Is Trump Biodegradable?

[schmidlap]

Of course, ones hope so, but Trump has been resolute and relentless in his denial and defiance of accepted science, especially medical and environmental. He dismisses experts in every academic discipline if their empirical data conflicts with his irrational dogma.

Putting aside the comfort that human biology affords us in this matter, the cost of imposed and enforced ignorance in anthropogenic climate change will be monumental, compounded by the human suffering that will, inevitably, result from Trump’s contempt for science and love of dirty fuels.

​

There is virtual global consensus among the most qualified in climatology, but that expert unanimity is treated with contempt by Trump because many of those experts are foreign, from all parts of the globe, and acknowledged by every other nation on earth.

​

When the Trump regime declared two weeks ago that it would largely disregard the economic cost of climate change as it sets policies and regulations, it was just the latest step in a multi-pronged effort to erase global warming from the American agenda.​

​

But Trump is doing more than just turning a blind eye to the fact that the planet is growing hotter. He is weakening the country’s capacity to understand global warming and to prepare for its consequences.​

​

The administration has dismantled climate research, firing some of the nation’s top scientists, and gutted efforts to chart how fast greenhouse gases are building up in the atmosphere and what that means for the economy, employment, agriculture, health and other aspects of American society. The government will no longer track major sources of greenhouse gases, data that has been used to measure the scale and identify sources of the problem for the past 15 years.​

​

“We’re not doing that climate change, you know, crud, anymore,” Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins [a Trump sycophant with no climatological qualifications] told Fox Business on May 8…​

​

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/19/climate/trump-climate-denial.html​

​

Climate and environment updates:
Climate change adds month of extreme heat for 4 billion people

"She called science 'crud!'
I like that!"



​

 

[MarathonMike]

You can bow down to the Climate Change Alarmists if you want. The rest of us who actually think for ourselves reject the FAKE SCIENCE that you gobble up like a good goldfish.

 

[Manonthestreet]

You can bow down to the Climate Change Alarmists if you want. The rest of us who actually think for ourselves reject the FAKE SCIENCE that you gobble up like a good goldfish.

All about control.

 

[MarathonMike]

All about control.

It's been the same story for at least 2000 years. Control the masses first, then gain power and riches for yourself.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

the cost of imposed and enforced ignorance in anthropogenic climate change will be monumental,

Hilarious!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Of course, ones hope so, but Trump has been resolute and relentless in his denial and defiance of accepted science, especially medical and environmental. He dismisses experts in every academic discipline if their empirical data conflicts with his irrational dogma.

Putting aside the comfort that human biology affords us in this matter, the cost of imposed and enforced ignorance in anthropogenic climate change will be monumental, compounded by the human suffering that will, inevitably, result from Trump’s contempt for science and love of dirty fuels.

View attachment 1120474
​

There is virtual global consensus among the most qualified in climatology, but that expert unanimity is treated with contempt by Trump because many of those experts are foreign, from all parts of the globe, and acknowledged by every other nation on earth.

​

When the Trump regime declared two weeks ago that it would largely disregard the economic cost of climate change as it sets policies and regulations, it was just the latest step in a multi-pronged effort to erase global warming from the American agenda.​

​

But Trump is doing more than just turning a blind eye to the fact that the planet is growing hotter. He is weakening the country’s capacity to understand global warming and to prepare for its consequences.​

​

The administration has dismantled climate research, firing some of the nation’s top scientists, and gutted efforts to chart how fast greenhouse gases are building up in the atmosphere and what that means for the economy, employment, agriculture, health and other aspects of American society. The government will no longer track major sources of greenhouse gases, data that has been used to measure the scale and identify sources of the problem for the past 15 years.​

​

“We’re not doing that climate change, you know, crud, anymore,” Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins [a Trump sycophant with no climatological qualifications] told Fox Business on May 8…​

​

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/19/climate/trump-climate-denial.html​

​

Climate and environment updates:
Climate change adds month of extreme heat for 4 billion people

View attachment 1120482
"She called science 'crud!'
I like that!"



​

There is virtual global consensus among the most qualified in climatology, but that expert unanimity is treated with contempt by Trump

Why do you feel the "climatologists" have a clue about economics?

 

[1srelluc]

Truth be told the sane reject the CC hoax.

The same as thinking faggotry is "normal".

OP is coming up zeros again.

 

[schmidlap]

There is virtual global consensus among the most qualified in climatology, but that expert unanimity is treated with contempt by Trump

Why do you feel the "climatologists" have a clue about economics?

I reference economists who study the impact of climate change on the economy for the impact of climate change on the economy. E,g., The global economic costs of climate change inaction

What is amusing is that the empirical data that is compiled and analyzed by climatologists is cherry-picked by the science-deniers when those most qualified to analyze it recognize that the data needs to be holistic, integrated into the comprehensive data to provide a valid assessment.

The deniers insist on feeling up elephants.

 

[Meathead]

Of course, ones hope so, but Trump has been resolute and relentless in his denial and defiance of accepted science, especially medical and environmental. He dismisses experts in every academic discipline if their empirical data conflicts with his irrational dogma.

Putting aside the comfort that human biology affords us in this matter, the cost of imposed and enforced ignorance in anthropogenic climate change will be monumental, compounded by the human suffering that will, inevitably, result from Trump’s contempt for science and love of dirty fuels.

