# Veep announcement \[Romney picks Paul Ryan\] **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 11, 2012, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157 "2012-08-11T03:40:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/121 "2012-08-11T18:18:58Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > He’s saying that because the example president doesn’t believe in nukes, he’ll go about his business in a manner as if they don’t exist. > > If we wants to invade Pakistan, he’ll mass an overwhelming amount conventional troops on their border, not understanding that they can just launch nuclear shells to kill everyone. > > So, because of his daft misunderstanding, he’ll do very, very stupid things. Like a how a climate change denier might cancel wind power subsides while retaining them for fossil fuels. Spot on, in the past people like Reagan and Bush senior still listened to scientists and we got one of the biggest “we dodged a bullet” moment thanks to governments organizing a face out of the CFC gases that were destroying the ozone layer, if the current crop of republicans had been in power then we would be looking at this grim future: [http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/world\_avoided.html](http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/world_avoided.html) > [@](#): > > The year is 2065. Nearly two-thirds of Earth’s ozone is gone – not just over the poles, but everywhere. The infamous ozone hole over Antarctica, first discovered in the 1980s, is a year-round fixture, with a twin over the North Pole. The ultraviolet (UV) radiation falling on mid-latitude cities like Washington, D.C., is strong enough to cause sunburn in just five minutes. DNA-mutating UV radiation is up 650 percent, with likely harmful effects on plants, animals and human skin cancer rates. > > Such is the world we would have inherited if 193 nations had not agreed to ban ozone-depleting substances, according to atmospheric chemists at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md., Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Bilthoven. > > Led by Goddard scientist Paul Newman, the team simulated “what might have been” if chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and similar chemicals were not banned through the treaty known as the Montreal Protocol. The simulation used a comprehensive model that included atmospheric chemical effects, wind changes, and radiation changes. The analysis has been published online in the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics. As pointed many times before it is clear that controlling global warming gases is a tougher nut to crack, but what is clear is that it is even tougher because currently one party has decided that current profits for fossil fuel companies are better than the well being of future generations. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/122 "2012-08-11T18:19:38Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I mean ads from semi mainstream sources. Sure you can get some wacko group to call Obama a Kenyan or say that Republicans are Klan members, but I mean real ads from the campaigns or the national party that show 80 year old women turning tricks to pay for their hospital bills or some other outrageous thing. You mean like[the official Romney campaign’s welfare ad](http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/08/07/13163204-the-scandal-behind-romneys-new-attack-ad?lite)? Wake up, Rip. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/123 "2012-08-11T18:33:35Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Spot on, in the past people like Reagan and Bush senior still listened to scientists and we got one of the biggest “we dodged a bullet” moment thanks to governments organizing a face out of the CFC gases that were destroying the ozone layer, if the current crop of republicans had been in power then we would be looking at this grim future: > > [http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/world\_avoided.html](http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/world_avoided.html) > As pointed many times before it is clear that controlling global warming gases is a tougher nut to crack, but what is clear is that it is even tougher because currently one party has decided that current profits for fossil fuel companies are better than the well being of future generations. That’s an interesting comparison. Unfortunately, [there’s evidence that the gases picked to replace CFCs are contributing to global warming more than CFCs ever were.](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/19/AR2009071901817.html) According to the Post story, some replacement gases trap heat several _thousand_ times more efficiently than CFCs. In solving one problem, we aggravated another, and now they are looking for replacements for the CFC replacements. That’s not to defend Ryan, however – you need to set policy with the best information available at the time, and he clearly doesn’t. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/124 "2012-08-11T18:41:41Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > That’s an interesting comparison. Unfortunately, [there’s evidence that the gases picked to replace CFCs are contributing to global warming more than CFCs ever were.](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/19/AR2009071901817.html) According to the Post story, some replacement gases trap heat several _thousand_ times more efficiently than CFCs. In solving one problem, we aggravated another, and now they are looking for replacements for the CFC replacements. > > That’s not to defend Ryan, however – you need to set policy with the best information available at the time, and he clearly doesn’t. Of course they are still a lesser amount than the CO2 we release and of course to prevent them from becoming a larger problem on the global warming front we need the government