Poll: Is Anyone having second thoughts about global warming/climate change ?

[MACAULAY]

It's called weather

Another ignoramus that doesn't understand the difference between climate and weather.

____________________________

I admit I don't know about the atmosphere. Not counting Al Gore, there probably aren't 2000 people that really understand it---and not one posts here.

But the Loons and Pinheads on this Board have taught me the difference between weather and climate:

1) When its too cold, they tell us its just Weather.

2) When its too hot, they tell us its Global Warming.

Also, when you are a Climate/Weather Expert and you are looking for government grants and government jobs to fix a problem---you find a problem. Meaning: How does anyone with good common sense ever trust a Loon/Pinhead/Expert who gets paid to whine about Global Warming....and when it stays cool for a decade or so...just starts calling it Climate Change so his/her bogus ass will be covered, and the grants & slush money will keep on coming---whether its get hot or gets cold.

Feels to a Heartland Scots-Irish boy like the biggest scam since the Great Society and the War on Poverty.

______________

 

[Redfish]

It's true, burning fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide.
It also gives us this wonderful high tech society.
Allows us to feed billions of people.
And?

Hey, guess what. I agree. I'm not advocating the elimination of fossil fuels. We have to use them - coal, oil, nat gas. We need them. I'm just saying we need to fund research into alternatives and be gradually working on a transition. And I think nuclear will need to be part of the mix and that we need to be working dealing with the waste products.

yes, but let the free market pursue them, the free market and the profit motive work, government mandates and intervention do not.

When alternatives are financially viable entrepreneurs will be all over them.

 

[blastoff]

Its real, so is air, water and land pollution. That is why so much money is being invested in alternative energy, its not a racket. We are trying to build a star, and many countries are signing up to lower carbon emissions. The earth is sinking, look at Texas.

Forty-six years ago during Earth Day I various academics and others had dire predictions of terrible consequences that would befall the entire world if we didn't quickly act to stop or limit x,y, or z. In the ensuing years the drum beat has continued with other warnings that in 5 or 10 or 15 or whatever years we'd be facing all sorts of calamaties such as famine, flooding, the extinction of the poor polar bears, etc., etc., ad nauseam. Heed the warnings or we're all gonna be up shit's creek!

Well of course none of their predictions have come to fruition, but that hasn't stopped the worrisome hand wringers who continue paddling their way up bullshit's creek in spite of the inconvenient truth all around them that they've been had by the hucksters.

 

[FJO]

It's called weather

Another ignoramus that doesn't understand the difference between climate and weather.

There is no "climate change", ignorant one. You've been duped....a progressive I presume?

Call it what you want. The earth is growing warmer.

Indeed, by act of nature, not man.

Other planets in the solar system are warming, too. Positive proof that irresponsible, SUV driving, coal burning, climate denying, knuckle dragging, mouth breathing hillbilly Republicans live there.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

It's called weather

Another ignoramus that doesn't understand the difference between climate and weather.

There is no "climate change", ignorant one. You've been duped....a progressive I presume?

Call it what you want. The earth is growing warmer.

Indeed, by act of nature, not man.

Other planets in the solar system are warming, too. Positive proof that irresponsible, SUV driving, coal burning, climate denying, knuckle dragging, mouth breathing hillbilly Republicans live there.

Even though the planets in our solar system are billions of miles away, the earth is causing it. Ok.

 

[FJO]

just checking the pulse of the politics usmb'ers.

i keep hearing consensus, and the discussion/debate is over. that certainly raises my interest.

no reason to discuss, imagine that.

i am personally disqualified because i always considered it a hoax cause my Dad did, but i'm voting anyway.

are you voting for a global warming candidate ??

It is real, it is happening, it IS NOT LOOMING. And there are a great deal many more issues to use in choosing a candidate.

The Climate has been changing for 4.5 Billion years and will continue to change. No one disputes that. The dispute lies in the claim that Middle Class suburbanites driving SUVs are the problem. Speaking of lies, if it is real, why then do the proponents feel compelled to corrupt data supporting their narrative? See East Anglia.

Why do proponents of AGW have several 50,000 sq ft homes? Why do they have several private jets and several gas guzzling limousines? Why do they preach and not practice? Why do they think that their opinions are worth more than opinions of those who have a responsible carbon foot print? Why do human garbage like Leonardo DiCaprio have an audience at the United Nations? Why "buying" carbon credits save the Earth?

Why do the proponents of AGW have to resort to doctoring and falsifying their already dubious "data"?

Why don't Al Gore and that phony "science guy" fade away into well deserved and long overdue obscurity?

 

[FJO]

Another ignoramus that doesn't understand the difference between climate and weather.

There is no "climate change", ignorant one. You've been duped....a progressive I presume?

Call it what you want. The earth is growing warmer.

Indeed, by act of nature, not man.

Other planets in the solar system are warming, too. Positive proof that irresponsible, SUV driving, coal burning, climate denying, knuckle dragging, mouth breathing hillbilly Republicans live there.

Even though the planets in our solar system are billions of miles away, the earth is causing it. Ok.

Thank you. Now I understand.

 

[FJO]

Those who claim that AGW is "settled science" can join the ranks of royal court composers who declared, sometime in the eighteenth century that there are no more melodies to compose, or college professors in the early twentieth century who claimed that everything worth inventing had been invented already.

Only phony "science" is settled.

 

[washamericom]

It's called weather

Another ignoramus that doesn't understand the difference between climate and weather.

There is no "climate change", ignorant one. You've been duped....a progressive I presume?

Call it what you want. The earth is growing warmer.

but it's not. that's a big part of why it's a hoax. i am much more worried about the sun burning out. we'll have only seven minutes to get our affairs in order. that's only five jake starkey minutes.

 

[washamericom]

If people are the sole cause of climate change/whatever...
Why don't the Libs come clean on what they really want....
The limit on people that populate the planet....

Come clean Libs....

What is it you really want?

great post, it has a Trump clarity. i bet there is a 90% chance of climate change enthusiasts not knowing what co2 is, does, or even how much of it there is.

 

[washamericom]

Its real, so is air, water and land pollution. That is why so much money is being invested in alternative energy, its not a racket. We are trying to build a star, and many countries are signing up to lower carbon emissions. The earth is sinking, look at Texas.

if we can separate weed from the hard drugs, then we can separate pollution form global warming.

maybe we can cool the oceans by making fresh water, but that will cool off the earth's core, and if that happens, we'll freeze to death. i am glad the ozone layer is ok.

how's this for a plan, move to higher ground. we have deserts, we don't live in them.

Goodbye, Oil: US Navy Cracks New Renewable Energy Technology To Turn Seawater Into Fuel, Allowing Ships To Stay At Sea Longer

Molten salt reactor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Goodbye, Oil: US Navy Cracks New Renewable Energy Technology To Turn Seawater Into Fuel, Allowing Ships To Stay At Sea Longer

After decades of experiments, U.S. Navy scientists believe they may have solved one of the world’s great challenges: how to turn seawater into fuel.

The development of a liquid hydrocarbon fuel could one day relieve the military’s dependence on oil-based fuels and is being heralded as a “game changer” because it could allow military ships to develop their own fuel and stay operational 100 percent of the time, rather than having to refuel at sea.

The new fuel is initially expected to cost around $3 to $6 per gallon, according to the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, which has already flown a model aircraft on it.

 

[washamericom]

The earth has grown warmer and grown cooler since the beginning....the difference is now you assholes are trying redistribute wealth over it

And we will all vote for the elected officials of our own choosing.

See ya later

Lame....you're a nothing LOL (watches you scamper off)

Educate yourself

ESRL Global Monitoring Division - Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network

It's true, burning fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide.
It also gives us this wonderful high tech society.
Allows us to feed billions of people.
And?

i love that bill gates could give everyone in the world eight dollars.

