Montana kids in court
- Thread starter marshman
- Start date
Nick87
Well-known member
@Gr8bawana not to derail this thread
(further) ..but eat a bag. you contribute absolutely zero here. Except political bs at best.
I could catch the ban hammer for what I want to say. mtmuley
It must be tough when you can't handle the truth.
Nick87
Well-known member
Yup that's it.It must be tough when you can't handle the truth.
shrapnel
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2015
- Messages
- 2,347
The derailment of this thread is no better than the foundation by which this lawsuit is filed. Climate change and all the causes of the concept are not agreed upon by many accomplished scientists.
Regardless of the science in support or contradictory of climate change, those who are proponents raise the largest stink about why the non believers are not on board with climate change.
Biden’s energy Czar, when questioned about spending 2 Trillion$ on climate change, admits the U.S. being responsible for 13% of the global problems. What is the net affect of that money spent, and how does that really improve the odds against climate change?
Color me skeptical…
Regardless of the science in support or contradictory of climate change, those who are proponents raise the largest stink about why the non believers are not on board with climate change.
Biden’s energy Czar, when questioned about spending 2 Trillion$ on climate change, admits the U.S. being responsible for 13% of the global problems. What is the net affect of that money spent, and how does that really improve the odds against climate change?
Color me skeptical…
JustinsDad
Well-known member
I think the scientists receiving grants to study climate change will all agree it exists and is caused by using fossil fuels. Scientists not receiving grants do not agree. Their reports show .6 degrees increase since the end of the last mini ice age. One volcano eruption emits more than we put into the air in 30 years. The subject is very debatable. In any case, getting 5 and 10 year olds to sue is a chicken schlitt way of doing anything
RobG
Well-known member
FWIW, they are challenging a new MT law that prohibits climate change from even being considered when evaluating energy projects. It would have been challenged even if the kids hadn't done it as you can't prohibit relevant science just because may hurt an industry that you represent - especially when our state Constitution says we have a right to a clean and healthful environment. A project's effect should at least be allowed to be considered.
I don't know if the extra visibility brought by the kids was good or bad, but they have the most standing of anyone involved... and it did bring national attention to it, albeit misinformed attention suggesting the impact of this lawsuit is bigger than it is towards addressing climate change (which may be more advantageous to those that want to remove that part of Montana's Constitution).
It wasn't about whether or not climate change caused by fossil fuels was real - to my knowledge, the state never challenged that.
I don't know if the extra visibility brought by the kids was good or bad, but they have the most standing of anyone involved... and it did bring national attention to it, albeit misinformed attention suggesting the impact of this lawsuit is bigger than it is towards addressing climate change (which may be more advantageous to those that want to remove that part of Montana's Constitution).
It wasn't about whether or not climate change caused by fossil fuels was real - to my knowledge, the state never challenged that.
Nameless Range
Well-known member
Though I am certainly opposed to disallowing specific scientific views from government considerations, I think one of the reasons, other than the fact that they are leveraging children, that this seems somewhat theatric, is that Our Children's Trust has found groups of children in every state in the country, and brought forward similar suits. In fact, in 2011 in MT they tried and it was dismissed. This current case, which was originally brought forward in 2020, is just the flavor of the day that this litigious organization chose to attach themselves to. I believe they'd just pick something different if it didn't exist.
Last edited:
Irrelevant
Well-known member
I apologize, but this shit bugs me to no end. We can't just keep spreading these misconceptions that we hear. I don't know why they're still around, it's not hard to refute them.
1. 99.9% of climate research agrees. https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2021/10/more-999-studies-agree-humans-caused-climate-change
This isn't one industry vs the other, that idea is very much propaganda being pushed by industry to sow doubt. The science is consistent on this topic.
2.
3. Volcanos do not produce more CO2 than we do. Not even close even if you add up all the eruptions every year. https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/42/what-do-volcanoes-have-to-do-with-climate-change/
Now we can have healthy debate on what any of that means, what we should do about it- if anything, but we can't ignore reality.
FI460
Well-known member
Also 2000 is a sufficient sample size for most populations. Stats 101
JustinsDad
Well-known member
You guys say you are ok with having a debate but only if we agree with you.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Yeah except the folks who originally blew the whistle about climate change were scientists working for Exxon.
FI460
Well-known member
There is no debating significant statistics. Argue about climate change all you want, but 2000 responses is a sufficient sample size.
Sample Size Calculator
This free sample size calculator determines the sample size required to meet a given set of constraints. Also, learn more about population standard deviation.
www.calculator.net
Serious attempts to reduce the affects of human life on climate, would involve eliminating broad broad swaths of humans.
BROAD!
In the mean time, ask those 18 year Olds if they're willing to give up their iPhone, ac, transportation, toilet paper, comfy housing, etc, etc.
You know. Lead by example.
BROAD!
In the mean time, ask those 18 year Olds if they're willing to give up their iPhone, ac, transportation, toilet paper, comfy housing, etc, etc.
You know. Lead by example.
KB_
Well-known member
#CleanCoal
Irrelevant
Well-known member
You presented your version of "facts" we provided our own facts, with links. If you want to counter and provide actual evidence that a volcano eruption does, in fact, produce more carbon dioxide than all of humanity in a year, please provide, I'll read it. If you want to present an argument for why a sample size of 2,000 isn't statistically sufficient then let's hear it. This is actual debate, this is how it works, the very nature of debate means "we don't agree with you."
shrapnel
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2015
- Messages
- 2,347
All this name calling and Sabre rattling doesn’t change the fact that the US accounts for only 13% of the world’s contribution to climate change, according to the scientists that support climate change.
Right or wrong, 13% is really inconsequential. If you want to make a difference, convince the rest of the world there is a problem…
Right or wrong, 13% is really inconsequential. If you want to make a difference, convince the rest of the world there is a problem…
seeth07
Well-known member
This is a solid read from a good source about the temperature of earth: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/whats-hottest-earths-ever-been
Opens you up a little bit to just how cold earth really is right now. warming and cooling of the polar ice caps is normal. The rate at which we are warming in our current world state is something else but its not the first time in earth's history that a vast change in global temperature occurred and it for sure wasn't human induced.
Opens you up a little bit to just how cold earth really is right now. warming and cooling of the polar ice caps is normal. The rate at which we are warming in our current world state is something else but its not the first time in earth's history that a vast change in global temperature occurred and it for sure wasn't human induced.
Similar threads
