Climate Change Denial, Anyone?

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Thank you! I will read up on this and try to get a better grasp. I appreciate someone FINALLY answering this question.

a reply to: Bluesma

Well - I kinda wish you didn't have to know

None of this is easy to know

But you are most welcome

:-)

You need to understand that corporatists will deny mans effect on climate changes until the very end. It costs them profit to follow epa guidelines. The dollar reigns King.

The increase in co2 could I believe be caused mainly by the hot air emanating from most politicians fat greedy gobs.

I also have to wonder about 1000's of climate scientists jetting about the globe to attend conferences, using carbon neutral .... lol .... taxis and hotels.

Tough job but somebody has to do it eh

a reply to: intergalactic fire

The information you seek is readily available. Try skepticalscience.com

I'm not going to play along with you, its pointless in this thread already. Anything of substance I write will be lost in pages of meaningless rabble from the denial crowd.

a reply to: bigyin

Spend some time in South Florida and then try to tell me the sea level is not rising.

Also, I mentioned CO2 levels are increasing. This is 100% confirmed. We also have confirmed the extra CO2 is a direct result of human activity, mostly burning fossil fuels for energy.

No competent person can deny this reality.

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: intergalactic fire

The information you seek is readily available. Try skepticalscience.com

I'm not going to play along with you, its pointless in this thread already. Anything of substance I write will be lost in pages of meaningless rabble from the denial crowd.

Who is denying what?
Why you link me to a blog site, you find that a credible source?
That's the same guy who did a 'study' stating 97% of all scientists believe in man-made climate change and the whole media jumped on it of course, a blogger not even far from a climatologist or even a scientist.

a reply to: intergalactic fire

Skepticalscience links actual accredited papers and research to their articles....much more than a blog site.

Are you going to still deny that 1. The CO2 levels are rising and 2. That man is the major contributor to said CO2 rise?

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: intergalactic fire

Skepticalscience links actual accredited papers and research to their articles....much more than a blog site.

Are you going to still deny that 1. The CO2 levels are rising and 2. That man is the major contributor to said CO2 rise?

As do WUWT blog site, same family only opposite ideas. None of those are much interest to me.

I do not deny a rise in co2 nor do i dismiss the human contribution to it.
I only said there is no evidence that a rise in co2 will cause warming with extreme weather events as a result and humans are to blame.
But if there are I must have missed the facts on that and therefor my apologies already.

a reply to: intergalactic fire

Lol, you are trying to compare WUWT, which is literally a known quack's blog site to skeptical science. Please check your sources.

The correlation between CO2 and temperature has been established. To deny this is ignoring science; living in denial.

originally posted by: Astyanax
In my city, we’re regularly experiencing 40ºC temperatures, and schools are closing in the afternoons because of the heat. This has never happened before. Across the country the year’s first rice harvest has pretty much failed because of a lack of rain.

In nearby India, entire cities are out of drinking water. Power stations have shut down because the rivers from which they draw coolant water have dried up. In the south of the country, a heatwave is claiming the lives of the frail and the elderly.

On the opposite side of the world, in Venezuela, an unprecedented drought has combined with political mismanagement to create a situation where the government has imposed a two-day week on the public sector to save energy. It would like to do the same to the private sector but knows that there will be a revolt if it tries.

In North America, unprecedented rainfall has caused severe flooding in the US state of Texas, the latest in a long series of climate-related disasters and extreme weather events the country has suffered in the last few years.

And across the border in Canada, unusually high temperatures and changing wind patterns are helping a wildfire consume the town of Fort McMurray, pop. 88,000.

The La Niña effect this year (reverse El Niño) has caused worldwide bleaching of coral reefs, again on a scale never seen before.

Greenland is melting.

Anyone still feel like denying climate change, or feel like claiming, in the face of vast if circumstantial evidence, that we’re not helping to cause it?

Welcome, climate change deniers, to the Real Anthropocene. And a hell of a scene it is.

check out Mandela Effect and geology chances

a reply to: jrod
I am not comparing the two I am saying they are exactly the same, nonsense that is. I bet John Cook and Anthony Watts meet every night to tuck in each others.
If there is a correlation that doesn't mean a causation.

a reply to: intergalactic fire

Cute....there is more than a correlation here. There is a direct relationship with burning fossil fuels which releases CO2 and the sharp increase of CO2 we are observing.

But go ahead and pretend its just a coincidence....

a reply to: jrod

again

I do not deny a rise in co2 nor do i dismiss the human contribution to it. I only said there is no evidence that a rise in co2 will cause warming with extreme weather events as a result and humans are to blame.

a reply to: intergalactic fire

Again, it's easy to see that more CO2 in an atmosphere raises temperatures.

Therefore, if you accept that humans are increasing CO2, then we are responsible for warming.

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: intergalactic fire

Again, it's easy to see that more CO2 in an atmosphere raises temperatures.

Therefore, if you accept that humans are increasing CO2, then we are responsible for warming.

Easy? so you are smarter than most scientists studying the climate?

a reply to: jrod

I brought up no one at all.

tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: Greven

Judith Curry, a climatologist at georgia tech is not CREDIBLE

scitation.aip.org...

obviously you mean that Judith Curry doesn't buy into AGW theory with slavish and religious fervor. Apparantly you can any kind of degree behind your name, like Billy Nuy the science guy (who is a simple engineer) but you run around claiming the sky is falling and man is doomed, you are credible

But a real scientist who questions and debates, a climatologist no less, is not qualified to speak unless she first has the blessing of Pope Al Gore.

Tired of Control Freaks.

a reply to: Greven

how do you explain that historically there is an 800 year gap between rising atmospheric temperatures and rising CO2 but apparently there is no gap this time?

How do you explain that man was burning fossil fuels and co2 was rising from 1945 to 1975 and temperatures were falling?

Where is your proof of correlation? Don't bother replying that it is the only thing that makes sense. That just means scientists didn't look hard enough and have not found proof of correlation yet.

Tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

how do you explain that historically there is an 800 year gap between rising atmospheric temperatures and rising CO2 but apparently there is no gap this time?

It's the fault of the oceans dude.

How do you explain that man was burning fossil fuels and co2 was rising from 1945 to 1975 and temperatures were falling?

Wait for it,...it lags remember.