 

[LeftofLeft]

just checking the pulse of the politics usmb'ers.

i keep hearing consensus, and the discussion/debate is over. that certainly raises my interest.

no reason to discuss, imagine that.

i am personally disqualified because i always considered it a hoax cause my Dad did, but i'm voting anyway.

are you voting for a global warming candidate ??

It is real, it is happening, it IS NOT LOOMING. And there are a great deal many more issues to use in choosing a candidate.

The Climate has been changing for 4.5 Billion years and will continue to change. No one disputes that. The dispute lies in the claim that Middle Class suburbanites driving SUVs are the problem. Speaking of lies, if it is real, why then do the proponents feel compelled to corrupt data supporting their narrative? See East Anglia.

Why do proponents of AGW have several 50,000 sq ft homes? Why do they have several private jets and several gas guzzling limousines? Why do they preach and not practice? Why do they think that their opinions are worth more than opinions of those who have a responsible carbon foot print? Why do human garbage like Leonardo DiCaprio have an audience at the United Nations? Why "buying" carbon credits save the Earth?

Why do the proponents of AGW have to resort to doctoring and falsifying their already dubious "data"?

Why don't Al Gore and that phony "science guy" fade away into well deserved and long overdue obscurity?

You nailed it. In an era where virtual conferencing gets more and more interactive I scoff when I see Climate Change leaders Jet Set around the World and roll across town in big autos that they can sprawl. By their own rules and edicts they are insisting that the masses follow, a very "green" way to have a conference would be to do so virtually at all times. Then again, we are talking about wealthy liberal elites who believe in "do what I say, not what I do".

 

[washamericom]

just checking the pulse of the politics usmb'ers.

i keep hearing consensus, and the discussion/debate is over. that certainly raises my interest.

no reason to discuss, imagine that.

i am personally disqualified because i always considered it a hoax cause my Dad did, but i'm voting anyway.

are you voting for a global warming candidate ??

It is real, it is happening, it IS NOT LOOMING. And there are a great deal many more issues to use in choosing a candidate.

The Climate has been changing for 4.5 Billion years and will continue to change. No one disputes that. The dispute lies in the claim that Middle Class suburbanites driving SUVs are the problem. Speaking of lies, if it is real, why then do the proponents feel compelled to corrupt data supporting their narrative? See East Anglia.

Why do proponents of AGW have several 50,000 sq ft homes? Why do they have several private jets and several gas guzzling limousines? Why do they preach and not practice? Why do they think that their opinions are worth more than opinions of those who have a responsible carbon foot print? Why do human garbage like Leonardo DiCaprio have an audience at the United Nations? Why "buying" carbon credits save the Earth?

Why do the proponents of AGW have to resort to doctoring and falsifying their already dubious "data"?

Why don't Al Gore and that phony "science guy" fade away into well deserved and long overdue obscurity?

You nailed it. In an era where virtual conferencing gets more and more interactive I scoff when I see Climate Change leaders Jet Set around the World and roll across town in big autos that they can sprawl. By their own rules and edicts they are insisting that the masses follow, a very "green" way to have a conference would be to do so virtually at all times. Then again, we are talking about wealthy liberal elites who believe in "do what I say, not what I do".

well said, and not just "a very green way", it's "their very green way".

if this thread is an indicator, i just don't see a layperson's consensus either, much less a scientific one. if any subject is political, this one is, especially when we see society so obviously manipulated for money.

they're not getting one dime from me to help cool off the planet. and how much co2 was expelled debating for this so called consensus.

if the global warming alarmists would STFU we wouldn't even have climate change or migraine headaches.

 

[mamooth]

There's a long list of very stupid reality-defying cult beliefs that the right-wing-fringe cult is expected to preach as loudly as possible. Supply side economics is one, for example. Global warming denial is another. The kook-right-fringe political cultists don't care about the science. Their political cult has ordered them to deny global warming, so that's what they're going to do, no matter how insane and delusional it makes them look. Just look at them on this thread, not talking about science, but instead just bitterly raving about the liberals who always make them look so stupid. With that cult, it's entirely about revenge.

