43% of Americans are Dumb
This topic has absolutely NO justification and makes absolutely no sense and can't possibly be truth.
So, with that said. I'm outta here right after I click submit.
- lyricsingrayposted 15 years ago
043% of Americans write for HubPages
- bloodnlatexposted 15 years ago0
- zampanoposted 15 years ago0
- zampanoposted 15 years ago0
and don't forget, BUSH has was en in office for the past 8 years, some of his dumb was bound to rub off on the American people.
- lyricsingrayposted 15 years ago0
HA we WIN cause 46% of Canadians are eh? HA HA HA WE WON AGAIN o
: - blackorchidposted 15 years ago0
- ralwusposted 15 years ago0
- ralwusposted 15 years ago0
No, Americans are not dumb. Any poll trying to measure it is dumb.
Thanks for playing.
Interesting observations:
There is a belief in bible god.
There is a belief in human induced global warming.
Both beliefs are equally irrational to an impartial person.
People who believe in god tend not to believe in global warming, and vice versa.
Is it because a human needs some kind of irrational belief to be able to function?
So, there is a "feature" in human psychology that these people employ.
Me? No. I am immune to this. I still have a few older misconceptions ingrained into a psyche by my socialist upbringing, but I am pretty resistant to new indoctrinations.
Well, it might, and it might not -- as a non-specialist economist, I'm hesitant to make a definitive pronouncement like that
(though it would seem to make sense). And, similarly, the non-specialists who would say the opposite, are *also* non-specialists...
- baconmidgetposted 15 years ago0
Definatley not dumb!
Globally challenged maybe lolTalking of elephants - the fact that, on the Dr Mann's 'Hockey Stick Curve' graph (which provides definitive 'proof' of Global Warming), the entire Medioeval Warming Period has been conveniently missed out is rather a big elephant to ignore, I'd say.
(See:http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100011716/how-the-global-warming-industry-is-based-on-one-massive-lie/)
But as I said before, why do we have to line people's pockets to look after the planet? Surely we should be doing that anyway without being shown 'we are all doomed' data (a lot of it originating from the University of East Anglia who are at the centre of 'Climategate'.)Thanks for the link - I looked at it but I have to say I found it a bit vague. According to this, Mann's paper is 'valid' but there's no exhaustive explanation as to why. It mentions 'an array of evidence that includes both additional large-scale surface temperature reconstructions'
According to research carried out by the Canadian mathematician Steve McIntre the cores they used to carry out tests in Yamal, Russia were 'implausibly low' - ten, in fact - I find his research much more thorough (see: http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/27/yama … e-problem/ )
All the same I think things like graphs and data could be bounced back and forth an eternity with no one agreeing on anything. Although I personally buy into McIntyre's research, the main point, for me, is - what has someone like McIntyre got to win by disproving Dr Mann's hockey stick graph? And what have all the other scientists got to lose if Global Warming is found out to be a scam?
Added to that there's the discovery of emails sent by scientists at the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit whose computers were broken into by hackers last month. Here's a sample of correspondance between pro Global Warming scientists:
'I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.'
And another:
'The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.'
They can show me all the data they want but I'm going with my instinct on this one. And I'm going to carry on doing what I've always done - looking after the planet regardless of what scare tactics they use.
Yes! They're all totally dumb!
Convincing argument.
Perhaps if I keep working on it I might someday be a part of that intelligent 57%! Sigh! Better keep practising!
(What was it again - 2+2=5, 2+2=5, 2+2=5..nearly got it!)Hi Rhamson! I'm not declaring myself as an expert but I'll be happy to hear what you know and have a confab. On the basis of what you've written so far I don't have a lot to go on regarding your own explanations but you're welcome to read my previous postings and give me your opinions. They won't take long to read but please do take the time to read them. If you point out where I am explaining it away that would be very welcome - any advice on strengthening my own argument is always welcome!
Hi WilliamRWilson! Thanks for your link.
So apparently Trenberth inconsciously wrote:
'The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."
but what he actually meant to say was this:
"Global warming is still happening - our planet is still accumulating heat. But our observation systems aren't able to comprehensively keep track of where all the energy is going. Consequently, we can't definitively explain why surface temperatures have gone down in the last few years. That's a travesty!"
Oh, the silly billy! Must have been his sub conscious speaking.
Sorry but as I say, with the majority of scientists on their side and with a lot riding on this, they're going to do their best to cover up things.
As I say, I'm going on gut instinct with this one.
