Pollution, climate change, or control?

[washamericom]

trying to understand what is really behind the left's obsession with "man made climate change".

If its reducing man made pollution, I am all in with them. So are 99% of the people of planet earth.

If its an unproven link between pollution and climate, its bunk and not necessary----- if the goal is reducing pollution

If its controlling human activity, which I believe it is, then they can stick it where the sun never shines.
Liberals seem to think that they know how the rest of us should live and want to force us to live as they dictate, where to set our thermostats, what kind of light bulbs, what kind of cars, what kind of food, how our power is generated, where we can travel, and what we must believe---------------because they have all the answers and they are always right.

Listen libs, pollution is bad, everyone wants to stop pollution. You don't need a fake link between pollution and climate to make the case for stopping pollution. Soooooooooo, your real issue has to be control of the actions of others.

Comments?

doesnt the shifting positions/angles of the sun have anything to do with climate change? so the white man is making the sun get closer to earth?

Whatever you are smoking, best dial the amount back a bit. You might want, when in a better mental state, to look us Milankovic Cycles.

Yes, the climate of earth is changing, it has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now. Man has never had anything to do with it, and short or all out nuclear war, never will.

Sunspots, a slight wobble on earth's axis, changes in ocean currents----------affect climate, but soccer moms driving big SUVs don't.

i guess one of my main objections is why would they have to get caught cooking the numbers if they were all that great to begin with. it's been politicized, to keep high paying jobs for academic societies, like government research and institutions of higher learning. carbon credits are scary.

its about money and control. nothing more

pretty much, prestige and job security, and that warm fuzzy feelin' they get when they are "helping the earth". heh

 

[BlindBoo]

it was virtually the same % as far back as we can determine using scientific methods, ice cores, etc.

Except that it's not. Before the industrial revolution the % was .028. Now it's above .04. Burning fossil fuels is the cause for the rise.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

trying to understand what is really behind the left's obsession with "man made climate change".

If its reducing man made pollution, I am all in with them. So are 99% of the people of planet earth.

If its an unproven link between pollution and climate, its bunk and not necessary----- if the goal is reducing pollution

If its controlling human activity, which I believe it is, then they can stick it where the sun never shines.
Liberals seem to think that they know how the rest of us should live and want to force us to live as they dictate, where to set our thermostats, what kind of light bulbs, what kind of cars, what kind of food, how our power is generated, where we can travel, and what we must believe---------------because they have all the answers and they are always right.

Listen libs, pollution is bad, everyone wants to stop pollution. You don't need a fake link between pollution and climate to make the case for stopping pollution. Soooooooooo, your real issue has to be control of the actions of others.

Comments?

When it comes down to it reduction of pollution and respect for our environment is all we can really do. It doesn't matter if there is a link between mans actions and climate change. We should all be able to agree that the cleaner we live the better for all.

Now yes, there are wingnuts on the left that point to doomsday and want too much government control/regulations over our daily lives... and there are rightwing nuts that focus on discrediting all environmental discussion because they don't really give a shit what they do as long as they can make a buck. I believe the majority of people fall in the middle. They don't want big business and our government destroying our habitat, they support development of clean energy methods, they support infrastructure that keeps our water and air clean, and they support better education about environmental issues.

It would be great to have a constructive discussion about the best ways to move forward without the voices of the wingnuts taking over.

Right now, solar and wind are the cheapest form of generation by kw delivered. And continuing to get cheaper. And at the same time, the technology for building affordable grid scale batteries is already here, with some being installed as we post. That make wind and solar 24/7. So we will see renewables win out because of economics, not ideology.

In the meantime, we know that the GHGs increase the temperature of our atmosphere and ocean. And that increase will have some very definate negative effects. Just how serous those will be, we don't know yet. We have not been down this road before.

This has been happening for over millions of years. We are but a pinprick. To suggest otherwise is pure arrogance.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

well said sir. global warming is an excuse so hyper liberals can act histrionic.
i hate to say it, but it was on it's way to being like scientology, which actually has more correct facts up to and including xenu.

climate deniers....imagine that....... that's how it starts.
but, luckily, like the march toward socialism, it's dead.
Trump won't allow hard earned tax money to be wasted on nefarious science.