and industry to work toward the control of them, **unfortunately even in this case** Ryan is bound to continue with the idea that nothing needs to be done. ---
**Author:** ![2ManyTacos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/2/3da27b/32.png) [@2ManyTacos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2ManyTacos)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/125 "2012-08-11T18:53:18Z")
Haha, RCP [has moved Wisconsin back into the toss-up category.](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html) Okay, c’mon now, what’s this based off of? Yes, Ryan is from Wisconsin, but Obama has been leading in [virtually every fucking poll in that state](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/wi/wisconsin_romney_vs_obama-1871.html#polls) throughout this entire campaign. Having Ryan on the ticket might make the race there a bit more competitive, but it isn’t going to magically swing the state to Romney. Seriously? :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/126 "2012-08-11T18:58:35Z")
> [@2ManyTacos](#): > > Having Ryan on the ticket will turn out more of the GOP and Tea Party base Even on that metric I think its a bad idea. People underestimate how much the “Tea Party Base” consists of elderly white people who were afraid Obamacare would lead to Medicare cuts. Having a VP whose signature issue was replacing Medicare with a much less comprehensive program isn’t going to motivate those people to go to the polls (at least, not motivate them to vote for Romney). I’m not really sure who Ryan is supposed to attract to the ticket. He’s popular amongst a certain type of beltway deficit hawk, and I guess he might be good for a point or two at the polls in Wisconsin. But having him on the ticket is just going to let Obama focus the race on entitlement reform, where the public favours his position, and away from the slow economic recovery. Someone really should’ve put a sign in Romney’s office saying: “Its not the entitlements, stupid” ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/127 "2012-08-11T19:00:34Z")
I agree with Spencer Critchley here, Romney is guy with no core that thinks he can order one. > **[Ryan Is Romney's Sarah Palin](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ryan-is-romneys-sarah-pal_b_1767278)** > > As any psychologist could tell you, if you're obsessed with escaping someone, you are not free of that someone. In fleeing Sarah Palin, anxiously looking over his shoulder, Mitt Romney has run around in a circle, smack into Paul Ryan. > [@](#): > > McCain was seen by the conservative base as far too impure ideologically, palling around with liberals on bellwether issues like immigration, global warming and campaign finance reform. He was also proving to be a disappointing campaigner: lacking a coherent message, committing gaffes and never really firing up any part of the electorate. > > Sound familiar? > > McCain chose Palin in a desperate attempt to buy credibility with the base of his own party. Same with Romney and Ryan. Romney, a man who apparently has no core, has attempted to hire one. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/128 "2012-08-11T19:23:09Z")
People have so little faith in Romney’s ability to lie and rewrite history. By the time of the election a large percentage of voters could believe Ryan offered a voucher program for additional medicare benefits for white people and the evil Democrats blocked it. All the while the the press will be offering two sides of the story rather then correcting the falsehoods. The amount of funding the Romney campaign has to throw into this is unprecedented. The shitstorm of misinformation that will be created will cloud the senses of even the most informed voters. While many will be able to find their way to the truth the majority might not do so until after they’ve cast their vote. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/129 "2012-08-11T19:23:47Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Magellan, imagine if someone who didn’t believe in nuclear warheads wanted to run for president. Imagine that he would support implementing policy that would start full-on war with Pakistan, because “They would have no way to defend themselves from our traditional warfare”. Imagine if he based this on his failure to understand basic physics. Okay. Imagining that? Would you consider us out of line for voicing our stern opposition to such a ludicrously out-of-touch-with-reality candidate? Look. We’re talking about climate change and global warming, which, by the way, I accept. What is reasonable to expect from those very concerned about this is the same thing I would demand from someone talking about anything in which their are still unknowns, i.e., an attitude that makes room for, “…but I may be WRONG!” The FACT is that we do not KNOW the degree to which the warming we’re experiencing isn’t something that occurs rather normally in the earth’s long history. We also do not KNOW the degree to which it is now attributable to man’s actions. And we do not KNOW the degree to which our actions—even if we did _everything_ that the most fervent global warming alarmist recommends—would reduce temperatures. I know that there is a lot of good data and that we can estimate all things, and this is not _merely_ the realm of opinion, but when people take an issue with important unknowns and then champion the cause the way GiGO does, attacking anyone who does not ascribe to his belief system and not admitting that he, and the scientists who actually do the work he relies on, do not KNOW that answers to important questions, then it starts to look much more like a religion than a dispassionate scientific endeavor. And THAT should be called out. Just recently I posted that the man who is considered the father of global warming thinks that the “movement” is out of control. Of course, he is now a “crackpot”. The subject matter may be different, but there is very little separating people like GIGO from the most fervent sure-of-themselves evangelical preacher championing the rights of the unborn. Opponents are marginalized and demonized. There is only one interpretation of the facts, in spite of the gaping holes in the knowledge set. ---
