Bluelight

Thread: The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere just hit its highest level in 800,000 years

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 74 of 74
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #51
    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    Oh I've researched it. I just wish I could get the time back because it's retarded crap.
    Out of the specific subjects I've mentioned which ones did you research, all of them? How much time did you put in before coming to the conclusion that it was all retarded crap? I'd say you got frustrated and gave up quite quickly and was never really honest about what you claim you were doing.
    Any honest and dedicated researcher into these fields will at the very least have some questions, or more likely will say that there is something unexplainable happening on our planet.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    As I said above, I seem to attract conspiracy theorists somehow. So unfortunately I know all the major conspiracies and what they believe and who the big names are. Man I wish I didn't.
    This is important. People talk about all 'conspiracy theories' and group them together. So are you saying that every single one of them is just nonsense? What about the CIA's (or others) potential involvement in the assassination of JFK? That was a conspiracy theory. We're now seeing documents being declassified which lend a lot of weight to these theories.

    The Iran-Contra scandal was a conspiracy theory. Until there was evidence it was actually happening.
    NSA conducting mass surveillance was a conspiracy theory before Snowden. Plenty more.
    Project Mockingbird and MK-Ultra were/are legitimate operations with supporting, official government documents (most destroyed). How much do you know about these specific operations?
    Do you get this feeling inside that if you start to look into anything related then you will become an Alex Jones?
    As soon as you group every single thing that the mainstream media calls a conspiracy theory into the same category as something obviously false like Flat Earth, is when you consciously decide to cut yourself off to a massive amount of information. Yeah a lot of it is bullshit. But a lot of it is also objective evidence, facts. It's up to the individual to connect the dots.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gore Vidal
    I'm not a conspiracy theorist - I'm a conspiracy analyst
    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    I don't believe in ET Jesus.
    Do you believe Jesus existed at all? Or someone that the religious myths were based on?
    Let's say the was a 'Jesus', the fact is it is more likely he was associating with interstellar/inter-dimensional beings, than his mother giving birth to him from immaculate conception.
    There are lots of references to ETs in ancient scriptures btw, but you no doubt are aware of them all since you've researched it.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    Research time is over. No more research.
    Is research time ever over? That's only true when you already know everything already.
    Although this does sound like a lot like the global warming alarmists' "the science is settled".
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #52
    Climate skeptics more eco-friendly than global-warming alarmists: study
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...obal-warming-/

    Al Gore has been accused of hypocrisy for talking the talk on climate change despite burning through fossil fuels at a rapid clip, but it turns out he?s not alone.

    A study by Cornell and the University of Michigan researchers found that those ?highly concerned? about climate change were less likely to engage in recycling and other eco-friendly behaviors than global-warming skeptics.
    Published in the April edition of the Journal of Environmental Psychology, the one-year study broke 600 participants into three groups based on their level of concern about climate change: ?highly concerned,? ?cautiously worried,? and ?skeptical.?

    The ?highly concerned? cluster was ?most supportive of government climate policies, but least likely to report individual-level actions, whereas the ?Skeptical? opposed policy solutions but were most likely to report engaging in individual-level pro-environmental behaviors,? the researchers concluded.

    Conducting the study, entitled ?Believing in climate change but not behaving sustainably,? were Cornell assistant professor Neil A. Lewis Jr. and University of Michigan researchers Michael P. Hall and Phoebe Ellsworth.
    The skeptics were the more likely than the ?highly concerned? to recycle, use public transportation and reusable
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #53
    Senior Moderator
    Sober Living
    Words
    Captain.Heroin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    My hopes are blighted, my heart is broken, my life a burden, everything around me is sad and mournful; earth has become distasteful to me, and human voices distract me. It is mercy to let me die, for if I live I shall lose my reason and become mad.
    Posts
    64,871
    Al Gore is someone who just show boats on the issue. Agreed.

    This doesn't mean you can't make reasonable life changes to help out the earth.

    Global warming is real. It's alright to hold different positions on what we should do on it, but to deny it is dangerous. It's like thinking the earth is the center of the universe. People will scoff at your ignorance hundreds of years later.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #54
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain.Heroin View Post
    Global warming is real. It's alright to hold different positions on what we should do on it, but to deny it is dangerous. It's like thinking the earth is the center of the universe. People will scoff at your ignorance hundreds of years later.
    Climate change is real.
    Anthropogenic global warming has not been conclusively proven. Anyone who says otherwise has a financial interest in doing so, doesn't understand the science or is appealing to authority.
    People will readily admit they do not know as much as climate scientists, yet will confidently parrot their work as gospel.
    The sugar lobby paid off Harvard scientists to publish fake studies demonizing dietary fat. $50,000, 50 years ago that suppressed the truth and had a massively negative impact on the world.
    Think about how much money is involved in climate change grants.

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain.Heroin View Post
    People will scoff at your ignorance hundreds of years later.
    (vaccines)
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #55
    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    Out of the specific subjects I've mentioned which ones did you research, all of them? How much time did you put in before coming to the conclusion that it was all retarded crap? I'd say you got frustrated and gave up quite quickly and was never really honest about what you claim you were doing.
    Any honest and dedicated researcher into these fields will at the very least have some questions, or more likely will say that there is something unexplainable happening on our planet.
    It's not that I researched it one time for a specific amount of time, then concluded it was crap and never looked again. Generally I've looked into a subject, determined it was almost certainly BS, then given it another chance later on when someones claimed to have something "new worth looking at", then come to the same conclusion again. Which specifically? Well all the major conspiracies, 9/11, UFO's, moon hoax, all the retarded shit about HAARP and other projects people don't understand and so believe are evil.


    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    This is important. People talk about all 'conspiracy theories' and group them together. So are you saying that every single one of them is just nonsense? What about the CIA's (or others) potential involvement in the assassination of JFK? That was a conspiracy theory. We're now seeing documents being declassified which lend a lot of weight to these theories.

