Rhetoricbuster

I can’t speak for any one else, but I can point out something that is weird to me. Why is it that liberals unload hate on the people who express ideas they disagree with? If you don’t like an idea of the tea party, why call some one a tea bagger? Why not just refute the idea with facts? Don’t hate the person, hate the idea.

Another example is climate change. It is clear humans have a massive impact on our environment, good and bad. It is clear that the climate changes, that it has for millions of years, and that we have 9,000 years more warming on the 20,000 year climate cycle we used to teach in school, you know, the one that had glaciers in Kentucky. 11,000 years ago the climate stopped cooling and started warming on the 20,000 year upswing, who knew that 11,000 years in the extreme left in this country would seize on it to control people’s behavior? Either way, the extreme left will have 9,000 years of warming to bolster their claims. We will all be dead by then, it will be hard to prove them wrong.  It took a long time to prove that thunderstorms are just weather events, not acts of god which allow the ‘chosen’ to receive tithes. It took a long time to prove that the earth was not the center of the universe.

The adherents in the church of Our Lady of Perpetual Climate Change are doing their very best to attempt to convince you that your actions cause thunderstorms, well that is the analogy, they really want to convince you that your actions are making the earth warm, and that without those actions the earth would not warm. Although we have been told that the earth is going to warm for 9,000 more years, that does not factor in. As with any charlatan, if we change our actions and the earth continues on it’s 20,000 year cycle, the Warmers will make excuses. They can’t explain how the earth warmed and cooled without humans.

Back to my point, lefties call skeptics that humans cause climate change, “deniers”, not attacking the ideas with fact. Why should I believe that the earth is warming? Because, before climate science became politicized, we were told by credible scientists that the eath would by warming for another 9,000 years. That glaciers were in Kentucky and an ice sheet covered the continent. We have 11,000 years to present, why would anyone believe their will be glacier growth in the next 9,000 years?

Please explain why, with increasing emissions, the climate cooled for 30 years from the 1940’s to the 70’s? Please explain the small ice age from 1545 to 1850? How about the medieval warming from 700 to 900 (approx.)?

Just correlate that, plus millions of years of more drastic climate change with no humans to minimal change since humans have been ‘changing the climate’

As to science, back before the hypothesis became ‘humans cause climate change, prove it’, the hypothesis was ‘what causes climate change, let’s find out’.

We need to get back there.