Question for believers in man made climate change

[Harpy Eagle]

Hibernation as in fewer sun spots and the like you stupid partisan zealot. Not hibernation as in cooler.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Another one that doesn't know science or history , you don't know what a Maunder minimum is and what happened between 1645 and 1715?


A little ice age retardo..



.

The Maunder Minimum occurred in the middle of the “little ice age” and was not the cause of it. Solar minimums relate to solar activity, not the temperature of the sun itself.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Still trying to post facts from your butt?


Maunder Minimum - Wikipedia



Maunder Minimum

The Maunder Minimum shown in a 400-year history of sunspot numbers
The Maunder Minimum, also known as the "prolonged sunspot minimum", is the name used for the period starting in about 1645 and continuing to about 1715 when sunspotsbecame exceedingly rare, as noted by solar observers of the time.

The term was introduced after John A. Eddy[1]published a landmark 1976 paper in Science.[2] Astronomers before Eddy had also named the period after the solar astronomers Annie Russell Maunder (1868–1947) and E. Walter Maunder (1851–1928), who studied how sunspot latitudes changed with time.[3]The period which the husband and wife team examined included the second half of the 17th century.

Two papers were published in Edward Maunder's name in 1890[4] and 1894,[5] and he cited earlier papers written by Gustav Spörer.[6] Because Annie Maunder had not received a university degree, due to restrictions at the time, her contribution was not then publicly recognized.[7]

Spörer noted that, during a 28-year period (1672–1699) within the Maunder Minimum, observations revealed fewer than 50 sunspots. This contrasts with the typical 40,000–50,000 sunspots seen in modern times.[8]

Like the Dalton Minimum and Spörer Minimum, the Maunder Minimum coincided with a period of lower-than-average European temperatures.

Climate fakers have zero facts

They act like they can Bullshit us like even I know basic 2rd grade science, lol...

The problem is that you never went beyond 2nd grade

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Since they all do not endorse the consensus I

Wrong. Every major scientific society on the planet endorses the consensus.

So...liars, incompetent, or both? Let's see if you have the stones to answer this simple question.

Once again where do they get their information from?

Who said they were liars?

Who said they were incompetent?



Tell me who said that ?

You said they were saying things for money. That makes them liars. You also say they unwittingly use bad sources for info; that makes them incompetent.

So, you are saying they are both liars and incompetent. Own it, you little liar.

Listen up:

You know less than nothing about any of this. You are not providing a challenge to any accepted theory to fondle yourself on a message board. You are an uneducated slob who has no right even trying to describe any of this science, much less critique it. You are a lying sack who parrots every debubked denier lie found in the blogosphere. You are embarrassing yourself.

That's all. Have a nice night!

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It’s like how as adults we know we have to wash our hands because of germs, but dumb little kids who don’t know any better think they don’t have to if they don’t look dirty.

“Psh humans don’t affect climate” = “psh microscopic imaginary bugs floating around? Yeah right.”

AGW is the lefts religion. Just fill in all the holes with "man" instead of "god."
Faith, it does a body good

Humans affecting climate, same as we affect everything, is not a stretch. Magical all powerful beings are a stretch.

Humans pollute, they do not change the climate of planet earth. the climate of our planet has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years after humans disappear from the earth. Human activity has never had anything to do with climate. Even if we had all out nuclear war, the impacts would be temporary in terms of the life of planet earth.

It’s so naive to think we can control climate. How many clouds have you made? Stop the earth rotation lately? Too fking funny

Nobody said we could control it, just affect it. Big difference, but since you never made it past the 2nd grade you wouldn't understand the difference.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You're avoiding the question, too.

You denier goofballs always avoid this question.

I'm saying no one can accuse Michael Mann of being a liar.

Do you agree or not?

How rude of you to ask me a question, without answering my question first.

Liars, incompetent, or both?

Some of them are incompetent liars.
Some of them are very good liars.

No, you are still being a sissy. You have to address nearly all of them, not some of them.


Haha...look at you guys, doing your little two-steps....

They all like money. Unfortunately, they've been corrupted by it.

Yes, it's too bad the impoverished fossil fuel industry doesnt have the money to fund the CORRECT science, amiright?!?!?!?

So effing stupid...you guys embarrass our entire country. .

 

[Wyatt earp]

Of course you wouldn't because I answered your questions..

Yoh answered nothing.

One more try: incompetent, liars, or both?