    The Iran-Contra scandal was a conspiracy theory. Until there was evidence it was actually happening.
    NSA conducting mass surveillance was a conspiracy theory before Snowden. Plenty more.
    Project Mockingbird and MK-Ultra were/are legitimate operations with supporting, official government documents (most destroyed). How much do you know about these specific operations?
    Do you get this feeling inside that if you start to look into anything related then you will become an Alex Jones?
    As soon as you group every single thing that the mainstream media calls a conspiracy theory into the same category as something obviously false like Flat Earth, is when you consciously decide to cut yourself off to a massive amount of information. Yeah a lot of it is bullshit. But a lot of it is also objective evidence, facts. It's up to the individual to connect the dots.
    Well there are conspiracies, then there are "conspiracy theorists". Real conspiracies are easy to tell apart from the bs conspiracy theorists come out with. They tend to be much more incompetent, far less elaborate, and just generally far less retarded sounding. Plus, there's actually evidence that stands up to scrutiny.

    JFK "might" have been a conspiracy, it's one of the very few where I'm willing to class it as at least an outside possibility. But if there was a greater agenda at work in the assasination, which I find to be highly unlikely, the conspiracy theorists are still mostly wrong anyway. There was definitely no second gunman. That's just more overly complicated bs conspiracy theorists love to imagine. The idea that the assasination itself was part of a greater conspiracy, unlikely, but at least not the kind of stupid impossible ideas conspiracy theorists usually come up with.

    Yes, there have been conspiracies within the government, but in reality most were totally inept and incompetent. Just as you'd expect from the government. MKULTRA is an example. A conspiracy yes, but totally retarded on the governments part. An idiotic waste of money. I've never found any evidence that anything of any real worth came out of the project. The government has come up with lots of really stupid and illegal projects over the years. The difference is in reality the evidence is that it's the result of a bloated incompetent bureaucracy. What's especially stupid about conspiracy theorists is that they BOTH think that the government is so crazy over the top competent as to come up with and sucessfully pull off this kind of shit, but also totally unsucessful at actually keeping any of it secret to the point that conspiracy theorists don't work it all out.

    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    Do you believe Jesus existed at all? Or someone that the religious myths were based on?
    Let's say the was a 'Jesus', the fact is it is more likely he was associating with interstellar/inter-dimensional beings, than his mother giving birth to him from immaculate conception.
    There are lots of references to ETs in ancient scriptures btw, but you no doubt are aware of them all since you've researched it.
    Yes there likely was a man who we know as jesus. That the christian mythology is based off. But no, he was almost definitely not associated with interstellar beings. Let alone inter dimensional beings (for fucks sake, it's never enough with conspiracy theorists, it can't just be aliens, it's gotta be other dimensions, and worse still they don't even know what the word dimension even means!). There is absolutely no evidence of that. There's an easy answer here apart from god and aliens. It's that the story is WRONG. That perhaps Mary might want to lie about getting pregnant to some random man. Or that the whole thing is wrong all together and made up after the fact. And there are no references to ET in ancient scriptures. And yes, I am aware of the stupid shit you're likely talking about.

    Like the Sumerian tablets and the anunnaki. God the utter bullshit people imagine. It's all bullshit interpretations. Humans have been recording bullshit for a LONG time. The mormans believe Joseph Smith found golden plates (which would have weighed a fucking ton and match with no way of recording information from the time period) depicting all sorts of shit that is wrong with whats known about prehistoric america. And that magical stones translated it from bullshit egyption into... english, but not the english they spoke at the time. "Ye old english". Apparently god needed to make it sound more like the king james bible for PR purposes. That or it's all bullshit. Is that true too? It can't ALL be true, it's self contradictory. But people are dumb and tend to think old civilizations had access to some amazing secret knowledge and everything written back then was litterally true. Then others believe it was aliens. Not sure which is stupider.

    It's not even just that it's often wrong, the interpretations themselves are usually wrong. Conspiracy theorists just make up new interpretations that say what they wanna hear. So ancient civilizations talking about a god becomes talking about aliens. And they start imagining images of grays and space ships and other retarded shit.


    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    Is research time ever over? That's only true when you already know everything already.
    Although this does sound like a lot like the global warming alarmists' "the science is settled".
    Research time is never over in the broad "learning new things" sense of the word outside any context. But it can definitely be over about a particular subject. And the science IS settled by the way. And you're right, it is similar. Once you've done a sufficient amount of research, why would you waste precious resources doing more? Once everythings been looked into, relooked into, studied, restudied, reverified. Why would you continue the same shit forever? There's being prudent and doing science, and then there's BULLSHIT. and this, is BULLSHIT. Most people are dumb, and can't tell the difference, but there IS a difference.

    If I've already looked into something and gotten the same result a hundred times before, then do it a hundred more, WHY would I continue? Just in case it changes on search 201? It was stupid to start with! I could be spending that time learning new things that are real. We live in an amazing age where we can learn almost anything about anything, and morons waste it propagating diseases of thought. I have a name for this by the way, I call it the brain AIDS. When you spend all day watching conspiracy videos on youtube, or propagating such things, that's the brain AIDS. When you think aspartame gives you cancer, that's brain AIDS. And the brain AIDS isn't just humorously retarded. It's seriously dangerous. People die from this stupidity. They trust magic healing water called homeopathy. They think vaccines are giving them autism. Innocent children have died from the retardation of adults.

    And this, is what I meant when I said earlier, that I'm happy to just NOT talk about this shit and leave it alone. But if pressed on it, I won't be sugar coating it. But conspiracy theorists feel compelled to spread their beliefs. They think they have evidence that's indisputable. They don't even realize how wrong and unscientific it all is, cause they just don't have the reasoning skills to see it. And they don't know enough about the techniques to manipulate people to realize they've been duped.

    Man, I don't like insulting people, but it's like I said earlier in the other thread, some views just can't be sugar coated while preserving the meaning. So when conspiracy theorists don't get the hint, and press me on it, I can either lie, which I don't wanna do, and will invite more conspiracy talk. Or tell the truth. I'd have been happy to just not discuss it at all. Well, not happy, but I accept that it's a phenomenon out of my control, all I can control is how it affects me. So I'm willing to just ignore it. Hell I usually let conspiracy theorists and the other brain AIDS types say their BS to people totally uncontested. Just so we can not have the argument where I'm gonna wind up calling them an idiot. But a lot of the time I'm not given a choice.