**Author:** ![dalej42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@dalej42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dalej42)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/130 "2012-08-11T19:27:33Z")
The last time a member of the House of Representatives was picked as a running mate was Bill Miller with Barry Goldwater in 1964, right? That didn’t work out too well. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/131 "2012-08-11T19:30:05Z")
To comment again on the subject of the thread (I’ll leave the global warming alarmist/evangelical debate for another thread if anyone would like to continue it), I’m torn about Ryan. I like him. I think he’s a smart guy. And I think choosing him sends a clear signal that Romney is going for substance. It says that he views the economy and fiscal matters as the things of paramount importance. And that is good and refreshing. And I think a lot of libertarian-leaning Independents will like that quite a lot On the negative side, he’s not an orator. He’s not great at rallying people. Christie, my preference, is terrific at that. And given that Romney is rather challenged in that regard, as del, I fear he might have made a mistake in not picking someone like Christie, or even Rubio. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/132 "2012-08-11T19:31:49Z")
> [@dalej42](#): > > The last time a member of the House of Representatives was picked as a running mate was Bill Miller with Barry Goldwater in 1964, right? > > That didn’t work out too well. Wow. Is that right? I think so… I wouldn’t have guessed that, though. ---
**Author:** ![2ManyTacos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/2/3da27b/32.png) [@2ManyTacos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2ManyTacos)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/133 "2012-08-11T19:35:00Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > People have so little faith in Romney’s ability to lie and rewrite history. By the time of the election a large percentage of voters could believe Ryan offered a voucher program for additional medicare benefits for white people and the evil Democrats blocked it. All the while the the press will be offering two sides of the story rather then correcting the falsehoods. > > The amount of funding the Romney campaign has to throw into this is unprecedented. The shitstorm of misinformation that will be created will cloud the senses of even the most informed voters. While many will be able to find their way to the truth the majority might not do so until after they’ve cast their vote. You have to realize that, yes, Romney is going to have an unholy amount of cash to throw at his campaign; the thing is, though, _so will Obama._ This is the one part of the Democratic line that I don’t really buy into; this idea that Obama will somehow be the underdog in this election because he might be outspent by Romney. That’s just ridiculous. BOTH campaigns are going to have an insane amount of money to throw away at this election, and all that really matters is that each party has enough cash to get their messages out. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/134 "2012-08-11T19:41:26Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Look. We’re talking about climate change and global warming, which, by the way, I accept. What is reasonable to expect from those very concerned about this is the same thing I would demand from someone talking about anything in which their are still unknowns, i.e., an attitude that makes room for, “…but I may be WRONG!” > > The FACT is that we do not KNOW the degree to which the warming we’re experiencing isn’t something that occurs rather normally in the earth’s long history. We also do not KNOW the degree to which it is now attributable to man’s actions. And we do not KNOW the degree to which our actions—even if we did _everything_ that the most fervent global warming alarmist recommends—would reduce temperatures. The real fact is that you are relying on discredited sources for your points. > **[What does past climate change tell us about global warming?](https://skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm)** > > Natural climate change in the past proves that climate is sensitive to an energy imbalance. If the planet accumulates heat, global temperatures will go up. Currently, CO2 is imposing an energy imbalance due to the enhanced greenhouse effect. Past... > [@](#): > > Climate reacts to whatever forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant forcing. > **[BEST Results Consistent with Human-Caused Global Warming](https://skepticalscience.com/best-results-consistent-with-human-caused-global-warming.html)** > > Richard Muller is the head of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) project, which has just made available a preliminary paper (not yet having passed the peer-review process) regarding the causes of the recent global warming.  