@ Final - Fan - i dont see how that changes the comments context? he is still saying that people with the facts will take his side, which is not fair or true.
@ whatever - nice link, ty.
When I read the title I was like "What the hell is GreenpAce???" Then I realized it was Greenpeace! Silly OP!
Currently Playing:
PS4 - Killzone:SF and Assasins Creed 4
XBox One: BF4, CoD:Ghosts, Dead Rising 3, Forza 5
Changing channels with my voice: priceless!!!
my bad, typo. im not getting involved in this thread again though.
| LetsAllMakeBelieve said: @ Final - Fan - i dont see how that changes the comments context? he is still saying that people with the facts will take his side, which is not fair or true. @ whatever - nice link, ty. |
Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: 
; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for 
, let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia. Thanks WordsofWisdom!
Final-Fan said:
|
| Viper1 said: PS360ForTheWin, haven't you heard? Now a lot of those scientists are claiming we are about to enter a cold era based on new data. Having a scientific background, I can tell you that results from research tend to get skewed towards the ideologies of the financiers. A lot of global warming research funding came from leftist groups predisposed to global warming as fact. With that work environment, any data can be skewed as we gamers know all too well. |
Yeah. Free Market economy works for a lot of things. Sciences like this... not so much.
The thread writer meant Green Peace. lol. a typo.
LetsAllMakeBelieve said:
So im not alowed to stick to my opinion, but he can stick to his? also if thats what Sqrl wanted to say why did he not just say it, rather than making an inflaitory remark? If he wants truth, then surely he would welcome a different opinion, instead he refuses to debate me on the basis that he dosent like my opinion? |
Nah. The point is... in a debate it should be point/counterpoint.
When data is brought into an arguement... said data needs to be debunked before the arguement can go foward. If you can't debunk the data, you should logically concide your point... if you can't because of bias, you should at least bow out of the arguement.
He has offered data and graphs. (note the last page has the same graph but with an axis, so that problem is solved.)
He's debunked all of PS360's data. So right now... it is a matter of debunking his data. If you can't, it's not like anybody is forcing you to change your mind... but your being intelectually dishonest if you can't admit one of two things.
1) I I think I'm wrong.
or
2) I don't know enough about this subject to debate it competantly.
Either way, it's a case of debunk, or concede defeat as far as debating goes.
Like me. I don't know enough about global warming to decide either way. (if it's man-made that is.) Though I do believe I know enough about proposed carbon credit taxes to know they are a bad idea that won't do anything for global warming and instead will just redistribute wealth from 1st world countries to 3rd world countries since every plan i've seen allows said carbon credits to be transferable.
Of course said nations are likely to cut back on their disaster aid and other such things to make up for it... basically hurting the flexability of international aid, and keeping everything else pretty even.
Kasz216 said:
Nah. The point is... in a debate it should be point/counterpoint. When data is brought into an arguement... said data needs to be debunked before the arguement can go foward. If you can't debunk the data, you should logically concide your point... if you can't because of bias, you should at least bow out of the arguement. He has offered data and graphs. (note the last page has the same graph but with an axis, so that problem is solved.) He's debunked all of PS360's data. So right now... it is a matter of debunking his data. If you can't, it's not like anybody is forcing you to change your mind... but your being intelectually dishonest if you can't admit one of two things. 1) I I think I'm wrong. or 2) I don't know enough about this subject to debate it competantly. Either way, it's a case of debunk, or concede defeat as far as debating goes. Like me. I don't know enough about global warming to decide either way. Though I do believe I know enough about proposed carbon credit taxes to know they are a bad idea that won't do anything for global warming and instead will just redistribute wealth from 1st world countries to 3rd world countries since every plan i've seen allows said carbon credits to be transferable. Of course said nations are likely to cut back on their disaster aid and other such things to make up for it... basically hurting the flexability of international aid, and keeping everything else pretty even. |
i did debunk his points, i pointed out that his graphs could easily be manipulated to support either argument, i pointed out that ann article from a newspaper is likely biased or flawed. Like him i have done plenty of research, but i came to the opposite conclusion to him, why do people refuse to accept this, or do you want me to post graphs that have been manipulated and articles that are biased, the truth is that neiter of us can give hard evidence as there is none, just a volume of research, which IMO suggest that AGW is real, unless someone can give me clear consice proof that AGW isnt happening...............
Honestly i don't know how anyone can say whether or not Global Warming exists or not. I mean... to do so you would need to know how much CO2 is produced by the world.
We have no clue how much CO2 and other greenhouse gases are produced normally because we have no ways to measure some of the biggest natural causes of such gasses.
The basic assumption that global warming is man made is that the planet naturally gets rid of all the CO2 that is natural, but can't get rid of man made CO2. Which doesn't explain how tempertures have changed before then... and why Nature CO2 is different then CO2... when it has the exact same atomic composition.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
