Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 16 Jul '15 16:20
    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/10/just_say_no_to_a_carbon_tax.html

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/02/climate_consensus_con_game.html
  2. 16 Jul '15 17:46
    Firstly: which country is considering a carbon tax, and how will it be implemented?
    Secondly: in what way do you see it costing you?
  3. 16 Jul '15 18:13
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Firstly: which country is considering a carbon tax, and how will it be implemented?
    Secondly: in what way do you see it costing you?
    Exxonmobile's Rex Tillerson has openly stated they support a carbon tax. I can't tell you which countries support it or have a position on it, but if you had read the article I posted you would know it is essentially a consumption tax which burdens the poor more.
  4. 16 Jul '15 19:50
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    Exxonmobile's Rex Tillerson has openly stated they support a carbon tax. I can't tell you which countries support it or have a position on it, but if you had read the article I posted you would know it is essentially a consumption tax which burdens the poor more.
    I had a quick look at the first link, but when it started talking nonsense, I decided to find out more from you as to what you are on about.
    1. What are you so concerned about? Do you have to foot the bill? If so, how much do you think you would end up paying?
    2. Do you honestly think posting links with nonsense in will help your cause?
  5. 16 Jul '15 21:05
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I had a quick look at the first link, but when it started talking nonsense, I decided to find out more from you as to what you are on about.
    1. What are you so concerned about? Do you have to foot the bill? If so, how much do you think you would end up paying?
    2. Do you honestly think posting links with nonsense in will help your cause?
  6. 16 Jul '15 21:12 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    Do you not wish to answer my questions, or do you genuinely not realise that the contents of the first link you posted in the OP contains some absolute nonsense?
    Would you like to discuss it?
  7. 16 Jul '15 21:27 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Do you not wish to answer my questions, or do you genuinely not realise that the contents of the first link you posted in the OP contains some absolute nonsense?
    Would you like to discuss it?
    It might help if you said what you view as nonsense, or absolute nonsense. Saying you disagree with the contents of an article doesn't really narrow things down much.

    On any controversial subject or article, some are going to view stuff as nonsense. The what, where, who, and why can be debated, but only if you specify what you object to.
  8. 16 Jul '15 23:03
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/10/just_say_no_to_a_carbon_tax.html

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/02/climate_consensus_con_game.html
    Oh dear, another anarchist.

    Why do you hate government so much?
  9. 17 Jul '15 00:16
    Originally posted by whodey
    Oh dear, another anarchist.

    Why do you hate government so much?
    I'm glad I am familiar with your sarcastic humor.
  10. 17 Jul '15 03:36
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    I'm glad I am familiar with your sarcastic humor.
    Sarcasm? What are you mad?

    Carbon taxes are the only way we can save humanity!
  11. 17 Jul '15 07:09
    Originally posted by normbenign
    It might help if you said what you view as nonsense, or absolute nonsense.
    It would if the poster actually thought what he was posting made sense. I would like to establish that first. Have you read the articles? Do you agree with them?
  12. 17 Jul '15 11:14
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    It would if the poster actually thought what he was posting made sense. I would like to establish that first. Have you read the articles? Do you agree with them?
    It makes perfect sense, but you would not know that because you didn't read it all by your own admission. You had every chance to prove a consensus exists on the science forum too and you failed along with everyone else on that forum.
  13. 17 Jul '15 16:02
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    It makes perfect sense,....
    So, do you wish to discuss the issues I have with them?
  14. 17 Jul '15 17:58
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    So, do you wish to discuss the issues I have with them?
    I've been waiting this long......
  15. 17 Jul '15 18:56
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    I've been waiting this long......
    I did ask you and your response was not clear.

    OK, the first link says:
    It ignores the considerable benefits of atmospheric carbon dioxide in promoting the growth of plants, advancing agriculture, and lowering the cost of food for a growing world population.


    1. Higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere do not significantly contribute to crop production.
    2. Higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere does not 'advance agriculture'.
    3. Because of 1. and 2. it doesn't lower the cost of food.
    4. How is 'a growing population' relevant? This must be an appeal to the myth that the worlds population will outstrip food production. The reality is the food production depends on demand and pricing. There is no major shortage of available land or production capacity for food crops.

    If you really want to improve farming, there are many many ways to significantly increase the production that a given farmer can achieve. The down side is that only a finite amount of food can be consumed, so every time you increase one farmers production, you are putting another farmer out of business.