superstriper

does mr trump believe in global warming ?

83 posts in this topic

It is a yes or no question 

That's your first mistake...especially in terms of considering human's affect on the climate (if you're speaking in general terms, regardless of occurring naturally or accelerated by man, I retract the contents of this post because it does occur naturally)...its not a yes or no question...'inconclusive' the most optimistic a global warming enthusiast can claim right now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's your first mistake...especially in terms of considering human's affect on the climate (if you're speaking in general terms, regardless of occurring naturally or accelerated by man, I retract the contents of this post because it does occur naturally)...its not a yes or no question...'inconclusive' the most optimistic a global warming enthusiast can claim right now

The scientific world begs to differ

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always laugh when I read that American Medical Association comment on global warming.  Might as well get an endorsement from the International Union of Sanitary Plumbers, too, for all the climate research that either group does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe he does maybe he doesn't but that part really doesn't matter. What does matter is the con that's been presented to the world, and most importantly the USA, named the Paris Climate Accord. I care 100% about the environment and it's protection but that farce was nothing more than a global money grab out of every US workers pockets with zero accountability placed on the shoulders of the other participants. Plain and simple.

100% correct. The tough part is trying to inform "others" that this decision is not against the environment but against the money flowing down the drain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

How did global warming cause the terrorist attack in Lindoin last night, as the leaders of the global warming movement have stated so many times?

Never said it did- and whether it does or doesn't influence terrorism doesn't change the science as to the facts leading to the conclusion about CO2 contributing to global warming.

Edited by paraphysis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CO2 is bad. Got it.

 

Everybody stop exhaling.

 

The plants will have to find their own way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scientific world begs to differ

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

LOL - NASA - out of one side of their ass, they provide a chart that shows global temps on the rise, then from the other, they report that 'climate change' is on 'hiatus' 

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/1141/hiatus-in-rise-of-earths-surface-air-temperature-likely-temporary/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL - NASA - out of one side of their ass, they provide a chart that shows global temps on the rise, then from the other, they report that 'climate change' is on 'hiatus'

 

 

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/1141/hiatus-in-rise-of-earths-surface-air-temperature-likely-temporary/

1- that story is from 2014

2- if you actually read the story it in no way contradicts the fact that CO2 (man made) contributes to warming the planet.

 

Just another attempt to discredit facts one doesn't like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1- that story is from 2014

2- if you actually read the story it in no way contradicts the fact that CO2 (man made) contributes to warming the planet.

 

Just another attempt to discredit facts one doesn't like.

Their chart shows a steady climb from years prior to 2014 up through 2014...and the planet is quite capable of regulating itself...that's why these scientists have to cherry pick regions to 'prove' their case. Various cities in China, India and others places with severe pollution issues can be resolved with local solutions and do not require adjustments from the other side of the globe to help (see the recovery of Los Angeles)...lastly, many places forces you to pay a tax for carbon credits, but still allow you to create carbon - if it was a real threat, there would be a consensus to eliminate right now...

Edited by albacized

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess all those scientists aren't atheists then.

The "97%" Myth  (Don't know if this is true but if it is.....)

 

Where did the 97% number come from—was there some worldwide survey of all scientists? No there was not.

 

The 97% number is based on two publications—the first by Doran and Zimmerman (2000) and a later one by Cook et al. (2013").

 

The Doran and Zimmerman paper was a University of Illinois master's thesis by Maggie Zimmerman and her thesis advisor, Peter Doran, who claimed that "97% of climate scientists agree" that global warming is caused by rising C02. They sent an Internet survey to 10,257 people working at universities and government agencies and received 3146 replies. Of these, only 5% identified themselves as "climate scientists." Only two questions were asked: (1) "When compared with pre-1800 levels, do you think that global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remain relatively constant?" and (2) "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperature?" Of the 3146 replies, Doran and Zimmerman arbitrarily selected 79 responses, of whom 77 replied "yes." They divided 77 by 79 to get 97%, which was then elevated to "97% of all scientists" by various proponents of C02. The proper number should have been 77 divided by 3146, which equals 2%.

 

The Cook et al. (2013) paper was based on counting abstracts of climate papers. The authors contended that "Among [4014] abstracts expressing a position of AGW [Anthropogenic Global Warming], 97% endorsed the consensus position humans are causing global warming." However, Legates et al. (2013*) point out that "the author's own analysis shows that only 0.5% of all 11,944 abstracts, and 1.6% of the 4014 abstracts expressing a position, endorsed anthropogenic warming as they had defined it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok- attack the accuracy of "97%". Whatever makes you feel better. Show me the reputable scientists or scientific organizations that dispute CO2 influence on global warming. Why the need to dispute this? Why not look at leading the revolution in wind, solar, nuclear etc. seems like we just gave China the opportunity to cement its current leadership in these fields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.