one.opinion

On 1/22/2023 at 9:42 PM, teddyv said:

"Ultra woke NHL"? Do you even watch hockey?

That's possibly the dumbest thing I've ever seen from WorthyBot, and that is saying a lot. 

3 hours ago, teddyv said:

Why is this in Christian News?

Trump is such a strong Christian that if he evacuated to another state, the loss of Christian influence would be palpable?

2 hours ago, Rick-Parker said:

The U.N. now wants industrialized nations to give 2 trillion dollars a year to developing countries as "restitution" for "climate change." There ya go!

That sounds like a good idea as long as China is paying their proportionate share!

2 hours ago, Sparks said:

You know, you should be paying attention to the fact that they never get their predictions right.

As far as I know, the most recent data has indeed shifted the timetable. I’m not convinced that the situation is as dire as they are portraying now. It certainly isn’t as dire as was being portrayed 10 years ago.

That does not excuse making up stories about what has been in IPCC reports. There is plenty of verifiable material that there is no need for fabrication.

7 hours ago, ayin jade said:

New York Times 1969
"Scientists predict new Ice Age by 21st century"

New York Times 1969
‘Everyone will disappear in a cloud of blue
steam by 1989.’

Boston Globe 1970
"Air pollution may obliterate the sun and cause a new ice age in the first third of the new century"

Boston Globe 1970
Ice age by 2000

Redlands Daily Facts 1970
‘America subject to water rationing by 1974 and food rationing by 1980.’

Washington Post 1971
"In the next 50 years dust man puts into the air with fossil fuel burning will screen out so much sunlight the average temp could drop by 6 degrees."

Washington Post 1971
‘New Ice Age Coming’

Brown University 1972
New ice age by 2070

The Guardian 1974
"Space satellites show new Ice Age coming fast"

1974: ‘New Ice Age Coming Fast’ The Guardian

1974: ‘Another Ice Age?’ Time Magazine

1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life’ University of Michigan

1976: ‘The Cooling’ National Center for Atmospheric Research

New York Times 1978
"No end in sight to 30 year cooling trend"

1978: ‘No End in Sight’ to 30-Year Cooling Trend New York Times

1980: ‘Acid Rain Kills Life in Lakes’ Nobelsville Ledger

Canberra Times 1988
"Gradual rise in average sea level is threatening to completely cover this Indian Ocean nation (Maldives) of 1196 small islands within the next 30 years"

1988: Washington DC days over 90F to from 35 to 85 Gannett

1988: Maldives completely under water in 30 years Canberra Times

1989: Rising seas to ‘obliterate’ nations by 2000 AP

1989: New York City’s West Side Highway underwater by 2019 Salon

Salon 1989
"NYC westside highway to be underwater by 2019"

1995 to Present: Climate Model Failure CEI.org

The Independent (UK) 2000
"Snowfalls are now a thing of the past - children won't know what snow is"

(Btw it snowed in arizona last thursday, which is not unusual. I have seen it snow here even in june and august. November and december is typically when we first see snow here.)

2000: ‘Children won’t know what snow is.’ The Independent

2002: Famine in 10 years The Guardian

2004: Britain to have Siberian climate by 2020 The Guardian

The Guardian (US Edition) 2004
"Britain to have Siberian climate by 2020"

2008: Arctic will be ice-free by 2018 Associated Press

2008: Al Gore warns of ice-free Arctic by 2013

2009: Prince Charles says only 8 years to save the planet The Independent

2009: UK prime minister says 50 days to ‘save the planet from catastrophe’ The Independent

2013: Arctic ice-free by 2015 The Guardian

2013: Arctic ice-free by 2016

2014: Only 500 days before ‘climate chaos’ Washington Examiner
 

I’m sure it has not escaped your notice that none of these prediction were made in IPCC reports. I have no doubt that the IPCC reports got some things wrong. What we really should be doing is analyzing things that were actually reported, not making things up and defending false statements - as another poster is doing.

7 minutes ago, Sparks said:

I am honest.  There is nothing to admit.  I have pushed nothing false.

I had hoped I would be wrong, but your response is as I’d expected.

The IPCC never said that Florida would be underwater, yet you cannot admit the obviously false statement.

17 minutes ago, Sparks said:

So, the dozens of other IPCC failed predictions don't bother you?

I am just trying to see if you have the integrity and honesty to admit to pushing a false statement. Maybe if you own up to that, we can look at failed predictions that the IPCC *actually* made.

47 minutes ago, Sparks said:

I see.  Who do you think Al was citing when he made his claim?

For someone fully aware of the dishonesty of politicians, it is odd that you think Al Gore is incapable of coming up with this on his own.

We can check out Al Gore’s quotes to see if we can get to the bottom of this - context and links will be helpful.