What are you scared of....sounding like an idiot, maybe?

Because you refuse to read..




7 projects win funding for climate change solutions





7 projects win funding for climate change solutions
Harvard grant program provides $1 million across a range of academic boundaries





Seven research projects led by scientists, historians, economists, and public health experts from five Harvard Schools will share about $1 million in the third round of grants awarded by the Climate Change Solutions Fund. This initiative, which was launched by Harvard President Drew Faust, encourages multidisciplinary research that seeks creative solutions to climate change.

“Universities have a uniquely important role to play in the battle against climate change, and Harvard must continue to be at the forefront of efforts to bring disciplines together, deepen awareness of the issue, and speed progress,” said Faust. “This year’s Climate Change Solutions Fund awards will help experts from engineering, medicine, chemistry, public health, public policy,and the arts confront the challenges facing our society and our planet at a moment when the dire consequences of inaction are becoming increasingly apparent

Answer my question, ya sissy!

Liars, incompetent, or both?

I did answer you question ....you have academy fields no where related to climate science signing a piece of paper saying man made climate change is real and the get a big fat funding check, not that complicated is it? ..



You have narcissist like your self who wants to believe in faith...who is so indoctrinate that you can't even see the Forrest from the trees



Btw any good scientist is a skeptic .

Democratic mega-donor Tom Steyer says he'll spend $30 million to flip Congress




Democratic mega-donor Tom Steyer says he'll spend $30 million to flip Congress
Facebook

• Twitter

• Email

Fredreka Schouten, USA TODAY
6 seconds ago
WASHINGTON – Tom Steyer, a billionaire environmentalist who has waged a high-profile campaign calling for President Trump’s impeachment, announced Monday that he will not run for public office this yea




What did Tom Steyer get for his $70 million?


What did Tom Steyer get for his $70 million?


the billionaire climate activist, spent heavily to back environmentally friendly candidates for Congress in 2014.

But Tuesday’s election results produced a stunning disappointment, and a low return on his $70 million investment.

Many of the environmentally friendly candidates he backed most heavily, such as Sen. Mark Udall in Colorado and Rep. Bruce Braley in Iowa, were defeated — earning him a low “return on investment” score from the Sunlight Foundation, which ranks the major independent spending groups that now dominate federal campaigns.

So you are claiming they are liars . Fascinating.

So, you honestly believe that they are all lying for money. Do I have that right?

I didnt say they were liars you did , I said academic fields that have nothing to do with climate change sign a piece of paper to get funding ..


You can't figure that out can you?

1. UN Scientists Who Have Turned on the UN IPCC & Man-Made
   www.climatedepot.com/.../un-scientists-who-have-turned-...
   Climate Depot
   Aug 21, 2013 - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD ... I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for ... had to threaten legal action to have his name removed from the IPCC. ... his experience with the UN: “I am withdrawing [from the UN] because I have ...
2. UK professor refuses to put his name to 'apocalyptic' UN ...
   Home Mail Online
   Daily Mail
   Mar 25, 2014 - Previous IPCC reports on climate impact have been plagued by errors that ... the Himalayas could disappear by 2035, a claim it has since withdrawn. Scientists are meeting in Japan this week to agree the wording of the final ...
3. Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels
   Latest news world news sport and comment from the Guardiantheguardian.com The Guardian › Environment › Sea level
   The Guardian
   Feb 21, 2010 - Climate scientists withdrawjournal claims of rising sea levels ... by the end of century – but the report'sauthor now says true estimate is still ... Sender's name ... No apology from IPCCchief Rajendra Pachauri for glacier fallacy.
4. IPCC author brands upcoming climatereport 'alarmist' - The ...
   www.theguardian.com/.../ipcc-author-climate-report-alarmi...
   The Guardian
   Mar 28, 2014 - Professor Richard Tol withdraws from writing team for UN climate science panel's report on impacts of global warming. ... Sender's name. Recipient's ... Climate change report'should jolt people into action' says IPCCchief.
5. Climate Scientist Demands IPCCRemove His Name From ...
   www.thepiratescove.us/.../climate-scientist-demands-ipcc-remove-his-na...
   Mar 27, 2014 - Climate Scientist Demands IPCC Remove His Name From Report ... You think that a group leader of the report withdrawing his support is not a ...
6. Scientist Resigns Over 'Alarmist' Tone of UN Climate ...
   www.newsmaxworld.com/GlobalTalk/Climate-change-IPCC/.../562248/
   Mar 27, 2014 - Tol's withdrawal is bad news for the IPCC, which is still reeling from the fallout ... requested that his name be removed, the Daily Mail reported.
7. “The idea that climate change poses an existential threat to ...
   8220 The idea that climate change poses an existential threat to humankind is laughable 8221 8212 Prof. Richard Tol
   Apr 1, 2014 - Last week, Tol accused the IPCC of being too alarmist about global ... his name withdrawn from its recently-released Working Group II report ...
8. Outlier scientist seeks spotlight as newIPCC report outlines ...
   www.climatesciencewatch.org/.../outlier-scientist-seeks-spotlight-as-new-i...
   Mar 29, 2014 - The IPCC climate change assessment report on Impacts, Adaptation ... to withdraw from the author team drafting the report summary to seek a ...
9. Scientists: Resignations & withdrawalsfrom the IPCC ...
   Scientists Resignations withdrawals from the IPCC HABITAT 21
   A number of them have found it impossible to reconcile their scientificwork with the lead-authors who compile IPCC reports. Others have found that when they ...

