Climate Change The facts some people can't wrap their around

originally posted by: Eshel
Asked in the other thread... gonna ask here.

it's a natural cycle that will adjust as it has for billions of years.

Climate change has been around long before humans even existed.

It is normal period. Alarmists blaming a years weather on a 4.5 billion year history of changes.

How do we know this information? Is there a written history somewhere? Or are you all just pulling this outta your a**es

LOL, some of the 90% of scientists who suck the titties of AGW, also studied the past by Ice core samples, tree rings, and soil deposits. It's called "science", look into it.

a reply to: network dude

Yeah good luck with a that LOL

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks
People trying to scam money doesn't make climate change fake. Despite what the huge oil companies may tell you.

No, continually failed predictions whilst asking for money makes the whole thing no more than a religion.

What predictions by climate scientists are you talking about?

How about the 50m climate refugees by 2010?

How about the actual temperature rises they predicted being way off? You know the key information we are supposed to act upon...since 1988 the estimates have been continually revised down after the initial scaremongering. By 2007, the IPCC had released several models ranging from 1.1 degrees to 6.4 degrees by 2100! Which model is the settled science???? Their 2013 effort was not much better - they just added more models. All of the money and models and their best effort now is... erm, it might have an effect in 83 years time, but it might not. In other words, they don't f****** know, yet the braindead climate change pushers keep droning on about settled science.

Have you actually read "An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security" released by the Pentagon in 2003?

How about back in 2000, the Climatic Research Unit's bold claim that the Uk would have no more snow?

Shall we dip into Al Gore's predictions based on the rubbish his scientist friends were feeding him??

We could have an entire thread just on the hapless efforts of these scientists and their spokespeople/puppet masters.

Please, post evidence and links. Specific points that prove your position that climate science is a worldwide scam.

I'll wait.

a reply to: JAGStorm
look i live along coast and thus know we get hurricanes so we prepare ahead of time. i still shake my head when the climate doom cult starts going toot toot. here are some things i have noticed in my 47 years.

1. my coastline is pretty much the same for this timeframe except for a lil erosion here or there. but according to mr al manbearpig i should be underwater already.

2 you all want to stop fossil fuels ok then throw your money into research for alternatives like solar ,fusion ,and wind quit bitching about everyone not listening and put your money where your mouth is. if it works and looks cool the sheeple will jump on the bandwagon

3. if you did this you could win war on terror by killing the main tradeable commodity .

4. understand this main factor in earth's climate is the sun and venus is very hot but our atmosphere will never have the same amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere unless we get hit with a comet of dry ice a quarter of the moons size and where that to happen climate change might be a moot point.

5 can we be better tenets here sure but taxing the crap out of people or using fear is not the way.

a reply to: JAGStorm

Here is my problem. Science has recorded massive floods, polar shifts, ice ages, and warmer ages, we have had the dust bowl drought, and many other extreme climate changes, all before co2 and humans existed. Cities that were on land centuries ago, were under water way before co2 emissions and destroying the ozone (which they finally admitted to being false).

Assuming climate change is occuring is a given. Our weather patterns and the earth itself is dynamic. Weather is never the same. Moreover, if hot weather and cold weather is caused by climate change, please name one way that makes it possible that it is not happening ? You can't. Not because it is happening but because its a logical fallacy. I believe its the either or fallacy, however, its been a while since I read "Intro to logic and reasoning." If anybody here knows the name of it, feel free to correct me.

Bottom line is, we have 100 years worth of data on weather and temps (a drop in an ocean), evidence that there have been major weather and climate shifts multiple times throughout history (before co2 and even humans I.E. dinosaurs), and yet we know for a fact that global warming is a product of humanity ? We live on a dynamic planet, that has dynamic weather patterns, always has, and always will.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks
People trying to scam money doesn't make climate change fake. Despite what the huge oil companies may tell you.

No, continually failed predictions whilst asking for money makes the whole thing no more than a religion.

