Belief in biblical end-times stifling climate change action in U.S.: study

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

child of wonder

Diamond Member
Aug 31, 2006
8,307
175
106
Notice that they don't even tell you where they came up with that "97%" number. Look it up, try to find where they got it from. It's a great statistical story.

I'm not referencing the link to quote the scientific consensus, I'm using it to reference that several independent agencies have recorded that the average temperature of the planet is increasing.

Are you disputing that?
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Don't know if this would interest you but:

2. Order and sequence of Qur’an divinely inspired


The complete Qur’an was revealed over a period of 22½ years portion by portion, as and when it was required. The Qur’an was not compiled by the Prophet in the chronological order of revelation. The order and sequence of the Qur’an too was Divinely inspired and was instructed to the Prophet by Allah (swt) through archangel Jibraeel. Whenever a revelation was conveyed to his companions, the Prophet would also mention in which surah (chapter) and after which ayat (verse) this new revelation should fit.

Every Ramadhaan all the portions of the Qur’an that had been revealed, including the order of the verses, were revised and reconfirmed by the Prophet with archangel Jibraeel. During the last Ramadhaan, before the demise of the Prophet, the Qur’an was rechecked and reconfirmed twice.

It is therefore clearly evident that the Qur’an was compiled and authenticated by the Prophet himself during his lifetime, both in the written form as well as in the memory of several of his Companions.
===================
What I find most interesting is that the Koran was taught out of order, like putting the pieces of a puzzle down on a table in the exact position they will occupy when the puzzle is completed. By comparison, I think hearing a bush talk would be easy.

I don't know.... But, some fellow named Smith who was a convicted con artist and felon said he found some stuff all ready for him to decipher back into 17th century English and there are lots of folks who believe that to be truth... And, a guy named Hubbard who has some thoughts about volcanic action doing in lots and lots of folks from some planet far far away and stuff. This also attracts lots of folks. The physics is a bit off but what the heck... miracles happen, I guess.

That the Prophet said what he said is nice... and lots of folks hang their hat on that too. At least he's consistent with God's notion of doing in the infidel...

It seems everyone religious is atheistic about all but their God and his teachings... The agnostic simply includes one extra God.
Folks grab on to what they think or rationalize is right... that is, unless they were born into it and don't know any different... Their environment mandates their belief.

We do live on the same planet though. And, it seems we ought to behave in a manner that is consistent with rationally produced observations...

Maybe the Earth decided it wanted plastic and created humans to provide it and now has decided to melt it and form it all into plastic bunnies... A puzzle of sorts to entertain the mind of the Scientist.
 
Last edited:

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
I'm not referencing the link to quote the scientific consensus, I'm using it to reference that several independent agencies have recorded that the average temperature of the planet is increasing.

Are you disputing that?

Nope, a number of agencies that receive billions of dollars in funding from the US government agree that they need even more money for policy reasons. Big surprise. Do find out where that 97% number comes from though, you'll be surprised about it.
 

BlueWolf47

Senior member
Apr 22, 2005
653
0
76
SkepticsvRealistsv3.gif
http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/SkepticsvRealistsv3.gif

Climate tempertures increase in an up and down escalator. you can find cooling trends about every 10 years. But overall the temperature increases in a linear fashion. Skeptics just cherry pick the data.
 
Last edited:

child of wonder

Diamond Member
Aug 31, 2006
8,307
175
106
Nope, a number of agencies that receive billions of dollars in funding from the US government agree that they need even more money for policy reasons. Big surprise. Do find out where that 97% number comes from though, you'll be surprised about it.

Yes, all these international agencies receive funding from the US government to fudge their temperature readings to fool us into thinking the average temperature of the Earth is increasing when it actually isn't. :rolleyes:

Squawk all you want about the "97%," but I'm talking to you specifically about whether or not the average temperature of the Earth is increasing and there is a global scientific consensus that it most certainly is, which is in direct refutation of your earlier claims.

How people intentionally lie not only to others but to themselves endlessly confuses me.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
That graphic probably made some skeptics heads explode. Hopefully :biggrin:

Hoping for harm to come to people that disagree with you. What a class act.
Hmmm, all the way back to 1973 and you complain that some skeptical scientists cherry pick?
 

OverVolt

Lifer
Aug 31, 2002
14,278
89
91
I don't doubt global warming but the economy is fossil fuel based so good luck with that.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
62,679
11,023
136
Thar h'ain't nuthin in the Holy Bible bout no climate change nor global warming...If Jeezus didn't say it, it ain't true!!
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,981
3,318
126
We shouldn't hold up Hamas as being the authority on Islam
That`s right how many authorities are their on Islam.....
Yet Hamas being Islam and being the group that has you know that Charter that says -- 'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.'
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,981
3,318
126
According to the bible, he already came back at least once. The term "doubting Thomas" comes from the story where Thomas insists on seeing Jesus' wounds to confirm that someone claiming to be Jesus really is Jesus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doubting_Thomas

So I guess Christians are waiting for the third coming? Jews are still waiting for the first coming because Jesus wasn't their savior; he did not end the occupation like he was supposed to.

