Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    14 Sep '18 02:181 edit
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/12/hurricane-florence-washington-post-declares-trump-is-complicit-for-dangerous-storm.html

    Yep, you guessed it. As the storm crashes into the US tonight, rest assured, Trump is complicit.

    Is this finally enough to impeach him?

    I'm thinking that this cuts to the heart of the Russian collusion. Putin has bought off Trump to ignore global warming, thus causing hurricane disasters all over the US. It finally makes sense.

    Incidentally, why is it that we insist on gender identifying these hurricanes by giving them girl or boy names? Why not let the storm decide which gender they wish to be?
  2. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14766
    14 Sep '18 04:01
    Here is an article that claims a law was passed to suppress science because In 2012, the state now in the path of Hurricane Florence reacted to a prediction by its Coastal Resources Commission that sea levels could rise by 39in over the next century by passing a law that banned policies based on such forecasts.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/12/north-carolina-didnt-like-science-on-sea-levels-so-passed-a-law-against-it?CMP=share_btn_fb

    The article went on to mention this:

    “The science panel used one model, the most extreme in the world,” Pat McElraft, the sponsor of the 2012 bill, said at the time, according to Reuters. “They need to use some science that we can all trust when we start making laws in North Carolina that affect property values on the coast.”

    Instead of following the proper scientific method of averaging the different climate model predictions they cherry picked the worst prediction. Not that climate model predictions were ever reliable to begin with, but the so called science panel were the true science deniers. The irony of it all.
  3. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    14 Sep '18 10:11
    Originally posted by @metal-brain
    Here is an article that claims a law was passed to suppress science because In 2012, the state now in the path of Hurricane Florence reacted to a prediction by its Coastal Resources Commission that sea levels could rise by 39in over the next century by passing a law that banned policies based on such forecasts.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ...[text shortened]... begin with, but the so called science panel were the true science deniers. The irony of it all.
    Are you a cherry picking science denier?!
  4. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14766
    15 Sep '18 05:581 edit
    Originally posted by @whodey
    Are you a cherry picking science denier?!
    It is necessary to cherry pick to expose another's cherry picking. For example, when GW alarmists cherry pick sea level rise in the last 15 years it is necessary to cherry pick sea level rise between 1880 and 1900 to show an equal acceleration back then to prove it means little. What were CO2 levels back then? Get it?
Back to Top