One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Citing grave threat, Scientific American replaces 'climate change' with 'climate emergency'
Page <<first <prev 4 of 6 next> last>>
Apr 14, 2021 16:37:42   #
martsiva
 
Kevyn wrote:
These idiots are complacent with sh!ting in their own nest for one of two reasons. Either they are not long for the world and don’t want to be inconvenienced in any way or they think they are days or weeks from being raptured to the heavens.


OK - here we have another brainwashed imbecile who actually believes that man influenced all the climate changes this earth has seen when there were no combustible engines, no factories and a very sparse population - isn`t that right kevyn??

Reply
Apr 14, 2021 18:10:46   #
microphor Loc: Home is TN
 
rumitoid wrote:
Really? Please present the case against CNN.


you know you told me to do my own research, you should do the same but here is an "excerpt" for the newest "caught on tape" report on CNN staff. "Chester (technical director) described some of CNN's reportage on Trump during the campaign as "propaganda." He said CNN invited medical experts to undermine public confidence in Trump’s health.

PS. if you want to hear the consideration at lawsuit, you have to listen to the news, you know the one you rely on for all your up to date info

Reply
Apr 14, 2021 18:42:25   #
rumitoid
 
martsiva wrote:
OK - here we have another brainwashed imbecile who actually believes that man influenced all the climate changes this earth has seen when there were no combustible engines, no factories and a very sparse population - isn`t that right kevyn??


kevyn sees today man-made problem.

Reply
 
 
Apr 14, 2021 18:47:02   #
rumitoid
 
microphor wrote:
you know you told me to do my own research, you should do the same but here is an "excerpt" for the newest "caught on tape" report on CNN staff. "Chester (technical director) described some of CNN's reportage on Trump during the campaign as "propaganda." He said CNN invited medical experts to undermine public confidence in Trump’s health.

PS. if you want to hear the consideration at lawsuit, you have to listen to the news, you know the one you rely on for all your up to date info
you know you told me to do my own research, you sh... (show quote)


Still no case. Something you guys seem to hate: evidence. Then there is also reliable and verifiable sources. QAnon makes statements like your everyday.

Reply
Apr 14, 2021 19:40:53   #
son of witless
 
rumitoid wrote:
(Most on the Right are anti-science, be it the pandemic, climate change, vaccines, or whatever. They would rather cling to their superstitions than to facts. They are ushering in a new Dark Age.)

Scientific American magazine announced Monday that it would stop using the term "climate change" in articles about man-made global warming and substitute "climate emergency" instead.

"Journalism should reflect what science says: the climate emergency is here," Scientific American senior editor Mark Fischetti said in a Monday post about the magazine's decision.

To make his point, Fischetti pointed to the mounting number of weather-related disasters that most scientists agree stem from climate change.

"A hurricane blasts Florida. A California dam bursts because floods have piled water high up behind it. A sudden, record-setting cold snap cuts power to the entire state of Texas," Fischetti wrote. "These are also emergencies that require immediate action. Multiply these situations worldwide, and you have the biggest environmental emergency to beset the earth in millennia: climate change."

The oldest continuously published magazine in the U.S., Scientific American is not alone it its decision to highlight what it sees as an emergency requiring immediate action. It joined the Columbia Journalism Review, the Nation, the Guardian, Noticias Telemundo, Al Jazeera, Japan's Asahi Shimbun and Italy's La Repubblica in releasing a statement about the change in language.

"The planet is heating up way too fast. It’s time for journalism to recognize that the climate emergency is here," the statement said, adding, "Why 'emergency'? Because words matter. To preserve a livable planet, humanity must take action immediately."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/citing-grave-threat-scientific-american-replacing-climate-change-with-climate-emergency-181629578.html
(Most on the Right are anti-science, be it the pan... (show quote)


Why not call it the Global Warming Super Urgent Dire Emergency ?

Reply
Apr 14, 2021 21:53:44   #
Hadenough
 
rumitoid wrote:
If your state upriver decides the coal ash can be dumped without treatment, the next state down will suffer the consequence. Environmental regulations need to be federal. Our future is not free-for-all.


