Top Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Just more proof AGW (Climate Change) is a "hoax"!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Just more proof AGW (Climate Change) is a "hoax"!

    This post is political. Enter at your own risk.

    http://www.dailywire.com/news/19211/global-warming-hoax-exposed-australia-weather-john-nolte

  • #2
    Shouldn't be to risky, aren't all the global warming folks still stuck in the ice?

    Comment


    • #3
      This post will piss some readers off. Enter at your own risk.

      Safeguarding the waters we fish, the animals we hunt, and the wild places we love has always been a central mission here at OL—even when it has been unpopular among our readers. I would encourage you guys to branch out from your primary sources on climate change and dig a bit more into the data on it. Nature isn't partisan, and we'd all do well to resist those biases when it comes to conserving it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Natalie Krebs_2 View Post
        This post will piss some readers off. Enter at your own risk.

        Safeguarding the waters we fish, the animals we hunt, and the wild places we love has always been a central mission here at OL—even when it has been unpopular among our readers. I would encourage you guys to branch out from your primary sources on climate change and dig a bit more into the data on it. Nature isn't partisan, and we'd all do well to resist those biases when it comes to conserving it.
        Ms. Krebs,
        I have no problem with the aspect of protecting waters, lands and creatures we all enjoy seeing and pursuing.
        But when one aspect promotes a bias to the point of "manufacturing" models and using fear mongering to promote an unrealistic agenda, are we who realize the fallacy of this false agenda to sit back silently and allow a fanatic few to weaponize gov't agencies, spout untruths and enact inane legislation?

        Comment


        • #5
          Bubba, get your head out of the sand. Global temps are rising and humans are part of the problem. Notice that I didn't say all of the problem. And, there's also no doubt that many politicians want to use the issue in order to grab for money and power.

          Most people that seem so concerned about the issue are not willing to make the necessary sacrifices to reverse the trend.
          #1 - At our current level of technology, there's simply too many people
          #2 - There's never going to be a global consensus for equal burden. Poor and developing countries are not going to make the effort to do anything that produces results 100 years out. Their leaders are too worried about staying in power and/or keeping their population fed.

          PigHunter's recommendation:
          - Work toward a drastic reduction in population with global birth control tied to funding. You let your population grow, we let you starve.
          - Increase funding of clean energy methods
          - Lower standards of living by putting restrictions on pet ownership, non-business travel, excess consumption of goods and services, etc.

          The bottom line- it's not my problem. I'll probably be dead by 2050 and that's way before the worst will hit.

          Comment


          • #6
            I watched a television show about the Great Barrier Reef.
            The Scientists say it's dying because of climate change. Twenty five percent is dead already.
            Here is the link below.

            https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-04-18/scientists-say-great-barrier-reef-officially-dying

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Natalie Krebs_2 View Post
              This post will piss some readers off. Enter at your own risk.

              Safeguarding the waters we fish, the animals we hunt, and the wild places we love has always been a central mission here at OL—even when it has been unpopular among our readers. I would encourage you guys to branch out from your primary sources on climate change and dig a bit more into the data on it. Nature isn't partisan, and we'd all do well to resist those biases when it comes to conserving it.
              Natalie,

              The climate changes, it always has and always will, and I don't have any qualms with studying it. What I really don't like are the people who are pushing an agenda and manipulate the data to match it.
              And then there's Al Gore who consumed 230,889 kilowatt hours at his Nashville residence(the average American home uses 10,812 kwh), he also owns two other homes. With hypocrites like that promoting global warming, it is very easy to doubt their dedication to anything other than their pocketbook. You might could say, with friends like that, who needs enemies?
              Rant over.

              I too am working to safeguard our water through no till farming practices and the use of cover crops to control erosion. Another benefit of cover crops is they also serve as a late fall through early spring food source for wildlife.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Natalie Krebs_2 View Post
                This post will piss some readers off. Enter at your own risk.

                Safeguarding the waters we fish, the animals we hunt, and the wild places we love has always been a central mission here at OL—even when it has been unpopular among our readers. I would encourage you guys to branch out from your primary sources on climate change and dig a bit more into the data on it. Nature isn't partisan, and we'd all do well to resist those biases when it comes to conserving it.
                Do I listen to First Bubba or the expert scientists investigating Global Warming???
                Hmmm, Could you please give me a couple days to decide who I believe? :-))

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Natalie Krebs_2 View Post
                  This post will piss some readers off. Enter at your own risk.

