• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

1700 private jets were flown to a conference discussing climate change

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
14,368
7,149
146
Yeah, I can. A whole bunch of really rich folks got together to talk about how to control something. Now it's possible that it could be the climate. But I'm going to venture a guess that it's really about how to wring more money out of the cause for their benefit. It shouldn't be that difficult because despite mountains of information debunking climate change as it's defined at this point in time, there are a ton of believers.

Just between you and me, it's because the believers fear centers go into overdrive when this is talked about. It's more or less a Pavlovian response.
I mean just the number of Op-Eds debunking climate change in the Wall Street Journal should be enough!

Amirite?
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,200
8,044
136
Why was the name changed from global warming?
Because people were too stupid to understand what and how global warming worked. It's why idiot climate change deniers go on tv telling everyone that the extreme cold weather they are having is clear evidence global warming doesn't exist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: highland145

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
14,368
7,149
146
Why was the name changed from global warming?
While the planet is warming as a whole not everywhere is going to necessarily ne warmer ever year. While 2014 was another record year, the east coast and Midwest was colder than normal.

Climate change is a better description. Unlike religion, when new data is found theories are refined and we try to make things more accurate. It's also to help deal with skeptic partisan bullshit when people say, "herp derp it was cold at my house, checkmate science!"

This is all basic stuff. I mean seriously but

 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
29,493
2,996
126
Jets burn a crazy amount of fuel. Now if I really believed that the exhaust from that jet was really damaging the environment... I would arrange to make my presentation via Skype.
Davos is the 1% telling the rest of us how to get poor.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,423
614
126
Well, let's see...

I'm worth $4.2B. I'm the CEO of one multi-national corporation and I sit on the boards of two others. I'm concerned about global warming, but not yet convinced that there's anything humans can do about it. I feel it's my duty to understand how my companies may be contributing to warming and whether we're acting responsibly. That's why I'm attending the conference.

I personally own two private jets and have access to several more owned by the company. Immediately after the conference in Switzerland I'm vacationing in Greece with my family. No, I'm not flying commercial.

HI there, if you get to Boulder let's get a beer at Avery brewery.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,876
460
126
Well, let's see...

I'm worth $4.2B. I'm the CEO of one multi-national corporation and I sit on the boards of two others. I'm concerned about global warming, but not yet convinced that there's anything humans can do about it. I feel it's my duty to understand how my companies may be contributing to warming and whether we're acting responsibly. That's why I'm attending the conference.

I personally own two private jets and have access to several more owned by the company. Immediately after the conference in Switzerland I'm vacationing in Greece with my family. No, I'm not flying commercial.
Really?

We need to get together. I've got an idea that'll make us both multimillionaires!
 

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
6,023
4,089
136
Why was the name changed from global warming?
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-global-warming-basic.html



"It’s time for us to start talking about “climate change” instead of global warming and “conservation” instead of preservation…“Climate change” is less frightening than “global warming”…While global warming has catastrophic connotations attached to it, climate change suggests a more controllable and less emotional challenge".
-Frank Luntz, Republican Pollster

The name wasn't changed. The effects (climate change) rather than the cause (global warming) is now the phrase that scientists and, uh, Republicans prefer.
 
Last edited:

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,897
638
126
While the planet is warming as a whole not everywhere is going to necessarily ne warmer ever year. While 2014 was another record year, the east coast and Midwest was colder than normal. Climate change is a better description. Unlike religion, when new data is found theories are refined and we try to make things more accurate. It's also to help deal with skeptic partisan bullshit when people say, "herp derp it was cold at my house, checkmate science!"
2014 was a record year... But one of your brethren stated that the likelihood that 2014 was the warmest year since 1880 is just 38%. Wait, so NASA doesn't even know for certain? What? 38% - what?

Poor spin on the name change too. By your description, why, it almost sounds like the science isn't settled. But I keep reading that it is...

Keep crying Wolf!

 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
14,368
7,149
146
2014 was a record year... But one of your brethren stated that the likelihood that 2014 was the warmest year since 1880 is just 38%. Wait, so NASA doesn't even know for certain? What? 38% - what?

Poor spin on the name change too. By your description, why, it almost sounds like the science isn't settled. But I keep reading that it is...

Keep crying Wolf!

I think you maybe confused to as to which fairy tale we're in. Here's a hint it's not the one where the boy goes to town:

 

Blanky

Platinum Member
Oct 18, 2014
2,457
12
46
That's exactly my feelings on the subject. There is no negative to be proactive in keeping our environment clean.
Of course there are negatives, as we see in China. Do you think they are trashing their environment just for fun? Nope, it's much cheaper to not give a shit about it, just like the US used not to care.

