S4: Athiests are our friends act (failed)

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

97 percent of physicists once believed in the Aether.

Consensus is not the same as truth.

"I'm like Galileo for believing global warming is a hoax!"
No, you're not.
Also, I doubt there was that much of a consensus on an Aether, at least since the 19th century. This is modern times. What evidence could you possibly have to contradict the word of the PhDs?

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In the 19th century that was the consensus is that light needed a medium to travel through. Classical physics required it at the time.

That's the thing about science, science always marches on. Just because a theory is the consensus doesn't mean that it will remain that way.

There are serious flaws with the current theories, as they make predictions that the warming trend would continue. It has not. We've not had global warming for 20 years now.

[JustinTimeCuber]

There has been no slowdown in global warming over the past decades.

There was a spike around 20 years ago because of an unusually hot year but that's not how trendlines work.

If you are going to deny an accepted theory, you should have evidence. What evidence do you have, that could have been overlooked by some of the smartest people in the world?

[Wisconsin+17]

Taking it from the last 18 years rather than the 'little ice age', shows no increase whatsoever.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The fact that the medieval warm period and the 'little ice age' existed and were well known to anyone who's studied either period?

[JustinTimeCuber]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWXoRSIxyIU
"that's not how you draw a trendline through data."

Also, there's that minor complication for your side that ALL of the top 17 hottest years on record were since 1998, and that 2014, 2015, AND 2016 have all seen record heat.

Do you have any ACTUAL evidence, or can we move along?

[IceAgeComing]

that graph is often banded around by deniers: it uses Remote Sensing System data which now shows that there has been warming since the late 1990s (partially because of a methodology change which involved taking into account the fact that a few of the satellites don't have thrusters so drift a bit from their polar orbit, which made the data that they would submit occasionally slightly off), although less than the ground data suggests (0.2C rather than 0.35C).  The other major satellite data also indicates warming as well; as does literally all of the ground based data.  Every time the theory of the pause in Climate Change has been studied seriously by any credible scientific organisation it has been debunked: all statistical analysis demonstrates that the most accurate way of displaying the data in relation to global temperature changes since 1970 is with a linear trend.  Sure, warming has slowed since 1998 but that's because there were more years in the 2000s have had natural cooling influences, and if you compare the data for La Nina (cooling influences), El Nino (warming influences) and neutral years separately all of them show a very similar linear warming trend of around 0.18C per decade.  The reason why 1998 is used for the beginning of all of these denialist charts was that it was an incredibly warm El Nino year while most of the years after then have been neutral or cooler years - 2016 was an El Nino though and the average global temperature increased 0.35 from 1998 - which is totally in line with what we'd expect with the current global temperature trend.

Sorry for intruding like this; I can't get that rubbish go unchallenged.

[diptheriadan]

Again, why are we teaching a narrative to students rather than the actual science? I'm not arguing against the narrative, but I just don't think doing so would help the critical thinking ability of students.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If you go back 500 years that's not true. Further back shows clearly that the late 18th, 19th century, early 20th was the little ice age.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If you go back 500 years that's not true. Further back shows clearly that the late 18th, 19th century, early 20th was the little ice age.

since we started specifically recording, temperatures have risen DRASTICALLY

Again, why are we teaching a narrative to students rather than the actual science? I'm not arguing against the narrative, but I just don't think doing so would help the critical thinking ability of students.

Teaching evolution in science class is science, not a narrative.
Is it a narrative to teach the Pythagorean theorem in math class?
Is it a narrative to teach about past participles in English class?
Is it a narrative to teach about WWII in history class?
Is it a narrative to teach about verb endings in a foreign language class?

If yes, then let's just call off school for the rest of the year until we can find out what the hell is going on.

I move for a final vote. We're getting nowhere on this.

[diptheriadan]

No, but it is a narrative to teach that humans accelerate global warming. If we teach kids what carbon dioxide is and that gases can be trapped in the atmosphere, naturally kids are going to put two and two together. Besides, if we just simply teach "humans do climate change," we're going to end up with kids believing that they (Americans) are responsible.

[JustinTimeCuber]

No, but it is a narrative to teach that humans accelerate global warming. If we teach kids what carbon dioxide is and that gases can be trapped in the atmosphere, naturally kids are going to put two and two together. Besides, if we just simply teach "humans do climate change," we're going to end up with kids believing that they (Americans) are responsible.

A planetary crisis isn't the time for moderate hero education on the subject. People need to be educated about a) what's happening b) why and c) why it's bad.

I'm too tired to think clearly right now so I'm not gonna go into full detail.

[diptheriadan]

You heard it here first, folks! Teaching children how to think rather than what to think is apparently "Moderate Hero Education".

[JustinTimeCuber]

From what you said it sounded like "teach the controversy", maybe I misunderstood. I think you have to teach WHAT science tells us, WHY it's like that, and of course, HOW to think scientifically.

[JustinTimeCuber]

We never voted on this...

[fhtagn]

We never voted on this...

Mixup on which things I clicked on to update on my phone.
My bad.

[fhtagn]

Since it appears that no one else has anything to add, I'm going to go ahead and bring this to a 48 hour final vote.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

In the event that this bill passes, will the chamber sponsor the deportation of the region's scientists to Arizona?

[JustinTimeCuber]

NAY

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

NAY

[fhtagn]

NAY

[White Trash]

NAY

[Goldwater]

I know this whole thing absolutely nothing to do with me, but I can just say that I don't understand the naming of this bill at all.

[fhtagn]

I know this whole thing absolutely nothing to do with me, but I can just say that I don't understand the naming of this bill at all.

^^^
Literally everyone's reaction.

[Wisconsin+17]

You've all convinced me, and since Atheists are our friends....

NAY!

[fhtagn]

With 0 votes in favor and 5 against, the "Atheists are our friends act" has failed.