As for not doing anything, that is just contradictory, it is either a problem or it is not. The huge point that you are missing is that scientists already do know what is the more likely outcome of doing nothing, \*\*if we do something \*\*we will still suffer lots of trouble but it is very likely that we will manage, what we have in the current republican leadership is the solution of ignoring it or affirming there is no solution that is needed as there is no problem. > [@magellan01](#): > > I know that there is a lot of good data and that we can estimate all things, and this is not _merely_ the realm of opinion, but when people take an issue with important unknowns and then champion the cause the way GiGO does, attacking anyone who does not ascribe to his belief system and not admitting that he, and the scientists who actually do the work he relies on, do not KNOW that answers to important questions, then it starts to look much more like a religion than a dispassionate scientific endeavor. And THAT should be called out. Just recently I posted that the man who is considered the father of global warming thinks that the “movement” is out of control. Of course, he is now a “crackpot”. And you ignored that most scientists do not see him that way, he was not the father of the movement (and here you betray the fact that you got that point from discredited sources) on global warming. > [@magellan01](#): > > The subject matter may be different, but there is very little separating people like GIGO from the most fervent sure-of-themselves evangelical preacher championing the rights of the unborn. Opponents are marginalized and demonized. There is only one interpretation of the facts, in spite of the gaping holes in the knowledge set. Piffle, as usual you will ignore the evidence and ignore that Republicans right now have an even more extreme positions that the one you have. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/135 "2012-08-11T19:47:40Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Piffle, as usual you will ignore the evidence and ignore that Republicans right now have an even more extreme positions that the one you have. I’m not ignoring squat. I’m acknowledging that we don’t fully understand climate change. Unbelievably, you seem to take the opposing view. You really need to adopt the same attitude that evangelicals do. “I believe this fervently, BUT I may be wrong.” Give it a try, come on, read this aloud one word at a time: “I. May. Be. Wrong.” Now all together in a sentence: “I may be wrong.” That didn’t hurt now, did it? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/136 "2012-08-11T19:50:27Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I’m not ignoring squat. I’m acknowledging that we don’t fully understand climate change. Unbelievably, you seem to take the opposing view. You really need to adopt the same attitude that evangelicals do. “I believe this fervently, BUT I may be wrong.” > > Give it a try, come on, read this aloud one word at a time: > > “I. May. Be. Wrong.” > > Now all together in a sentence: > > “I may be wrong.” > > That didn’t hurt now, did it? Good, now stop posting unfounded points and learn to identify good sources. It is Ryan the one that needs to be taken to task for relying on discredited information, and making decisions in government that are appalling because he is not relying on science for sure. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/137 "2012-08-11T19:58:02Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Much as I think Ryan is an idiot or a liar or both, I am completely mystified by your response. Are you talking about a president who would start a conventional war with Pakistan, or a nuclear war with Pakistan, “because they would have no way to defend themselves…” They certainly do have ways to defend themselves against conventional attack, mostly with weapons we provided them. No one country has any real means of defending itself against a nuclear missile attack. > > Are you saying that starting a nuclear war against Pakistan is a better choice than starting a conventional war? Lobo nailed it. > [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Ok, I understand that, so I will just say that this is a ridiculous comparison. I know of literally no one on earth who disbelieves that nuclear weapons exist or that they work. Ryan is simply not nearly THAT stupid. My guess is he isn’t stupid at all, more likely he is in the pocket of the energy industry, and perhaps even doesn’t believe the situation is as dire as probably is. > > Now, if you can come up with a scenario where Ryan is being paid or otherwise personally benefiting from a claim that nukes aren’t real, you might have something. > > Now, this leads us to the question of whether we want a corrupt and/or stupid Vice President. Unfortunately, we have lots of precedents of that. It’s just an analogy. If you have a president who lacks an important piece of information, they will most likely not act on that information. It’s why an engineer who doesn’t believe in electricity will fare poorly, and a virologist who doesn’t believe in evolution will get fired. And in this case, Magellan is questioning our objections to a vice president who doesn’t believe in anthropogenic global warming, or at least is trying very hard to deny it. Yeah, no shit, we have objections. They’re valid objections, because AGW is here and causing extreme damage, and politicians who are incapable of facing the facts on global warming are also incapable of doing anything about it. Capisce? > [@magellan01](#): > > Look. We’re talking about climate change and global warming, which, by the way, I accept. What is reasonable to expect from those very concerned about this is the same thing I would demand from someone talking about anything in which their are still unknowns, i.e., an attitude that makes room for, “…but I may be WRONG!” Okay. There are still unknowns about gravity. Would you respect an engineer more or less who said, “Given my calculations based on gravitational force, the plane will take off somewhere between 80 and 90 miles per hour. But I may be WRONG, and it could be that it will just fly into outer space at 10 miles per hour”. There are still unknowns, but this doesn’t shove aside the _knowns_. You’re making the issue out to be far more controversial than it is, and that is stupid. > [@](#): > > The FACT is that we do not KNOW the degree to which the warming we’re experiencing isn’t something that occurs rather normally in the earth’s long