But not only that - I've read a lot of the emails and they don't leave me in any doubt. It's a pity that not more of the newspapers are writing about 'Climategate' but then, with the money behind it, that's to be expected. Of course, I've no doubt that the majority of people are going to buy into the version the 'bonafide' scientists give them.
It's a shame there's such deceit in the world - after all, these people could actually being doing something for the planet.
Yes I did read the emails in their entirety and it's true that some of them can easily be talked out of of but others are pretty clear I'd say, but obviously no email is ever going to be entirely clear. The fact is they're certainly pretty damning evidence and the failure to pick up on it in the mainstream press is enough to make one suspicious in itself. Even if the emails were very little to go on (and they're certainly not in my eyes) why are the press so tongue-tied all of a sudden? Not being able to make a story out of very little is something they're good at after all.
It's something that could be discussed all night but I'm afraid I'm going to have to take a break because I could have written a hub in this time and perhaps it would have been quicker! (although it's been interesting having this discussion) Like I said, graphs, facts and so forth could be bounced backwards and forwards for an eternity but my nose smells a cover up here!Haha! A computer break, what a novel idea!
I need one too.
I'm glad to discuss this with you - I get a lot of inspiration and knowledge from forum discussions. Thank you for your thoughtful and respectful points!
And by the way - I'm looking forward to the hub on this topic that you mentioned on Barry Rutherford's hub.Hello! I'm back and extremely unreposed as I've just spend hours and hours writing my Global Warming hub and now I'm off for another break.
I have to thank you for your very informed thoughts yesterday as they inspired me to write something that has been milling round my head for weeks! I know you're a GW supporter but I'd welcome any thoughts from the 'opposition'.
http://hubpages.com/hub/How-to-make-mon … rming-here
And anyone else from who has any views on GW for that matter. Needless to say, if my manner seems brash anywhere in the article (although it shouldn't do) please don't take offence - my point is that we should all work together in protecting our planet (although perhaps in a different way to how the GW supporters see it!)
Cheerio
Try this http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/27/yama … e-problem/ - it was working for me!
Ok, I'll have a better read of the PNAS article (I read all your links but I don't remember seeing that one - are you sure you put the link in?)
As I say, for me the fundamental point is simply that McIntyre has nothing much to gain from all the research he's carried out. What I mean is, I suppose he'll gain something but it won't be anything in comparison to what he had to go through to get hold of information from the CRU (apparently they weren't very obliging in handing over data). And as I say, in comparison to what a lot of people might lose from his findings...well, as I say, I go on gut feeling with this one.
There's undoubtedly a lot of other evidence as you say - the decreasing ice caps and so forth but as far as I can make out it does seem to be a case of pieces of information being twisted to back up someone else's agenda.
From what I've read there is ice melting in western Antartica but, apparently in East Antartica, which is four times the size of west Antartica, parts of it are actually cooling. According to Dr Ian Allison, head of the Australian Antarctic Division glaciology program
'sea ice losses in west Antarctica over the past 30 years had been more than offset by increases in the Ross Sea region, just one sector of east Antarctica'.
And of course,(at least as far as I know) this isn't reported by the mainstream press.
As regards the melting ice in the West, Allison says 'ice shelves in general have episodic carvings and there can be large icebergs breaking off - I’m talking 100km or 200km long - every 10 or 20 or 50 years.'
So, according to Allison, this would be a expected phenomenum.
In a way, I wish such deception didn't exist (although it's perhaps better for the planet if it's the way the sceptics say it is) but the fact remains that we don't need scare tactics to look after the planet. We should be doing that anyway.
Related Discussions
- 46
The Global Warming Scam has failed. Time for Global Cooling . .
Global Cooling and the New World Order ... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/james … rld-order/
- 10
Do you think Global Warming is real or a myth?
Do you think Global Warming is real or a myth?
- 129
49% of American believe climate change is a hoax or "aren't sure"
These are results of a public policy poll:Q1 Do you believe global warming is a hoax, ornot?Do ................................................................... 37%Do not ............................................................. 51%Not sure...
- 119
Are all those who believe in global warming living a hypocritical life
Had a good discussion with a relative. She drives a large SUV and her husband owns a large pick-up truck. They fly for their work often. She and her family use quite a bit of fossil fuel during their daily lives. They are also strong believers in global warming. I told...
- 153
The Global Warming Scam - yet more lies and exaggerations
Online news service promotes false climate change study http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 … CMP=twt_fd
- 207
Can the Earth Survive Four Years of a Trump Presidency?
There are two major would shaping forces at risk with a Trump presidency; an economic meltdown brought on by a sharp decline in American productivity, and, a much more important one, the environment. I will leave the economy to another forum, for it is the environment I am much more worried...