It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The view is a new iteration of Pruitt’s antagonism toward established climate science, but it flies in the face of such research all the same. Scientists have long held a near-unanimous consensus that the climate is changing and that humans are the primary cause. World leaders and global organizations have declared the phenomenon one of the most pressing threats to humanity and have warned that unless the world works to halt greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, a host of climate-related effects could devastate the world.
The planet is already far off its goals to reduce such emissions, just two years after almost every country in the world signed on to the landmark Paris climate accord.
But Pruitt and others in the Trump administration have long moved to downplay the effects of climate change or outright rejected that it is happening (despite a White House report released in November that said humans were the dominant cause of global warming). Pruitt told CNBC a year ago, just weeks after he assumed his role at the EPA, that he rejected the science behind climate change and that President Donald Trump himself has called it a hoax manufactured by the Chinese.
originally posted by: lostbook
A climate Change denier
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: lostbook
A climate Change denier
the dumbest label you could ever give to a person.
Who, in the history of the world, has ever denied that the climate changes?
But as long as you have a name to call someone, .........wait, isn't name calling juvenile?
originally posted by: lostbook
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: lostbook
A climate Change denier
the dumbest label you could ever give to a person.
Who, in the history of the world, has ever denied that the climate changes?
But as long as you have a name to call someone, .........wait, isn't name calling juvenile?
It isn't name calling. It's a title or a label given to someone who denies the science behind global warming/climate change but, of course, you knew that.
originally posted by: SocratesJohnson
a reply to: lostbook
lol, you are using the words "Climate Denier" and "Global Warming" as political phrases not scientific terms. That's where your confusion is, but that is the goal of indoctrination.
The earth always heats up and cools off. A warmer earth is better for humanity then a cooling earth.
originally posted by: dothedew
a reply to: network dude
Denying bad science brought about by misrepresented data, disregarded readings, elimination of anomalous data, over exaggerated statistics and models, and a blind eye to temperature data over the last 850,000 years doesn't make someone a "Climate Change Denier"......
It means they simply don't believe the narrative being pushed by bad science brought about by misrepresented data, disregarded readings, elimination of anomalous data, over exaggerated statistics and models, and a blind eye to temperature data over the last 850,000 years.
originally posted by: lostbook
originally posted by: SocratesJohnson
a reply to: lostbook
lol, you are using the words "Climate Denier" and "Global Warming" as political phrases not scientific terms. That's where your confusion is, but that is the goal of indoctrination.
The earth always heats up and cools off. A warmer earth is better for humanity then a cooling earth.
How will a warmer Earth be better?
originally posted by: lostbook
originally posted by: SocratesJohnson
a reply to: lostbook
lol, you are using the words "Climate Denier" and "Global Warming" as political phrases not scientific terms. That's where your confusion is, but that is the goal of indoctrination.
The earth always heats up and cools off. A warmer earth is better for humanity then a cooling earth.
How will a warmer Earth be better?
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: lostbook
originally posted by: SocratesJohnson
a reply to: lostbook
lol, you are using the words "Climate Denier" and "Global Warming" as political phrases not scientific terms. That's where your confusion is, but that is the goal of indoctrination.
The earth always heats up and cools off. A warmer earth is better for humanity then a cooling earth.
How will a warmer Earth be better?
Was it ever warmer than it is now on this planet? Other than our discomfort, or our having to realize that building cities inches from an ever eroding ocean on a sandy platform was a really stupid idea, or having remnants from the last Ice Age melt, what damage would a warmer Earth do to the planet?