>you're too chicken to take a side Yes, that's why I stand between the sycophants on both sides.
Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC) is typically couched as either "It's significant and must be countered." or "It's natural and can't be countered."
Truth is that scientists believe ACC is real, but cannot determine its magnitude due to lack of historical data- both pre and post increased CO2 emissions.
Both the scientific knowledge and efforts to combat ACC are government funded- thus both serving government interests- which are non-free-market activities, given that citizens are compelled to fund it- and there are no metrics (data showing reversal of ACC) able to prove that costly efforts are worth it.
As such, ACC funding will only be spent to achieve political purposes- to increase support for government, especially the ruling government.
Thus, the rift between believers / deniers is actually a matter of belief / disbelief in political solutions to scientific matters.
1. CC has no metrics to prove that any action actually combats it. 2. relating to (1), money spent on CC can never be proved to be a waste. 3. CC allows politicians to buy voters (carbon tax scam- collect money on fuel, then give it to citizens near election) and corporate favors (choose which corporations to give CC-related contracts to).
That is, the debate isn't whether CC is real, but whether or not it matters whether real or fake.
Aaron Reed
Climate change is just like flat earth.
Let's say it's real, so fucking what. Also spergs will will only increase their level of involvement no matter the info.
YEAH FUCKING RIGHT they managed to build an icewall when Trump can't even lay a yard of wall.
Lincoln Thompson
>if real, who cares Imagine believing in government science. And thus CC deniers are anti-science and anti-life.
Eat another bowl of insects and shut the fuck up you coward.
Cameron Harris
"Calmly and impersonally, she, who would have hesitated to fire at an animal, pulled the trigger and fired straight at the heart of a man who had wanted to exist without the responsibility of consciousness."
"who had wanted to [impede her ability to live, by order of authority.]"
Oh shit! I was about to go shovel the snow and walk to the grocery store and you just reminded me I wanted to look up how to add ground beef to my kraft dinner so as to lord that over the Canadians (I was going to buy an extra box anyway just to try the difference)
I wish we could get Beer brand beer. We have too much freedom :(
Juan Cook
It's No Name brand beer. (Yes, it's brand name is No Name.)
Ryder Reyes
Oh my god. There's a website called kraftcanada and the first result is how to add ground beef to your kraft dinner. top fucking kek.
Jayden Bailey
It shouldn't be hard to do... just brown the beef, add to noodles already mixed with powder.
Adrian Watson
I'm more of a No Frills brand kind of guy. I like the way they intentionally put the lines on slightly diagonal so that it doesn't matter if the back of the label lines up quite right or not.
I guess that is kind of frilly tho.
David Peterson
Well, I didn't even know it needed milk! The in-store prices are a LIE!
>Truth is that scientists believe ACC is real *Truth is that some scientists claim ACC is real There, corrected that for you. By Definition, Science is never based on belief, but on data, and according to that, climate change, though real, is most likely not caused by mankind as there have been changes of similiar speed in the past (since some people here are to stupid to operate a search engine, here's one source for this claim: fau.eu/2015/11/10/news/research/idea-of-slow-climate-change-in-the-earths-past-misleading/ ). Unless some archeologist suddenly finds a dinosaur-made steam engine, chances are that the current climate change is natural.
Brandon Sanchez
The red and blue lines are intentionally meant to not line up where the label wraps around on itself in back. That way they're always misaligned regardless of whether the machine gets it close to being aligned or not. Pretty clever. And that becomes part of their logo.
Josiah Thompson
I'm speaking broadly- the 95% figure, I believe, is that they believe humans have affected the climate- thus humans (partially) cause climate change.
Jordan Wood
The main issue is 'government science.' Governments cannot do science- as governments work to remain in power- and unless remaining-in-power relies on being truthful, then governments don't do science-.
Kayden Lopez
Ah, funny I guess.
Eli Diaz
It really messed with my autism when I was a child until I figured it out.
Juan Cook
>the autism meme Here is Hayek on not fighting the unknown:
"The resistance against being guided by something that is unintelligible to them (the common intellectual) is, I think, quite understandable in an intellectual. Go back to the origin of it all: Descartes of course explicitly argued only that we should not believe anything which we did not understand. But his followers immediately applied it to we should not accept any rules which we did not understand. And the intellectual has very strongly feeling that what is not comprehensible must be nonsense. And to him the rules he's required to obey are unintelligible and therefore nonsense. He defines rational almost as intelligible, and anything which is not intelligible to him is automatically irrational, and he's opposed to it." -Hayek (youtu.be/9KER-KYK0-0@1:37)
Nathan Perez
I don't need some long-neck philosopher to tell me I like when things line up correctly. He can write all the books he wants as long as he doesn't mow my lawn so it looks all haphazardly.
Thomas Martinez
>information is direction That's where you're wrong, bucko
Ethan Nguyen
You have no idea how unclean my room is. Just yesterday, I ordered a Tesla + Kirlian device to help me be able to clean more efficiently.
Fuck. That reminds me I need to buy batteries as well. thx again.
Colton Diaz
>Tesla + Kirlian device Looked it up, found something about light distributions. True?
Brody Clark
I haven't looked into it that much, but the description reminds me of a few times I've done touch healing while in a trance-like state. If I had more time, I'd do more research, but shitposting is the priority.
Guess I'll find out if it works or not.
Justin Sanchez
Good luck bro.
Samuel Martin
Well, I'm deathly scared of handling raw meat, so I appreciate it. If I can pull of browning ground beef, I shall endeavor to try my hand at liver.
And with that, I'm off to write my name in snow and then shovel it away. Just like music: gone, into the wind as soon as you play it.
Easton Sanders
>handling raw meat Basically: -turn tap on -take meat from package to pot -rinse hands
This is if you want to be REALLY safe.
And cooking beef requires experience- with less experience, to be safe, just over cook.
Remember to: -have no pieces much larger than others -if in a pot, put on lid and allow steam to permeate meat not on bottom of pot
There is moisture (blood, turning to water) that will indicate whether it's cooked, as well as color. (Color is harder for chicken, as retains red near bone).
Easton Baker
>shovel snow Good luck user!
Adam Carter
It's unknowable if climate change is anthropogenic, so it's not worth worrying about.
Jaxon Johnson
>It's unknowable if climate change is anthropogenic True >so it's not worth worrying about. Doesn't follow. What should be considered is whether we can know if combatting CC is effective
Nathan Clark
"God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."
Whatever strategies you used to combat would need to be validated by the same sorts of experiments that are undoable and which would have to be done to determine if climate change is anthropogenic.
You would be randomly and baselessly trying things. You would be a sick person taking random pills to get better.
