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'm afraid they'll get rid of all the heat and then the sun will burn out and the earth and luna will crash.YES! The climate IS changing! Why wouldn't it? It ALWAYS has in the past! The REAL question should be: Are we, the humans of this planet, speeding the natural process of Climate Change to the point where it is moving too fast and violently for us as a species (or for ANY species for that matter) to cope with it?! If We approach this issue as default bogus, then THAT is the real issue! We have all heard of the proverbial head in the sand and the presumed STUPIDITY behind that action! Frankly, I am choking to death with the STUPIDITY of having our collective head in the sand! STOP IT and WAKE UP! This is REAL!
Hang on, I'm thought you climate alarmists were into science? Oh I see, selective science.Sorry I'm not going to engage any more of you climate change denial people. None of you are working with a full deck and your reasoning is circular. You make me dizzy with your illogic. Goodbye.
Technology is available (the Netherlands)It is happening, property sales in Florida barrier Islands is finally slowing down. Climate change has made most of them poor investments because of their increase vulnerability. They are not sinking, the Waters around them are rising.
The Dust Bowl.Take a look at the national planting guides, view one from the 1950s and view one of today. I live in Nebraska, in the 1950s most of Nebraska was his zone 4, today most of Nebraska is on 5. Plus we are having more extreme weather events. Nebraska has always been a windy state, but now it's getting almost ridiculous, they're giving them terms like straight line winds, and the term I've never heard before used here called derecho which has very strong thunderstorms, often withheld they're completely shreds cornfields and hurricane force winds. Scientists here are saying it's all due to climate change. Increase energy trapped on the surface of the Earth by CO2 in the atmosphere exaggerates the normal weather patterns making them more severe and more unpredictable. We are getting the same amount of rain basically but it comes less often and any bigger downfalls so it is less useful to Farmers. And farming is the bottom line here in much of Nebraska. So there is no doubt climate change is affecting us here. I'm sure the rest of the world is saying the same thing. Also we used to have tons of snow, the last couple Winters it's been mostly rains. I don't mind that, I'm not a winter person, so it's not all bad. Your Winters in Vermont haven't changed, you still get plenty of snow. I'm sure there are areas on the planet that are less affected than others but it seems to me it's changing everywhere.
I would prefer this to been seen over hundreds of thousands of years , and if not, millions of years. Trying to observe climate over 200 to 300 years is meaningless. How on earth can that be compared and contrasted anywhere throughout earth's history?Have you taken a meteorology class ever? ... No? ... then why are you speaking? ...
=====
Pick any point on the surface of the Earth ...
• What was the climate 100 years ago ...
• What is the climate today ...
• What will the climate be in 100 years ...
If all three are the same, then climate isn't changing for that point ... and if this is true for all the points, then climate isn't changing anywhere ...
How can so many of you be this stupid? ...
C'mon ... just one [deleted] place where climate has changed ... [deleted] morons ...
Where does one go to sign up to become a CC scientist,Yeah......and so you trot out that lie.......
2. How do we know the 97% agree?
To elaborate, how was that proven?
Almost no one who refers to the 97% has any idea, but the basic way it works is that a researcher reviews a lot of scholarly papers and classifies them by how many agree with a certain position.
Unfortunately, in the case of 97% of climate scientists agreeing that human beings are the main cause of warming, the researchers have engaged in egregious misconduct.
One of the main papers behind the 97 percent claim is authored by John Cook, who runs the popular website SkepticalScience.com, a virtual encyclopedia of arguments trying to defend predictions of catastrophic climate change from all challenges.
Here is Cook’s summary of his paper: “Cook et al. (2013) found that over 97 percent [of papers he surveyed] endorsed the view that the Earth is warming up and human emissions of greenhouse gases are the main cause.”
This is a fairly clear statement—97 percent of the papers surveyed endorsed the view that man-made greenhouse gases were the main cause—main in common usage meaning more than 50 percent.
But even a quick scan of the paper reveals that this is not the case. Cook is able to demonstrate only that a relative handful endorse “the view that the Earth is warming up and human emissions of greenhouse gases are the main cause.” Cook calls this “explicit endorsement with quantification” (quantification meaning 50 percent or more). The problem is, only a small percentage of the papers fall into this category; Cook does not say what percentage, but when the study was publicly challenged by economist David Friedman, one observer calculated that only 1.6 percent explicitly stated that man-made greenhouse gases caused at least 50 percent of global warming.
Where did most of the 97 percent come from, then? Cook had created a category called “explicit endorsement without quantification”—that is, papers in which the author, by Cook’s admission, did not say whether 1 percent or 50 percent or 100 percent of the warming was caused by man. He had also created a category called “implicit endorsement,” for papers that imply (but don’t say) that there is some man-made global warming and don’t quantify it. In other words, he created two categories that he labeled as endorsing a view that they most certainly didn’t.
