I haven't seen you actually reference anything on this topic. You haven't referenced anything on lumber companies, paper companies, hemp, land acreage, oil & car companies, politicians or science.
Please re-read your own posts. You say things about how it seems possible that big oil paid off every single anti-global warming scientist. Where have you actually seen proof of this?
Where are any of your counter points on my statements about companies and government paying large sums of money to develop new and better technologies?
This isn't just any old message board. This is a site to debate and discuss important topics in the world. If you want to talk about your opinions then use a blog. This is a site for educated debates using facts (as well as your viewpoint on the subject matter). If all you can do is
guess that big business pays everyone off to hide their evil doings, how am I supposed to discuss that with you.
If you guess that the govt. and big oil is evil, how am I supposed to have a logical discussion with you about it. I can sit here all day and
guess that it seems like our government is evil and big business just wants to pay off scientists and buy up technology so no one can have it. But where will that get us? No where.
I am trying to discuss reality and facts about climate shift, agriculture, how American businesses actually do help develop new technologies. And all you can do is say things like:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tROCO
From what I've heard, there really aren't that many scientists that disagree with the global warming-man made link, so I don't think it would be that hard to pay them off...especially when only a small number are actually publishing materials about it.
Of course lumber companies want to keep trees growing so they still have business and money to make, but that's not to say that deforestation of the other trees doesn't have some bad effects. Simply putting a paved road through the woods messes up the habitat and has some pretty bad effects. I'm not a scientist, but a friend of mine studies that sortof thing so I take his word for it.
|
How is any of that factually based, logical or a counter point to a debate or even an educated discussion?
I'm not trying to be mean, but you can't say things like "from what I've heard" when debating facts about global warming. I'm not saying you need to be an expert on the subjects at hand, but if all you can offer to a real debate is "from what I've heard", then don't try to debate the subject.
We can discuss the issues, but don't use hearsay to counter factually based debate points. As a major in journalism you should really know these sorts of things.
I don't want to scare you off this site, but you need to realize the difference between discussion and debate. And from your other posts on this site, you haven't quite realized the difference yet.
Don't leave this site just because I debate facts...I can be sort of overbearing sometimes. Please add to our discussions as you see fit. Just don't try to debate someone who has facts and research compared to your hearsay and guessing.