Trump sums up Global Warming in one Savage Tweet

originally posted by: Nickisup
Do i need to source information for every animal on the endangered list? Last I checked it’s public knowledge.a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Your 'public knowledge' is a myth based upon computer models, just like the whole global warming myth itself lol.
Why is it so hard for anyone here to provide citations when asked to provide one?

Most ecologists believe that we are in the midst of the sixth mass extinction. Humanity’s impact on nature, they say, is now comparable to the five previous catastrophic events over the past 600 million years, during which up to 95 percent of the planet’s species disappeared. We may very well be. But recent studies have cited extinction rates that are extremely fuzzy and vary wildly.

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, which involved more than a thousand experts, estimated an extinction rate that was later calculated at up to 8,700 species a year, or 24 a day. More recently, scientists at the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity concluded that: “Every day, up to 150 species are lost.” That could be as much as 10 percent a decade.

But nobody knows whether such estimates are anywhere close to reality. They are based on computer modeling, and documented losses are tiny by comparison. Only about 800 extinctions have been documented in the past 400 years, according to data held by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Out of some 1.9 million recorded current or recent species on the planet, that represents less than a tenth of one percent.

Nor is there much documented evidence of accelerating loss. In its latest update, released in June, the IUCN reported “no new extinctions,” although last year it reported the loss of an earwig on the island of St. Helena and a Malaysian snail. And some species once thought extinct have turned out to be still around, like the Guadalupe fur seal, which “died out” a century ago, but now numbers over 20,000.

Moreover, the majority of documented extinctions have been on small islands, where species with small gene pools have usually succumbed to human hunters. That may be an ecological tragedy for the islands concerned, but most species live in continental areas and, ecologists agree, are unlikely to prove so vulnerable.

e360.yale.edu...

originally posted by: Nickisup
Do i need to source information for every animal on the endangered list? Last I checked it’s public knowledge.a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Why should we really care anyway? - extinction is perfectly natural.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Justoneman

I've looked into this also... there is a lot of conflicting information with some saying that the magnetic pole shift is caused by global warming and others say the opposite.

What I don't know is whether the current models being used factor in the effect...

It is caused by the Sun's magnetic field is my understanding.

And when that heat from that sun dies out we will not be able to survive.

ETA
www.space.com...


solar.physics.montana.edu...

originally posted by: Nickisup
Do i need to source information for every animal on the endangered list? Last I checked it’s public knowledge.a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

If the Earth's archaeological findings had no evidence of past species that had came and went, it would be unimaginable that even one is dying off. I love animals especially and I understand that whatever reason a species is lost forever seems bad to me, but it is also natural. Darwin stated it was 'adapt or die' in the plant and animal kingdoms.

originally posted by: wantsome
What does Trump know about climate change honestly? To someone in the south it might not be as obvious but here in the north I've seen enough change in the weather to know something is going on. I've been ice fishing for the past 35 years. I know when lakes freeze and I know when they thaw. 3 of the last 4 years the lakes didn't freeze. Since the year 2001 9 of 16 years the lakes didn't freeze. I never saw 2 years in a row without ice like the last 2 seasons. In the 70's and 80's it was so cold we could drive our cars on the lakes but not anymore.

Agreed! Not sure where in the "north" you are, but where i am, seems like the winters are bitter cold, colder than past years as you speak of, but very little snow. Lakes don't seem to be freezing even with the very cold because there are a lot of really warm days thrown in just sporadically enough to keep the ice at bay.

Seems also, from a gardening perspective that it stays colder (for planting) later in the season and warmer for longer at the end.

originally posted by: Jusvistn

originally posted by: wantsome
What does Trump know about climate change honestly? To someone in the south it might not be as obvious but here in the north I've seen enough change in the weather to know something is going on. I've been ice fishing for the past 35 years. I know when lakes freeze and I know when they thaw. 3 of the last 4 years the lakes didn't freeze. Since the year 2001 9 of 16 years the lakes didn't freeze. I never saw 2 years in a row without ice like the last 2 seasons. In the 70's and 80's it was so cold we could drive our cars on the lakes but not anymore.

