Global Warming Petition Project - New England Patriots Forums

***NEPatriot*** · 05-19-2009, 12:32 PM

Quote:

The purpose of the Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climatological damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

Publicists at the United Nations, Mr. Al Gore, and their supporters frequently claim that only a few “skeptics” remain – skeptics who are still unconvinced about the existence of a catastrophic human-caused global warming emergency.
It is evident that 31,478 Americans with university degrees in science – including 9,029 PhDs, are not "a few." Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,478 American scientists are not “skeptics.”
These scientists are instead convinced that the human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity and that government action on the basis of this hypothesis would unnecessarily and counterproductively damage both human prosperity and the natural environment of the Earth.

I hope that I won't pay any fraud tax for Al Gore's BS and Obama's new fuel and emission plan..

***BelichickFan*** · 05-19-2009, 12:40 PM

But Nancy said it's decided. She's right, they're all wrong.

***NEPatriot*** · 05-19-2009, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BelichickFan

But Nancy said it's decided. She's right, they're all wrong.

When did Nancy, Al Gore, and Obama become 'scientists'?

efin98 · 05-19-2009, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NEPatriot

When did Nancy, Al Gore, and Obama become 'scientists'?

When Al won the peace prize.

***NEPatriot*** · 05-19-2009, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by efin98

When Al won the peace prize.

He got it because of anti-Bush war rehetoric. He didn't get it because he put his life in the front line so that we can have peace.

Al Gore is an internet inventor. We OWNED him that much.

***apple strudel*** · 05-19-2009, 04:45 PM

Let's use our brains. This is easy to debunk if we're reasonable being (i.e., governed by strict rules of logic).

This article does a good job of that by bringing up several inherent fallacies in such a petition.

Debunking the Oregon Petition Project

Specific fallacies are appeal to authority and appeal to false authority. There is another claim that previous versions of the petition included falsified signatures (oops).

So formally we already begin to have problems. Science is not settled with petitions, it is settled with publications and experiments.

Are there other problems? Apparently so, according to the Sierra Club. Who asserts that there is scientific consensus.

Ten Popular Myths About Global Climate Change

But wait, it gets better. At least one of these petitions is a hoax.

Ten Popular Myths About Global Climate Change

Think and reason before you blindly believe, people.

Wildo7 · 05-19-2009, 05:06 PM

People who deny Global Climate Change do so because doing something about it involves regulating the sacred free market, not because they have carefully weighed both sides of the issue.

Holy Diver · 05-19-2009, 05:20 PM

the real logic lies in the 2 actual options we have, with each option having a yes or no answer. Thus 4 possible outcomes....it is indeed LOGIC.

1) Global warming is not real - We, as humans, do nothing -

Result: We spend no money, and go about our time on earth.

2) Global warming is not real - We, as humans, attempt to stop it -

Result: we spend billions trying to clean the evironment, since the threat was not real, we go about our time living on Earth. Along the way we have cleaned up the planet, and made our environment better.

3) Global warming is real - We, as humans, attempt to stop it -

Result: we spend Billions to combat the effects, hopefully we are smart enough to reverse the course, and we go about living our time on Earth. Along the way we have cleaned up the planet, and made our environment better.

2) Global warming real - We, as humans, do nothing -

Result: we are FUKCED. we all die.

without any scientific data, each scenario has a 25% chance of success. If we attempt to fix this problem, the cost is money, the benefit is saving of the globe, a cleaner environment, and possible technological evolution. The percentage of a positive outcome is 75%. the only downside is that we will spend money on science and attempting to clean the Earth.

by doing nothing, you are hedging your bet at 50-50, the downside being the worst case scenario of the planet not being able to sustain human life. The upside will be that thousands of scientists will be wrong, and we will not spend money on protecting the environment.

its all math.

***patsfan13*** · 05-19-2009, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildo7

People who deny Global Climate Change do so because doing something about it involves regulating the sacred free market, not because they have carefully weighed both sides of the issue.

It mostly a matter of science, there is no evidence the models of the climate alarnmist are accurate.

***apple strudel*** · 05-19-2009, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

It mostly a matter of science, there is no evidence the models of the climate alarnmist are accurate.

Disappearing species, reduced biodiversity, and melting ice caps and glaciers are hardly alarmism. And you're stuck on the models but that's hardly any meaningful criticism. We've been over that one before. And please, let's quit the inflammatory language (alarmists - lol) and make real arguments, for once.