    I've given all this shit an opportunity to convince me, several times in fact. I've watched hours of this shit. Loose change, ancient aliens bs, and lesser known shit about the amazing life changing powers of the torus. God knows how much of my life I won't get back because of a combination of knowing way too many victims of the brain AIDS and my own desire to give everything the benefit of the doubt and be sure I've given even stupider ideas the time to make their case. Every time its the same. There's a point at which you've done your due diligence and are right to stop wasting time on it anymore.
    Last edited by JessFR; 18-05-2018 at 10:21.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #56
    OK so thanks for the reply but you really need to stop calling people dumb. If I'm being completely honest I find what you are saying "dumb" but there's no need for me to repeatedly tell you that. It doesn't help and it doesn't change or sway anyone's mind. It's also extremely condescending because from my point of view you've either not taken a serious and discerning look at these things, or you are simply not adept enough to separate the legitimate leads from the disinformation.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    Well there are conspiracies, then there are "conspiracy theorists". Real conspiracies are easy to tell apart from the bs conspiracy theorists come out with. They tend to be much more incompetent, far less elaborate, and just generally far less retarded sounding. Plus, there's actually evidence that stands up to scrutiny.
    OK so now we're getting some clearer definitions but you're still not addressing the important issue. One specific theory can have a whole bunch of nonsense attached to it but still some information that is legitimate. That is how disinfo works by muddying the waters, the goal being to overwhelm someone like yourself with all the nonsense that they completely discard the entire theory (throwing the baby out with the bathwater)

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    Yes, there have been conspiracies within the government, but in reality most were totally inept and incompetent. Just as you'd expect from the government.
    How much have you looked into Iran-Contra? This was the opposite of what you describe. It doesn't always take a massive number of people to execute a nefarious plan, and often jobs are compartmentalized so someone can have a mission yet be completely unaware of the bigger plan they are contributing to. For example the Manhattan Project. The shadow government produced an atomic bomb and even Congress had no idea. It's estimated that up to 100,000 people were involved.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    MKULTRA is an example. A conspiracy yes, but totally retarded on the governments part. An idiotic waste of money. I've never found any evidence that anything of any real worth came out of the project.
    Well then you would know that almost all the official records were destroyed. Even from what little we know, this one is extremely shocking and a real eye-opener as to what the government is willing to do - and for no apparent reason according to yourself. Also it is not crazy to suggest that these types of experiments would continue just under a different name. It is crazy to definitively state "they would definitely not be doing this anymore". Based on what? We know for a fact they were already doing it.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    What's especially stupid about conspiracy theorists is that they BOTH think that the government is so crazy over the top competent as to come up with and sucessfully pull off this kind of shit, but also totally unsucessful at actually keeping any of it secret to the point that conspiracy theorists don't work it all out
    The honest researchers do not think that they've worked it all out, they know how much information is still under wraps and are also aware of the disinfo. They are merely looking closer than others and focusing at least some of their efforts on things that the government tried or is trying to keep secret.

    Also I am not referring to the types of people that jump on every single conspiracy theory and think that any youtube video with an occult title is true. Those people are idiots and the "conspiracy theorists" I assume you are referring to. So a conspiracy theorist is not a conspiracy analyst, because as you've agreed there are some conspiracies that are true and therefore worthy of serious analysis. i hope you can comprehend this huge difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    Let alone inter dimensional beings (for fucks sake, it's never enough with conspiracy theorists, it can't just be aliens, it's gotta be other dimensions, and worse still they don't even know what the word dimension even means!)
    It's actually inter-density but most people only know the term dimensional. A density being like a ceiling and a dimension being more like a horizontal wall.

    Aliens exist but in parallel universes ? and we might actually see them someday (International Business Times)
    https://www.ibtimes.co.in/aliens-exi...ly-see-them-so meday-769332

    Are we alone? Humans have been looking for an answer since forever. A group of scientists now believes that aliens do exist, but they are in a parallel universe or in another dimension. And, dark energy might be the common thread between these universes.

    Two closely related research papers were published recently by scientists from Durham University. The papers questioned dark energy and the potential for the existence of alien life in other universes, reports ScienceExaminer. Prevailing theories say that there is a certain amount of dark energy in the universe and that amount is ideal for the existence of life. There is just about enough dark energy to allow the formation of planets and suns as well as planets like Earth where life is possible.


    Lately I've witnessed an explosion of serious alien-related articles in the media. If scientists are taking an issue seriously, and now we know the government is spending (at least) millions on it too, does that still make it a conspiracy theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    And there are no references to ET in ancient scriptures. And yes, I am aware of the stupid shit you're likely talking about.
    Studying historical records isn't stupid shit. Thinking that you know what it all means is quite daft though.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    Humans have been recording bullshit for a LONG time......That or it's all bullshit. Is that true too? It can't ALL be true, it's self contradictory. But people are dumb and tend to think old civilizations had access to some amazing secret knowledge and everything written back then was litterally true. Then others believe it was aliens. Not sure which is stupider.
    Well they did cut and then move stones that were up to 3,000 tons. One stone, think about how much that actually is. Please don't tell me that it was done with ropes, pulleys and a million slaves. Think about what we would need today to be able to do this. And the most important question remains unanswered - why? We have no clear idea why they would go to the trouble just guesses but the stone megaliths all around the world are evidence of a seemingly advanced civilization. Advanced enough to leave us puzzled and we are super smart.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    And the science IS settled by the way
    If you're referring to climate change then no that isn't true. I've personally spoken to a scientist that disagrees.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    Loose change, ancient aliens bs, and lesser known shit about the amazing life changing powers of the torus.
    I wouldn't call those videos proof of anything. But I'm going to assume that you assume that I treat those videos as gospel and believe 100% of their claims unquestioned.
    I agree with you if you're just going to rant then maybe you shouldn't comment on 'conspiracy theories' as a whole. But if you can separate your emotion from an argument and stick to discussing the facts of one theory then you may prove that you are as serious as you've claimed, and you may even learn something.

    I don't want to de-rail the thread too much but what is your opinion on 9/11? You said you've looked into it. If you say something like - Bin Laden definitely masterminded 19 Saudis to bring down 3 skyscrapers with 2 planes in NYC - then I guess this debate is over. We can agree that both of us are dumb.