View attachment 1120474
​

There is virtual global consensus among the most qualified in climatology, but that expert unanimity is treated with contempt by Trump because many of those experts are foreign, from all parts of the globe, and acknowledged by every other nation on earth.

​

When the Trump regime declared two weeks ago that it would largely disregard the economic cost of climate change as it sets policies and regulations, it was just the latest step in a multi-pronged effort to erase global warming from the American agenda.​

​

But Trump is doing more than just turning a blind eye to the fact that the planet is growing hotter. He is weakening the country’s capacity to understand global warming and to prepare for its consequences.​

​

The administration has dismantled climate research, firing some of the nation’s top scientists, and gutted efforts to chart how fast greenhouse gases are building up in the atmosphere and what that means for the economy, employment, agriculture, health and other aspects of American society. The government will no longer track major sources of greenhouse gases, data that has been used to measure the scale and identify sources of the problem for the past 15 years.​

​

“We’re not doing that climate change, you know, crud, anymore,” Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins [a Trump sycophant with no climatological qualifications] told Fox Business on May 8…​

​

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/19/climate/trump-climate-denial.html​

​

Climate and environment updates:
Climate change adds month of extreme heat for 4 billion people

View attachment 1120482
"She called science 'crud!'
I like that!"



​

The question is if Pelosi is biodegradable since I don't believe Botox is.

 

[schmidlap]

The question is if Pelosi is biodegradable since I don't believe Botox is.

You can contemplate Pelosi to your heart's content, but you do understand that climate change is not created by the Chinese to make American manufacturing non-competitive, I hope.

 

[whitehall]

The faction of society that can't define a woman and claims that global warming is the source of all disasters now accuses Trump of being a science denier. Things must be getting desperate in TDS land.

 

[Meathead]

You can contemplate Pelosi to your heart's content, but you do understand that climate change is not created by the Chinese to make American manufacturing non-competitive, I hope.

You brought up biodegradability. Now if you dug up Pelosi ten years after she dies she would look exactly the same, except for maybe her eyes.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I reference economists who study the impact of climate change on the economy for the impact of climate change on the economy. E,g., The global economic costs of climate change inaction

What is amusing is that the empirical data that is compiled and analyzed by climatologists is cherry-picked by the science-deniers when those most qualified to analyze it recognize that the data needs to be holistic, integrated into the comprehensive data to provide a valid assessment.

The deniers insist on feeling up elephants.

Fake economic forecasts based on fake climate forecasts?
Awesome!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I reference economists who study the impact of climate change on the economy for the impact of climate change on the economy. E,g., The global economic costs of climate change inaction

What is amusing is that the empirical data that is compiled and analyzed by climatologists is cherry-picked by the science-deniers when those most qualified to analyze it recognize that the data needs to be holistic, integrated into the comprehensive data to provide a valid assessment.

The deniers insist on feeling up elephants.

At the same time, erratic temperatures are wreaking havoc on production planning and output, especially in agriculture, mining, and construction (Kennet and Marwan 2015, Casanueva et al 2021).

Erratic? How erratic were temperatures in Europe in the 1200s? Link?

How many trillions do we need to spend to make things less "erratic"?

How will we know when we've done enough?

If we spend $2 trillion to reduce CO2 by quantity "X" and China boosts CO2
by 3"X", have we made a smart investment or a stupid investment?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You can contemplate Pelosi to your heart's content, but you do understand that climate change is not created by the Chinese to make American manufacturing non-competitive, I hope.

Stupid American policies to "fix" climate change do make American manufacturing non-competitive.

 

[schmidlap]

You brought up biodegradability. Now if you dug up Pelosi ten years after she dies she would look exactly the same, except for maybe her eyes.

I think that your fantasies concerning Nancy Pelosi are quite harmless, so enjoy yourself.

 

[Meathead]

I think that your fantasies concerning Nancy Pelosi are quite harmless, so enjoy yourself.

As are your fantasies about Trump, but see Pelosi is a thing of the past while Trump is still driving you nuts.

Pretty cool, eh?

 

[schmidlap]

Fake economic forecasts based on fake climate forecasts?
Awesome!

Why are the consensus of global climatologists and international scientific associations, and the recognition of its economic impact, "fake"?

Even if you must believe whatever Trump tells you, where is his data analysis and refutation?

 

[schmidlap]

At the same time, erratic temperatures are wreaking havoc on production planning and output, especially in agriculture, mining, and construction (Kennet and Marwan 2015, Casanueva et al 2021).

Erratic? How erratic were temperatures in Europe in the 1200s? Link?

How many trillions do we need to spend to make things less "erratic"?

How will we know when we've done enough?

If we spend $2 trillion to reduce CO2 by quantity "X" and China boosts CO2
by 3"X", have we made a smart investment or a stupid investment?

If you need to fantasize that the world's climatologists and scientific authorities are all complicit in a vast, pervasive and enduring conspiracy to challenge your conviction that you can poop into the heavens with impunity, you can agree with Trump that it is all part of a Chinese scam to make American manufacturing non-competitive, certainly.

 

[schmidlap]

As are your fantasies about Trump, but see Pelosi is a thing of the past while Trump is still driving you nuts.

Pretty cool, eh?

Why are you still pleasuring yourself with Pelosi when you have your Trump?