Hemorrhoid,

So what you’re really saying is no matter what we do we can’t stem the flow of pollution if we don’t enforce our ways on other countries. You need to go to India, China or any other third world country and let them know we’re coming.
You do realize the minimal amount of pollution we produce is nothing compared to the rest of the world. Our rules and regulations are not for all.
Grab all your dem/lib and prog friends and start your world tour. You can take some of your chicken little friends from OPP and save the world.
You can hitch a ride with Gore or deCrapio and travel the world in their jet leaving a footprint letting them know of the danger.

Reply
Apr 14, 2021 21:56:01   #
Hadenough
 
rumitoid wrote:
kevyn sees today man-made problem.


Yep, we should put the blame on kevie’s parents for creating him.

Reply
 
 
Apr 14, 2021 22:27:42   #
martsiva
 
rumitoid wrote:
kevyn sees today man-made problem.


You are avoiding what I stated! Why is that? How did man influence all the climate changes when there were no combustible engines, no factories and a sparse population?? Direct question!!

Reply
Apr 14, 2021 23:07:53   #
WEBCO
 
rumitoid wrote:
The tyranny of facts; so dry compared to the conspiracy theories on the Right.


The UN and their IPCC are the driving force behind climate change. They have made over 50 predictions on what our planet and weather would be like by now...they are 0 for 50, so who's the science denier?

Reply
Apr 15, 2021 08:02:11   #
Weewillynobeerspilly Loc: North central Texas
 
Rumi...... i slapped you in the face with a heavy leather gauntlet and tossed it down, you have been challenged to the science topic of your choosing. ...... i deferred giving you home field advantage and the opportunity to show my ignorance.

I see you ran your suck for another 2 pages...... Bring it, be prepared to defend it.

Kinda smelling like old cat food on this thread. ...... ,Rumi.

Reply
Apr 15, 2021 08:03:20   #
SGM B Loc: TEXAS but live in Alabama now
 
martsiva wrote:
You are avoiding what I stated! Why is that? How did man influence all the climate changes when there were no combustible engines, no factories and a sparse population?? Direct question!!


Good question. Good luck with getting a direct answer. 🦗🦗🦗

Reply
 
 
Apr 15, 2021 08:10:24   #
SGM B Loc: TEXAS but live in Alabama now
 
Weewillynobeerspilly wrote:
Rumi...... i slapped you in the face with a heavy leather gauntlet and tossed it down, you have been challenged to the science topic of your choosing. ...... i deferred giving you home field advantage and the opportunity to show my ignorance.

I see you ran your suck for another 2 pages...... Bring it, be prepared to defend it.

Kinda smelling like old cat food on this thread. ...... ,Rumi.


Aaaa and WWNBS strikes again. Good job my friend!

Reply
Apr 15, 2021 08:14:57   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
rumitoid wrote:
So poison people and the environment and let the courts decide damages? How about regulations that prohibit such egregious such activities?


They are still there.. Like I said Federal abrogation of something is still left to the states to enforce as they so choose..Approve or deny..

Reply
Apr 15, 2021 08:27:31   #
EmilyD
 
martsiva wrote:
You are avoiding what I stated! Why is that? How did man influence all the climate changes when there were no combustible engines, no factories and a sparse population?? Direct question!!


The left avoids this question whenever it's presented. What someone once told me when I asked that same question was: "there were no climate problems before man appeared." (!!) Honestly!

I asked him if I could borrow his time machine, so I could go back to the dawning of mankind and see for myself. 😀

Reply
Apr 15, 2021 09:31:17   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
EmilyD wrote:
The left avoids this question whenever it's presented. What someone once told me when I asked that same question was: "there were no climate problems before man appeared." (!!) Honestly!

I asked him if I could borrow his time machine, so I could go back to the dawning of mankind and see for myself. 😀


Lolol good one Emily~~

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 6 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.