    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #57
    Moderator
    Current Events and Politics
    cduggles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Incognito
    Posts
    4,336
    JGrimez, can you expand on your thoughts on 9/11? I have read and seen a few things that I wouldn't call "conspiracy theories" but moreso information that wasn't really given equal time in the "mainstream" media?

    (OP was cool with going off topic.)
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #58
    Thanks, there's a few things surrounding 9/11 worth looking into:

    Flight audio. Plane transponders turned off and the military's delayed response and lack of interception
    Norman Mineta's testimony under oath from when he was sitting next to Cheney at the Pentagon
    Suspicious lack of video footage of Pentagon strike
    Reports of secondary explosions in the WTC lobbies from police, FD
    Building 7 imploding like a controlled demolition yet not being hit by a plane
    9/11 Commission only created after victim uproar and doesn't mention WTC#7
    Larry Silverstein's insurance on WTC complex
    The 2 vans of Israelis that were detained - one group celebrating the attacks, another group allegedly with explosives in van. Quietly released.
    Bush family close ties to Bin Laden family
    Osama Bin Laden denying involvement in interview and reported dead in Pakistani media Dec, 2001
    PNAC's 2000 report/prediction in Rebuilding America's Defenses
    Nobody in US government held accountable
    Link of 9/11 attacks to starting wars in Afghanistan and then Iraq
    Lack of public evidence during capture of Osama

    Also just recently learned of this:
    Odigo Says Workers Were Warned of Attack
    https://www.haaretz.com/1.5410231

    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #59
    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    OK so thanks for the reply but you really need to stop calling people dumb. If I'm being completely honest I find what you are saying "dumb" but there's no need for me to repeatedly tell you that. It doesn't help and it doesn't change or sway anyone's mind. It's also extremely condescending because from my point of view you've either not taken a serious and discerning look at these things, or you are simply not adept enough to separate the legitimate leads from the disinformation.
    I said earlier today about how you go about debating things with people if you wanna try and change their mind. There's no point in doing it though unless of course you ARE trying to change someones mind. And I'm not, cause I can't. Like, If I can take some time to try and change someones mind about something and help a little, that's all great. But conspiracy theorists have often spent years brainwashing themselves. To make any serious impact at all, we would have to sit down, and probably spend weeks, maybe longer, going over every single last shred of evidence, and that's all for the slim chance that it might make a difference. All for one person. And even then that will only work if the other person is actually willing to invest that kind of time in hearing that they may be wrong. And most people won't. Which honestly I think is kinda bullshit given how much time I've been subjected to this shit.

    Yeah, technically you're right, in the sense that in terms of overall intelligence, conspiracy theorists aren't really any stupider than anyone else. But the shit they believe IS stupid. Thing is, even an average person, or even a slightly above average person, with the right psychological makeup, can so easily brainwash themselves.

    The nature of things like youtube and the internet, is that it causes the most effective brainwashing materials to be the most likely to be viewed and shared. It's not even deliberate. Sometimes it IS deliberate, and in those cases it's to drive book sales and ad revenue, but a lot of the time it's just natural selection at work.

    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    OK so now we're getting some clearer definitions but you're still not addressing the important issue. One specific theory can have a whole bunch of nonsense attached to it but still some information that is legitimate. That is how disinfo works by muddying the waters, the goal being to overwhelm someone like yourself with all the nonsense that they completely discard the entire theory (throwing the baby out with the bathwater)
    Except a lot of people DON'T do that. First of all, almost all the shit I would consider totally debunked about any given conspiracy theory, is shit that I've found almost all the adherents believe and share. It's not from niche sources that most of the conspiracy theorists reject. Because most conspiracy theorists believe EVERYTHING. They don't reject almost anything. And this is actually how a lot of this works. I've said a couple times about how there are all these tricks that can brainwash people. This is one of them. Information overload. You provide so many shitty shreds of evidence, so many MANY dubious pieces of information, that people see it all and think to themselves "well if even 10% of that is true, there must be something real here!". But 10% of it ISN'T true. Usually NONE of it is true. By not true, I mean either outright false, or the implication is false.

    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    How much have you looked into Iran-Contra? This was the opposite of what you describe. It doesn't always take a massive number of people to execute a nefarious plan, and often jobs are compartmentalized so someone can have a mission yet be completely unaware of the bigger plan they are contributing to. For example the Manhattan Project. The shadow government produced an atomic bomb and even Congress had no idea. It's estimated that up to 100,000 people were involved.
    There's a BIG difference between real conspiracies, there the objective is largely simple, build a new a better bomb, destabilize a government, etc, and what conspiracy theorists come up with. The existence of real conspiracies that often barely resemble the elaborate insanity of conspiracy theorists doesn't add any evidence to what conspiracy theorists come up with. Believing the government wants a better bomb or to fund its interests overseas and evades oversight, is NOT the same as thinking every bad thing that happens in the US is a false flag operation. And not just a false flag but an insanely convoluted one.

    It's never enough with conspiracy theorists. It can't JUST be that the government let 9/11 happen. They had to have made it happen, and done it in this absurdly oversophisticated way with smuggling thermite and explosives into a packed building then diverting planes then firing a missle into the pentagon. It can't JUST be aliens, it has to be interdimentional energy beings that defy physics outright. And it's because it's all one and the time, it's all because of the same flawed reasoning. Conspiracy theorists come up with ideas, then the best presentation of those ideas cause others to believe them, so in the end, EVERYTHING is believed. Because they want to believe them. They think they're being critical but they're not.

    It's not just about being intelligent, even fairly intelligent people can be brainwashed by this shit. For the most part, proper science and reasoning skills are something you learn how to do and why you do it that way. And there's a lot to learn about how you can manipulate people psychologically susceptable people. Brainwashing exists, but it doesn't look like MKULTRA or what conspiracy theorists imagine. It's all just exploting flaws in peoples reasoning skills. There's an entire industry devoted to it called advertising.

