"Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

[Athetotheist]

What are we to make of this?




Do they not realize that they're making Jesus out to be a liar?

"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."
(Matthew 24:35)

"He that loveth Me not, keepeth not My sayings. And the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s who sent Me."
(John 14:24)

[marke]

[Replying to marke in post #317]

AI Overview
Learn more
While a direct, irrefutable proof of a cause-and-effect relationship between every specific weather calamity and a small temperature increase is difficult to establish, the scientific consensus is that human-caused climate change, including rising global temperatures, is significantly increasing the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events.

Cause-and-effect relationships don't have to be established between every specific weather calamity and a small temperature increase; the higher temperatures, stronger winds, heavier rainfall and more severe storm surges show what the small changes are leading to.

Marke: Believing weather changes supposedly affected or effected by humans are causing abnormal rises in catastrophic events is pure speculation.

[marke]

[Replying to marke in post #318]

When leftist politicians claim the seas are rising because of GW and then buy multi-million dollar homes on the coast and fly all over the world on fuel-guzzling jets, they prpove they do not care for the environment. Their interest is in propagating a narrative they do not believe but need other people to believe in order to create public support for trillions of dollars in support of the questionable narratives they do not even themselves believe.

The rich are the rich, politicians are politicians and rich politicians are rich politicians.

Too many research professionals simply go along with the propagated narrative for reasons not related to science.

Research professionals don't "simply go along with the propagated narrative". They're the ones conducting the science.

Marke: Many if not most researchers are connected to government funding so they concur with government-propagated narratives whether the narratives are sound or not. Do cow farts cause global warming? That is something that Obama commissioned the EPA to investigate and an issue that has been promoted by GW enthusiasts like AOC.

AI Overview

While the overwhelming scientific consensus is that human activities are the primary driver of global warming, some scientific papers and individuals have expressed skepticism or offered alternative explanations, often focusing on natural climate variability or questioning the accuracy of climate models.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to marke in post #321]

Believing weather changes supposedly affected or effected by humans are causing abnormal rises in catastrophic events is pure speculation.

"Truth is only harsh if you're unable to face it."
---Stewart Stafford

"Sadly, how often did mankind heed a warning? Gadflies are often swatted unmercifully."
---E.A. Bucchianeri, "Vocation of a Gadfly"

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to marke in post #322]

Many if not most researchers are connected to government funding so they concur with government-propagated narratives whether the narratives are sound or not. Do cow farts cause global warming? That is something that Obama commissioned the EPA to investigate and an issue that has been promoted by GW enthusiasts like AOC.

So you want to follow the money?
https://www.desmog.com/exxonmobil-fundi ... ce-denial/

[Clownboat]

Please, I beg of you to realize I am not making claims about needing to spend trillions of dollar or any of the other things you go on about because of GW. I'm only claiming that to know what Carbon Dioxide does in our atmosphere, noting that humans are adding to it and wondering if it is responsible to consider curbing the amount we add to the atmosphere. What are your thoughts on that? I bolded, underlined and changed the color of the actual question to help it stand out.

When leftist politicians claim the seas are rising because of GW and then buy multi-million dollar homes on the coast and fly all over the world on fuel-guzzling jets, they prpove they do not care for the environment.

I grant this for the sake of debate (even though I begged you to realize I am not making claims about needing to spend trillions of dollar). Leftist politicians do not care for the environment and they are doody heads (if that helps).

Their interest is in propagating a narrative they do not believe but need other people to believe in order to create public support for trillions of dollars in support of the questionable narratives they do not even themselves believe.

I grant this as well for the sake of debate. I'm also willing to consider them doody heads if that helps.

Too many research professionals simply go along with the propagated narrative for reasons not related to science.

I grant this for the sake of debate. Too many research professionals go along with propagated narratives, and they are doody heads.

Now that those big doody heads have been dealt with, I ask you for the second time:
"Please, I beg of you to realize I am not making claims about needing to spend trillions of dollar or any of the other things you go on about because of GW. I'm only claiming that to know what Carbon Dioxide does in our atmosphere, noting that humans are adding to it and wondering if it is responsible to consider curbing the amount we add to the atmosphere. What are your thoughts on that? I bolded, underlined and changed the color of the actual question to help it stand out."

[oldbadger]

]Marke: Believing weather changes supposedly affected or effected by humans are causing abnormal rises in catastrophic events is pure speculation.

You got that wrong.
.........Believing weather changes supposedly affected or effected by humans are causing abnormal rises in catastrophic events is pure observation

Sorted ....

[marke]

]Marke: Believing weather changes supposedly affected or effected by humans are causing abnormal rises in catastrophic events is pure speculation.

You got that wrong.
.........Believing weather changes supposedly affected or effected by humans are causing abnormal rises in catastrophic events is pure observation

Sorted ....

Marke: Like Darwin finding an animal fossil encased in rock and declaring that he has found proof that humans evolved from animals.

[oldbadger]

Marke: Like Darwin finding an animal fossil encased in rock and declaring that he has found proof that humans evolved from animals.

Ahhhh! So you don't understand how Darwin first discovered evolution? You would need to learn about this in detail but basically .........He noticed that existing species could change because they were adapting in order to survive in their immediate vicinities. With that in mind he began to discover how creatures could develop over time.

[marke]

Marke: Like Darwin finding an animal fossil encased in rock and declaring that he has found proof that humans evolved from animals.

Ahhhh! So you don't understand how Darwin first discovered evolution? You would need to learn about this in detail but basically .........He noticed that existing species could change because they were adapting in order to survive in their immediate vicinities. With that in mind he began to discover how creatures could develop over time.

Marke: What speciation changes did Darwin witness firsthand that proved to him that speciation changes are an observable phenomenon? Fruit flies evolving into fruit flies?

[oldbadger]

Marke: What speciation changes did Darwin witness firsthand that proved to him that speciation changes are an observable phenomenon? Fruit flies evolving into fruit flies?

Amongst many other species he took great interest in the evolution of finches on individual islands around Galapagos.

You should read about it.