Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I want him to first guarantee me, with certification, exactly what the correct "natural state" of the Earth and its climate IS, and that it was intended to become that way and then stay there forever, and would have done so without man's intervention. THEN he can go about proving that mankind can accomplish what an entire planet couldn't.
Well it WOULD be nice to know what the Earth's thermostat SHOULD be at before we decide to give someone a bunch of money to change it. Besides, it might come in handy if we are a little warmer BEFORE a cataclysmic global winter hits.
I think the point is that there isn't any "should be" about it. Nothing about the Earth is static and unchanging, and certainly not its climate. We tend to think of it as such over the long term, only because OUR long term is like the blink of a gnat's eye in comparison to the planet's. From our perspective, it appears solid and reliable, but it really isn't, and never has been.
No, the point is that CO2 warms the earth, no one disputes that, and we have increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by 39% in the last 200 years. Soon we will have doubled it.
The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is higher now than at any time ever recorded, and the Antarctic ice core record goes back 600,000 years.
We are warming the earth. The only question is, How much?
No, the point HERE is that "no one disputes that" is a flat-out lie. LOTS of people dispute every aspect of global warming. A corollary point is that science is not decided by taking a vote, and then telling everyone else that it's settled, now sit down and shut the hell up and don't ever, ever, EVER question it again. In REAL science, EVERYTHING is up for question, and if your argument runs along the line of, "This is how it is, and that's that, and now all that's left is how much we destroy our lives to change it", you have veered away from science and into religion.
The world is not a static environment. IMO we only exhibit or monumental arrogance when we state a belief that we can change the course of the global climate.
no, you mindlessly parrot talking points.
my apologies to parrots everywhere.
No, CO2 in the atmosphere causes the earth to retain heat.
No one disputes that.
No, we state facts.
No one denies where the hole in the ozone came from.
LOTS of people - not just any people, but climatologists and other scientists working in the field of weather, climate, and atmospherics - dispute the idea that CO2 is dangerous or harmful to the Earth's climate, and that mankind is endangering the Earth by producing too much of it. And don't even try that whole "I will equate one argument with another, superficially related one in order to make mine appear correct" tactic on me. That's like saying, "See, this species shows microevolution, so that proves that macroevolution exists." I have very little patience with such intellectual laziness.
Show me a link where a climatologist says that CO2 in the atmosphere does not cause the earth to warm.
What part of "that bullshit don't fly with me, Bubba" do you not understand? Microevolution isn't macroevolution, and temporary, harmless, natural warming isn't catastrophic, man-made, global warming.
If the best you can do is to fraudulently pretend that 1) I said something I didn't and 2) one thing is automatically another, then you have merely proven my point that man-made global warming is crap with no substantial basis and its preachers are nothing but lying wackjobs.
I'm feeling generous, so you can have one more try at making a REAL argument.
What part of "that bullshit don't fly with me, Bubba" do you not understand? Microevolution isn't macroevolution, and temporary, harmless, natural warming isn't catastrophic, man-made, global warming.
If the best you can do is to fraudulently pretend that 1) I said something I didn't and 2) one thing is automatically another, then you have merely proven my point that man-made global warming is crap with no substantial basis and its preachers are nothing but lying wackjobs.
I'm feeling generous, so you can have one more try at making a REAL argument.
Oh, I also forgot to mention that, while he's pointing to a theory from a hundred years ago, FORTY years ago people thought the globe was in danger from COOLING.
Now, of course, it's just "climate change". That way, they can claim to be prescient and infallible no matter what happens. And, after all, they can rest assured that the climate WILL change.
The world is not a static environment. IMO we only exhibit our monumental arrogance when we state a belief that we can change the course of the global climate.
