Trump Pulls Out of The Paris Accord

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

You can criticize sources all you want thus insulating yourselves from alternative points of view....just like the folks that you baselessly vilify for allegedly "only watching Fox News and listening to Rush Limbaugh."

But every once in a while, even mainstream media sources let things slip out:

http://www.tbo.com/news/blogs/the-ri...y-so-20140519/

Fully two-thirds of the 11,000 scientific articles Cook and Co. reviewed took no position on AGW. Then, when authors graded themselves, some flipped, but more than a third still declined to say yay or nay on AGW. Perhaps the discrepancy can be attributed to peer pressure. Even so, 64.5 percent — the number who did take a position — is a long way from 97 percent.

The history of the climate change debate seems to have a number of its advocates who aren't ashamed to "cook the books".

You can piss and moan all you want, Mike but the fact remains that your source is a loon who's major award is from the Washington 'Moonie' Times.

Really, bro. You should look up logical fallacy and learn not to embarrass yourself so much.

[Pio1980]

E.J. Dionne: Donald Trump and the diplomacy of narcissism - http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/536363...-trump-and-the

[Dondilion]

A more sober analysis: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...s-all-politics

[Chicks]

Originally Posted by bobabode

You can piss and moan all you want, Mike but the fact remains that your source is a loon who's major award is from the Washington 'Moonie' Times.

Really, bro. You should look up logical fallacy and learn not to embarrass yourself so much.

Yes, crackpots are never to be taken seriously. Real news outlets will always verify their sources, preferably with 3 or more reliable sources, which may take years to cultivate. Real journalism is one of the most important foundations of democracy, protected by the very first amendment to the constitution. Unfortunately, crackpots are also protected, but most educated folks can easily tell real journalism from crackpot nonsense. Trump supporters, sadly, cannot.

[Chicks]

Originally Posted by whell

You can criticize sources all you want thus insulating yourselves from alternative points of view....just like the folks that you baselessly vilify for allegedly "only watching Fox News and listening to Rush Limbaugh."

Anyone with half a brain knows that Limbaugh is a propagandist. He's very good at what he does, but he's really no better than the worst televangelist. You'd have to be quite ignorant to take him seriously; he's too smart to take himself seriously, but his foolish listeners keep the money flowing in, so he keeps slinging the shit.

[whell]

Originally Posted by bobabode

You can piss and moan all you want, Mike but the fact remains that your source is a loon who's major award is from the Washington 'Moonie' Times.

Really, bro. You should look up logical fallacy and learn not to embarrass yourself so much.

And yet, you would support the 97% consensus argument, which is the product of Naomi Oreskes, herself a walking logical fallacy.

[Chicks]

FWIW, Fox "News" said Trump shouldn't have pulled out of the Paris accord.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/...rong-move.html

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by Chicks

FWIW, Fox "News" said Trump shouldn't have pulled out of the Paris accord.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/...rong-move.html

Schoen is a commitment guy.

[sheltiedave]

It is always hard to create an exact theory model for an open thermal system that involves accelerative heat sources that are not fully understood, coupled with diminishing polar heat sinks, compounded by increasing ocean temperatures and entropic ocean currents. Anyone who can not accept these paradigms, or cannot look at a twenty year temperature graph and notice a pattern, has no business advancing spurious claims.

[JJIII]

Is the pattern in dispute or is the amount of input from mankind in dispute?