In contrast to the purely political nature of denialism, the rational people are non-political, and only look at the science. All across the globe, political groups of all types understand the reality of global warming. That's because it's real science, which ignores political boundaries.

So why does the kook-right-fringe cult and its fantastical beliefs still cling to life in the USA? Our nutty conservative mainstream media, of course, which gets paid to give such political cultists a PC shield of protection. If the media was honest, deniers would always be lumped in the same category as flat earthers, antivaxxers, moon landing hoaxers, JFK assassination theorists, and all the other various mindless conspiracy cults.

 

[Redfish]

There's a long list of very stupid reality-defying cult beliefs that the right-wing-fringe cult is expected to preach as loudly as possible. Supply side economics is one, for example. Global warming denial is another. The kook-right-fringe political cultists don't care about the science. Their political cult has ordered them to deny global warming, so that's what they're going to do, no matter how insane and delusional it makes them look.

In contrast to the purely political nature of denialism, the rational people are non-political, and only look at the science. All across the globe, political groups of all types understand the reality of global warming. That's because it's real science, which ignores political boundaries.

So why does the kook-right-fringe cult and its fantastical beliefs still cling to life in the USA? Our nutty conservative mainstream media, of course, which gets paid to give such political cultists a PC shield of protection. If the media was honest, deniers would always be lumped in the same category as flat earthers, antivaxxers, moon landing hoaxers, JFK assassination theorists, and all the other various mindless conspiracy cults.

No one is denying that the climate is changing. The hoax here is that man is causing it. The climate has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now. Man has never had anything to do with it.

Look up in the sky, see that big ball of fire? Its called the sun, it controls the climate of planet earth, not the prophet algore, the Kenyan messiah, or soccer moms driving SUVs.

The sun, moron. The source of all live on earth.

Now, if you libs must have a cause, take on pollution. Everyone would be with you on that.

 

[mamooth]

No one is denying that the climate is changing. The hoax here is that man is causing it

Yet nobody can show any evidence for this conspiracy. No, raving about how much you hate liberals is not evidence, nor is posting rants from your fellow cultists. Literally millions of people worldwide would have to be in on such a conspiracy. It would have to be the biggest conspiracy theory ever in all of human history. Yet not a single person is talking. Fascinating.

There is no VastSecretGlobalSocialistPlot. You've just been played.

The climate has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now. Man has never had anything to do with it.

According to your "If it happened naturally before, man can't cause it now" line reasoning, it's impossible for humans to cause forest fires, because they used to be always be naturally caused before.

Your line of reasoning fails. The fact that climate changed naturally before in no way prevents humans from changing climate.

Look up in the sky, see that big ball of fire? Its called the sun, it controls the climate of planet earth,

The sun has been cooling as the earth warmed. Did you masters not tell you that? No matter. You can always recycle your "Those darn egghead liberal scientists don't know 'nuffin!" line for something else that you have no knowledge of.

not the prophet algore,

Gore rule invoked. Whoever brings up Gore firsts admits to being a brainwashed political cultist, and forfeits the discussion for their own side. Well done.

You don't see any of the rational people bringing up Gore, of course, as he's not a scientist. Only denier political cultists invoke him, because all cults require enemies to whip up the faithful against.

the Kenyan messiah, or soccer moms driving SUVs

When I point out that deniers are just political cultists raging at their political opponents, you probably shouldn't work so hard to confirm that point.

The sun, moron. The source of all live on earth

Someone who was too damn ignorant and stupid to know the sun has cooled has no business bothering the adults.

Now, if you libs must have a cause, take on pollution. Everyone would be with you on that.

We've been doing that. Where have you been? Oh, that's right, supporting the polluters.