--------

The science is hardly settled. It's pretty shitty in a lot of ways. I have the impression the bulk of scientists who have studied this do believe mankind is affecting climate change, though. I am not convinced a net warming is necessarily bad, though. I've never seen anybody say what the perfect temperature is.

Absolutely we should always be working toward definite, undeniable truths such as: Clean air is better, cleaner earth (not polluted) is better, clean water is better. Most of these things coincide with what hardcore climate change people want.

It looks to me like the republican mantra of mocking all this is going to be on the wrong side of history. At the same time the opposite side overcompensates by making insane and totally false, and regularly wrong predictions about what's going to happen. But to be clear I think the former is worse than the latter.

I've seen some of the particularly nutty morons in the US even go so far as to say things like the EPA should be abolished.
 

unokitty

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2012
3,349
1
0


I don't understand all the negativity.

Why won't American taxpayers give billions more to the politicians for their War on Climate Change?

After all, they gave billions for the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs. Didn't they?

How can the 'expert consultants' like Dr. Gruber continue to get their millions in consulting fees if the taxpayers don't give more money to the politicians?

Besides:

All the political scientists agree, the political science is settled.

And all the Climate Change politicians agree, the American taxpayer just needs to STFU and pay!

Uno
 
Last edited:

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,200
8,044
136
This article says china has, almost continuously, invested in green technology more than us. China at one time may have not given a shit but that is not the case now.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/17/news/economy/china-green-energy/


Of course there are negatives, as we see in China. Do you think they are trashing their environment just for fun? Nope, it's much cheaper to not give a shit about it, just like the US used not to care.

--------

The science is hardly settled. It's pretty shitty in a lot of ways. I have the impression the bulk of scientists who have studied this do believe mankind is affecting climate change, though. I am not convinced a net warming is necessarily bad, though. I've never seen anybody say what the perfect temperature is.

Absolutely we should always be working toward definite, undeniable truths such as: Clean air is better, cleaner earth (not polluted) is better, clean water is better. Most of these things coincide with what hardcore climate change people want.

It looks to me like the republican mantra of mocking all this is going to be on the wrong side of history. At the same time the opposite side overcompensates by making insane and totally false, and regularly wrong predictions about what's going to happen. But to be clear I think the former is worse than the latter.

I've seen some of the particularly nutty morons in the US even go so far as to say things like the EPA should be abolished.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,897
638
126
The science is hardly settled. It's pretty shitty in a lot of ways. I have the impression the bulk of scientists who have studied this do believe mankind is affecting climate change, though. I am not convinced a net warming is necessarily bad, though. I've never seen anybody say what the perfect temperature is. Somebody just tell me what the normal temperature is and back it up with something other than a pack of lies.

Absolutely we should always be working toward definite, undeniable truths such as: Clean air is better, cleaner earth (not polluted) is better, clean water is better. Most of these things coincide with what hardcore climate change people want. We have been and we are. I understand the point of continued vigilance such that we don't slip back into bad practices. Nobody is spouting off about going back to the way things used to be.

It looks to me like the republican mantra of mocking all this is going to be on the wrong side of history. Perhaps so, but as you touch on in your next sentence, if Republicans don't speak up, the left will go off the deep end to assuage their fears. We have people lying to us continually to justify their agenda. There needs to be an opposing force and if the Republicans are the ones fulfilling that need then so what? Someone must. At the same time the opposite side overcompensates by making insane and totally false, and regularly wrong predictions about what's going to happen. But to be clear I think the former is worse than the latter.
And I think the latter is worse than the former. If you want to win me over, I will ignore the first lie and hope you'll cease that behavior. When you lie to me the second time, I will cease listening to anything you have to say. You have proven you are untrustworthy and not worth my time.
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
14,368
7,149
146
And I think the latter is worse than the former. If you want to win me over, I will ignore the first lie and hope you'll cease that behavior. When you lie to me the second time, I will cease listening to anything you have to say. You have proven you are untrustworthy and not worth my time.
On the question of whether the Earth is warming and if the recent increase is mostly caused by man, why should anyone have to win you over?

The data and analysis are readily available to you. Anyone with a technical background should be able to understand them and draw the same conclusions.

The only debate remaining on the subject is what if anything should be done about it.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,200
8,044
136
And I think the latter is worse than the former. If you want to win me over, I will ignore the first lie and hope you'll cease that behavior. When you lie to me the second time, I will cease listening to anything you have to say. You have proven you are untrustworthy and not worth my time.
Ahahahaha!! One of the biggest liars on the forum preaching to others about lying! You couldn't make this shit up if you tried!
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY