MovieChat Forums > Politics > Some conservatives actual are pro-scienc...

Some conservatives actual are pro-science...just not the trump-cultists


This weak as the trump administration rolled back regulations on methane emissions, conservative business leaders actually say it's a bad idea:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/29/trump-to-roll-back-methane-climate-change-regulations.htm

"Some major oil, gas and auto companies have actually opposed the Trump administration’s rollback proposals.

Four of the world’s biggest automakers opposed Trump’s plan to let vehicles pollute more by striking a deal in California to curb their own emissions. And some electric utility companies have opposed the EPA’s weakened regulations on toxic mercury emissions by coal-burning power plants."

And since 2017 (better late than never) some conservatives have stepped into the fight against climate change deniers:

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/xwwzdd/the-republicans-trying-to-fight-climate-denial-in-their-own-party

So there is hope for conservatives. Just not the ones who have pledged their undying loyalty to donald trump, a climage change denier who is actively repealing regulations that even business leaders think is stupid.

reply

Conservatives are more pro science than the "there are 500 gender" liberals. Global temps are rising, but there is a debate on whether this is man made or a natural cycle. Don't be mad at Trump, be mad at China & India who pollute the world and face no consequences.

reply

No one can seriously say they are pro-science and also say that there is a debate whether climate change is man made.
From NASA's website:
Scientific Consensus: Earth's Climate is Warming
...
Statement on Climate Change from 18 Scientific Associations
"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver."

"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies)"

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

reply

Up for debate. Many scientists will tell you its a natural cycle. This all irrelevant because even if the US went completely green you still have Asia & India polluting the world.

reply

Up for debate? Primarily in conservative sunday school classes and not much of anywhere else.
People are always going to believe nonsense so everything is always "up for debate."
That's the only defense conservatives have at this point.

I bet there was a tribe of cavemen saying. "Let's hunt with sticks." and one guy was like "I'd like to debate that proposal."
You know how humans survived and hunted and ate better? They ignored the imbecile.

reply

All moot if the US goes green because other countries will kill the earth anyway.

reply

Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be ANY hope for liberals.

reply

If that is your assessment of liberals, awesome.
I'll bet there are a lot of intelligent people in the club of people you find hopeless.
Good luck with your climate change denying reality. Your views are disappearing fast.

reply

It was just a mirror of your assessment of conservatives. You have no idea what my views are, so you typically stereotype.

reply

Lol.
"I'm upset that you stereotype me because you don't know my views.... but libs are hopeless."
Yeah. You are a pretty good example of the movie chat dudes I've seen here. Stereotype based on your behavior. Just like climate science based on observable facts.
Tadaa!

reply

I just echoed your stereotyping conservatives. I'm not surprised you didn't notice. Again, you have no idea what my views are but you..... wait for it.... stereotypically assume. All you accuse me of is in any mirror you gaze upon.


Oh, Tadaa!

reply

Soooo clever! Mirror defense. Are you the rubber and I'm the glue? Now I feel really burned.

reply

So clever bro..... sorry. non-gender specific person. diverting from my points with meaningless rhetoric.

reply

WWSmith & Chilone: Just once I would like to see a discussion on climate change that doesn't devolve into bashing liberals and conservatives alike. Makes me wonder if either of your concerns on climate change is even genuine.

reply

What would you like to discuss? As far as I can tell (I'm no expert), the world has been going through warming and cooling cycles for as long as the world has existed and since WAY before fossil fuel was discovered, much less used. There are credible scientists on both sides of the spectrum as to whether humankind's activities have/are contributed to it or caused it. If we are to blame, what caused it before?

reply

"If we are to blame, what caused it before?"

Google it or stay clueless but please, don't argue out of ignorance.

reply

How 'bout this? Enlighten me, Copernicus.

reply

No I won't because you'll keep asking inane questions. I told you to Google it. Answers to your questions are VERY easy to find. You just prefer to stay ignorant and think you found a hole in the science.

reply

In other words you have no position other than inane liberal rhetoric and posing as being enlightened and superior. Fail.

reply

See? You don't want to learn.

Look up Milankovitch cycles.

reply

Of course I want to learn but this is a discussion form. If everyone just said "Google it", there'd be no discussion.

reply

There's no discussion to have. It's tons of information that you can find easily. There are many lectures on youtube from scientists who work on this.

I've done this before, trying to educate someone, and all I ever got were "gotcha" questions. People like you ask questions until I can't find an answer and then go "gotcha! You can't answer this about a detail, so it's ALL bullshit." They're not interested in learning. That's the difference between skeptics and deniers. Skeptics listen to the answers, deniers do not.

And if you think it's political, the science isn't. What is political is what we should do about it and libtards are sitting at the table while conservaturds cover their ears going "la la la".

BTW, the latest BS from denier guru Tony Heller is that Greenland is gaining ice. He quotes a paper but not the part where they say it's only about the surface. When you take glacier calving, Greenland is losing ice year after year.

reply

My question wasn't a skeptical one, really. We all know the earth goes through cycles. My question is simply, why is it man made, this time? Also, if it is man made, will there be another non man made one?

reply

It's man-made because we're pumping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. We're the trigger, so to speak.

Yes, there will be more non-man-made. The Earth has plenty of life left to do its thing without us.

reply

So no matter what we do, the cycles will continue then. There's not real consensus about it being man made or not. One can find VERY convincing arguments on all sides of the spectrum. Subjects such as this, "big bang", etc. have been and continue too be hotly debated and many so called proven theories have been debunked, over the years, so who really knows? I do my best to treat our world with care and respect but I don't think extremism is appropriate. You're right. The earth has plenty of life in it and it is great at sustaining it's self.

reply

See what I meant by not interested in learning? You dismissed my argument because cycles will continue. Then you go on on irrelevant generalities. There's no debate on climate change. It's only fuelled by those who stand to lose. Read or watch "Merchants of doubt".

Extremism will come whether we want it or not.

reply

I did not dismiss your argument. I introduced another factor and then I illustrated that there is no real consensus, THEN I gave my ideas about how it all factors into my own personal life. I never said whether or not there's any debate on climate change. I did say the cause is hotly debated by many different credible people with no clear resolution.

reply

Politics has nothing to do with science, except with people who are climate change deniers or believe the earth is flat.

reply