    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    Well then you would know that almost all the official records were destroyed. Even from what little we know, this one is extremely shocking and a real eye-opener as to what the government is willing to do - and for no apparent reason according to yourself. Also it is not crazy to suggest that these types of experiments would continue just under a different name. It is crazy to definitively state "they would definitely not be doing this anymore". Based on what? We know for a fact they were already doing it.
    I didn't say they weren't doing it anymore. They might be. I tend to doubt it because of the damage it could do if it were uncovered at a time when public confidence is so low. But it's possible. But it was a stupid project to start with. If it does still exist, most likely it's evolved into a modern version where it uses information to cause people to brainwash themselves, much like conspiracy theorists do, or how advertising works. Using drugs to mind control people is all fiction, it doesn't work. It's worth remembering who "the government" is. With MKUltra we're largely talking about shit in the intelligence community, which can be pretty seperate from the executive, which can be pretty seperate from congress. It's a bloated mess of incompetence and waste. But conspiracy theorists imagine it's BOTH an incompetent mess and also insanely competetent. And usually the way they imagine government works doesn't bare much resemblence to the reality. The reality being that the shit the government works in, all the dirty classified secrets, are all mostly very boring compared to what the theorists imagine. We know this because of how bad a job they do keeping it secret.

    It's not like it's a surprise, the government wants power, it wants to guard its interests overseas, and it's a bloated mess run by humans so it's usually retarded and inept. The other thing is that conspiracy theorists generally know almost nothing about the fields they're talking about to know why what they suggest is wrong. Like 9/11 with how controlled demolition works, ET's with physics, or what a plane hitting a building is supposed to look like.

    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    The honest researchers do not think that they've worked it all out, they know how much information is still under wraps and are also aware of the disinfo. They are merely looking closer than others and focusing at least some of their efforts on things that the government tried or is trying to keep secret.

    Also I am not referring to the types of people that jump on every single conspiracy theory and think that any youtube video with an occult title is true. Those people are idiots and the "conspiracy theorists" I assume you are referring to. So a conspiracy theorist is not a conspiracy analyst, because as you've agreed there are some conspiracies that are true and therefore worthy of serious analysis. i hope you can comprehend this huge difference.
    This strikes me as similar to people who research paranormal phenomenon. It's something that, while almost always fruitless, could be done in a serious and scientific way. But I've never met anyone, EVER, not even ONCE, with conspiracies or the paranormal, who actually seemed to be doing that. Without exception they were all already believers in a whole range of crazy ideas ALL of which had already been as disproven as disproven gets. I've never met anyone, not even online, I've never met a single person, in any capacity, IN MY LIFE. Who ONLY believed one or two conspiracy theories. If they believed one, they believed at almost all the others too to some extent. The only exceptions being the most insanely extreme theories even among the theorisies, like that public figures are lizard aliens. The conspiracy theorists conspiracy theory.

    You "could" do it scientifically, but I've never met anyone who has. And it requires first learning a lot of other stuff about science and scientific method and biases and logical fallacies, and if that shit interested you to start with, chances are you'd just keep learning about that and forget about the fruitless and boring search for either conspiracies or the paranormal. Because once you start doing science with those they become a lot less interesting. And that novelty, and sense of having secret knowledge, is the need the theorists have filled by this stuff.

    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    It's actually inter-density but most people only know the term dimensional. A density being like a ceiling and a dimension being more like a horizontal wall.

    Aliens exist but in parallel universes ? and we might actually see them someday (International Business Times)
    https://www.ibtimes.co.in/aliens-exi...someday-769332

    [/FONT]
    URL is showing a page not found error. So anyway, different realities, if that IS what's being talked about instead of something stupid. Yeah they probably exist, and there are probably what you'd call aliens there. But UFO hunters don't stop there, they don't stop with the science. They take that and make it into science fiction, bad science fiction. None of it means aliens are HERE in a meaningful way though. There's no evidence of that that stands up to science.

    EDIT: When I was editing out some of the formatting problems I was able to fix the URL so it works, media sensationalism as usual. I mean yeah, underneith the sensationalist BS and bad terminology, there's something real. Other realities are totally plausible, like I said, but none of that, and nothing said in the article, suggests alien intervention in human society at any time.

    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    Lately I've witnessed an explosion of serious alien-related articles in the media. If scientists are taking an issue seriously, and now we know the government is spending (at least) millions on it too, does that still make it a conspiracy theory?


    Studying historical records isn't stupid shit. Thinking that you know what it all means is quite daft though.
    Media is not science. The media takes science and sensationalizes it. Most of what you've said there is too vague to say much, and I'm not gonna assume anything. What IS true is that conspiracy theory shit and UFO and paranormal shit is experiencing an explosion in interested in the PUBLIC. So of course the media is getting on board.

    It IS worth searching for alien signals, and we do that. The idea that aliens exist is perfectly rational. Saying they DON'T exist is what's irrational. But the UFO types like the conspiracy theorists take it all and turn it into bullshit. They turn a small idea, and explode it into an insane one built out of nothing.

    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    Well they did cut and then move stones that were up to 3,000 tons. One stone, think about how much that actually is. Please don't tell me that it was done with ropes, pulleys and a million slaves. Think about what we would need today to be able to do this. And the most important question remains unanswered - why? We have no clear idea why they would go to the trouble just guesses but the stone megaliths all around the world are evidence of a seemingly advanced civilization. Advanced enough to leave us puzzled and we are super smart.
    No, they aren't. We've worked out how it was done, people have even done it to show that it could be done. It's all this logical fallacy that how it look NOW must be how it always looked and nothing else was used to construct it. It makes all these assumtions about what societies back then were like that don't hold up in fact. Humans have come up with all sorts of ingenious building tricks, many are very old.

    But just hypothetically, even if we didn't know how it were done, that still wouldn't mean aliens. That would mean we don't know. It wouldn't be evidence of anything. This is what I call the "gray of the gaps" phenomenon. Everything that is unexplained is aliens. I think it was dawkins who came up with the phrase "god of the gaps" to describe how religious types used any gap in the fossil record as evidence of god. I've come up with my own spins on that. I have the gray of the gaps, where anything unexplained is aliens. And the ghost of the gaps, anything unexplained is paranormal. But it's not. If it's unexplained it's unexplained.

    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    If you're referring to climate change then no that isn't true. I've personally spoken to a scientist that disagrees.
    I couldn't give a shit. "A scientist" could mean anything. It's arguing by proxy authority. It means nothing. It's settled.A few individuals of dubious understanding doesn't mean anything. Using this kind of reason to doubt, means you can't act on ANYTHING in science because NOTHING is certain if you let that tiny level of doubt be reason to not act.