 

[Wyatt earp]

Another one that doesn't know science or history , you don't know what a Maunder minimum is and what happened between 1645 and 1715?


A little ice age retardo..



.

The Maunder Minimum occurred in the middle of the “little ice age” and was not the cause of it. Solar minimums relate to solar activity, not the temperature of the sun itself.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Still trying to post facts from your butt?


Maunder Minimum - Wikipedia



Maunder Minimum

The Maunder Minimum shown in a 400-year history of sunspot numbers
The Maunder Minimum, also known as the "prolonged sunspot minimum", is the name used for the period starting in about 1645 and continuing to about 1715 when sunspotsbecame exceedingly rare, as noted by solar observers of the time.

The term was introduced after John A. Eddy[1]published a landmark 1976 paper in Science.[2] Astronomers before Eddy had also named the period after the solar astronomers Annie Russell Maunder (1868–1947) and E. Walter Maunder (1851–1928), who studied how sunspot latitudes changed with time.[3]The period which the husband and wife team examined included the second half of the 17th century.

Two papers were published in Edward Maunder's name in 1890[4] and 1894,[5] and he cited earlier papers written by Gustav Spörer.[6] Because Annie Maunder had not received a university degree, due to restrictions at the time, her contribution was not then publicly recognized.[7]

Spörer noted that, during a 28-year period (1672–1699) within the Maunder Minimum, observations revealed fewer than 50 sunspots. This contrasts with the typical 40,000–50,000 sunspots seen in modern times.[8]

Like the Dalton Minimum and Spörer Minimum, the Maunder Minimum coincided with a period of lower-than-average European temperatures.

Climate fakers have zero facts

They act like they can Bullshit us like even I know basic 2rd grade science, lol...

The problem is that you never went beyond 2nd grade

Says the guy I burned his ass so many times already, so what's this you saying a Maunder minimum didn't produce colder weather?


.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The Maunder Minimum occurred in the middle of the “little ice age” and was not the cause of it. Solar minimums relate to solar activity, not the temperature of the sun itself.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Still trying to post facts from your butt?


Maunder Minimum - Wikipedia



Maunder Minimum

The Maunder Minimum shown in a 400-year history of sunspot numbers
The Maunder Minimum, also known as the "prolonged sunspot minimum", is the name used for the period starting in about 1645 and continuing to about 1715 when sunspotsbecame exceedingly rare, as noted by solar observers of the time.

The term was introduced after John A. Eddy[1]published a landmark 1976 paper in Science.[2] Astronomers before Eddy had also named the period after the solar astronomers Annie Russell Maunder (1868–1947) and E. Walter Maunder (1851–1928), who studied how sunspot latitudes changed with time.[3]The period which the husband and wife team examined included the second half of the 17th century.

Two papers were published in Edward Maunder's name in 1890[4] and 1894,[5] and he cited earlier papers written by Gustav Spörer.[6] Because Annie Maunder had not received a university degree, due to restrictions at the time, her contribution was not then publicly recognized.[7]

Spörer noted that, during a 28-year period (1672–1699) within the Maunder Minimum, observations revealed fewer than 50 sunspots. This contrasts with the typical 40,000–50,000 sunspots seen in modern times.[8]

Like the Dalton Minimum and Spörer Minimum, the Maunder Minimum coincided with a period of lower-than-average European temperatures.

