Climate Change Is Extremely Political And Agenda Serving, Unfortunately It Is Also True

[Sparks]

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

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

People who demand evidence for the obvious are usually 'scamming you' to try to claim the intellectual high ground.   It's not like you have to get up off your duff and head to a research library to confirm Al's public claim, or pay $50 to get through a pay wall. 

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.

I won't hand-hold you for this simple answer, nor play fetch the stick.

[Not of the World]

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

[Sparks]

3 minutes ago, Not of the World said:

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

Yes, and why all the hysteria over it?

[one.opinion]

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.

[Sparks]

8 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

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.

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

You don't seem to understand (based on various topics you have posted) that government legendarily lies.  The IPCC is the InterGOVERMENTAL panel on climate change.  They are not scientists they are politicians, and the few scientists they did employ 30 years ago disagreed with the IPCCs summaries that were written up for politicians, and wanted their names removed from the published papers.  They were interviewed about this by John Stossel at the time.

11 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

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.

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

[one.opinion]

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.

[Sparks]

7 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

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?

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.

7 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

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

You have dismissed nothing.  It's like the 2000 Mules documentary that was posted, but you refuse to look at it.  You refuse to type a few characters into a search engine.

Actually, you are like the evolutionist that refused to look at the foot prints that walked along side a dinosaur, then claimed he saw nothing that would conflict with evolution theory.  Yeah, he refused on camera to even turn around and look.  You remind me of this guy.

[one.opinion]

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.

[Sparks]

2 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

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

I am referring to Gore's predictions in a book, and a film, from which he got from the IPCC.

3 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

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.

You refuse to look.  That's your issue.

[one.opinion]

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.