    Besides, even if it wasn't settled, basic risk analysis would favor action anyway, so it hardly matters.

    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    I wouldn't call those videos proof of anything. But I'm going to assume that you assume that I treat those videos as gospel and believe 100% of their claims unquestioned.
    I agree with you if you're just going to rant then maybe you shouldn't comment on 'conspiracy theories' as a whole. But if you can separate your emotion from an argument and stick to discussing the facts of one theory then you may prove that you are as serious as you've claimed, and you may even learn something.

    I don't want to de-rail the thread too much but what is your opinion on 9/11? You said you've looked into it. If you say something like - Bin Laden definitely masterminded 19 Saudis to bring down 3 skyscrapers with 2 planes in NYC - then I guess this debate is over. We can agree that both of us are dumb.

    [/FONT]
    Finally at the end! By the way, if you make another post like this, I can't promise how quickly I'll be able to reply. You're welcome to do so and I'll reply to it when I can, but almost all my posts are done on my phone, but these last 2 on this thread have been too complex to do that way so I had to get my computer up and running. It's no problem, it doesn't take long, it just means I can't always respond as quickly as I could when using my phone.

    And yes, I think both of us are going to think the others beliefs are dumb. 9/11 is probably the conspiracy I've looked into more than anyone else. Since it's one of the most significant, popular, and important were it true. And yes, I think that al-qaeda did it, and I think it happened the way it was shown. It's not like this was even the first time. They'd tried to knock down the buildings once before but they screwed it up. It wasn't just bin laden though, not even mostly. He had help from people with enough engineering understanding to see it was possible. They fucked it up the first time around, but it worked when they tried again.

    You said it yourself, a small group can conspire to do a lot of damage. But no, that's clearly so unbelievable. There's no way they could have come up with something as impressive as using box cutters to hijack planes, something that has a LONG history in terrorism, and smash them into things. That's clearly way too complicated. Much more likely they somehow snuck piles of explosives into the towers then hit the pentagon with a cruise missle.

    Not wanting to assume what you believe, but just... to throw this out there. You don't have to melt steel to weaken the supports of a building and cause it to collapse. As I said, I've gone into a lot of conspiracy theory's. And 9/11 is the one I've spent more time on than any other.
    Last edited by JessFR; 18-05-2018 at 20:47. Reason: Fixed lots of formatting issues.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #60
    I already posted this on Bluelight elsewhere but this is a pretty appropriate thread. It relates to a new promising technique for sequestering CO2 by injecting it in volcanic Basalt where minerals in the Basalt literally turn CO2 into stone. The process looks to be cost prohibitive at this stage but could be potentially scaled up and become cost effective in the future. At some point if the consequence of CO2 in the atmosphere become high enough we may have no choice but to intervene on behalf of the environment and our own survival and this looks like a potentially promising avenue

    https://www.sciencealert.com/scienti...climate-change
    Reply With Quote
     

  11. Collapse Details
     
    #61
    Moderator
    Psychedelic Drugs
    Trip Reports
    Philosophy and Spirituality
    The Dark Side
    Xorkoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    In the mountains
    Posts
    28,895
    Wow that would be amazing to have what basically amounts to a CO2 mop! I hope it pans out.

    To people who deny that humans are accelerating global warming/climate change, I feel like the only way to refute that it's happening is to refute that we are dumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. And to suggest that we are not seems pretty silly, since burning fossil fuels DOES release gaseous carbon dioxide into the air, and we burn staggering amounts of fossil fuels. It is simply scientific fact that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. The more of it in the atmosphere, the less heat can radiate back out into space. Obviously burning fossil fuels accelerates the greenhouse effect. Yes, we're coming out of an ice age still, I know. The planet is warming naturally, too. But the rate of change is unprecedented compared to evidence we have of past natural climate change (for example from ancient arctic/antarctic ice cores, residues left in rock strata, etc). We aren't supposed to see, in one human lifetime, significant sea level change and the elimination of sea ice in the summer at the north pole. Coral reefs are dying too, you could go there and see it for yourself. Global climate change is supposed to happen on a geological scale, over tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of years. The evidence is everywhere. I tend to agree with Jess (I think it was Jess), that hundreds of years from now, people are going to be incredulous that anyone could have denied our impact.
    Reply With Quote
     

  12. Collapse Details
     
    #62
    Moderator
    Current Events and Politics
    cduggles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Incognito
    Posts
    4,336
    ^ I actually think we will screw up the atmosphere enough to enter the age of the squid/octupodes (octopuses/octopi are also acceptable).

    They're quite smart and I think they're next. Or the lizard people.

    aifhl usually posts something grim from NASA. I'm half anticipating and half scared.

    It's interesting that Secretary of Defense Mattis recognizes the threat of climate change as a possible national security threat that the military should be prepared to deal with somehow.

    It's like of like a meme I put up awhile ago. If we clean up the air and water, etc. and global warming isn't really happening, then what? It's not a bad thing.
    Reply With Quote
     

  13. Collapse Details
     
    #63
    Senior Moderator
    Sober Living
    Words
    Captain.Heroin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    My hopes are blighted, my heart is broken, my life a burden, everything around me is sad and mournful; earth has become distasteful to me, and human voices distract me. It is mercy to let me die, for if I live I shall lose my reason and become mad.
    Posts
    64,871
    A lot of the carbon dioxide is already dissolved in the ocean, causing acidification.
    Reply With Quote
     

