Planting trees is not an error, so I assume the error is in the ‘just’?
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” – That Amendment that people forget about.
@eromlig – What assertions that I made do you feel are unsupported? I’d be happy to give you (more) support, though @cherns has already provided basic citations. I note that you provided no support for your assertion that the three items were Leftist misconceptions.
Also, I don’t consider myself a centrist, and I’m not sure what your ‘everyone is a centrist’ is supposed to mean, in context?
You can’t claim a monopoly on rationality and then refuse to accept evidence and logic. (Well, I mean, you can, but you shouldn’t, as it’s very hypocritical, and undermines trust.)
“Um…you’re saying the Left has no misconceptions? It’s the Left that still thinks Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election from Hillary; that GW Bush really lost Florida in 2000; that 9/11 was an inside job…shall I go on? Back off the virtue signaling, my friend. Both sides need to come together and get a dose of Truth.”
Came here to say more or less what @cherns said: 1) There is plenty of evidence that the Trump campaign tried their dangdest to collude with the Russians, including a direct appeal by the candidate himself on live TV. The Mueller investigation garnered multiple convictions. So…not really a misconception, much less a conspiracy. 2) There is plenty of evidence that W and his brother, the Governor of Florida at the time, did their dangdest to suppress the Democratic vote and before the 2000 election, and then W and a rogues gallery of GOP operatives did their dangdest to block an accurate count before a very controversial ‘one off’ SCOTUS decision mooted the whole thing. This is, again, not a misconception, and very definitely not a conspiracy. 3) Finally, 9/11 being an inside job is very definitely a conspiracy theory…but not one that is exclusive to, or even predominately on, the Left. So three strikes, yer out.
…none of which is to say that the Left is somehow immune to misconceptions, just that those aren’t them. It is unfortunately true that misconceptions abound on the Right currently, but that is only to be expected given that science denial, suspicion of elites, and extreme religious beliefs are shibboleths of the current GQP, to say nothing of the fact that the Big Lie operates on destruction of critical faculties. The Left is not similarly burdened.
And his latest explicit confusion of cause and effect is priceless. I know I said he knows better and is just in it for the pwning of the libs, but I really have to wonder if he’s not just a truly impressive idiot.
“So you finally concede that I was correct in my original statement that the natural cycle will continue, and that any human additions to it, even if so extreme as outlined in your detailed charts and graphs showing correlation, are meaningless.”
He conceded no such thing, as I’m sure you know. But it’s always been clear that you’re not arguing in good faith. He pointed out that the real issue is the man-made acceleration of warming, which, according to at least some articles I’ve read (in Scientific American, if that helps), are blocking the natural trend, which would be towards an Ice Age right now, from the solar cycle. The reason warming would continue if people were suddenly removed from the equation right now is that there’s a huge buildup from human activity since the development of agriculture, and, more recently and powerfully, since the Industrial Age exploitation of fossil fuels. But then, you know that too, and would admit it if only it served your political viewpoint.
“All dissembling and deflection aside, how do you intend to move more water farther inland to maintain inland hydration by reducing the amount of thermal energy available through carbon remediation? I’d love to hear the science.”
What are you talking about? Who promised you that they were going ‘to move more water farther inland…’. This is the inevitable consequence of man made warming (in the form of rising seas, per the comic). We’d like to stop it, if we could, which is why people are discussing carbon remediation. Carbon remediation → lower global average temperatures → increasing fresh water resources inland due to higher snowpack, and, yes, glacier growth.
You’ve constructed some sort of absurd strawman whereby you won’t be satisfied until we’ve solved non-existent problems that you’ve produced in your fevered hypothesizing about how climate works. There are plenty of good resources out there, and we’ve now shown a bunch of ways in which your facts, logic, conclusions, are at odds with each other and reality: if this really is important to you, please try educating yourself somewhere other than a comments thread for a comic strip. Try finding answers to basic questions like, “What is the effect of burning billions of tons of fossil fuels and cutting down forests for agriculture and ranching across thousands of years of human history?,” and, “What is a low/high pressure front or ocean current?” Or just start with, “How does cause and effect work?”
“Like I said, I’m not smart, but I’m pretty sure that rain and snow don’t have motility to migrate on their own. They have to be forced to move inland.” Please cite ANY source for this line of thought, along with an explanation of what ‘force’ means in this context.
Clouds carry water vapor inland all the time. There’s this thing called ‘weather’ that is the result of pressure and temperature differentials. Adding more heat and more water by burning fossil fuels (both directly and by trapping heat with CO2) makes the system much more energetic and chaotic. This is basic stuff.
Also, in the fallacy category, “The seas get their energy from internal warming from gravitational compression and nuclear fission, and from sunlight and atmospheric heat.” Increased pressure does lead to increased temperature, but I think you’ll find that the temperature falls as you get deeper into the ocean, in general. There is no nuclear fission in the ocean at all – this is straight up lunacy. And sunlight and atmosperic heat – which are the correct answers as to how the oceans are warmed and warming (barring small, fairly constant amounts of geothermal heat) – are not ‘internal’.
Here’s a basic one, from chemistry: 2C8H18 + 25O2 → 16CO2 + 18H2O + Heat Energy. More water is produced by burning octane than carbon dioxide.
So much lunacy in so few words. There’s no point in confronting all of the misconceptions, misunderstandings, and outright fabrications in your assertions about the climate – are you an alien or something?