interesting read on climate change...

[kx250rider]

Wrong

,

Its not a political issue. It has nothing to do with the left. It's like saying cholesterol is liberal.



Think of all the drought, starvation, species extinction, destruction of property, forest fires, increased poverty...

You think you you can just decide what is going on and what will happen?



I know you are a lost cause, but you speaking from an extremely ignorant point of view. Read the links I posted above and get some real information. And I'm still waiting for the article on cow fluorocarbons

Agree to disagree?

It's ironic that you cited cholesterol: Lots of doctors say that cholesterol levels indicate future heart health... But not in all cases. People can live to be 100 with perfectly clear, plaque-free arteries with lifelong off-the-scale cholesterol levels. In fact, my triglycerides are 590+. But 0% arterial blockage and 4.9% body fat. In other words, those who are "sure" of something; one way or the other, are sure only based upon what they have studied and what they believe and perceive as fact.

Charles

 

[wootoom]

Frac frac frac!!!!

 

[mrplunkey]

Agree to disagree?

It's ironic that you cited cholesterol: Lots of doctors say that cholesterol levels indicate future heart health... But not in all cases. People can live to be 100 with perfectly clear, plaque-free arteries with lifelong off-the-scale cholesterol levels. In fact, my triglycerides are 590+. But 0% arterial blockage and 4.9% body fat. In other words, those who are "sure" of something; one way or the other, are sure only based upon what they have studied and what they believe and perceive as fact.

Charles

I noticed his cholesterol analogy as well.

We should apply global warming logic to the cholesterol problem:

1) we know that cholesterol can be bad for you

2) we don't know how much is natural and normal ( medical opinion varies) versus what is pathological.

Thus the solution is simple: let 's buy $6 trillion worth of Crestor every year and put it in the water supply.

 

[machine23]

Agree to disagree?

In other words, those who are "sure" of something; one way or the other, are sure only based upon what they have studied and what they believe and perceive as fact.

Charles

Indoctrinated

 

[Headholio]

Agree to disagree?

It's ironic that you cited cholesterol: Lots of doctors say that cholesterol levels indicate future heart health... But not in all cases. People can live to be 100 with perfectly clear, plaque-free arteries with lifelong off-the-scale cholesterol levels. In fact, my triglycerides are 590+. But 0% arterial blockage and 4.9% body fat. In other words, those who are "sure" of something; one way or the other, are sure only based upon what they have studied and what they believe and perceive as fact.

Charles

Yeah its not a perfect analogy, but information on cholesterol gives us probabilities for future problems. For example we can know that a person with lipid profile X has 5 times the likelihood of having a heart attack compared with a person with lipid profile Y. It doesn't predict the future for every case, but is very accurate for knowing the overall health of certain populations.

Anecdotes about guys with high cholesterol or smokers who live a long time are just as stupid as anecdotes about global warming isn't real because it is cold today.

Likewise it would be stupid to smoke or ignore a cholesterol problem based on anecdotal evidence, just like it would be stupid to ignore the danger of our continued disruption of the environment.

For smoking, cholesterol, and global warming, the risks are known. there are scientific ways of looking at data that allows us to make accurate predictions, and we have the data.

And by the way, cardiovascular risk of high triglycerides is more complicated, and an interesting topic, but completely different than cholesterol.

 

[Headholio]

I noticed his cholesterol analogy as well.

We should apply global warming logic to the cholesterol problem:

1) we know that cholesterol can be bad for you

2) we don't know how much is natural and normal ( medical opinion varies) versus what is pathological.

Thus the solution is simple: let 's buy $6 trillion worth of Crestor every year and put it in the water supply.

1 is true and 2 is false. We know what is an unhealthy level of cholesterol. Current recommendations are based on data of people with different levels of cholesterol and likelihood of CVD. There are many studies showing that LDL over 130 increases risk for atherosclerotic progression, and LDL under 100 (even more for under 70) can result in regression of plaque.

And your suggestion about putting Crestor in the water isn't far from the truth. Lipid drugs are the number 1 prescribed drug class. they are a huge benefit for millions of people and will continue to increas. Maybe someday statins will be in the water, like flouride.

The cholesterol thing is a sidetrack, but that's ok. To get back to AGW, AGW deniers are like 400 pound ignorant sedentary slobs saying they don't believe they have health risks.

 

[Headholio]

Notice that the skeptics never provide scientific facts becsuse they don't have them. This thread has pointed out the the overwhelming evidence for AGW, the logic behind it, the lack of contrary evidence, and the settled consensus in the scientific community.

The arguments by skeptics pretty much boil down to "I don't believe it because I don't want to". Either that or misinformation about the science that is easily corrected, which I have tried to do.

If you want to disbelieve science, you should disbelieve that cell phone in your pocket. It is a miracle that is just one tiny example of the incredible ability of humans to understand nature and the universe. If science didn't work, you wouldn't have that cellphone. The level of complexity of that cellphone and the human understanding that went into it is really a much more difficult thing to understand than the basic principles of greenhouse gases and the effect on the environment.

 

[mistaballoonhands]

They wont put it in the water unless they figure out the whole rhabdo thing.

 

[wootoom]

Can I frac?

 

[Headholio]

They wont put it in the water unless they figure out the whole rhabdo thing.

Right. But cholesterol lowering bottled water might be an option.

That's my idea. All rights reserved.