Why do you think climate science is nefarious?

great question. it's tainted by and for a liberal agenda. it's a way to control people and on a world scale. it's about money too, and lot's of it. the science it's self has been cooked, embellished, in some cases invented. the idea of controlling the weather is preposterous, that we can somehow stop hurricanes and tornados by not burning coal is outrageous. the global community has hijacked people's good spirit toward environment, everyone wants a greener earth.

if you really dig into it, for instance CO2 or vapors as "greenhouse gases".

it's a mantra that started out with shivering polar bears stranded on a piece of floating ice. over the years it progressed to climate deniers should be persecuted. the science was wrong when al gore invented this "crisis", and it's wrong today. there was never a consensus.

the underlying tone is inherently evil/insidious, because the premise is pinned to taking people's hard earned money and wasting it on chasing windmills.

all i'm saying is let's secure the borders, stop inner city genocide fix some bridges, before we obsess over the pie in the sky, and how we decide how many blue sky days we want. that technology is a wayoff.

nice summary. what's really happening is that liberals are losing on every front and are getting desperate. Desperate people lie, cheat, loot, burn, and riot. They also demonize anyone who dares speak out against their screwed up view of the world. The Berkeley riots are a perfect example. Shut down with violence anyone who does not agree with you. Hitler did it, Mao did it, Stalin did it. If Hillary had won, she would be doing it.

i agree, colleges like berkeley are so cloistered, they will end up being the steam release valve for some of the battles. liberals will protest, even without a cause.

If Students Aren't Paid, They're Not Worth Anything

Replace the obsolete aristocratic university with highly paid professional training or else its entitled predatory politics will continue. Being paid a salary will attract the talented from all classes and eliminate the present dominance by the spoiled, sheltered, and pushy snobs (although "snobes" or "snoobs" might be a useful way of making fun of the Trustfundie Treehuggers).

 

[Redfish]

it was virtually the same % as far back as we can determine using scientific methods, ice cores, etc.

Except that it's not. Before the industrial revolution the % was .028. Now it's above .04. Burning fossil fuels is the cause for the rise.

do you understand what a small number .039% is? less than half of 1%. And now you are claiming that a tiny increase in that is changing the climate of the entire planet and that its all the result of burning fossil fuels? Do you understand that one volcanic eruption could cause a temporary increase much larger than that?

AGW is bunk science. its a hoax. Most of the world is waking up to the fraud.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Reducing pollution is one thing, that's a good thing to do.

Making crazy rules in the name of CO2 production is/was a wealth redistribution scheme.

Obama was crowing about "global warming" as he streaked to the conference in Air Force 1.

 

[Slade3200]

well said sir. global warming is an excuse so hyper liberals can act histrionic.
i hate to say it, but it was on it's way to being like scientology, which actually has more correct facts up to and including xenu.

climate deniers....imagine that....... that's how it starts.
but, luckily, like the march toward socialism, it's dead.
Trump won't allow hard earned tax money to be wasted on nefarious science.

Why do you think climate science is nefarious?

great question. it's tainted by and for a liberal agenda. it's a way to control people and on a world scale. it's about money too, and lot's of it. the science it's self has been cooked, embellished, in some cases invented. the idea of controlling the weather is preposterous, that we can somehow stop hurricanes and tornados by not burning coal is outrageous. the global community has hijacked people's good spirit toward environment, everyone wants a greener earth, not just liberals.

if you really dig into it, for instance CO2 or vapors as "greenhouse gases". their quantity and effect has been overblown.

it's a mantra that started out with shivering polar bears stranded on a piece of floating ice. over the years it progressed to climate deniers should be persecuted. the science was wrong when al gore invented this "crisis", and it's wrong today. there was never a consensus.

the underlying tone is inherently evil/insidious, because the premise is pinned to taking people's hard earned money and wasting it on chasing windmills.

all i'm saying is let's secure the borders, stop inner city genocide fix some bridges, before we obsess over the pie in the sky, and how we decide how many blue sky days we want. that technology is a wayoff.

