Happy Earth Day

[wufan]

But the science isn't bad, and it's intellectually dishonest to act like the topic has changed every decade. People have known about global warming for far longer than thirty years. My post was pointing out that even according to his own list, the science has been consistent since at least the 80's because those three issues are intimately tied.

Also, Earth Day is far less political than you're making it out to be. It was a response to an oil spill and was just a way to remind people of general environmental concerns. There's been no effort to control people with it.

I also think you're giving the original post too much credit when you defend it. Your response to me was well thought out. His response was just to call me a pagan...

I will just say that the terms "science" and "global warming" are too broad to state universally that they are good/true or bad/false. I take up issue with specific instances of a lack of integrity in data reporting, coercion, and sensationalism used by some organizations within the scientific community that push a devolution agenda. For whatever reason, policy makers use this bad scince when enacting new laws.

[wsushox1]

For whatever reason, policy makers use this bad scince when enacting new laws.

What laws have specifically been passed in the past 15 years that have used this 'bad science' as its political motivation?

[small tyme baller]

What laws have specifically been passed in the past 15 years that have used this 'bad science' as its political motivation?

I've seen a few laws passed based off of religious beliefs & motivations. 'Most' of those have my shaking my GD head. I understand religions' place in the world & have an appreciation for the values they teach but also feel they have no place in politics.

On the flip side, sciences can be a dangerous thing if used improperly by politics. Most politicians skew scientific data to support their side of an issue or use bogus research to begin with, which IMO is just as bad as bringing religion into political decision making.

[SB Shock]

Because I think Earth Day is an acceptable holiday? I assume you're a Christian. If you are, you should read the Bible.

I read the bible all the time - there is many verses that speak to who how his creation points to his Godship, and our sin ruins his creation.

Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. --- John 1:3
The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. - Psalm 19:1
The Lord loves righteousness and justice; the earth is full of his unfailing love. - Psalm 33:5

The earth dries up and withers, the world languishes and withers, the heaven languish with the earth. The earth is defiled by its people; they have disobeyed the laws, violated the statutes and broken the everlasting covenant. Therefore a curse consumes the earth; its people must be their guild. Therefore earth inhabitants are burned up, and very few are left. -- Isaiah 24:4-6

Stewardship of the Earth is in there. Living in excess and purposefully destroying the environment are very anti-Christian sentiments.

Where did I advocate destroying the environment? I'm only making fun of you who worship the earth Idols and are manipulated for other people gain. As I know in from John 17:16 "They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world" - this is not my world, I am only passing through.

That said, I'm not going to call you pagan without knowing anything about you because that would be kind of ridiculous, right?

Actually I was saying it in gist - but evidently it struck nerve with you. If you know the Lord - sorry I offended you. If you don't - well Yeshua died on the cross for you and me so we can be forgiven for our sins. Confess them and be changed. Believe in the Lord God and you will be saved.

People have known about global warming for far longer than thirty years.

Global warming has been occurring 1000's of years - just as recent as we have came out of the "Little Ice Age" in the 1600's - temperature can't do anything but come up. The earth has been warming and cooling for his whole history (and is more prosperous when it hotter).

As the population grows and city grow - you creating bigger and bigger heat sinks.
CO2 emissions - good luck with that, China not going to do anything about that and they are the biggest producers of CO2 in the world.
Volcanoes - they are the worst, the worst I say. Maybe we will come up with the "volcano freezer" - aka star trek.

Do you know ever wonder why they changed their marketing from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change"? It pretty simple - every time they have a global warming conference there is a blizzard in that city (I think God is mocking them). Also some don't see a warmer winter as bad and there is a lot of land mass and resources that are locked up do to the cold environment. But everybody can see "climate change" - it happens in Kansas 4-5 times a week.

The science has been taken over by those who want to manipulate it for their own gain and $$$$. Of course the politicians want you to move to alternate means of energy (because it to their gain as they right laws and are going to profit from it). But have you ever wondered why we have one of the cleanest forms of energy - Nuclear power and that is taboo.

Instead of actually researching climate science properly and without bias, there are those who are now fabricating data (as we have seen in the latest scandals).

[SB Shock]

What laws have specifically been passed in the past 15 years that have used this 'bad science' as its political motivation?

Segwick county commission used bad science to pass a rule that allowed "vaping" at their facilities and offices. They had two witnesses for allowing it (one was a county commissioner wife). They ignored all the all the other health experts that had better science (though probably incomplete at this time).

Senator Diane Feinstien was trying to get a Ban of BPA - it is an additive used to improve safety and reliability of plastics from shatter proof bottle to container to keep food from spoiling. This all came about because of scientific fear mongering. It has been banned in some states like NY and CA. Europe when they were looking at the ban did a extensive amount of research and found no evidence of harm to humans.

