on a football forum provide indisputable proof. The foremost authorities on climate change are a bunch of charlatans!
Selective data analysis?
Another problem is that he typically misrepresents what scientists claim with prejudice. Like his continued talk of how scientists make out it’s the end of the world. It isn’t the end of the world; the world will happily exist beyond us, most likely with life, like it has done after previous mass extinctions. The issue is that it brings hard challenges for us to face, where life will be difficult. I care greatly about helping humanity and would like to see us survive longer, even if the planet will be ok in the end.
Though the existence of Extinction Rebellion and environmentalists like it, who claim to be the representatives of science, give an easy opportunity for the ideologue to say this is what scientists say. The difference between scientific literature and Extinction Rebellion claims is easy to see for anyone versed, yet the science and scientists are easily mischaracterised as this sort of environmentalism by those who have an agenda.
On a side note, the climate was much hotter 300 million years ago when the Sun was weaker and CO2 levels were high. I wonder what caused such a hothouse atmosphere, given that adding CO2 has no effect on temperatures, apparently. It’s a brain buster. It must be that mysterious variable which controls climate and we don’t understand, despite no evidence for it affecting climate, like the Sun and CO2 do.