Climate fakers have zero facts

They act like they can Bullshit us like even I know basic 2rd grade science, lol...

The problem is that you never went beyond 2nd grade

Says the guy I burned his ass so many times already, so what's this you saying a Maunder minimum didn't produce colder weather?


.

So you think it produced a colder winter in parts of Europe but nowhere else in the world? Maybe 2nd grade was stretch for you.

Also, the little know fact about that time in our world, the summers were no different, they were just average temperatures.

Which means your stupid partisan ass think that the Maunder minimum only cooled part of the world and only during a few months each year.

Fuck, you are one stupid ass bitch.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I'm saying no one can accuse Michael Mann of being a liar.

Do you agree or not?

How rude of you to ask me a question, without answering my question first.

Liars, incompetent, or both?

Some of them are incompetent liars.
Some of them are very good liars.

No, you are still being a sissy. You have to address nearly all of them, not some of them.


Haha...look at you guys, doing your little two-steps....

They all like money. Unfortunately, they've been corrupted by it.

Yes, it's too bad the impoverished fossil fuel industry doesnt have the money to fund the CORRECT science, amiright?!?!?!?

So effing stupid...you guys embarrass our entire country. .

You do know fossil fuels spent billions if not a trillion of dollars in reaserch and devlopment in green energy right since the 1970s right?


But you wouldn't know that ..

One of the world's largest oil companies is spending $1 billion a year on green energy research



One of the World's Largest Oil Companies is Spending $1 Billion a Year on Green Energy Research

 

[Wyatt earp]

Still trying to post facts from your butt?


Maunder Minimum - Wikipedia



Maunder Minimum

The Maunder Minimum shown in a 400-year history of sunspot numbers
The Maunder Minimum, also known as the "prolonged sunspot minimum", is the name used for the period starting in about 1645 and continuing to about 1715 when sunspotsbecame exceedingly rare, as noted by solar observers of the time.

The term was introduced after John A. Eddy[1]published a landmark 1976 paper in Science.[2] Astronomers before Eddy had also named the period after the solar astronomers Annie Russell Maunder (1868–1947) and E. Walter Maunder (1851–1928), who studied how sunspot latitudes changed with time.[3]The period which the husband and wife team examined included the second half of the 17th century.

Two papers were published in Edward Maunder's name in 1890[4] and 1894,[5] and he cited earlier papers written by Gustav Spörer.[6] Because Annie Maunder had not received a university degree, due to restrictions at the time, her contribution was not then publicly recognized.[7]

Spörer noted that, during a 28-year period (1672–1699) within the Maunder Minimum, observations revealed fewer than 50 sunspots. This contrasts with the typical 40,000–50,000 sunspots seen in modern times.[8]

Like the Dalton Minimum and Spörer Minimum, the Maunder Minimum coincided with a period of lower-than-average European temperatures.

Climate fakers have zero facts

They act like they can Bullshit us like even I know basic 2rd grade science, lol...

The problem is that you never went beyond 2nd grade

Says the guy I burned his ass so many times already, so what's this you saying a Maunder minimum didn't produce colder weather?


.

So you think it produced a colder winter in parts of Europe but nowhere else in the world? Maybe 2nd grade was stretch for you.

Also, the little know fact about that time in our world, the summers were no different, they were just average temperatures.

Which means your stupid partisan ass think that the Maunder minimum only cooled part of the world and only during a few months each year.

Fuck, you are one stupid ass bitch.

How would we know if it was colder in the southern hemisphere during the 1645 to 1715?


Did we have thermoscopes down there ?

Did we thermometers down there ? ( note thermometer wasn't invented till 1714) Do we have history down there like we do in the civilized Europe at the time?


No you are one indoctrinate fool

 

[Wyatt earp]

Climate fakers have zero facts

They act like they can Bullshit us like even I know basic 2rd grade science, lol...

The problem is that you never went beyond 2nd grade

Says the guy I burned his ass so many times already, so what's this you saying a Maunder minimum didn't produce colder weather?


.

So you think it produced a colder winter in parts of Europe but nowhere else in the world? Maybe 2nd grade was stretch for you.

Also, the little know fact about that time in our world, the summers were no different, they were just average temperatures.

Which means your stupid partisan ass think that the Maunder minimum only cooled part of the world and only during a few months each year.

Fuck, you are one stupid ass bitch.