Your theory might be more believable if it was a handful of scientists or agencies that were giving these "false reports" that you speak of, against opposing reports from the majority of the scientific community. However, it is the opposite of that. The majority of the scientific community and the majority of leading countries in the word all agree about the threat that our changing climate is causing. The so called climate deniers, all use the same talking points trying to point the discussion to a "governemnt control" thing.

In reality we should all be working towards a cleaner environment. Im a small government guy and don't want them all over my life, i've also been very frustrated by extreme environmental groups and the obstruction they bring to progress in our communities. But there can be a simple compromise by recognizing that climate issues are a threat to our society and working together on common sense policies to help take care of our land, water and air in a way that make sense. We have a democracy so there will always be arguments on both sides. But lets at least work on the problems and discuss the issue rather that going all in to completely discredit the other side. That is simply counter productive.

 

[BlindBoo]

it was virtually the same % as far back as we can determine using scientific methods, ice cores, etc.

Except that it's not. Before the industrial revolution the % was .028. Now it's above .04. Burning fossil fuels is the cause for the rise.

do you understand what a small number .039% is? less than half of 1%. And now you are claiming that a tiny increase in that is changing the climate of the entire planet and that its all the result of burning fossil fuels? Do you understand that one volcanic eruption could cause a temporary increase much larger than that?

AGW is bunk science. its a hoax. Most of the world is waking up to the fraud.

Your claim was that the % has virtually not change as far back as we can determine. That is provably false. That's over a 40% increase due to mankind's burning of fossil fuels.

 

[BluesLegend]

trying to understand what is really behind the left's obsession with "man made climate change".

Climate change is just the latest in a LONG string of schemes the left has invented to attack their mortal enemy, corporations.

Before that it was a hole in the ozone layer, global cooling, deformed frogs, the spotted owl, the delta smelt, the list is endless.

 

[mamooth]

This has been happening for over millions of years. We are but a pinprick. To suggest otherwise is pure arrogance.

"Because I say so!" is not regarded as good science, except by your cult.

The data says you are totally wrong. To any rational person, that should end the discussion. Alas, in the Trump post-truth era, data is a liberal conspiracy, and it has to take a backseat to conservative feelings.

 

[mamooth]

do you understand what a small number .039% is? less than half of 1%.

Nice, you can do math. What's that got to do with the well-established fact that even tiny traces of CO2 will absorb infrared radiation?

Put a drop of black ink in a glass of water. The ink concentration will be around the same concentration as CO2 in the atmosphere, yet that trace of ink will block all visible light. According to your "a trace can't have any effect" theory, that can't happen. But it does, so your theory is plainly total crap.

And now you are claiming that a tiny increase in that is changing the climate of the entire planet and that its all the result of burning fossil fuels?

We're not claiming it. We're pointing out that the directly measured data shows it's happening.

Do you understand that one volcanic eruption could cause a temporary increase much larger than that?

Do you understand that's a big ol' lie that you cult fed you? CO2 emitted by volcanoes is about 1% as much as the CO2 emitted by human activity.

AGW is bunk science. its a hoax. Most of the world is waking up to the fraud.

You've been lied to by your cult leaders. At this stage, you have a choice. You can take them to task and demand to know why they lied to you, or you can fall to your knees, lick their boots with even more fervor, and beg for more lies. We all know you'll choose the latter option.

 

[Slade3200]

trying to understand what is really behind the left's obsession with "man made climate change".

Climate change is just the latest in a LONG string of schemes the left has invented to attack their mortal enemy, corporations.

Before that it was a hole in the ozone layer, global cooling, deformed frogs, the spotted owl, the delta smelt, the list is endless.

haha, that talking point has been repeated almost verbatim in this thread a few times now. Yall crack me up!

 

[mamooth]

its about money and control. nothing more

True. And all of the corrupting money is on the conservative denier side.

All of the denier spokespeople are paid shills. None of the real scientists are. Any scientist could quickly get rich by lying for the deniers, yet they maintain their integrity and refuse the denier bribe money. That gives the scientists added credibility.

Ask yourself this. Which is more likely?

A. You screwed up.

B. A Vast Secret Global Socialist Plot composed of millions of people exists, yet none of them are talking.

Those who aren't consumed with overwhelming narcissism will say that option "A" is more likely to be true. Get over yourself. You do not know more than the entire planet just because you read a propaganda story on a kook blog.

