Has the United States surrendered to anthropogenic climate change?

[HikerGuy83]

But climate change is definitely inevitable no matter what we do.

Pretty much sums it up.

 

[HikerGuy83]

ON THE OTHER HAND

[]Trump dismisses climate science, saying[/]​

[] ‘It will start getting cooler!"[/]​

I don't want it to get cooler.

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't want it to get cooler.

The history of the world is pretty absolute that humankind and the flora and fauna on Earth in general has thrived much better in warmer periods than it has in colder ones.

 

[HikerGuy83]

The history of the world is pretty absolute that humankind and the flora and fauna on Earth in general has thrived much better in warmer periods than it has in colder ones.

Yes ma'am.

The left just needs something to whine about so they can sleep at night thinking they are not totally irrelevant.

 

[Sunsettommy]

I think we'd better start thinking about mitigation.

Unless that's a commie plot, too.

Suuuure you keep thinking that way while reality marches on:

 

[schmidlap]

I don't want it to get cooler.

Let trump know. He controls climate.

 

[westwall]

Let trump know. He controls climate.

Ahhh, good Ole schitflappy....thinking Trump is God.

Too funny.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Let trump know. He controls climate.

Why ?

He's to busy screwing up the deficit....but not as bad as Biden.

I doubt he'll care.

 

[EMH]

Indeed. The climatogocal consensus has only been further confirmed by the data that has continued to accrue.

Despite the dogmatic rejection by crackpots on the fringe, the earth is spherical and has been getting warmer since millions of tonnes of industrial gases have been spewing into the atmosphere.

... federally funded climate science, including observation and modeling work, is being systematically dismantled. This is not a thought experiment. It is all too real. We are now observing what happens when decades of work to understand the nature and causes of climate changes are rejected, and are replaced by ideology, conspiracy theories and disinformation. Stopping climate work will lead to a data vacuum that could last years or even decades. This experiment in willful ignorance can only end poorly.​

Climate Change’s Fingerprints Came Early, a Thought Experiment Reveals

Climate change left its signature on the atmosphere early in the industrial revolution, reveals a thought experiment investigation

www.scientificamerican.com

​

LOL!!!

Even though you were shown the NBC documentation of the fudging of atmospheric temps, you continue to parrot the fudge.

I'll let you in on another smoking gun, this one proves that Earth is neither warming nor experiencing an ongoing net ice melt.


This is the surface air pressure data from Mars, and it documents that as Mars gets closer to Sun (which means it got WARMER), its SAP goes up. As a planet with an atmosphere warms, its SAP rises. If there is a melt/sublime issue with polar caps, the move is "turbocharged"

Now, for the past 70 years, not only has Earth SAP not gone up, it has actually had a microscopic drop.... and that is all about Antarctic ice GROWING...

Any idea what percent of Earth ice is on Antarctica?

 

[EMH]

The history of the world is pretty absolute that humankind and the flora and fauna on Earth in general has thrived much better in warmer periods than it has in colder ones.

Yeah, but foot long scorpions and 80 foot snakes I can do without...

 

[EMH]

ON ONE HAND

​

By a large majority, climate scientists agree that average global temperature today is warmer than in pre-industrial times and that human activity is the most significant factor. ​

​

The United States' foremost scientific agencies and organizations have recognized global warming as a human-caused problem that should be addressed. The U.S. Global Change Research Program has published a series of scientific reports documenting the causes and impacts of global climate change. NOAA, NASA, the National Science Foundation, the National Research Council, and the Environmental Protection Agency have all published reports and fact sheets stating that Earth is warming mainly due to the increase in human-produced heat-trapping gases.​

​

On their climate home page, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicines says, "Scientists have known for some time, from multiple lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth’s climate, primarily through greenhouse gas emissions," and that "Climate change is increasingly affecting people’s lives." ​

​

The American Meteorological Society (AMS) issued this position statement: "Scientific evidence indicates that the leading cause of climate change in the most recent half century is the anthropogenic increase in the concentration of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, tropospheric ozone, and nitrous oxide." (Adopted April 15, 2019)​

​

The American Geophysical Union (AGU) issued this position statement: "Human activities are changing Earth's climate, causing increasingly disruptive societal and ecological impacts. Such impacts are creating hardships and suffering now, and they will continue to do so into the future—in ways expected as well as potentially unforeseen. To limit these impacts, the world's nations have agreed to hold the increase in global average temperature to well below 2°C (3.6°F) above pre-industrial levels. To achieve this goal, global society must promptly reduce its greenhouse gas emissions." (Reaffirmed in November 2019)​

​

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) What We Know site states: "Based on the evidence, about 97 percent of climate scientists agree that human-caused climate change is happening."​

​

Isn't there a lot of disagreement among climate scientists about global warming?

No. By a large majority, climate scientists agree that average global temperature today is warmer than in pre-industrial times, and that human activity is the primary contributing factor.

www.climate.gov

​

​

ON THE OTHER HAND

Trump dismisses climate science, saying​

‘It will start getting cooler!"​

​

If you aren't that old, you may live to see every single one of those get sentenced to death and total asset forfeiture....

The crime was fraud in the 1990s.... it is way past treason now with the US bilked to the tune of $20 trillion and counting.

 

[EMH]

Please provide your list of all international scientific organizations and authorities that have rejected climatological science, and embraced your denialism.

Have you sold any qualified climatologists on your dogma?

Why do you rage against empirical data, and embrace whatever Trump pulls from his big, flabby butt? What are his scientific qualifications?

Trump Clings to Inaccurate Climate Change Talking Points​

They all have the same conflict of interest. The decision to fudge the atmospheric data is classic. Funny thing is, all of the "climate scientists" you parrot are lame rejects from professions dealing with REAL SCIENCE, not "the science."