 

[westwall]

No one is denying that the climate is changing. The hoax here is that man is causing it

Yet nobody can show any evidence for this conspiracy. No, raving about how much you hate liberals is not evidence, nor is posting rants from your fellow cultists. Literally millions of people worldwide would have to be in on such a conspiracy. It would have to be the biggest conspiracy theory ever in all of human history. Yet not a single person is talking. Fascinating.

There is no VastSecretGlobalSocialistPlot. You've just been played.

The climate has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now. Man has never had anything to do with it.

According to your "If it happened naturally before, man can't cause it now" line reasoning, it's impossible for humans to cause forest fires, because they used to be always be naturally caused before.

Your line of reasoning fails. The fact that climate changed naturally before in no way prevents humans from changing climate.

Look up in the sky, see that big ball of fire? Its called the sun, it controls the climate of planet earth,

The sun has been cooling as the earth warmed. Did you masters not tell you that? No matter. You can always recycle your "Those darn egghead liberal scientists don't know 'nuffin!" line for something else that you have no knowledge of.

not the prophet algore,

Gore rule invoked. Whoever brings up Gore firsts admits to being a brainwashed political cultist, and forfeits the discussion for their own side. Well done.

You don't see any of the rational people bringing up Gore, of course, as he's not a scientist. Only denier political cultists invoke him, because all cults require enemies to whip up the faithful against.

the Kenyan messiah, or soccer moms driving SUVs

When I point out that deniers are just political cultists raging at their political opponents, you probably shouldn't work so hard to confirm that point.

The sun, moron. The source of all live on earth

Someone who was too damn ignorant and stupid to know the sun has cooled has no business bothering the adults.

Now, if you libs must have a cause, take on pollution. Everyone would be with you on that.

We've been doing that. Where have you been? Oh, that's right, supporting the polluters.

No, it's YOU who have to show cause. We can show EVERY single thing you point to claiming it is man caused, as having occurred naturally in the past. Thus according to Occam it is most likely a natural event NOW. YOU are the person making the extraordinary claim thus it is up to YOU to support your argument. So far there is nearly zero empirical data to support your assertion, but LOADS of empirical data to say you are wrong.

Deal with it.

 

[mamooth]

No, it's YOU who have to show cause. We can show EVERY single thing you point to claiming it is man caused, as having occurred naturally in the past. Thus according to Occam it is most likely a natural event NOW. YOU are the person making the extraordinary claim thus it is up to YOU to support your argument. So far there is nearly zero empirical data to support your assertion, but LOADS of empirical data to say you are wrong.

Deal with it.

In that case ...

Show how the measured stratospheric cooling during a warming period can be natural.

Show how the measured increase in backradiation can be natural.

Show how the measured decrease in outgoing longwave radiation in the greenhouse gas absorption bands can be natural.

If you can, you'll be the first. Until you can, your theory is contradicted by the observed data, hence it is wrong.

Global warming theory, OTOH, is the simplest theory that explains all of the observed data, hence according to Occam's Razor, it is most like to be correct.

 

[westwall]

No, it's YOU who have to show cause. We can show EVERY single thing you point to claiming it is man caused, as having occurred naturally in the past. Thus according to Occam it is most likely a natural event NOW. YOU are the person making the extraordinary claim thus it is up to YOU to support your argument. So far there is nearly zero empirical data to support your assertion, but LOADS of empirical data to say you are wrong.

Deal with it.

In that case ...

Show how the measured stratospheric cooling during a warming period can be natural.

Show how the measured increase in backradiation can be natural.

Show how the measured decrease in outgoing longwave radiation in the greenhouse gas absorption bands can be natural.

If you can, you'll be the first. Until you can, your theory is contradicted by the observed data, hence it is wrong.

Global warming theory, OTOH, is the simplest theory that explains all of the observed data, hence according to Occam's Razor, it is most like to be correct.

Nope. You have to show how it is unnatural. That's how science works silly boy.