Anyway, who cares about global warming? We'll just increase building standards and get on with our lives. People in third world countries are kinda fucked, but that's a good thing because it means we can jack their resources without needing to directly kill anyway. We let mother nature kill them.
You have no clue.....
 

BlueWolf47

Senior member
Apr 22, 2005
653
0
76
My reply was to your first "chart" , but you knew that. I do like to see that your Hadley/CRU temp chart shows no statistically significant warming for about 20 years while CO2 increased by over 30%.

I'm not sure what interval you are talking about but you can find periods like that throughout the data. Those can be explained by short-term weather evens such as el Nina's and el ninos, volcanic eruptions (which cause Co2 to increase while blocking sunlight thus reducing temperatures), etc.

But, this is why you don't try to base your argument on an outlier in the data that occurred over 20 years. Maybe you could try googling "weather" and "climate".




An ethical scientist approaches their hypothesis as a skeptic and continually trys to disprove their originally hypothesis. If they are unable to they draw a conclusion based on the parameters of their investigations.

A skeptic how ever already has a conclusion and is just looking to find anyway to make it seem credible.
 
Last edited:

Spungo

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2012
3,217
2
81
Thar h'ain't nuthin in the Holy Bible bout no climate change nor global warming...If Jeezus didn't say it, it ain't true!!

Jesus never said anything about me cheating on my husband, therefore :cool:
 

Paul98

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2010
3,732
199
106
My reply was to your first "chart" , but you knew that. I do like to see that your Hadley/CRU temp chart shows no statistically significant warming for about 20 years while CO2 increased by over 30%.

The earth temperatures will not go up at a constant rate, there are lots of variables that can affect the global temperature that will cause a warm up or cooling. These will happen outside of the man made global warming. So you still get the variation over short time periods even though man made global warming is still a major driver.

Just look at the charts you have temp rise from 1920 to 1940 stayed the same from 1940 to 1980 then up again till 2000, where it has stayed the same since then.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
I'm not sure what interval you are talking about but you can find periods like that throughout the data. Those can be explained by short-term weather evens such as el Nina's and el ninos, volcanic eruptions (which cause Co2 to increase while blocking sunlight thus reducing temperatures), etc.

But, this is why you don't try to base your argument on an outlier in the data that occurred over 20 years. Maybe you could try googling "weather" and "climate".




An ethical scientist approaches their hypothesis as a skeptic and continually trys to disprove their originally hypothesis. If they are unable to they draw a conclusion based on the parameters of their investigations.

A skeptic how ever already has a conclusion and is just looking to find anyway to make it seem credible.

You don't know what "ethical" means and you won't until you explore where NASA got and used that 97% number on their site. Good try though.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
You don't know what "ethical" means and you won't until you explore where NASA got and used that 97% number on their site. Good try though.

I don't think you understand where NASA got that number. Apparently you didn't even realize it was in the footnotes.

Now I already know what you've been desperately waiting to write for 3-4 posts now, but maybe you should take a really close look at that NASA report and its footnotes before you embarrass yourself.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
I don't think you understand where NASA got that number. Apparently you didn't even realize it was in the footnotes.

Now I already know what you've been desperately waiting to write for 3-4 posts now, but maybe you should take a really close look at that NASA report and its footnotes before you embarrass yourself.

Just like you lied about media bias and I showed evidence and proved your lie, you're lying about this. At least try to be honest for one time in your life.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Just like you lied about media bias and I showed evidence and proved your lie, you're lying about this. At least try to be honest for one time in your life.

Oh, you mean the 'small, measurable, and probably insubstantial' media bias that wasn't subject to statistical significance? (also, don't forget the small conservative bias it found in printed publication!) Yeah, that's a real winner for you right there.

Your continuing attempts to use your own stupidity for a discussion advantage are in some ways novel, but that shouldn't make them any less embarrassing.
 

OverVolt

Lifer
Aug 31, 2002
14,278
89
91
Wouldn't it be ironic if we were actually headed into an ice age? In terms of 10,000 year or 50,000 year cycles we actually know nothing. We don't really know what the warning signs of an ice age would be anymore than warning signs of an earthquake.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,328
126
Of course its for the purpose of deregulation. But with regards to climate change, the right has no rational argument to refute climate change, so instead they have created a false narrative of dis-consensus among scientists in order to protect the profits of corporations. These are the same corporations that lobbied for citizens united. If we had campaign finance reform, it would be harder these crazy politicians to get elected.

While I am not defending the right by any means, the left has no rational solution to the Global Climate Change problem.