[Vision2020] global warming will kill us all (well, most of us)... tonight!

[Joe Campbell]

Examples of bad arguments for a position are meaningless. Do you really
think I can't find MORE bad arguments from the global warning deniers?
There are lots of bad arguments from you and them that I could post. That
would be funny too were the issue not so important. But it is a waste of
time and an intellectual disservice for me to post them. There are bad
arguments for God's existence, for falsehoods as well as truths. Give me a
claim and I'll give you a bad argument simply by stating some irrelevant
premises and putting a "therefore" before the conclusion. Bad arguments
mean absolutely nothing and using them to make a point is just a form of
irrational rhetoric. You can and should do better than that.

The real issue is whether there are any GOOD arguments on either side. What
is your argument that human beings DON'T have an impact on climate? You
don't have one. You just have criticisms of a view held by 90+% of
scientists around the world. Your comments about this topic are and always
have been intellectually irresponsible. That's not skepticism, that's
dogmatism.

On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>wrote:

> **
> I thought it was humorous.  It also serves as an example of how global
> warming alarmism can and does get out of control sometimes.  Or did 4.5
> billion people die and I missed it?
>
> Paul
>
>
> On 12/31/2011 07:50 PM, Joe Campbell wrote:
>
> Paul,
>
> Will you stop posting this crap for Christ's sake. You don't know what the
> f**k you are talking about. What "recent" prediction that is viable would
> make such a broad predication about 2012. NONE.
>
> If beliefs should be totally based on evidence, then why not criticize
> those who believe in Jesus Christ? Because the evidence for global warming
> is so much more plausible than the evidence that Christ has risen from the
> grave that it isn't funny.
>
> If belief in Christ gives us reason for belief that we can vote on or
> belief that matters to general debate, so does pretty much anything else.
> Rational discussion is pointless.
>
> Best, Joe
>
>  On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>>  Here is a link I found posted on a climate skeptic blog:
>>
>> http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/01/08/01291.html
>>
>> "Over 4.5 Billion people could die from Global Warming-related causes by
>> 2012
>>
>> *Hydrate hypothesis illuminates growing climate change alarm*
>>
>> Compiled by John Stokes
>>
>> A recent scientific theory called the "hydrate hypothesis" says that
>> historical global warming cycles have been caused by a feedback loop, where
>> melting permafrost methane clathrates (also known as "hydrates") spur local
>> global warming, leading to further melting of clathrates and bacterial
>> growth."
>>
>> <skip to the bottom>
>>
>> "Over 4.5 billion people could die from Global Warming related causes by
>> 2012, as planet Earth accelarates into a greed-driven horrific catastrophe."
>>
>> Apparently, 4.5 billion of us could die from global warming before 2012,
>> which is in about 6 and a half hours from now.  Be warned!
>>
>> I hope that this is either a joke website, or just rampant alarmism,
>> because I, for one, don't want to die tonight.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> =======================================================
>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>               http://www.fsr.net
>>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120101/413ac56b/attachment.html>