U.N.'s Global Warming Report Under Fresh Attack (by Fox News) for Rainforest Claims - Polidicks

I wonder why Fox's "expert" climate deniers are a Czech physicist and a Canadian economist. It's almost as if they can't find anyone with experience in a relevant field who agrees with them! gasp This is exactly the same tactic used by creationists--they cite everyone from physicists to fucking DENTISTS as "scientists who don't believe in evolution."

I like how Fox extinguishes the facts with arguments like "How can global warming be real? It snowed in Houston!" Also, if anyone thinks this is a good argument, you don't understand the science behind global warming at all.

This is actually a great example of how Fox works as a propaganda outlet. The IPCC makes a mistake, and Fox wants to give them shit about it. But they can't just say "global warming is a conspiracy," because that wouldn't be journalism. So they interview "experts." They're generally kept on-hand as people Fox knows they can reliably get the "right" opinions from. So whenever a global warming story pops up, all Fox has to do is call their Czech physicist and Canadian economist, who will say "there's no global warming!" And then Fox can report that the IPCC is "drawing fire" from "experts"--a roundabout way of attacking that they're able to present as news. Sometimes they don't even bother with tertiary sources--they simply have their TV pundits say something inflammatory and then report THAT as news.

And that's why The Daily Show and The Colbert Report are more legitimate than every Fox News program put together.

The problem is that if we once will be able to prove the global warming (if ever), it could be too late.

[QUOTE=thisispain;19919342]I wonder why the two "scientists" in this thread haven't posted anything since my last post.[/QUOTE] I'm not a scientist, I'm a history major. And, this is a post after your last. :downs:

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;19919686]The problem is that if we once will be able to prove the global warming (if ever), it could be too late.[/QUOTE] It's already been proven that temperatures have been going up--that's easy enough. But science is far too complicated to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that people are responsible for it, just like we can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt how evolution works. But when the vast majority of scientists in a given field agree on something, that's as close to undisputed fact as you can get.

[QUOTE=TH89;19919558]This is actually a great example of how Fox works as a propaganda outlet. The IPCC makes a mistake, and Fox wants to give them shit about it. But they can't just say "global warming is a conspiracy," because that wouldn't be journalism. So they interview "experts." They're generally kept on-hand as people Fox knows they can reliably get the "right" opinions from. So whenever a global warming story pops up, all Fox has to do is call their Czech physicist and Canadian economist, who will say "there's no global warming!" And then Fox can report that the IPCC is "drawing fire" from "experts"--a roundabout way of attacking that they're able to present as news. Sometimes they don't even bother with tertiary sources--they simply have their TV pundits say something inflammatory and then report THAT as news.[/QUOTE] Czech Republic is officially sorry for that physicist incident, and will promptly work on his [i]correction[/i] [editline]10:16PM[/editline] [QUOTE=TH89;19919722]It's already been proven that temperatures have been going up--that's easy enough. But science is far too complicated to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that people are responsible for it, just like we can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt how evolution works. But when the vast majority of scientists in a given field agree on something, that's as close to undisputed fact as you can get.[/QUOTE] Another question is, even if global warming wasn't our work, can't we do something to ease it?

Although I say that global warming is real, I think any "legislation" to stop it will be useless. Emerging countries like India and China are exempt from any laws that global summits will create, and this year, China will build about 350 coal burning plants, just about 1 plant per day. Also, lets say Global warming is false, these plants will still pollute the air (we all know that we can [b]pollute[/b] our environment). Truly, when it comes to the environment, I believe we have passed the point of no return.

[QUOTE=Daolpu;19904268] in terms of both are making claims that are incredibly far fetched/false[/QUOTE] Yea like how they said that there were no WMDs in Iraq. PFFFFFFTTT. Seriously, What are you referring to? Those findings aren't even necessarily wrong.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;19919718]I'm not a scientist, I'm a history major. And, this is a post after your last. :downs:[/QUOTE] well at least you admit you don't know shit about science and your knowledge of history is pretty questionable too nope not at all impressed

People focus too much on global warming / climate change, busy trying to prove it or disprove it for political purposes. Hell I even remember a friend of mine who used to be concerned about pollution in his area, but because he was so influenced by the norm in Republican circles to see global warming as junk science, he suddenly did a 180 on his views. I never thought it would be hard to grasp that maybe unrestricted industrial practices aren't helping in regards to pollution. Just a crazy idea. Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children.

[QUOTE=Alan Ninja!;19907222]Whenever I think of global warming I laugh; not long ago scientists were terrified of "global cooling."[/QUOTE] No they weren't: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB3S0fnOr0M[/media]