                  Safeguarding the waters we fish, the animals we hunt, and the wild places we love has always been a central mission here at OL—even when it has been unpopular among our readers. I would encourage you guys to branch out from your primary sources on climate change and dig a bit more into the data on it. Nature isn't partisan, and we'd all do well to resist those biases when it comes to conserving it.
                  I can't give a better reply than PigHunter. I can't personally verify any reports of global warming one way or the other, but I can report my own observations which are, that where I live, the climate has been getting warmer overall. My closets are stuffed with sweaters and jackets that haven't been used in years and I have more and more firewood left over each year. These things don't involve trusting my memory, but I do remember lots of cold weather that I haven't seen the likes of in decades, and I'm not talking about isolated incidents. The sloughs and mudholes in the creek bottoms where I hunt used to freeze over a couple of times every winter, but I've seen no ice on them at all in a long time (I even checked my journal which I started in 1984). Warming may or may not be caused by us, but we are overpopulating and using up this old planet at an alarming rate. I fear that when we reach the tipping point, it will be sooner and more devastating than we expect.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I think the alarmists do exaggerate a few things, but there can't be any doubt that humans have screwed up the planet something fierce. The list could be a mile long, and each line could name a different body of water or patch of soil that's been tainted or outright ruined by human-induced substances and/or activity -- and no argument, no debate, nobody saying, for example, "Naw, that wasn't 'cuz of those factories!" So when it comes to the climate change argument, what's the end game of calling "hoax!"? Honestly, I'm curious as to what you envision, and why it's so important that the theory be completely discredited. Suppose proof that humans aren't the cause of climate change (or even proof that the change isn't happening) did come out. And further suppose that even the greenest Gore-groupie out there accepted it. Are all of the specific things that they say are causing climate change suddenly going to be less harmful to the environment? I don't believe that you believe that, but I just don't get this insistence on absolute denial.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by MattM37 View Post
                      I think the alarmists do exaggerate a few things, but there can't be any doubt that humans have screwed up the planet something fierce. The list could be a mile long, and each line could name a different body of water or patch of soil that's been tainted or outright ruined by human-induced substances and/or activity -- and no argument, no debate, nobody saying, for example, "Naw, that wasn't 'cuz of those factories!" So when it comes to the climate change argument, what's the end game of calling "hoax!"? Honestly, I'm curious as to what you envision, and why it's so important that the theory be completely discredited. Suppose proof that humans aren't the cause of climate change (or even proof that the change isn't happening) did come out. And further suppose that even the greenest Gore-groupie out there accepted it. Are all of the specific things that they say are causing climate change suddenly going to be less harmful to the environment? I don't believe that you believe that, but I just don't get this insistence on absolute denial.
                      I wish I were as eloquent and insightful as you are, Matt. I agree.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by MattM37 View Post
                        I think the alarmists do exaggerate a few things, but there can't be any doubt that humans have screwed up the planet something fierce. The list could be a mile long, and each line could name a different body of water or patch of soil that's been tainted or outright ruined by human-induced substances and/or activity -- and no argument, no debate, nobody saying, for example, "Naw, that wasn't 'cuz of those factories!" So when it comes to the climate change argument, what's the end game of calling "hoax!"? Honestly, I'm curious as to what you envision, and why it's so important that the theory be completely discredited. Suppose proof that humans aren't the cause of climate change (or even proof that the change isn't happening) did come out. And further suppose that even the greenest Gore-groupie out there accepted it. Are all of the specific things that they say are causing climate change suddenly going to be less harmful to the environment? I don't believe that you believe that, but I just don't get this insistence on absolute denial.
                        Al Gore will agree just send a donation his way.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by MattM37 View Post
                          I think the alarmists do exaggerate a few things, but there can't be any doubt that humans have screwed up the planet something fierce. The list could be a mile long, and each line could name a different body of water or patch of soil that's been tainted or outright ruined by human-induced substances and/or activity -- and no argument, no debate, nobody saying, for example, "Naw, that wasn't 'cuz of those factories!" So when it comes to the climate change argument, what's the end game of calling "hoax!"? Honestly, I'm curious as to what you envision, and why it's so important that the theory be completely discredited. Suppose proof that humans aren't the cause of climate change (or even proof that the change isn't happening) did come out. And further suppose that even the greenest Gore-groupie out there accepted it. Are all of the specific things that they say are causing climate change suddenly going to be less harmful to the environment? I don't believe that you believe that, but I just don't get this insistence on absolute denial.
                          MattM37
                          The "hoax" is the "AGW" (anthropogenic global warming) or man made global warming.
                          As for the "climate change", well, that was going on well before Thag drew his first creature on a cave wall and warmed his butt by a fire HE built!
                          ...and will continue as long as "Earth" exists in its current form.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Natalie Krebs_2 View Post
                            This post will piss some readers off. Enter at your own risk.

                            Safeguarding the waters we fish, the animals we hunt, and the wild places we love has always been a central mission here at OL—even when it has been unpopular among our readers. I would encourage you guys to branch out from your primary sources on climate change and dig a bit more into the data on it. Nature isn't partisan, and we'd all do well to resist those biases when it comes to conserving it.
                            Unused sweaters?
                            Left over firewood?
                            Perhaps you need to speak to your purchasing agent about purchasing less?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by MattM37 View Post
                              I think the alarmists do exaggerate a few things, but there can't be any doubt that humans have screwed up the planet something fierce. The list could be a mile long, and each line could name a different body of water or patch of soil that's been tainted or outright ruined by human-induced substances and/or activity -- and no argument, no debate, nobody saying, for example, "Naw, that wasn't 'cuz of those factories!" So when it comes to the climate change argument, what's the end game of calling "hoax!"? Honestly, I'm curious as to what you envision, and why it's so important that the theory be completely discredited. Suppose proof that humans aren't the cause of climate change (or even proof that the change isn't happening) did come out. And further suppose that even the greenest Gore-groupie out there accepted it. Are all of the specific things that they say are causing climate change suddenly going to be less harmful to the environment? I don't believe that you believe that, but I just don't get this insistence on absolute denial.
                              Matt, very good. +3

                              Comment

                              Welcome!

                              Collapse

                              Welcome to Outdoor Life's Answers section. Here you will find hunting, fishing, and survival tips from the editors of Outdoor Life, as well as recommendations from readers like yourself.

                              If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ for information on posting and navigating the forums.

                              And don't forget to check out the latest reviews on guns and outdoor gear on outdoorlife.com.

                              Right Rail 1 Ad

                              Collapse

                              Top Active Users

                              Collapse

                              There are no top active users.

                              Right Rail 2 Ad

                              Collapse

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Right Rail 3 Ad

                              Collapse

                              Footer Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X