How would we know if it was colder in the southern hemisphere during the 1645 to 1715?


Did we have thermoscopes down there ?

Did we thermometers down there ? ( note thermometer wasn't invented till 1714) Do we have history down there like we do in the civilized Europe at the time?


No you are one indoctrinate fool

Btw thanks for making me look this up, looks like you lose again...but then again these are just Bullshit gustemites proxies ..


Bwhahaha

Little Ice Age - Wikipedia







Scientific works point out cold spells and climate changes in areas of the Southern Hemisphere and their correlation to the Little Ice Age.

Africa
In Ethiopia and North Africa, permanent snow was reported on mountain peaks at levels where it does not occur today.[46] Timbuktu, an important city on the trans-Saharancaravan route, was flooded at least 13 times by the Niger River; there are no records of similar flooding before or since.[46]

In Southern Africa, sediment cores retrieved from Lake Malawi show colder conditions between 1570 and 1820, suggesting the Lake Malawi records "further support, and extend, the global expanse of the Little Ice Age."[49] A novel 3,000-year temperature reconstruction method, based on the rate of stalagmitegrowth in a cold cave in South Africa, further suggests a cold period from 1500 to 1800 "characterizing the South African Little Ice age."[50] Periglacial features in the eastern Lesotho Highlands might have been reactivated by the Little Ice Age.[51]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm saying no one can accuse Michael Mann of being a liar.

Do you agree or not?

How rude of you to ask me a question, without answering my question first.

Liars, incompetent, or both?

Some of them are incompetent liars.
Some of them are very good liars.

No, you are still being a sissy. You have to address nearly all of them, not some of them.


Haha...look at you guys, doing your little two-steps....

They all like money. Unfortunately, they've been corrupted by it.

Yes, it's too bad the impoverished fossil fuel industry doesnt have the money to fund the CORRECT science, amiright?!?!?!?

So effing stupid...you guys embarrass our entire country. .

If you don't like fossil fuels, stop using them.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Still trying to post facts from your butt?


Maunder Minimum - Wikipedia



Maunder Minimum

The Maunder Minimum shown in a 400-year history of sunspot numbers
The Maunder Minimum, also known as the "prolonged sunspot minimum", is the name used for the period starting in about 1645 and continuing to about 1715 when sunspotsbecame exceedingly rare, as noted by solar observers of the time.

The term was introduced after John A. Eddy[1]published a landmark 1976 paper in Science.[2] Astronomers before Eddy had also named the period after the solar astronomers Annie Russell Maunder (1868–1947) and E. Walter Maunder (1851–1928), who studied how sunspot latitudes changed with time.[3]The period which the husband and wife team examined included the second half of the 17th century.

Two papers were published in Edward Maunder's name in 1890[4] and 1894,[5] and he cited earlier papers written by Gustav Spörer.[6] Because Annie Maunder had not received a university degree, due to restrictions at the time, her contribution was not then publicly recognized.[7]

Spörer noted that, during a 28-year period (1672–1699) within the Maunder Minimum, observations revealed fewer than 50 sunspots. This contrasts with the typical 40,000–50,000 sunspots seen in modern times.[8]

Like the Dalton Minimum and Spörer Minimum, the Maunder Minimum coincided with a period of lower-than-average European temperatures.

Climate fakers have zero facts

They act like they can Bullshit us like even I know basic 2rd grade science, lol...

The problem is that you never went beyond 2nd grade

Says the guy I burned his ass so many times already, so what's this you saying a Maunder minimum didn't produce colder weather?


.

So you think it produced a colder winter in parts of Europe but nowhere else in the world? Maybe 2nd grade was stretch for you.

Also, the little know fact about that time in our world, the summers were no different, they were just average temperatures.

Which means your stupid partisan ass think that the Maunder minimum only cooled part of the world and only during a few months each year.

Fuck, you are one stupid ass bitch.

So you think it produced a colder winter in parts of Europe but nowhere else in the world?

Who said that? Where?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Since they all do not endorse the consensus I

Wrong. Every major scientific society on the planet endorses the consensus.

So...liars, incompetent, or both? Let's see if you have the stones to answer this simple question.

Once again where do they get their information from?

Who said they were liars?

Who said they were incompetent?



Tell me who said that ?

You said they were saying things for money. That makes them liars. You also say they unwittingly use bad sources for info; that makes them incompetent.

So, you are saying they are both liars and incompetent. Own it, you little liar.