history. We also do not KNOW the degree to which it is now attributable to man’s actions. And we do not KNOW the degree to which our actions—even if we did _everything_ that the most fervent global warming alarmist recommends—would reduce temperatures. And GIGO already addressed these claims. As I said above: you’re making the issue out to be far more controversial than it is, and that is stupid. It is an _utterly typical_ denialist tract – “I accept that this is happening, but we don’t know enough about it to make any sort of claims with certainty, and no I haven’t looked at the most recent research”. Newsflash: your ignorance does not make the rest of us ignorant. > [@](#): > > I know that there is a lot of good data and that we can estimate all things, and this is not _merely_ the realm of opinion, but when people take an issue with important unknowns and then champion the cause the way GiGO does, attacking anyone who does not ascribe to his belief system and not admitting that he, and the scientists who actually do the work he relies on, do not KNOW that answers to important questions, then it starts to look much more like a religion than a dispassionate scientific endeavor. And THAT should be called out. BUT THEY AREN’T UNKNOWNS! For christ’s sake, you’re ignoring the most recent advances in the field and claiming ignorance for everyone when the fact of the matter is that _you_ are ignorant, and _they_ (the scientists researching these things) are not. You’re like an opponent of wind power claiming that they only get an average 24% return of energy, when that number has been outdated for ages – it’s closer to 50% now. Yes, there are unknowns. But not the ones you’ve been trumping up, and certainly not enough to excuse a politician who _does not believe that humans have any effect in global warming_. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/138 "2012-08-11T20:12:27Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Okay. There are still unknowns about gravity. Would you respect an engineer more or less who said, “Given my calculations based on gravitational force, the plane will take off somewhere between 80 and 90 miles per hour. But I may be WRONG, and it could be that it will just fly into outer space at 10 miles per hour”. There are still unknowns, but this doesn’t shove aside the _knowns_. You’re making the issue out to be far more controversial than it is, and that is stupid. Nope. You’re assuming a greater degree of true knowledge than exists. Not only do I think global warming exists and that man contributes to it, I probably agree with most of the steps that should be taken. That doesn’t translate that there are not unknowns. You want to compare it to gravity? Okay, I’ll tell you what, when any scientists who study climate change can predict things with the same degree of certainty of a schoolboy predicting that a ball he throws up into the air will return to earth, you let me know and I’ll join the Church of Gigo. Until then, repeat after me, “But I may be wrong.” When the father of global warming things that the scientists are turning into religionists, that should give you pause. Oh wait, let’s just discredit him and say he’s a loon. Next! ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/139 "2012-08-11T20:14:11Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Good, now stop posting unfounded points and learn to identify good sources. It is Ryan the one that needs to be taken to task for relying on discredited information, and making decisions in government that are appalling because he is not relying on science for sure. Sure. If you stop trying to turn every fucking thread on these boards into a reason for you to cut and paste more of your scripture. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2012, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/140 "2012-08-11T20:15:25Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Nope. You’re assuming a greater degree of true knowledge than exists. Not only do I think global warming exists and that man contributes to it, I probably agree with most of the steps that should be taken. That doesn’t translate that there are not unknowns. You want to compare it to gravity? Okay, I’ll tell you what, when any scientists who study climate change can predict things with the same degree of certainty of a schoolboy predicting that a ball he throws up into the air will return to earth, you let me know and I’ll join the Church of Gigo. Until then, repeat after me, “But I may be wrong.” > > When the father of global warming things that the scientists are turning into religionists, that should give you pause. Oh wait, let’s just discredit him and say he’s a loon. Next! He was discredited, he was not the father of this, and he is a loon. > **[RealClimate: James Lovelock’s Gloomy Vision](https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/02/james-lovelocks-gloomy-vision/)** > > RealClimate: James Lovelock, renegade Earth scientist and creator of the Gaia hypothesis, has written a gloomy new book called “Revenge of Gaia”, in which he argues that we should be stashing survival manuals, printed on good old-fashioned paper, in... As for the unknowns, lets see a Republican that is an expert on the matter to explain it: [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/a69_owv4jEE/maxresdefault.jpg ""We don't know enough..." How to talk to an OSTRICH") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a69_owv4jEE) > [@](#): > > It’s true that Earth’s a massive jigsaw puzzle, with lots of pieces intricately fitting together. But, Richard Alley argues, we already know enough to see the Big Picture. The missing pieces of scientific understanding - exactly how clouds work, how extreme weather will change with global warming - are important, but we can already see how Earth works. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157.md?page=8)