I don't want to offend anyone, but ancient aliens.

Sunspots.

/that is all

It find it hard to believe people don't believe in an animals ability to alter it's environment, including man's ability to affect climate. The scale of it can be arguable, I suppose, but the fact of it seems inarguable.

You muzzle Sir David and I will bring my muzzle loader to the next rally

People gave up on the Discovery Channel when the supposedly education oriented channels like it (History and TLC) started airing reality shows. I doubt anyone other than derpers even watch them now anyway.

Remember when TLC was The Learning Channel?

Did they just say David Attenborough is not famous outside the UK? Really? I'm from the *colonies*, dammit! We sure as hell know who he is!

BIGNICKEL: Did they just say David Attenborough is not famous outside the UK?

Sabyen91: Who is this David Attenborough fella?

Was he the old guy in Jurassic Park?

You know, I think your country is doomed.

Wait, I'm honestly (not trolling here) missing something.

From everything I've read (which admittedly isn't much in the political side of stuff, but more on the science of climate and weather, which interests me due to my hobbies), I thought that it was pretty clear that global warming/climate change is happening; I had THOUGHT that the issue was whether or not humans were/are to blame for it... Is that not right? I mean, is there a scientifically plausible debate going on that the data that shows that trend is wrong? Or is the discussion whether or not man is causing it? Somebody, let me know; this (and other climate change threads on Fark) baffles me...

Also, another part that baffles me, and maybe someone can connect the dots for me on this: to the extent there is a POLITICAL argument (as opposed to a scientific discussion) over whether it's going on, why did the political divide split the way that it seems to have? Is it simply that if climate change were real, it would give stronger argument to those who wish to regulate stuff that might be causing the climate change? But isn't that reactionary? I think of myself as a pretty much pro-free market kind of guy (I like me a good invisible hand at work). But I don't see that necessarily the knee jerk reaction to a scientific conclusion that "humans caused global climate change" is "regulate it!" It could be a demand that we figure out alternate/better technologies, which could SPUR growth (much in the way that a lot of the Clean Air Act actually SPURRED tech development and created jobs). If it's anti-regulatory (which I'd empathize with in the abstract), why isn't that trumped by the pro-market forces at work? I mean, better to let the market come up with a solution for it, and not regulation - but that requires us to acknowledge it's happening, no?

Wouldn't want anyone to discover anything on the Discovery Channel, now would we?

/they should just stick to reruns of "Build a Huge Motorcycle in Your Garage"

Sabyen91: BroVinny: BIGNICKEL: Did they just say David Attenborough is not famous outside the UK?

Sabyen91: Who is this David Attenborough fella?

Was he the old guy in Jurassic Park?

No dummy, he is the dead French guy that liked snorkling.


I wish he'd do another season of "Insomniac". That show was hilarious.

Skwrl: Wait, I'm honestly missing something.

Everything you said makes good sense. Here's an oversimplified answer to pretty much anything:
Someone is profiting from it. They don't want you to question things because then you might question other things and then there's less profit to be had.

I'm not trying to be conspiratorial; we live on a planet where people have enough money to literally carve their name into it so big you can see it from space.
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=see+name+from+space (new window)
Do you think the kind of people who have the madness to piss money away like that would ever let anything threaten that power?

Pretty ironic name for their channel then.

God Dammit, America. I just want to walk out of my house and biatch slap the first person I see.

They also didn't air the episode of Mythbusters where they investigated RFID chips. (Not sure they even finished production of that episode.)

Corporate interests > education.

AnimateThis: Pretty ironic name for their channel then.

WIN

jehovahs witness protection: Um, somebody didn't read the article. Subby is actually a conservative...with a functioning brain.

How could you kn--

/subby

You think far too highly of yourself.

Well if you can stream the episode or watch it on Canadian channels you can end run american stupidity.

aearra: Well if you can stream the episode or watch it on Canadian channels you can end run american stupidity.

HOW DARE YOU! You imply that American stupidity is neither enduring nor innovative enough to prevent that from happening! You are un-American!

GOOD DAY SIR!

real_headhoncho: jehovahs witness protection: Subby is actually a conservative...with a functioning brain.

BULLshiat!!!

Yes, I am sure that it is literally impossible to be an intelligent conservative.

/hint: he said conservative, not Republican

This would surprise me 15 years ago when that channel was, you know, educational. Now it's all blue collar guys working reality tv.

jehovahs witness protection:

Um, somebody didn't read the article. Subby is actually a conservative...with a functioning brain.

/subby

Oxymoron from a Totalmoron. And, lo and behold, you are completely ignorant to the fact that you are a blithering retard. I guess that's a prerequisite for spouting the sh*t you do. I love how the right wing has convinced a bunch of sub-par fungi like yourself that they are actaully intelligent, by having the competition in a sealed dome where the only other contenders have to read the Hoverround instructions anew every time they waddle over to it. Congratulations on being a conservative with a "functioning brain", though; if that diagnosis is echoed by the lab's findings, you might be able to move up into being a "human with barely enough brainpower to avoid hugging oncoming trucks". But I hope not.

And I am aware that I mis-typed "actually". See that? See that right there? I spelt it "actaully" as a joke, like Herman Cain. Not my fault if you don't get it. Now don't question me about it, because when you look at it, it's not a couple of words out of order at all, and saying that they are out of order is a liberal plot for women to make money without having to work.

Diarrhea Anne Frank: Oxymoron from a Totalmoron. And, lo and behold, you are completely ignorant to the fact that you are a blithering retard. I guess that's a prerequisite for spouting the sh*t you do. I love how the right wing has convinced a bunch of sub-par fungi like yourself that they are actaully intelligent, by having the competition in a sealed dome where the only other contenders have to read the Hoverround instructions anew every time they waddle over to it. Congratulations on being a conservative with a "functioning brain", though; if that diagnosis is echoed by the lab's findings, you might be able to move up into being a "human with barely enough brainpower to avoid hugging oncoming trucks". But I hope not.