What predictions by climate scientists are you talking about?

How about the 50m climate refugees by 2010?

How about the actual temperature rises they predicted being way off? You know the key information we are supposed to act upon...since 1988 the estimates have been continually revised down after the initial scaremongering. By 2007, the IPCC had released several models ranging from 1.1 degrees to 6.4 degrees by 2100! Which model is the settled science???? Their 2013 effort was not much better - they just added more models. All of the money and models and their best effort now is... erm, it might have an effect in 83 years time, but it might not. In other words, they don't f****** know, yet the braindead climate change pushers keep droning on about settled science.

Have you actually read "An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security" released by the Pentagon in 2003?

How about back in 2000, the Climatic Research Unit's bold claim that the Uk would have no more snow?

Shall we dip into Al Gore's predictions based on the rubbish his scientist friends were feeding him??

We could have an entire thread just on the hapless efforts of these scientists and their spokespeople/puppet masters.

Please, post evidence and links. Specific points that prove your position that climate science is a worldwide scam.

I'll wait.

In other words, Prove a Negative.

originally posted by: CulturalResilience

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks
People trying to scam money doesn't make climate change fake. Despite what the huge oil companies may tell you.

No, continually failed predictions whilst asking for money makes the whole thing no more than a religion.

What predictions by climate scientists are you talking about?

How about the 50m climate refugees by 2010?

How about the actual temperature rises they predicted being way off? You know the key information we are supposed to act upon...since 1988 the estimates have been continually revised down after the initial scaremongering. By 2007, the IPCC had released several models ranging from 1.1 degrees to 6.4 degrees by 2100! Which model is the settled science???? Their 2013 effort was not much better - they just added more models. All of the money and models and their best effort now is... erm, it might have an effect in 83 years time, but it might not. In other words, they don't f****** know, yet the braindead climate change pushers keep droning on about settled science.

Have you actually read "An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security" released by the Pentagon in 2003?

How about back in 2000, the Climatic Research Unit's bold claim that the Uk would have no more snow?

Shall we dip into Al Gore's predictions based on the rubbish his scientist friends were feeding him??

We could have an entire thread just on the hapless efforts of these scientists and their spokespeople/puppet masters.

Please, post evidence and links. Specific points that prove your position that climate science is a worldwide scam.

I'll wait.

In other words, Prove a Negative.

Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making unfalsifiable claims, rather than shifting the burden of disproof to others.

a reply to: network dude

LOL, some of the 90% of scientists who suck the titties of AGW, also studied the past by Ice core samples, tree rings, and soil deposits. It's called "science", look into it.

OK...see that's what I was wondering. So we are to believe that half of their research is false? Maybe they're wrong about the climate of the past. You cannot cherry pick your science. It's a fact based institution.

Thank you for playing.

a reply to: amfirst1

you build a sea wall to fight erosion not climate change if you cut down trees along a beach there is nothing to stop normal tides from washing away the beach.

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: amfirst1

you build a sea wall to fight erosion not climate change if you cut down trees along a beach there is nothing to stop normal tides from washing away the beach.

Don't give all the secrets away...

a reply to: JAGStorm

Climate Change actually means Global Cooling, according to the legit scientist that I happen to put my own faith in, David Dilley:



www.youtube.com...

a reply to: JAGStorm

Thank you for starting this thread.

Considering that the majority of Americans accept that human activity is causing a change in climate, why is it that these threads are infested with so many who insist it is hoax to levy taxes, destroy freedom/capitalism, ect. ?

What is really going on here?

a reply to: proteus33

I live in the Florida Keys. Every fall we get flooding from high tides during new and full moons. This is a problem for all of south Florida. It is good evidence for sea level rise.

a reply to: jrod

Umm ... duh, like maybe because it is primarily a hoax?

