Are the anti-science zealots accepting anthropogenic climate change yet?

[schmidlap]

Oregon Petition (1998) Signed by 31,000+ Scientists and Experts

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals.

defyccc.com

Of 14 year vintage, and the majority of signatories not climatologists?

Your desperation is entirely understandable.

Your desperation to contrive support for you ideological dogma induces mirth. The National Academy held a press conference to disclaim the mailing.

The list has been criticized for its lack of verification, with pranksters successfully submitting the names of Charles Darwin, a member of the Spice Girls and characters from Star Wars, and getting them briefly included on the list.​

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

Still no

I'm still freaking out over spock

 

[MadChemist]

Inevitably, ineluctably, the taboo is being vanquished and the science accepted.

... Now, many in the Republican Party are coming to terms with what polls have been saying for years: independents, suburban voters and especially young Republicans are worried about climate change and want the government to take action.​

​

[Some Republicans Find Failure to Grapple With Climate Change a ‘Political Liability’]​

​

Expect to see Republicans increasingly respecting the science, recognizing the crisis, and joining in measure to mitigate the consequences.

The U.S. Senate recently passed the bipartisan Growing Climate Solutions Act by a 92-8 margin. This measure to provide access to carbon markets so that farmers can be rewarded for climate-smart farming methods has now also been introduced into the House with 15 Republican and 19 Democratic cosponsors...​

​

As ranking minority member of the Agriculture Committee, Thompson (R) wrote an op-ed in the Washington Examiner in April promoting the role of agriculture in addressing climate change: “To mitigate climate change and bolster rural economies, we must engage and empower the original stewards of our land and give them the tools to expand upon the work they are already carrying out day to day. This means greater access to affordable technologies and proven land management practices to harness the carbon-reducing potential of our farms and ranches while increasing their bottom lines and economic competitiveness.”​

​

Enhanced agricultural techniques and better forest management are welcome. But we cannot stop climate change by increasing carbon sinks alone. We must reduce emissions by doing many different things at the same time and quickly. The measures Republicans are taking in the agricultural sector nonetheless give hope because they indicate a recognition of the issue and a growing spirit of cooperation in addressing this difficult problem.​

​

[https://www.centredaily.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/article252667948.html]​

What issue ?

They want to boost rural economies.

More government redistribution of wealth.

 

[MadChemist]

Compared to you any of us are world renowned experts on climate.

You do not seem to be able to cite a single recognized climatological institution to sustain your ideological denial.

If you can, please do so. If you can't, you can just persist in mewling, of course.

Recognized by who ?

You ?

 

[Oddball]

Oregon Petition (1998) Signed by 31,000+ Scientists and Experts

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals.

defyccc.com

Of 14 year vintage, and the majority of signatories not climatologists?

Your desperation is entirely inderstandable.

Your desperation to contrive support for you ideological dogma induces mirth. The National Academy held a press conference to disclaim the mailing.

The list has been criticized for its lack of verification, with pranksters successfully submitting the names of Charles Darwin, a member of the Spice Girls and characters from Star Wars, and getting them briefly included on the list.​

The 31,000 number remains, Gomer Pyle.

 

[schmidlap]

The 31,000 number remains, Gomer Pyle.

I'll continue to respect the current consensus of climatologists, but you can go with the Spice Girls if you prefer, of course, even if the National Academy of Sciences has disavowed the wonky artifact you have excavated.

 

[ding]

Compared to you any of us are world renowned experts on climate.

You do not seem to be able to cite a single recognized climatological institution to sustain your ideological denial.

If you can, please do so. If you can't, you can just persist in mewling, of course.

Read the content of what I have posted, dummy. Elevate your game.

You know absolutely nothing about what you are talking about. You should not be calling people who do understand the science ideologues. YOU are the ideologue.

 

[ding]

Compared to you any of us are world renowned experts on climate.

You do not seem to be able to cite a single recognized climatological institution to sustain your ideological denial.

If you can, please do so. If you can't, you can just persist in mewling, of course.

