Choose the Title to the Book Version of "Most Terrifying Vid
Uploader Comments (wonderingmind42)
Top Comments
-
If you want to get proof out of the Bible, please prove first that god exists.
-
So many Bible posts.
What the heck does global warming have to do with the Bible.
I'll tell you: Nothing
All Comments (89)
-
@MaToHim not how religion works
-
how about "Cashing in on the latest hoax" ?
-
how about this "the idiots guide on how to make our government more oppresive and intrusive" or "how to further stifle production in america"
-
Title it 'An Argument to Ruin a Modern Economy: How 90 years of oil doomed planet earth & how scientists will never advance tech to save us in time unless they get trillions tommorrow. A doom and gloom saga.' "Riveting"- Al Gore. Anyway do like the facial hair.
-
how do you think it isnt humans that created it look at the pollution we spit out we know how build hybrids but we rather pollut, like insted of drinking glass of water u have a cigerette, n u do it becuz u dont care, the power is in the wrong hands we need to work to gether to change make a massive vote to force the government to do what we the people want them too, we could do this with allmost anything, but like our gorvnment i think people r lazy..so in away we desurve to die. I cant w8!!!!!
-
Awesome facial hair!
How did I miss all this... I send your stuff out ALL the time.
-
Silver Bullet Alert! Poke! Poke! Greg "attention" Craven to answer your question, yes you are delusional. Your conclusion is not logical. The premise that GCC is man made can not be proven true. Therefore, your conclusion is invalid and unsound. I suggest you do the proof for yourself. Are you aware that glaciers formerly extended into what is now Kentucky? The globe has been warming for about 15,000 years! Now, that's what I call and inconvenient truth! Silver Bullet Alert! Poke! Poke!
Without trying to be snarky, if you are getting your version of how to analyze this is getting published, then just about anyone can something on AGW published, if they have the acceptable pov.
By simplifying AGW problem solving to four choices, you have vastly over simplified it, and introduced a huge bias in favor of giving power over to the AGW fear industry.
huntera123 3 years ago
Good point. I guess you'll be getting your own opinion published, too, so that you can rake in the easy dough just like me. Hey--the more the merrier! (Oh, and I could tell you weren't even trying. . .some of us are just effortlessly snarky.)
wonderingmind42 3 years ago
Certainly some more than others.
I was not aware that publishing is a path to easy money, but then I guess a lot of things about AGW involves rewriting the rules.
I have no doubt you are a sincere believer, and you are certainly eloquent. But the fallacy I see in your argument is that you assert AGW mitigation will not have negative costs. But it will. That ignores a lot of evidence. Kyoto and ethanol come to mind. So I stand by that yours is a polite authority argument.
huntera123 3 years ago
Hey--you might have just what I've been looking for! I've been searching high and low for credible, thorough analyses of the economic costs of taking action that conclude it would be tremendously harmful. So far, I haven't found much (see "HIAE: Get What You Want"). Nothing more dire than a 3% reduction in GDP growth, unless it comes from a think tank. So far, the economic doomsaying seems to be mostly conjecture. Could you give me some heavyweight sources to give merit to your assertions?
wonderingmind42 3 years ago
If the snark level on either side in this thread gets much higher, it might take away from what appears to be one of the more attractive aspects of your video series- a reasonable appeal to skeptics. If you really do want to dialog, I will be happy to do so. If not, I understand.
huntera123 3 years ago
Whoops, sorry. My earlier post was snarky, but the last one (starting "Hey--") was entirely sincere, but reading it after the previous one I realize it certainly can do double duty as snarky if that's what the reader is (reasonably, in this case) expecting. I am sincere in the last comment--I have been looking for credible economic disaster scenarios, and need some help. You said "That ignores a lot of evidence," and I'm hoping you have some evidence I haven't come across yet. Please help.
wonderingmind42 3 years ago