  14. Collapse Details
     
    #64
    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    Except a lot of people DON'T do that.
    I know, so what? Stop talking about those people. I don't give a fuck about those people.
    All you do is rant about idiots and fail to prove any of my evidence is stupid.
    I agree with you that 99% of the stuff is nonsense.
    But you're saying that absolutely nothing is true, even though you've admitted some of it is.
    Maybe you should be clearer about the difference between a conspiracy and a conspiracy theory.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    so in the end, EVERYTHING is believed. Because they want to believe them. They think they're being critical but they're not.
    Once again, not referring to those people.
    It's the same with people who believe everything that the mainstream media tells them.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    But it was a stupid project to start with. If it does still exist, most likely it's evolved into a modern version where it uses information to cause people to brainwash themselves, much like conspiracy theorists do, or how advertising works. Using drugs to mind control people is all fiction, it doesn't work.
    I'm glad you've worked on the project and saw all of the destroyed documents.
    Drugs don't influence people's minds..... ?
    You think that they got caught and just stopped. It's just as plausible that they continued under a different name with increased secrecy.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    The reality being that the shit the government works in, all the dirty classified secrets, are all mostly very boring compared to what the theorists imagine. We know this because of how bad a job they do keeping it secret.
    Assumptions. You do not know if the stuff that was leaked showing the government was conducting unethical human experiment is only a fraction of what is really happening. You think everything secret has leaked already lol. Based on what. And you're glossing over the fact that the government was conducting unethical human experiments. That's a fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    Like 9/11 with how controlled demolition works
    How about architects, structural engineers, scientists and demolition experts. Do you care for their opinion?
    It also doesn't take a genius to look at the collapse of Building 7 and say that it at least appears like a controlled demolition.
    If you cannot admit that it at the very least looks like one then you are the one who has been brainwashed.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWorDrTC0Qg
    I mean seriously, office fires? This is my main litmus test to see how much cognitive dissonance a person is experiencing.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    ET's with physics,
    Ironic that the detractors of the ET phenomenon claim to know themselves how advanced technology works and also the intentions of ETs, who they also claim are fictional.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    or what a plane hitting a building is supposed to look like.
    The architects of the WTC have stated the buildings were designed to withstand being hit by an aircraft. They were built with this is mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    This strikes me as similar to people who research paranormal phenomenon. It's something that, while almost always fruitless, could be done in a serious and scientific way. But I've never met anyone, EVER, not even ONCE, with conspiracies or the paranormal, who actually seemed to be doing that.
    Seriously stop talking to insane people. I met a crazy doctor once does that mean all doctors are crazy?
    This brings me back to my main point that you are not qualified to give your opinion on this subject:

    Quote Originally Posted by https://www.futurehealth.org/populum/page.php?f=Parapsychology-and-the-Par-by-Grant-Lawrence-100316-459.html
    One of the most widely performed extra-sensory perception experiments is the Ganzfield test. In this test, a subject is deprived of sensory stimulus while a sender attempts to send random images mentally. The subject repeats out loud the mental images that he or she is receiving and those responses are compared to the visual images sent by the sender.

    "By chance, the average subject should guess the right target 25% of the time but Edinburgh's Koestler Parapsychological Unit often achieves 33% . Also, "Between 1974 and 2004, 88 Ganzfeld experiments were done, reporting 1,008 hits out of 3,145 tests (a 32.1% hit rate).[11] In 1982, Charles Honorton presented a paper at the annual convention of the Parapsychological Association that summarized the results of the Ganzfeld experiments up to that date, and concluded that they represented sufficient evidence to demonstrate the existence of psi."

    The amount of experiments and the massive data from decades of research is overwhelming. Yet, The skeptics always say, after decades of proof, that the experiments are flawed (even before examining them) and/or that more proof is needed to make a firm conclusion. No matter how much scientific and empirical evidence is gathered concerning the paranormal, the skeptics will always decide that the massive amount of replicated proof obtained will not meet their unscientific and ill defined requirement of 'extraordinary evidence.'
    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    No, they aren't. We've worked out how it was done, people have even done it to show that it could be done
    I haven't seen anyone move a 3,000 ton stone or even a 1,500 ton stone (Baalbek) without using advanced equipment.
    One of my questions was also WHY. Your answers are insufficient.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    But just hypothetically, even if we didn't know how it were done, that still wouldn't mean aliens.
    Never said it was aliens, I said we do not know how it was done. You assume too much.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    I couldn't give a shit. "A scientist" could mean anything. It's arguing by proxy authority. It means nothing. It's settled.
    lol science is never settled. Saying that is unscientific.

    Quote Originally Posted by JessFR View Post
    Not wanting to assume what you believe, but just... to throw this out there. You don't have to melt steel to weaken the supports of a building and cause it to collapse. As I said, I've gone into a lot of conspiracy theory's. And 9/11 is the one I've spent more time on than any other.
    If that's the case then I'm disappointed with your conclusions.
    I would've preferred you addressed the specific points I brought up regarding 9/11 but that's fine you claim you've looked into it and have made up your mind.
    I've spoken to fairly educated people who believe that Building 7 looks like it collapsed from fires.
    IMO they're not being honest because they're afraid of what questions will arise if they are.
    Reply With Quote
     

  15. Collapse Details
     
    #65
    This is a complete waste of time. Like I said right from the start, to people like you, it seems all so convincing, so absolute. So much so that anyone who has seen the "evidence" and doesn't believe has to be in denial.

    You act like you think 99% of it is crap, but based on what you've said, it looks to me a lot more like 10 or 20%. Probably the same 10 or 20% most conspiracy theorists don't believe, which is to say the most extreme suggestions. It's how they convince themselves they're being critical.

    Man, this isn't going anywhere. And it's off topic. So how about this, I'll say what you wanna hear and we will call it a day.

    Deep down I and everyone else who's seen the evidence knows that <insert conspiracy of choice> is real, but we're too brainwashed by <insert preferred target> to accept it and or in too much denial.

    Therefore we shall continue to be in denial, and we will leave it at that.
    Reply With Quote
     

  16. Collapse Details
     
    #66
    Moderator
    Current Events and Politics
    cduggles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Incognito
    Posts
    4,336
    Agreed. Let's get back on the terrifying topic please.

    Paging aihfl for scary NASA stuff. Thanks!
    Reply With Quote
     

  17. Collapse Details
     
    #67
    Moderator
    Current Events and Politics
    Non-Electronic Music Discussion
    swilow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Shielding off the weakening beams of salvation shining upon the mournful gloom of Earth
    Posts
    28,604
    Jgrimez stay on topic please.

    Your "method" seems to be inserting all manner of unrelated content into your posts. It makes them unreadable. Please drop the conspiracy stuff, it is off topic and generally uninteresting. CEP is not the place for it. Which you do know by now.
    Reply With Quote
     

  18. Collapse Details
     
    #68
    ^mod said the OP was cool with us going off-topic for a bit. That conversation is over.