Regardless, that does nothing to change the falsehood of the claim that “The IPCC said that Florida would be underwater”.

17 minutes ago, Sparks said:

So, your claim is that only Al said it, and wrote it, and put it in a movie but the IPCC had no input about it?

You have already read my claim. In case you are confused, I will repeat it.

"Your claim that the IPCC predicted that Florida would be underwater by now is a false claim."

5 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Your argument is destroyed, but you don't seem to realize it. 

This is my argument - your claim that the IPCC predicted that Florida would be underwater by now is a false claim. You are destroying nothing but your credibility.

23 minutes ago, Sparks said:

You just won't look.  You know, even Wikipedia 'the socialist times,' mentions it.

It is very weird how you won’t even try to show me I’m wrong.

3 hours ago, Sparks said:

The IPCC was caught twice lying, called Climate Gate I and II.

So you say.

What if I made the claim that the IPCC said the moon was made of green cheese and repeatedly insisted on it? What would that make me and what effect would that have on my credibility?

17 hours ago, Sparks said:

Yes, and then lying about them with bad math.  Climate Gate.

You are claiming that the IPCC cannot be trusted because of supposed lies, but you are going to literally make up a story about the IPCC claiming that Florida would be underwater by now. To top it off, you probably do not even recognize any inconsistency.

3 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Yes, and how did they figure out where to place the data points?

By taking measurements.

7 hours ago, Sparks said:

So, exactly where is the math formula for this graph?  I bet you didn't even look.

These graphs use data points, they are not graphing an equation.

2 minutes ago, Sparks said:

If you want to see the math dissected, I could provide you a video that shows it's flaws, but it would require you to watch at least some of it, to stray from the CNN agenda, and the math might make your head explode, ... but do you want to try?

Look at the data I provided, then see if you can "dissect" that. Thank you for the good laugh, though.

12 hours ago, Not of the World said:

What is the most convincing evidence that man is causing the climate to change?  

I'm not a climate scientist, so there may be better pieces of evidence, but this is my conclusion. There is very strong evidence that greenhouse gases have been steadily on the rise since the Industrial Revolution.

https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climate-change-science/causes-climate-change_.html

It is quite likely that this increase in greenhouse gases is tied to the global warming trend.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/GlobalWarming/page2.php

The rate of increase has nearly doubled over the last 50 years. This graph is a little old, having stopped at 2005, but the warming trend remains steadily increasing.

2 hours ago, Sparks said:

You refuse to look.  That's your issue.

I’m not the one attempting to convince the audience that the IPCC claims things that are clearly spurious. It’s a pretty wild claim that appears to have no evidence to support it.

52 minutes ago, Sparks said:

If by exaggerated, you mean lie, yes.  He lied.  The IPCC is a governmental body filled with politicians like Gore.  Regardless, he got the prediction wrong.

If Gore said this, he was obviously wrong. I’m referring to the IPCC and your evidence-free claim regarding their report.

53 minutes ago, Sparks said:

You have dismissed nothing.

Oh no, I dismiss the claim because you have not provided any evidence to support it. Others may accept this unsupported claim. I will not.

9 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Where do you think Al got his data?  The IPCC!

Your assumption that “If Al said it, then it must have been in the IPCC” is inconsistent with your distrust of politicians (a distrust I frequently share). Do you not think it possible that he exaggerated?

12 minutes ago, Sparks said:

No, you are just trying to make something from nothing.  Do a little reading on the topic, for once.

Until you provide evidence for your claim, I will continue to dismiss your claim.

7 hours ago, Sparks said:

Besides, no matter what I provide as evidence is never good enough for you, and that would include a phone call from Al telling you he said it, and wrote it.

You are trying to bait and switch. You claimed the IPCC report stated that Florida would be underwater by now. You have provided no support for that claim. You just want to talk about Al Gore. This is not a good faith argument on two different levels.

I’m sorry that it is troubling to you when I can point out obvious holes in your sources, but avoiding evidence altogether is not the answer.

34 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Yeah, because it is too simple for you to look up.

“That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.”

15 minutes ago, Sparks said:

My conclusion was that Al Gore and the IPCC made a public prediction about Florida, and it has failed.

For some reason, you’ve never actually presented evidence that the IPCC predicted that Florida would be underwater by now. It’s just so curious.

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

Are you covering for Al Gore and the IPCC who said it, but what they predicted didn't happen?

Asking for evidence isn't the same as covering for someone. That's a bit of an odd conclusion.

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

When the IPCC 'scientists' were caught altering climate data (email hacked is the source), was that incredibly weak evidence that they cheat, or strong?

Is this another complaint about the IPCC that will disappear when pressed for evidence, like your claim that the IPCC predicted that Florida would be underwater by now?