 

[BluesLegend]

trying to understand what is really behind the left's obsession with "man made climate change".

Climate change is just the latest in a LONG string of schemes the left has invented to attack their mortal enemy, corporations.

Before that it was a hole in the ozone layer, global cooling, deformed frogs, the spotted owl, the delta smelt, the list is endless.

haha, that talking point has been repeated almost verbatim in this thread a few times now. Yall crack me up!

We noticed you did not deny any of those prior schemes, I think we all know why.

 

[Slade3200]

trying to understand what is really behind the left's obsession with "man made climate change".

Climate change is just the latest in a LONG string of schemes the left has invented to attack their mortal enemy, corporations.

Before that it was a hole in the ozone layer, global cooling, deformed frogs, the spotted owl, the delta smelt, the list is endless.

haha, that talking point has been repeated almost verbatim in this thread a few times now. Yall crack me up!

We noticed you did not deny any of those prior schemes, I think we all know why.

Yes, because it is a waste of my time. You make claims based on partisan assumptions not facts so whats the point on arguing motives that you assign to your opponents. If you want to talk about something real then let me know otherwise don't waste my time with this BS.

 

[BluesLegend]

trying to understand what is really behind the left's obsession with "man made climate change".

Climate change is just the latest in a LONG string of schemes the left has invented to attack their mortal enemy, corporations.

Before that it was a hole in the ozone layer, global cooling, deformed frogs, the spotted owl, the delta smelt, the list is endless.

haha, that talking point has been repeated almost verbatim in this thread a few times now. Yall crack me up!

We noticed you did not deny any of those prior schemes, I think we all know why.

Yes, because it is a waste of my time. You make claims based on partisan assumptions not facts so whats the point on arguing motives that you assign to your opponents. If you want to talk about something real then let me know otherwise don't waste my time with this BS.

You are a liar. The liberal hole in the ozone layer hysteria is FACT. Liberals hyperventilating about deformed frogs is FACT. Liberals using the spotted owl to destroy the timber industry and liberals pounding iron spikes into trees injuring timber workers is FACT. Go lick your wounds liberal liar.

 

[Slade3200]

trying to understand what is really behind the left's obsession with "man made climate change".

Climate change is just the latest in a LONG string of schemes the left has invented to attack their mortal enemy, corporations.

Before that it was a hole in the ozone layer, global cooling, deformed frogs, the spotted owl, the delta smelt, the list is endless.

haha, that talking point has been repeated almost verbatim in this thread a few times now. Yall crack me up!

We noticed you did not deny any of those prior schemes, I think we all know why.

Yes, because it is a waste of my time. You make claims based on partisan assumptions not facts so whats the point on arguing motives that you assign to your opponents. If you want to talk about something real then let me know otherwise don't waste my time with this BS.

You are a liar. The liberal hole in the ozone layer hysteria is FACT. Liberals hyperventilating about deformed frogs is FACT. Liberals using the spotted owl to destroy the timber industry and liberals pounding iron spikes into trees injuring timber workers is FACT. Go lick your wounds liberal liar.

Im breathing just fine... There may be a few wingnuts chained to trees doing what you speak of but who gives a shit about that... they don't represent the mass majority of environmentally conscious people.

 

[washamericom]

well said sir. global warming is an excuse so hyper liberals can act histrionic.
i hate to say it, but it was on it's way to being like scientology, which actually has more correct facts up to and including xenu.

climate deniers....imagine that....... that's how it starts.
but, luckily, like the march toward socialism, it's dead.
Trump won't allow hard earned tax money to be wasted on nefarious science.