Listen up:

You know less than nothing about any of this. You are not providing a challenge to any accepted theory to fondle yourself on a message board. You are an uneducated slob who has no right even trying to describe any of this science, much less critique it. You are a lying sack who parrots every debubked denier lie found in the blogosphere. You are embarrassing yourself.

That's all. Have a nice night!

That's all you got no links , nothing , you refuse to read anything and you now run away from me?


To funny..

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Too late to prevent it, we just need to prepare for the coming changes

Okay. By doing what?

Sorry for the delay, this post got hidden by all the other response.

To use the examples that I gave in my first post, Cali needs to re-engineer their water control system. It was designed to gather water from the melting snow in a slow process. It was designed this way because that is what their climate was till not very long ago.
The mountains are having less snow and more of their water is coming to them via torrential downpours. Their dams and spillways were not designed to handle large influxes of water so they need to be updated and the spillways made stronger to deal with the climate.

In the mid-west farmers are starting to adapt as more of them are installing irrigation now even if they do not need it all of the time yet. In Illinois for example the number of irrigated acres almost doubled between the 2007 and the 2012 Census of Agriculture and I suspect when the results of the 2017 COA are published next year you will see the same trend continuing.

The military has contingency plans for all sorts of things related to climate change and have been putting them into place since even before I got out 9 years ago.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Is your goal to stop humans from polluting our air and water?

If yes, why isn't that enough? Why do you need an unproven link between pollution and climate in order to fight pollution?

If you were out there fighting pollution, 99% of humans would support your fight. But when you try to claim that pollution is changing the climate you lose 60% of the supporters.

Can someone explain?

I'm sorry but let me know when you idiots start believing in science.

Without that I'm wasting my time & you'll always be stupid.

More CO2 => more greenhouse effect => higher temps.

PROVEN FACT

Ah.....NO! Have you ever heard of the LOG function of a gas? Were already at the point that CO2 can do very little, even at another doubling. Less than 1 deg C in laboratory situations.

 

[SSDD]

No

My goal is to introduce sensible reductions in our current carbon output

Are you aware that recent published research puts a big question mark on our contribution to global CO2? Fact is that we don't produce enough CO2 to even overcome the annual variation in the earth's own CO2 making machinery...

 

[Redfish]

Is your goal to stop humans from polluting our air and water?

If yes, why isn't that enough? Why do you need an unproven link between pollution and climate in order to fight pollution?

If you were out there fighting pollution, 99% of humans would support your fight. But when you try to claim that pollution is changing the climate you lose 60% of the supporters.

Can someone explain?

Believers? You mean people who aren’t science deniers?

No, I mean people who have the mental capacity to think for themselves, make logical decisions, and recognize junk science for the propaganda that it is.

AGW is not science, it is a perverted religion.

 

[Redfish]

back to the original question. Why isn't fighting man made pollution enough of a cause for liberals? Why must you have the unproven link to climate in order to fight pollution?

Please think before responding. No talking points, no bullshit, just a few straight answers.

 

[Redfish]

Lets put the argument about the validity of climate science aside for a while. My question has nothing to do with whether or not "science" proves that man is changing the climate.

My question to liberals is: Why must you link pollution to climate in order to crusade against pollution? Your goal is to stop man made pollution, right? Pollution is bad, right? Why not put your efforts into fighting pollution rather than a debate about science?

I think I know the answer, but I doubt that most of you do (or won't admit it)

 

[Redfish]

It’s like how as adults we know we have to wash our hands because of germs, but dumb little kids who don’t know any better think they don’t have to if they don’t look dirty.

“Psh humans don’t affect climate” = “psh microscopic imaginary bugs floating around? Yeah right.”

AGW is the lefts religion. Just fill in all the holes with "man" instead of "god."
Faith, it does a body good

Humans affecting climate, same as we affect everything, is not a stretch. Magical all powerful beings are a stretch.

Humans pollute, they do not change the climate of planet earth. the climate of our planet has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years after humans disappear from the earth. Human activity has never had anything to do with climate. Even if we had all out nuclear war, the impacts would be temporary in terms of the life of planet earth.

It’s so naive to think we can control climate. How many clouds have you made? Stop the earth rotation lately? Too fking funny

Nobody said we could control it, just affect it. Big difference, but since you never made it past the 2nd grade you wouldn't understand the difference.

OK, back to the central issue. Why must you prove that man is affecting climate in order to fight pollution?