Discussion > There IS no answer in the climate debate.
A bit like Douglas Adams' Question to Life, the Universe and Everything.... the problem is not what the answer is, but what the question is. The answer seems to always be the same.... de-industrialisation.
TheBigYinJames
"the problem is not what the answer is, but what the question is." TheBigYinJames
Tee, hee. THat's exatly what went through my mind.
TinyCO2
Ya mean I needs ta be more specific? ^.^
The world has been debating this for 40 years and nobody knew the question??? Doh!
Dung
And as Richard Feynman said:
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.”
Ron
Ron
Ah but Feynman was of the enlightened and our opposition are of the dark side ^.^
Dung
Name one scientist who claims to know all there is to know about climate (or his field).
De-industrialisation is not an aim that any "warmists"I have come across would support. There may be those on the extremes for whom that is the aim, but there are extremists in every debate.
Raff
Pity we are no longer interested Raff :)
Dung
I've just spent hours of my life talking to Raff and still he comes out with nonsense. The Club of Rome are warmist they believe in de-industirialisating as does Agenda 21 from the UN. Sustainable living is all about stunting growth.
Read Agenda 21 and the tenets of the Club of Rome and the environmentalist literature. It's all there, like Hitler's Mein Kampf, the plan isn't a secret it's, to de-industrialise the world. Banning CO2 emissions would effectively destroy industry which is the goal of these loonies.
geronimo
If you ask the average person what the Club of Rome or Agenda 21 are you'd just get blank looks. Ditto warmists. I had to look on Wiki. They are an irrelevance. How many climate scientists or prominent warmists are members of the Club (how many know that one can even be a member)? The only people who really care about Agenda 21 are US Republican and Tea Party nutjobs who think it is some sort of UN plot. Laughable.
So come on, show me the huge numbers of average warmists who supports de-industrialisation. If you can find more than a handful or two of prominent warmists who claim such views as their own (as opposed to being accused by "skeptics") I'll be surprised.
And name one scientist who claims to know all there is to know about climate (or his field).
Raff
We've fed this fat troll long enough.
EVERY warmist I've ever met is in favour of de-industrialisation.
TheBigYinJames
I second the motion Mr BYJ ^.^
Dung
Does it comfort you to speak utter tosh? Or is it that you are such congenital liars that you can't help yourselves?
If you think we all favour de-industrialisation, it should be easy to find examples in the warmist blogs amongst the list on the right (Tamino, Real Climate, Rabett Run, Stoat, Science of Doom, Annan etc) - so find some examples where the blogger promotes de-industrialisation. And while you are at it find where they express membership or support for your Club of Rome or Agenda 21.
BTW if any of you thinks Dung is "open minded" then I'm then this place is even more other-worldly than I thought..
Raff
Anger, anger.
You're angry because I've put my finger on it.
Sad little man.
TheBigYinJames
Don't run away from your assertions.
If you think we all favour de-industrialisation, find some examples in the warmist blogs in the list on the right where the blogger promotes de-industrialisation. And find where they express membership or support for your Club of Rome or Agenda 21.
Raff
It is not so much that our climate kooks want deindustrialization. It is more that they believe in magical industry- energy with no pollution, cool gadgets with no hard work, abundant GMO free food at low price, and of course plentiful low cost wine.
hunter
I'm not running away from my assertion. I said that every warmist I've ever met favoured deindustrialisation.
If you have evidence that I am lying, please present it.
But you're not really interested, all you want to do is continue to demonize us in your mind.
TheBigYinJames
It is worth saying that not many people do claim to want deindustrialisation, however that is the inevitable consequence of their proposed policies.
Dung
Oh, my ... it's not very nice of you folks to keep helping Raff to expose his ignorance. I wonder if he's even heard of the 53 page outcome document (aka "The Future We Want") from the June 2012 "Rio +20" party ... sorry ... United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development..
For a brief intro to this 283 paragraph outcome document, see my Rio – the final score: climate change 22, sustainable 400
Memo to self: Update table of word counts on that post to note change of "Agenda 21" count which seems to have increased from 12 to at least 43 instances (with some paras containing more than one instance) while the "global warming" count has been reduced from one to zero. Counts of other words and phrases should also be verified and updated.
Hilary Ostrov
Great to see you again Hilary ^.^
Dung
Big Yin, how many are you talking about and how do you know what they favour? Did you ask them directly or did you just infer it from their rhetoric? I imagine most here think I favour de-ind. too, but they would be wrong. As would Dung in claiming it as an inevitable consequence of CO2 emission reduction.
But if it is such a widely held view it should be easy for you to find some examples in the warmist blogs in the list on the right where the blogger promotes de-industrialisation. And find where they express membership or support for the Club of Rome or Agenda 21.
Raff
Be a good egg and put a sock in it Raff.
Dung
Raff, I'm sure "the cause" could do with your sterling efforts elsewhere.
Or do they think you're an obsessed loon as well?
Could it be that the only reason you are here is because we're the only ones who speak to you?
TheBigYinJames
From the 'Seen elsewhere' section
Raff's House
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html?_r=0
Breath of Fresh Air
Jun 4, 2015 at 11:09 AM | Registered Commenter Breath of Fresh Air
Perhaps Raff gets an upgrade from his two stroke Wartburg company car if he can disrupt Bishop Hill hehe
Dung
I am an intelligent and reasonably open minded man and it seems to me that any person who falls into that category should be able to state with confidence that it is not possible to know the answer to the climate debate. I have asked a lot of well qualified people how much they know about their special areas of interest and all were modest enough to say that they had much to learn. They also admitted that current human knowledge was a small percentage of what we will eventually discover or deduce.
Despite our lack of knowledge one side of the climate debate claims to know with certainty that we face catastrophic human induced warming, the other side warns that such claims are not reasonable or at least can not be substantiated.
Also as Barry Woods has reminded us this week; for about 40 years one side of the argument has been so sure of their facts that they have been giving us a (constantly changing) limited time within which we must act.
If we were to ask any of the 'scientists' on the other side of the debate whether or not they knew everything about their science, then any person who said 'yes' would be a liar and any person who admitted that they did not; could not then claim to predict future climate.