*crickets*

a reply to: jrod

*refer to my post about David Dilley above*

originally posted by: kurthall

originally posted by: notsure1

originally posted by: kurthall

originally posted by: JAGStorm
Every winter when it is cold someone spouts off something about oh how do you like this global warming??? I think we should
have never used that term, and should have only used climate change (or something similar) from the start. Some simpletons can only understand the term global warming with extra hot in summer, not the weather instability or long term slow climate changes.

It makes me sad for humanity every time I hear it.
I remember in the early 1990's trying to explain the internet to my friends. They just couldn't understand how it works, it was like magic or something. I think many people feel that way about climate change, since they aren't experiencing it first hand (yet) they don't believe it is real. There is so so so so SO much evidence, real scientific evidence, but for some people they just want to be ignorant, what a shame for us all.


climate.nasa.gov...

www.skepticalscience.com...

Sad, Trump's ignorant tweet on climate change was ridiculous . The sad thing is his followers believe him. He tweets record cold on the East Coast and mocks climate change meanwhile we are having the hottest Winter on record in Southern California. Ignorance is Bliss with him and his followers. I now call them followers because that's what they are.

Sad thing is you dont think people had an opinion on this until Trump.

Of coarse they Had in opinion, but 90% of climatologist tell you global warming is real. Trump and his followers just go along with what they want to believe instead of scientific data. Trump exacerbates their own ignorance.

90% of some 40 odd people out of 4000+ "Climatologists". There are "Climatologists" that can provide opposing data sets.

1) Start with Al Gore.
2) Keep going through all the "experts" in climate change (I am sure Gore has plenty of relevant degrees to back it up)
3) Proceed to the UN's IPCC . One of the first IPCC heads was a railroad engineer from India (no , not even an engineering degree in locomotives. The person that sits and pulls the cord to blow the horn) But , in his defense , he did have a degree in Business . Really ? Business. Unfortunately for the IPCC , he had to resign and go back to India to stand trial. A trial on child molestation charges.
4) Dig deeper , I have only scratched the surface

a reply to: JAGStorm

That NASA articles is clearly stretching the truth to some extent, for example they claim decreased snow coverage in the Northern Hemisphere yet a time lapse video released by NASA themselves a few weeks ago showed very clearly that the ice/snow coverage is essentially the same magnitude now as it was two decades ago. The article claims to provide evidence of climate change yet almost every piece of evidence they present is aimed at showing global warming is real and man made, and much of it doesn't hold up to real criticism when closely examined. The declining Arctic sea ice is one of the only things which seems to indicate the Earth really is warming rather quickly, but even then it's hard to prove the decline in Arctic ice thickness isn't just part of another long term cycle. There's also the issue that warming isn't always a bad thing, trees breathe carbon dioxide and some amount of warming is good for plants and trees and may even be good for us. Also it's very likely that natural systems in the environment will be able to process our increased level of carbon dioxide in a way which prevents the type of heating we would expect from such levels of carbon dioxide. Climate change is a very real issue, mass deforestation and visible smog in cities is clearly having large impacts on the climate and ecosystem in those areas. Yet those concerns seem to be at the bottom of the list, we would rather fear monger about something we cannot even see with our own eyes and something even the experts cannot agree on.

Text

a reply to: JAGStorm


Read this guy. He's not one of the 97%.

www.linkedin.com...

There is a legitimate and worthy argument that is being made by scientists like myself that, while the additional CO2 is likely having a slight warming effect, the majority of the rise in temperature is due to a natural rise in temperatures since the end of the Little Ice Age. That cold period lasted for 550 years and only ended in the mid-1800’s. Bear in mind that really bad things occurred during that cooling period including famines, crop failures and death (half of the population of Iceland perished). An unbiased opinion may legitimately be that the current warming is a welcome respite from that harsh era. Prior to the current politicization of climate science, the warming periods were called "climatic optima" because humans flourished during those times.

Or watch

a reply to: Fowlerstoad

A youtube clip proves global warming is a hoax?

Maybe you should google the terms 'science research', radiative forcing' and try to comprehend what that means in relationship to all the excess CO2 we are pumping in the atmosphere.