That's why they forgot to fudge Surface Air Pressure.... DUMB...


When Earth does warm, SAP goes WAY UP....

During the Jurassic period, the Earth's atmosphere is believed to have had a higher surface air pressure than today, potentially 2 to 3 times greater

 

[MisterBeale]

Have We Reached Late-Stage Climate Hysteria?

The alarmists want to arrest and punish the Galileos of our time.

issuesinsights.com

https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/g25/070/22/pdf/g2507022.pdf

 

[schmidlap]

What exposes the anti-science fanatics as ideologues whose dogma is antithetical to the empiricai-data-based consensus of climatologists (that prolonged spewing of hundreds of millions of tonnes of industrial gases into the atmosphere has predictable consequences for the atmosphere) is the zealots' blatant impotence in concocting a coherent alternative explanation for the significant global temperature rise since the advent of the industrial revolution.

Lacking a viable theory that fits their agenda as well as climatological scientists or science organizations that find their dogma credible, they lash out irrationally.

Flat-earthers redux

 

[EMH]

What exposes the anti-science fanatics as ideologues whose dogma is antithetical to the empiricai-data-based consensus of climatologists (that prolonged spewing of hundreds of millions of tonnes of industrial gases into the atmosphere has predictable consequences for the atmosphere) is the zealots' blatant impotence in concocting a coherent alternative explanation for the significant global temperature rise since the advent of the industrial revolution.

Lacking a viable theory that fits their agenda as well as climatological scientists or science organizations that find their dogma credible, they lash out irrationally.

Flat-earthers redux

You are just a flat out liar.

CO2 FRAUD has no empirical data. CO2 FRAUD has FUDGE. That's been documented to you over and over.

Earth is not warming. Surface Air Pressure proves it, amongst other things...

And you are such a cowardly moronic science invalid you cannot answer any of the most basic climate questions...


1. Why does one Earth polar circle have 9+ times the ice of the other?
2. Why is there ice age glacier south of Arctic Circle on Greenland but no such ice age glacier north of Arctic Circle on Alaska?
3. If the oceans are "warming" why is the record decade for canes still the 1940s?
4. If the oceans are "rising" why can't we see one single photo of land sinking?
5. How did Co2 thaw North America and freeze Greenland at the same time?



If you cannot answer basic questions on the topic, you are a ABSOLUTE MORON for commenting on it...

 

[schmidlap]

You are just a flat out liar.

CO2 FRAUD has no empirical data. CO2 FRAUD has FUDGE. That's been documented to you over and over.

Earth is not warming. Surface Air Pressure proves it, amongst other things...

And you are such a cowardly moronic science invalid you cannot answer any of the most basic climate questions...


1. Why does one Earth polar circle have 9+ times the ice of the other?
2. Why is there ice age glacier south of Arctic Circle on Greenland but no such ice age glacier north of Arctic Circle on Alaska?
3. If the oceans are "warming" why is the record decade for canes still the 1940s?
4. If the oceans are "rising" why can't we see one single photo of land sinking?
5. How did Co2 thaw North America and freeze Greenland at the same time?



If you cannot answer basic questions on the topic, you are a ABSOLUTE MORON for commenting on it...

Your hysterical ad hominems only underscore your inability to cite climatologists or climatological organizations that find your dogma credible.

You merely parrot the inane rejection of science by ideologues.

There are thousands of legitimate, reputable climatologists, and dozens of legitimate, reputable climatological societies and organizations, yet you cite media entertainers with no scientific credentials.

Would you do so in any other scientific discipline? E.g., cardiology?

 

[westwall]

What exposes the anti-science fanatics as ideologues whose dogma is antithetical to the empiricai-data-based consensus of climatologists (that prolonged spewing of hundreds of millions of tonnes of industrial gases into the atmosphere has predictable consequences for the atmosphere) is the zealots' blatant impotence in concocting a coherent alternative explanation for the significant global temperature rise since the advent of the industrial revolution.

Lacking a viable theory that fits their agenda as well as climatological scientists or science organizations that find their dogma credible, they lash out irrationally.

Flat-earthers redux

Schitflap, you really need to look in the mirror. Your accusations more accurately fit YOU, and your fellow religious nutjobs.

 

[EMH]

Your hysterical ad hominems only underscore your inability to cite climatologists or climatological organizations that find your dogma credible.

You merely parrot the inane rejection of science by ideologues.

There are thousands of legitimate, reputable climatologists, and dozens of legitimate, reputable climatological societies and organizations, yet you cite media entertainers with no scientific credentials.

Would you do so in any other scientific discipline? E.g., cardiology?

LOL!!!

The parrot insists, only parroting conflicted fudgebaking liars matters, actual science does not.

Stay tuned, there is a reason why homO went silent for two years...

Google Search

and if Ms. Bondi doesn't "explain" that soon, she will be looking for a new job...

 

[schmidlap]

Schitflap, you really need to look in the mirror. Your accusations more accurately fit YOU, and your fellow religious nutjobs.

I appreciate your being upset by the consensus of climatological scientists who reject your ideological dogma.

The blowhard's basest claim that global warming is a Chinese hoax is, certainly, funnier than all that empirical data!

 

[EMH]

I appreciate your being upset by the consensus of climatological scientists who reject your ideological dogma.

The blowhard's basest claim that global warming is a Chinese hoax is, certainly, funnier than all that empirical data!

LOL!!!

The Chinese are the biggest beneficiaries of the hoax, but it is definitely a Jewish hoax, not Chinese...

and that's why the Mossad enforces it.