Agreed! Not sure where in the "north" you are, but where i am, seems like the winters are bitter cold, colder than past years as you speak of, but very little snow. Lakes don't seem to be freezing even with the very cold because there are a lot of really warm days thrown in just sporadically enough to keep the ice at bay.

Seems also, from a gardening perspective that it stays colder (for planting) later in the season and warmer for longer at the end.

With Mag N moving west I think the rain pattern moved with it. Clouds hold in some heat over an area over night so the heat escapes at night faster with no clouds. Where as during the day the clouds block the heat entering from the Sun which isn't warm in December till March up there I am sure.

Destroying their habitat and hunting them for personal gain wasn’t part of Darwin’s theories. Nuclear fallout and enviormental pollution weren’t included.
a reply to: Justoneman

originally posted by: Nickisup
Destroying their habitat and hunting them for personal gain wasn’t part of Darwin’s theories. Nuclear fallout and enviormental pollution weren’t included.
a reply to: Justoneman

I don't hunt em for personal gain, I hunt them because they are tasty.

originally posted by: Nickisup
Destroying their habitat and hunting them for personal gain wasn’t part of Darwin’s theories. Nuclear fallout and enviormental pollution weren’t included.
a reply to: Justoneman

Adapt or die did indeed take hunting out by another species as part of the theory. That is the reality, animals hunt food out till extinction.

ETA

We can be steward of the land and are, in America at least, better stewards than ever.

.a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Must be a special kind if person to enjoy the flavor of African elephants, black rhinos, lemurs, and gorillas.

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Really

Starving Polar Bear

Although he has seen over 3,000 bears in the wild over the course of his biologist and wildlife photography careers, Nicklen had never seen anything like this particular polar bear. “The emaciated polar bear […] was one of the most gut-wrenching sights he’s ever seen,” National Geographic says.

Tell that starving Polar Bear it doesn't exist, people who earn a living in those regions know better than armchair idiots/politicians thousands of miles away.

Wait till his homes in Florida are being flooded it will all change then

a reply to: Phage

I didn't know that was an industry. What does it produce?

If carbon credits are implemented, it will produce carbon credits.

In other words, nothing of use, but something of value to the power industry.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Contrary to superstition, the numbers do not lie:

But the claimed reasons for it is a LIE!! Ever think that maybe the sun is doing something different or our position in the known regions of space may be a culprit. For those willing to steal more from the masses its carbon dioxide. IF CARBON DIOXIDE WERE THE PROBLEM WHY HAS AL THE PUTTS GORE NOT MENTIONED PLANTING MORE TREES.!! And who may be starting all these forest fires. Problem - reaction - solution. Al Gore is all about his solar businesses and wind energy. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

a reply to: wmd_2008


Bear was sick, no connection to global warming, sorry your appeal to emotion won't work.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Yeah, that solar maximum is on its way back.

AS EVERY CYCLE IN THE UNIVERSE, IT GOES UP AND DOWN, THEN REPEATS.

Here is a good exploration of this matter of climate published two days ago on this "blog" that uses references with links to the sources from academia and elsewhere.
wattsupwiththat.com...

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: wantsome
What does Trump know about climate change honestly? To someone in the south it might not be as obvious but here in the north I've seen enough change in the weather to know something is going on. I've been ice fishing for the past 35 years. I know when lakes freeze and I know when they thaw. 3 of the last 4 years the lakes didn't freeze. Since the year 2001 9 of 16 years the lakes didn't freeze. I never saw 2 years in a row without ice like the last 2 seasons. In the 70's and 80's it was so cold we could drive our cars on the lakes but not anymore.

I'd say he has access to advisors and scientists that would provide him with more knowledge than the average Joe.

Apparently they don't know squat because I see it first hand.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Those numbers don't lie, but a complete graph showing numbers going back several hundred thousand years shows that those numbers DO LIE.

That's why the graph you posted, is the only one used by the media an everyone else to persuade people.