Here is your citation, dummy.

https://www.scirp.org/pdf/acs_2020041718295959.pdf

 

[marvin martian]

The resolution of the ideologues vs the climatologists squabble over who had a better grasp of climate was always silly.

View attachment 510995
​

View attachment 510997​

"I don’t know about you guys, but I think climate change is...​

'BULLSHIT!’ ​

...‘By the way, it is!"​

[Sen. Ron Johnson mouths to Republican luncheon that climate change is ‘bullsh—’]

​

Knowledge respects reality. Ignorance must have reality forced upon it. When ignorance is sustained by ideological dogma, it's a bitch to overcome, particularly in especially resistant cases.

The predictions are being validated. The theoretical is becoming blatant. The forecasts are being realized. Denial is becoming an increasingly costly ideological self-indulgence - agricultural failures, wildfires, flooding, soaring energy costs, droughts, mass starvation, relentless human migrations, etc., etc., etc.

By midcentury, if greenhouse gas emissions are not significantly curtailed, the coldest and warmest daily temperatures are expected to increase by at least 5 degrees F in most areas by mid-century rising to 10 degrees F by late century. The National Climate Assessment estimates 20-30 more days over 90 degrees F in most areas by mid-century. A recent study projects that the annual number of days with a heat index above 100 degrees F will double, and days with a heat index above 105 degrees F will triple, nationwide, when compared to the end of the 20th century.​

​

Extreme heat can increase the risk of other types of disasters. Heat can exacerbate drought, and hot dry conditions can in turn create wildfire conditions. In cities, buildings roads and infrastructure can be heated to 50 to 90 degrees hotter than the air while natural surfaces remain closer to air temperatures. The heat island effect is most intense during the day, but the slow release of heat from the infrastructure overnight (or an atmospheric heat island) can keep cities much hotter than surrounding areas. Rising temperatures across the country poses a threat to people, ecosystems and the economy...​

[Heat Waves and Climate Change | Center for Climate and Energy Solutions]​

​

An early summer heatwave across the western United States broke all-time records in multiple states, with temperatures above 100 degrees Fahrenheit for days on end in some places. This event marked yet another climate extreme for residents of a region already suffering through a devastating drought and with memories of last year’s horrific wildfire season likely still fresh on people’s minds.​

​

[Local, state leaders warn of climate change threat amid record heat wave]​

​

Truth not only endures. It has an irresistible way of imposing itself upon even the most willfully obtuse:

View attachment 511003​

Expect Americans to demand their elected representatives confront reality.

Some may be a bit slow, but eventually, everybody will get it, one way or another.

View attachment 511009
"If there is one thing that really burns my ass, it's
CLIMATE CHANGE!"


​

Not too long ago, you fear whores were railing about global cooling:

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Yes, indeed. Politicians are increasingly deferring to science over ideology as the understanding of anthropogenic climate change increases. For elected officials to persist in ignoring the science would be disastrous.

Is Bruce Jenner a man or a woman?

 

[ding]

Yes, indeed. Politicians are increasingly deferring to science over ideology as the understanding of anthropogenic climate change increases. For elected officials to persist in ignoring the science would be disastrous.

Is Bruce Jenner a man or a woman?

He's waiting for the climatologists to tell him the answer.

 

[schmidlap]

Not too long ago, you fear whores were railing about global cooling:

If you actually need to cling to Dr Spock, back in the 1970s, citing no source, telling you that you will freeze your ass off, to refute every climatological academy, society, and association on earth, you must have done a mindmeld with a tribble.


...

"Dammit! The Fir Ball sucked out his brain!"

.

 

[schmidlap]

He's waiting for the climatologists to tell him the answer.

"WHAAAA!
Why are the world's climatologists
and virtually every nation on earth
not pandering to ME???
WHAAA!"​

 

[schmidlap]

Is Bruce Jenner a man or a woman?

You have clearly summoned all your intellectual resources in your defense of your ideological dogma vs science.

You get an "A" for effort, but it still needs a little work.

 

[schmidlap]

Recognized by who ?

You ?

Whom.

No. not by me. By these folks:

[Scientific Consensus: Earth's Climate is Warming]​

​

AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES​

---

Statement on Climate Change from 18 Scientific Associations​

"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver." (2009)2​

​

• 
  American Association for the Advancement of Science​
  "Based on well-established evidence, about 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening." (2014)3​
• 
  American Chemical Society​
  "The Earth’s climate is changing in response to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and particulate matter in the atmosphere, largely as the result of human activities." (2016-2019)4​
• 
  American Geophysical Union​
  "Based on extensive scientific evidence, it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. There is no alterative explanation supported by convincing evidence." (2019)5​
• 
  American Medical Association​
  "Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2019)6​
• 
  American Meteorological Society​
  "Research has found a human influence on the climate of the past several decades ... The IPCC (2013), USGCRP (2017), and USGCRP (2018) indicate that it is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-twentieth century." (2019)7​
• 
  American Physical Society​
  "Earth's changing climate is a critical issue and poses the risk of significant environmental, social and economic disruptions around the globe. While natural sources of climate variability are significant, multiple lines of evidence indicate that human influences have had an increasingly dominant effect on global climate warming observed since the mid-twentieth century." (2015)8​
• 
  The Geological Society of America​
  "The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2011), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2013) and the U.S. Global Change Research Program (Melillo et al., 2014) that global climate has warmed in response to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases ... Human activities (mainly greenhouse-gas emissions) are the dominant cause of the rapid warming since the middle 1900s (IPCC, 2013)." (2015)9​

SCIENCE ACADEMIES​

---

International Academies: Joint Statement​

"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies)10​

​

• 
  U.S. National Academy of Sciences​
  "Scientists have known for some time, from multiple lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth’s climate, primarily through greenhouse gas emissions."11​

U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES​

---

• 
  U.S. Global Change Research Program​
  "Earth’s climate is now changing faster than at any point in the history of modern civilization, primarily as a result of human activities." (2018, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies)12​

INTERGOVERNMENTAL BODIES​

---

• 
  Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change​
  “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen.”13
  
  “Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems.”14​

OTHER RESOURCES​

---

List of Worldwide Scientific Organizations​

The following page lists the nearly 200 worldwide scientific organizations that hold the position that climate change has been caused by human action.
List of Worldwide Scientific Organizations - Office of Planning and Research​

​

U.S. Agencies​

The following page contains information on what federal agencies are doing to adapt to climate change.
https://www.c2es.org/site/assets/up...daptation-what-federal-agencies-are-doing.pdf​

​

---

*Technically, a “consensus” is a general agreement of opinion, but the scientific method steers us away from this to an objective framework. In science, facts or observations are explained by a hypothesis (a statement of a possible explanation for some natural phenomenon), which can then be tested and retested until it is refuted (or disproved).​

​

As scientists gather more observations, they will build off one explanation and add details to complete the picture. Eventually, a group of hypotheses might be integrated and generalized into a scientific theory, a scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena.​

In the interests of recognizing the opposing viewpoint:

​

 

[ding]

He's waiting for the climatologists to tell him the answer.

View attachment 513023
"WHAAAA!
Why are the world's climatologists
and virtually every nation on earth
not pandering to ME???
WHAAA!"​

https://www.scirp.org/pdf/acs_2020041718295959.pdf

Let's see you deny some more science, you ideological zealot.

 

[schmidlap]

https://www.scirp.org/pdf/acs_2020041718295959.pdf

Let's see you deny some more science, you ideological zealot.

You are free to cling to whatever your dogmatic ideology demands..

The scientific community will persist in objectively dealing with the credible empirical data that has resulted in the consensus.

Take whatever solace you can derive from Saudi Arabia (16%) and Indonesia (18%) having an even higher proportion of people denying science than the U.S., and/or Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Eritrea, Yemen, South Sudan remaining apostates by not having yet ratified the Paris Climate Accord.

 

[ReinyDays]

Other countries buy into the cradle to grave crap too.

Your appeal to that simply says that the U.S. is the one thing keeping us from making some seriously stupid decisions.

The United Sates, along with Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, are the hotbeds of science denialism, but that does not mean that the fringe element of dogmatic ideologues, impervious to the ever-mounting evidence, is anything more than that.

Whether all the world's scientific institutions, academies, and societies are corrupt or are all ignorant regarding the science, - either way duping virtually all the nations on earth who have ratified the Paris Agreement - is a comprehensive paranoia, indeed.

... impervious to the ever-mounting evidence ...

Whoa ... you have evidence of climate change? ... so far you've relied on political consensus ... which isn't evidence ... generally, the Alarmists use statistics, which are easily manipulated and disdained as evidence in science ... only politicians use statistics ... from "statistics don't lie, but liars use statistics" we can derive "LIES, DAMNED LIES AND STATISTICS" -- Benjamin Disraeli ...

For over 200 years, we had universal consensus about Newton's Laws of Gravity and Motion ... only one person dared to think otherwise ... Albert Einstein's 1905 paper on Special Relativity was published without citations ... no one had ever considered this before ... not only did Einstein provide the rigid mathematical proof of Special Relativity, the principles were easily demonstrated in any university lab ... consensus immediately changed while that edition of Annalen der Physik was still warm from the presses ... if 100% of the world's scientists can change their collective mind in an instant, consensus is worthless in science ... (I only made a quick scan of the paper itself, here's the link to the English version) ...

The CO2 portion of AGW Theory lacks both these conditions ... there's a serious gap in the mathematical proof and there's no demonstration that man-kind's CO2 has anything more that a trivial effect on global temperatures ... thus I ask for this evidence no one else seems to know about ...

I don't know why my fellow denialists disdain Climatology so much ... it's certainly deeper than any biologist or chemist would understand ... what biologists or chemists learn in first year physics is all they'll every use ... anything to do with the atmosphere is physics physics physics, and all that God-awful math that goes along with physics physics physics ... fluid mechanics with heaping doses of chemistry and geology and we have meteorology ... now blend in with astrophysics and we have climatology ...

"Appealing to Authority" is a logical fallacy ... I have the deepest respect for biologists who brought us this Covid vaccine ... amazing workmanship ... but that doesn't mean I'd trust them with a sling psychrometer around children ... once we get to Navier-Stokes-land, the typical scientist pees their pants ... this is the consensus you rely on? ... <sicilian voice>"morons, all of them"</sicilian voice> ...

ETA: I should probably qualify my claims above to the English speaking world ... the Vortex Theory of the Universe held out in some places until the late 18th Century ... when absolute proof of Newton's gravity became available ... yes, France, good guess ...

 

[westwall]

I see that Schmidlap has ignored my request:

What science is being denied, this means YOU have to post the science research YOU claim are being denied.

Let's see if you can do it......

He will neeeevr do it because he is a "believer" without knowing what the heck AGW conjecture is about. He ignored these three questions several times now that I have asked this galoot:

What is the AGW conjecture?

What is the NULL Hypothesis?

What is the Scientific Method?

This is a low IQ human being who keeps ignoring many questions and evidence, and fails to realize he is a copy and paste parrot, can't make a science based comments in his own words.

He is on my list of the worst warmist/alarmists science illiterates I have met over the years, he is now on my ignore list.

Schmiddy is the poster child for anti science religious nutbaggery. Not one of these fools has the slightest idea of what science even is, or what makes it scientific.

 

[westwall]

https://www.scirp.org/pdf/acs_2020041718295959.pdf

Let's see you deny some more science, you ideological zealot.

You are free to cling to whatever your dogmatic ideology demands..

The scientific community will persist in objectively dealing with the credible empirical data that has resulted in the consensus.

Take whatever solace you can derive from Saudi Arabia (16%) and Indonesia (18%) having an even higher proportion of people denying science than the U.S., and/or Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Eritrea, Yemen, South Sudan remaining apostates by not having yet ratified the Paris Climate Accord.

Climatology stopped being part of the science community when it abandoned the scientific method.