    I don't know what you mean by 'conspiracy stuff'. Is discussing government documents considered conspiracy? Honestly, it is confusing.
    I'm getting labeled a conspiracy theorist every time I say something that doesn't align with liberal media. I'd rather people either ignore me or address the argument instead of attacking me personally.
    Reply With Quote
     

  19. Collapse Details
     
    #69
    Bluelighter zephyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Your dads face
    Posts
    22,009
    Given the atmospheric conditions of earth have fluctuated significantly over billions of years and has had a series of sudden catastrophic changes caused by living organisms in the past, the himan factor is likely to be the next catalyst of change.

    Oxygen is just a byproduct of animals including us.


    Nothing else really needs it so its not the end of the world if animals die out.


    Stuff like this makes me feel insignificant. Humans are not the be all and end all.
    Reply With Quote
     

  20. Collapse Details
     
    #70
    High CO2 also means more vegetation.
    Reply With Quote
     

  21. Collapse Details
     
    #71
    Quote Originally Posted by JGrimez View Post
    ^mod said the OP was cool with us going off-topic for a bit. That conversation is over.

    I don't know what you mean by 'conspiracy stuff'. Is discussing government documents considered conspiracy? Honestly, it is confusing.
    I'm getting labeled a conspiracy theorist every time I say something that doesn't align with liberal media. I'd rather people either ignore me or address the argument instead of attacking me personally.
    It's a worthwhile question, what is a conspiracy theorist. Here's what it's not, in this context I mean. It's not someone who simply theorizes about conspiracies. The term is a label that has grown beyond that. In this context, it is someone who exhibits what could easily be seen as an obsession with certain kinds of conspiracies and how they go about them. Honestly I couldn't straight up define the word for you without thinking about it a lot more, it's one of those "I easily recognize it but can't easily tell you how I recognize it" things. But to take a stab at it, it's people who come up with extraordinary theories that don't resemble established history in known conspiracies and their motives and activities. And rely on evidence that is challenged by most authorities in their respective subject matter as a misinterpretation or otherwise false.

    Believing in a conspiracy to say, cover up illegal wiretapping, is not inherently being a conspiracy theorist. It's all about how at odds the belief is with what's considered with mainstream and how disregarded the evidence is by its respective expert communities.

    Which doesn't itself absolutely prove any given theory is wrong, though it certainly makes it very likely. But in the end its not about right and wrong. It's about the fact most people aren't interested in listening to it nonstop.

    I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds it a constant reminder about how stupid people can be and by extention all the problems caused by such ways of thinking. It's very much like religious extremists. And like a religion it can get very annoying to nonbelievers.
    Reply With Quote
     

  22. Collapse Details
     
    #72
    Since my important post was removed from the other thread. I thought it was worthy of a re-post here where it is relevant.
    This destroys the uninformed accusations that the "science is settled" with regards to anthropogenic global warming (it's not - science is never settled), and I was also insulted and ridiculed for simply discussing the issue, however we can see that there are many scientists (who obviously know more than us) who doubt the AGW narrative.

    Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesta.../#322002e44c7c

    It is becoming clear that not only do many scientists dispute the asserted global warming crisis, but these skeptical scientists may indeed form a scientific consensus.

    Don?t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.

    The survey results show geoscientists (also known as earth scientists) and engineers hold similar views as meteorologists. Two recent surveys of meteorologists (summarized here and here) revealed similar skepticism of alarmist global warming claims.
    ALL of these scientists must be compromised by the oil + gas industry! There's absolutely NO WAY that a scientist who knows what they're talking about could criticize the anthropogenic global warming narrative, right?

    Is the 97% climate consensus Fake News?
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/12/...sus-fake-news/

    Meteorologists examine causes of weather change every day. They are the scientists most likely to understand when unusual weather extremes are weather or climate change. Thus they have been polled every year about climate change.

    However most don't respond. Basically three fourths of weather scientists choose NOT to get entangled in a political, non-scientific debate. In 2015 the response rate was 22%, just 32% in 2016 and in 2017 just 22%. And as true for most skeptics, most agreed climate change is happening. However the question is: What is the cause of that change?

    Of 2017's respondents, only 15% thought climate change was entirely due to humans, while 34% thought 60 to 80% could be attributed to human activity. However the survey did not separate human contributions to climate change from urbanization, deforestation, loss of wetlands or CO2 .



    One fifth, or 21% thought changes were mostly or entirely natural while 8% admitted they just didn't know.

    So for ALL meteorologists surveyed only 11% actually claimed humans were mostly responsible for observed climate change: 22%(response) X 49% (attribution).
    Reply With Quote
     

  23. Collapse Details
     
    #73
    Bluelighter SheWasLvL18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    258
    So I clicked on the link you provided to the peer-reviewed Organization Studies and unless I've read it entirely wrong, it states that the majority of scientists agree global warming is an issue and it even states that most of these scientists believe humans are the main cause of this. The study doesn't seem to be about disproving global warming, just talking about the different beliefs behind it.

    Edit: "The largest group of APEGA respondents (36 draws on a frame that we label ?comply withKyoto?. In their diagnostic framing, they express the strong belief that climate change is happening,that it is not a normal cycle of nature, and humans are the main or central cause"

    "However, given the polarized debate(Antonio & Brulle, 2011; Hamilton, 2010; McCright & Dunlop, 2011), gaining access to the reasoningof deniers and sceptics (Kemp, Milne, & Reay, 2010), let alone unraveling their framings,is far more difficult than analyzing supporters of regulatory measures (Hoffman, 2011a)."

    "How do professional experts use frames to construct the realityof climate change, and themselves as experts, their credibility in making recommendations anddecisions, while engaging in defensive institutional work against others?"
    Reply With Quote
     

  24. Collapse Details
     
    #74
    As I said in the other thread, there are also studies that shown geoscientists have one of the highest degrees of climate change skepticism. And it's specifically centered around the geoscientists who are employed by the petroleum industry to use their skills to find and extract oil deposits.

    So not only are they not a relevant field of expertise, being geology and not climate. But they're also a field that had strong ties to petroleum companies. And have reason to not want to believe in climate change.

    Belief in climate change increases the more impartial the scientist is and the more their field of expertise involves the study of climate. Among climatologists the belief is about 97%. Even among geoscience the belief increases among people who aren't employed by petroleum companies.
    Reply With Quote
     

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •