No matter who wins in the general election, climate change deniers will lose.

it's like being a conservative in Hollywood, if you want any kind of acclaimed career in climate science you have to believe certain things

The similarities to public health are striking, for over 50 years experts and government agencies said eating less saturated fat was the key to reducing heart disease, diabetes, obesity. Yet all of these problems have dramatically increased since that became the conventional wisdom. If you don't subscribe to the lipid hypothesis (low fat) you are shunned.

 

So has the number of people who get all their food from fast food chains.

 

what does saturated fat have to do with climate change? oh, nevermind, you're just moving goal posts. typical.

 

Every new Summer that blowtorches the American heartland makes it a wee bit more difficult for the GOP to ignore global warming. They either must moderate their position or risk losing support.

 

LOL, revisiting old levels of FAIL: Al Gore is not a scientist, morans. He is a politician who claims to have "scientists as friends."

What does an evil, scheming climate scientist stand to gain with a government grant? 10x the number of administrative headaches and about $20k in extra salary. Woo-hoo!

 

What university?

And you are still a student, but already calling yourself an economist?

Interesting.

Do you also date p*rn stars?

 

Where did he call himself an economist? Just curious... I didn't see it. That aside, you can be something while still learning how to be that something - see doctors.

In any case, as with all other climate discussions here or elsewhere, this is pointless. Stupid people are stupid and believe that scientists are money and fame whores, and/or people didn't evolve but instead two white humans were put on earth, yada yada yada.

Earth loses. Rational thought loses. Intelligence loses.

 

University of Chicago (MBA)

I was also a Fulbright scholar.

I don't personally think much about university rankings, although I might mention that Chicago Booth is ranked around the top 10 whereas McGill is ranked around no. 60 by the Financial Times.

The Economist ranks Chicago no. 2 and McGill no. 64. Not sure where you got your self-aggrandizing "top 20 in the world" from.

I also find it hilarious that you are a student, but call yourself an "economist".

To each his own.

 

Once again, you are wrong, kid. I never claimed to hate MacBeth. On the contrary, I found MacBeth amusing. You, on the other hand, are boring.

 

I don't give a rat's ass about your personal life, sorry. You were the one who called himself an economist (although you are still a student) to bolster whatever you were proclaiming. You also tried to lend yourself more credibility by claiming you study at a "top 20 university in the world". These were all your own statements about your personal life, which had nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

As to the topic at hand, I am undecided. I think that, in very general terms, mankind has to be aware that the earth's resources are not unlimited. As to climate change, I am not sure if some projections are correct. I do think that there are people who profit from a certain climate change hysteria. As a liberal, I am concerned about some tendencies by leftists to use climate change as a pretense to try and govern too many aspects of people's personal lives in Germany.

While I am impressed with the wisdom of this:



...it is difficult to deny any one generation and any one country and its people the right to economic and industrial progress. Climate change is a topic that can only be addressed globally and unless you get countries like China on board, you will not achieve anything. But they are in the process of industrialization and want to catch up with the western world in terms of prosperity.

So, all in all, not an easy topic.

 

Since I never said that and you made it up, it seems to be your impression of me. Thank you for that, but please stop lying by putting it in quotation marks as if I had said that.

Better luck next time, kid.

 

Thank you, yes, it is, because it is a post of someone taking himself far less seriously than you obviously do yourself .

(and it still doesn't contain the quote you falsely attributed to me)