Bad science on immunizations has lead to surges in measels and mumps.

[SB Shock]

#5. is still occurring in China. And could be occurring in the US without the passage of the Clean Air Act.

I think a big thing to point out in regards to these that you listed is that human innovation, invention, and ideas helped make some of those issues not end up being true.
We're sitting on our hands in regards to a warming climate.

There is no doubt that you have to have regulation for our own protection. Because there are people/companies/governments who only look at their own welfare. But you can't allow the corruption of science for political motives. You also can't allow regulation to be used to hinder human innovation and invention when the basis for that regulation is based on junk science.

[wufan]

What laws have specifically been passed in the past 15 years that have used this 'bad science' as its political motivation?

Any legislation based on the Kyoto protocol and iterations thereafter. While some laws might be beneficial, the utilized coercion in order to publish the "scince".

[wsushox1]

Any legislation based on the Kyoto protocol and iterations thereafter. While some laws might be beneficial, the utilized coercion in order to publish the "scince".

There wasn't any specific legislation mentioned there.

[wsushox1]

Segwick county commission used bad science to pass a rule that allowed "vaping" at their facilities and offices. They had two witnesses for allowing it (one was a county commissioner wife). They ignored all the all the other health experts that had better science (though probably incomplete at this time).

Senator Diane Feinstien was trying to get a Ban of BPA - it is an additive used to improve safety and reliability of plastics from shatter proof bottle to container to keep food from spoiling. This all came about because of scientific fear mongering. It has been banned in some states like NY and CA. Europe when they were looking at the ban did a extensive amount of research and found no evidence of harm to humans.

Bad science on immunizations has lead to surges in measels and mumps.

Wufan's posted said "this bad science" where this was referring to Global Warming/Climate Change. I wasn't just asking for examples of bad science. But bad science that lead to detrimental environmental policy.

[SB Shock]

Wufan's posted said "this bad science" where this was referring to Global Warming/Climate Change. I wasn't just asking for examples of bad science. But bad science that lead to detrimental environmental policy.

What about federal Ethanol policy?

[jdshock]

...

I'm not going to respond to your whole post. It's too long and full of conspiracy theory arguments. And I didn't understand a lot of it. You admitted the Bible talks about us harming the world, so I just don't really get your point. If we agree it's good to be environmental stewards why make fun of environmentalists?

I do want to address your conspiracy theory regarding money in politics. The fossil fuel industry is one of the biggest lobbies. There's a lot more money to be made as a politician supporting fossil fuels than there is supporting global warming. And your point regarding nuclear power proves your bias. Environmentalist oppose nuclear energy because of the waste and because it's technically not a renewable energy. The general public opposes it because of nuclear weapons (misinformation) and because of large scale accidents that have occurred. The nuclear lobby is also large, so it's silly to think there's no money to be made supporting nuclear energy.

[SB Shock]

Wufan's posted said "this bad science" where this was referring to Global Warming/Climate Change. I wasn't just asking for examples of bad science. But bad science that lead to detrimental environmental policy.

You might want to look up the case of EPA ADMINSTRATOR Carol Browner who turned her back on the 1996 safe drinking act that says "use best peered-reviewed science" on regulating the amount of chloroform in water. To complex to be summarized here.

[SB Shock]

I'm not going to respond to your whole post. It's too long and full of conspiracy theory arguments. And I didn't understand a lot of it. You admitted the Bible talks about us harming the world, so I just don't really get your point. If we agree it's good to be environmental stewards why make fun of environmentalists?

I do want to address your conspiracy theory regarding money in politics. The fossil fuel industry is one of the biggest lobbies. There's a lot more money to be made as a politician supporting fossil fuels than there is supporting global warming. And your point regarding nuclear power proves your bias. Environmentalist oppose nuclear energy because of the waste and because it's technically not a renewable energy. The general public opposes it because of nuclear weapons (misinformation) and because of large scale accidents that have occurred. The nuclear lobby is also large, so it's silly to think there's no money to be made supporting nuclear energy.

LOL

[SB Shock]

Wufan's posted said "this bad science" where this was referring to Global Warming/Climate Change. I wasn't just asking for examples of bad science. But bad science that lead to detrimental environmental policy.

What about the endangered species act of 1973? Has a law did more over-reaching into public and private lands for what? It has saved nothing.

[jdshock]

LOL

Two separate one word responses. You're either a troll or you realize that you're wrong. Either way, I'm not sticking around to find out. Nice job stifling any discussion. You seem to do a great job when confronted with opposing view points.