Why do you think climate science is nefarious?

great question. it's tainted by and for a liberal agenda. it's a way to control people and on a world scale. it's about money too, and lot's of it. the science it's self has been cooked, embellished, in some cases invented. the idea of controlling the weather is preposterous, that we can somehow stop hurricanes and tornados by not burning coal is outrageous. the global community has hijacked people's good spirit toward environment, everyone wants a greener earth, not just liberals.

if you really dig into it, for instance CO2 or vapors as "greenhouse gases". their quantity and effect has been overblown.

it's a mantra that started out with shivering polar bears stranded on a piece of floating ice. over the years it progressed to climate deniers should be persecuted. the science was wrong when al gore invented this "crisis", and it's wrong today. there was never a consensus.

the underlying tone is inherently evil/insidious, because the premise is pinned to taking people's hard earned money and wasting it on chasing windmills.

all i'm saying is let's secure the borders, stop inner city genocide fix some bridges, before we obsess over the pie in the sky, and how we decide how many blue sky days we want. that technology is a wayoff.

Your theory might be more believable if it was a handful of scientists or agencies that were giving these "false reports" that you speak of, against opposing reports from the majority of the scientific community. However, it is the opposite of that. The majority of the scientific community and the majority of leading countries in the word all agree about the threat that our changing climate is causing. The so called climate deniers, all use the same talking points trying to point the discussion to a "governemnt control" thing.

In reality we should all be working towards a cleaner environment. Im a small government guy and don't want them all over my life, i've also been very frustrated by extreme environmental groups and the obstruction they bring to progress in our communities. But there can be a simple compromise by recognizing that climate issues are a threat to our society and working together on common sense policies to help take care of our land, water and air in a way that make sense. We have a democracy so there will always be arguments on both sides. But lets at least work on the problems and discuss the issue rather that going all in to completely discredit the other side. That is simply counter productive.

i'm talking about nasa too, not some obscure science agency. al gore and nasa.

there is a lot of disagreement. i resent when people say, it's settled. it's as settled as the weather.
"no more discussion is necessary", is over the top and a huge red flag.

it's believable all right.


NASA Exposed in 'Massive' New Climate Data Fraud - Principia ...
principia-scientific.org/nasa-exposed-in-massive-new-climate-data-fraud/
Nov 24, 2015 - Veteran award-winning journalist Günter Ederer reports of a shocking new global warming data fraud in NASA's global temperature data series ...
Fox's Doocy: NASA fudged data to make the case for global warming ...
www.politifact.com/.../statements/.../foxs-doocy-nasa-fudged-data-make-case-global-...
Jun 25, 2014 - A reader wondered if NASA really did cook the books (we love reader ... Anthony Watts, a popular skeptic of most climate change data, posted ...
100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering | The ...
https://realclimatescience.com/2016/.../100-of-us-warming-is-due-to-noaa-data-tamperin...
Dec 28, 2016 - NOAA is adjusting the data to match global warming theory. ... Gavin Schmidt at NASAexplains very clearly why the US temperature record does not need to be ... NASA – NASA Climatologist Gavin Schmidt Discusses the Surface ..... The 97% Cook Consensus – when will Environ Res Letters retract it?

 

[Marion Morrison]

trying to understand what is really behind the left's obsession with "man made climate change".

Climate change is just the latest in a LONG string of schemes the left has invented to attack their mortal enemy, corporations.

Before that it was a hole in the ozone layer, global cooling, deformed frogs, the spotted owl, the delta smelt, the list is endless.

haha, that talking point has been repeated almost verbatim in this thread a few times now. Yall crack me up!

We noticed you did not deny any of those prior schemes, I think we all know why.

Yes, because it is a waste of my time. You make claims based on partisan assumptions not facts so whats the point on arguing motives that you assign to your opponents. If you want to talk about something real then let me know otherwise don't waste my time with this BS.

You are a liar. The liberal hole in the ozone layer hysteria is FACT. Liberals hyperventilating about deformed frogs is FACT. Liberals using the spotted owl to destroy the timber industry and liberals pounding iron spikes into trees injuring timber workers is FACT. Go lick your wounds liberal liar.

I agree with that, except it's not liberals, it's leftists.

 

[washamericom]

This has been happening for over millions of years. We are but a pinprick. To suggest otherwise is pure arrogance.

"Because I say so!" is not regarded as good science, except by your cult.

The data says you are totally wrong. To any rational person, that should end the discussion. Alas, in the Trump post-truth era, data is a liberal conspiracy, and it has to take a backseat to conservative feelings.

your suggesting obama as some sort of "truth era" ? heh.

the argument is complicated, not settled.