The 97 percent claim is a deliberate misrepresentation designed to intimidate the public—and numerous scientists whose papers were classified by Cook protested:
“Cook survey included 10 of my 122 eligible papers. 5/10 were rated incorrectly. 4/5 were rated as endorse rather than neutral.”
—Dr. Richard Tol
“That is not an accurate representation of my paper . . .”
—Dr. Craig Idso
“Nope . . . it is not an accurate representation.”
—Dr. Nir Shaviv
“Cook et al. (2013) is based on a strawman argument . . .”
—Dr. Nicola Scafetta
Think about how many times you hear that 97 percent or some similar figure thrown around. It’s based on crude manipulation propagated by people whose ideological agenda it serves. It is a license to intimidate.
'97% Of Climate Scientists Agree' Is 100% Wrong
Think about how many times you hear that 97 percent or some similar figure thrown around. It’s based on crude manipulation propagated by people whose ideological agenda it serves. It is a license to intimidate.www.forbes.com
Spoken like a true democratSorry I'm not going to engage any more of you climate change denial people. None of you are working with a full deck and your reasoning is circular. You make me dizzy with your illogic. Goodbye.
I rest my case...Have you taken a meteorology class ever? ... No? ... then why are you speaking? ...
=====
Pick any point on the surface of the Earth ...
• What was the climate 100 years ago ...
• What is the climate today ...
• What will the climate be in 100 years ...
If all three are the same, then climate isn't changing for that point ... and if this is true for all the points, then climate isn't changing anywhere ...
How can so many of you be this stupid? ...
C'mon ... just one [deleted] place where climate has changed ... [deleted] morons ...
EloquentI would prefer this to been seen over hundreds of thousands of years , and if not, millions of years. Trying to observe climate over 200 to 300 years is meaningless. How on earth can that be compared and contrasted anywhere throughout earth's history?
Lol @ Stann. We recognize your strategic retreat for what it is: Surrender. And that’s the first intelligent thing you’ve done to date on this topic. Adios.Sorry I'm not going to engage any more of you climate change denial people. None of you are working with a full deck and your reasoning is circular. You make me dizzy with your illogic. Goodbye.
Nobody denies climate science, you silly Canuck duck. Your idiotic claims about climate science, however, are certainly subject to being denied or at least challenged. Get over yourself.Denial of climate science is just another indication of how the norms of a democracy are one by one falling to the gradual fascist takeover.
Threats of murder are becoming more frequent, but for nothing more than political differences. America is preparing for the return of Trump but even without Trump, the groundwork is accomplished enough to make it happen.
The Scotus has been secured already and the abortion fight has been won by the extreme right.
While those who should be wide awake to the facts, have become powerless to stop it happening.
Spoken like a true democrat
I'm a 10th amendment guy so the abortion argument for climate change is wasted on me.Denial of climate science is just another indication of how the norms of a democracy are one by one falling to the gradual fascist takeover.
Threats of murder are becoming more frequent, but for nothing more than political differences. America is preparing for the return of Trump but even without Trump, the groundwork is accomplished enough to make it happen.
The Scotus has been secured already and the abortion fight has been won by the extreme right.
While those who should be wide awake to the facts, have become powerless to stop it happening.
Dogmatic consensusNobody denies climate science, you silly Canuck duck. Your idiotic claims about climate science, however, are certainly subject to being denied or at least challenged. Get over yourself.
Tebunginako, one of the islands in the island nation of Kiribati has totally disappeared because of rising sea Waters. I'd say that's a significant, detrimental change. Florida lost 5.4 billion in home values between 2005 and 2017 due to rising sea levels. Bangladesh is a heavily populated Nation that lies almost entirely on the Delta of the Ganges River, they are losing land daily and by 2050 11% of the nation will be gone. The side I logged onto has over 8,000 examples do you want more.Have you taken a meteorology class ever? ... No? ... then why are you speaking? ...
=====
Pick any point on the surface of the Earth ...
• What was the climate 100 years ago ...
• What is the climate today ...
• What will the climate be in 100 years ...
If all three are the same, then climate isn't changing for that point ... and if this is true for all the points, then climate isn't changing anywhere ...
How can so many of you be this stupid? ...
C'mon ... just one [deleted] place where climate has changed ... [deleted] morons ...
You are a total idiot.Nobody denies climate science, you silly Canuck duck. Your idiotic claims about climate science, however, are certainly subject to being denied or at least challenged. Get over yourself.
No ma’am. You are, though.You are a total idiot.
Non est dingus responsione. Vale stultus.No ma’am. You are, though.
