what do global warming people want ??

[washamericom]

this has become a most divisive political hot potato in America, and the world.

a couple of quick question please.

1. what do the global activists want to happen ? (specifically)

2. have people signed on to this without knowing anything about it ?


WASHINGTON — A majority of Republicans — including 54 percent of self-described conservative Republicans — believe the world’s climate is changing and that mankind plays some role in the change, according to anew survey conducted by three prominent Republican pollsters.



Democrats, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, have sought to paint Republicans who question climate change as deniers of science who are out of touch with the mainstream.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/u...-majority-believe-in-climate-change.html?_r=0

to paraphrase neil degrasse Tyson, your "belief" doesn't matter. science exists whether you believe in it or not

i like him, but he also respects the nexus of faith science and religion, they can coexist. also, if our beliefs don't matter, what's the point of anything really.

i don't think global warming or climate change will amount to much now. there are so many more pressing things to worry about.

there has to be someone on this board that can speak to these charges of hoax, with math and physics. the warmalists are trying to seperate the scientists (e.g. the physicists from the climatologists... and so forth). that's odd. that and the idea they don't want any more discussion, that's a super red flag, especially coming from the left. gone are the days of question authority.

Do you question the authority of:

- the law of gravity
- the Earth revolves around the sun
- germs cause disease and we can't see them with the naked eye
- the Earth is 4.5 billion years old
- the moon revolves around the Earth
- we can split the atom

If you are REALLY looking for the facts about Global Warming, do so at your local university. Any number of physicists, chemists, geologists, climatologists, oceanographers, and biologists will explain it to you.

THERE ISN'T ANY DEBATE AMONG SCIENTISTS ANYMORE, THAT ENDED 15 YEARS AGO. THEY DEBATED AND DISCUSSED IT FOR THE LAST 100 YEARS AND THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED.

See why there is no discussion? Its because there is no discussion among the scientists of the world. They settled it and agree.

You can debate the law of gravity with people all you want, and that would qualify as discussion. But if you come to any conclusion that the law of gravity is wrong the discussion is meaningless. The discussion is settled already.

The denier cult is beginning to fade out as reality begins to set in for the human race. And the people that propped up the phoney hoax crap, the Koch brothers and the fossil fuel industry, will likely face charges for crimes against humanity at some point. This is no game.

man you are off the charts, i'm glad you're here.
i'd like to hear your take on the revelation.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

this has become a most divisive political hot potato in America, and the world.

a couple of quick question please.

1. what do the global activists want to happen ? (specifically)

2. have people signed on to this without knowing anything about it ?


WASHINGTON — A majority of Republicans — including 54 percent of self-described conservative Republicans — believe the world’s climate is changing and that mankind plays some role in the change, according to anew survey conducted by three prominent Republican pollsters.



Democrats, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, have sought to paint Republicans who question climate change as deniers of science who are out of touch with the mainstream.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/u...-majority-believe-in-climate-change.html?_r=0

to paraphrase neil degrasse Tyson, your "belief" doesn't matter. science exists whether you believe in it or not

i like him, but he also respects the nexus of faith science and religion, they can coexist. also, if our beliefs don't matter, what's the point of anything really.

i don't think global warming or climate change will amount to much now. there are so many more pressing things to worry about.

there has to be someone on this board that can speak to these charges of hoax, with math and physics. the warmalists are trying to seperate the scientists (e.g. the physicists from the climatologists... and so forth). that's odd. that and the idea they don't want any more discussion, that's a super red flag, especially coming from the left. gone are the days of question authority.

Do you question the authority of:

- the law of gravity
- the Earth revolves around the sun
- germs cause disease and we can't see them with the naked eye
- the Earth is 4.5 billion years old
- the moon revolves around the Earth
- we can split the atom

If you are REALLY looking for the facts about Global Warming, do so at your local university. Any number of physicists, chemists, geologists, climatologists, oceanographers, and biologists will explain it to you.

THERE ISN'T ANY DEBATE AMONG SCIENTISTS ANYMORE, THAT ENDED 15 YEARS AGO. THEY DEBATED AND DISCUSSED IT FOR THE LAST 100 YEARS AND THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED.

See why there is no discussion? Its because there is no discussion among the scientists of the world. They settled it and agree.

You can debate the law of gravity with people all you want, and that would qualify as discussion. But if you come to any conclusion that the law of gravity is wrong the discussion is meaningless. The discussion is settled already.

The denier cult is beginning to fade out as reality begins to set in for the human race. And the people that propped up the phoney hoax crap, the Koch brothers and the fossil fuel industry, will likely face charges for crimes against humanity at some point. This is no game.

Nothing is settled.

 

[washamericom]

this has become a most divisive political hot potato in America, and the world.

a couple of quick question please.

1. what do the global activists want to happen ? (specifically)

2. have people signed on to this without knowing anything about it ?


WASHINGTON — A majority of Republicans — including 54 percent of self-described conservative Republicans — believe the world’s climate is changing and that mankind plays some role in the change, according to anew survey conducted by three prominent Republican pollsters.



Democrats, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, have sought to paint Republicans who question climate change as deniers of science who are out of touch with the mainstream.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/u...-majority-believe-in-climate-change.html?_r=0

to paraphrase neil degrasse Tyson, your "belief" doesn't matter. science exists whether you believe in it or not

i like him, but he also respects the nexus of faith science and religion, they can coexist. also, if our beliefs don't matter, what's the point of anything really.

i don't think global warming or climate change will amount to much now. there are so many more pressing things to worry about.

there has to be someone on this board that can speak to these charges of hoax, with math and physics. the warmalists are trying to seperate the scientists (e.g. the physicists from the climatologists... and so forth). that's odd. that and the idea they don't want any more discussion, that's a super red flag, especially coming from the left. gone are the days of question authority.

Do you question the authority of:

- the law of gravity
- the Earth revolves around the sun
- germs cause disease and we can't see them with the naked eye
- the Earth is 4.5 billion years old
- the moon revolves around the Earth
- we can split the atom

If you are REALLY looking for the facts about Global Warming, do so at your local university. Any number of physicists, chemists, geologists, climatologists, oceanographers, and biologists will explain it to you.

THERE ISN'T ANY DEBATE AMONG SCIENTISTS ANYMORE, THAT ENDED 15 YEARS AGO. THEY DEBATED AND DISCUSSED IT FOR THE LAST 100 YEARS AND THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED.

See why there is no discussion? Its because there is no discussion among the scientists of the world. They settled it and agree.

You can debate the law of gravity with people all you want, and that would qualify as discussion. But if you come to any conclusion that the law of gravity is wrong the discussion is meaningless. The discussion is settled already.

The denier cult is beginning to fade out as reality begins to set in for the human race. And the people that propped up the phoney hoax crap, the Koch brothers and the fossil fuel industry, will likely face charges for crimes against humanity at some point. This is no game.

Nothing is settled.

i agree, merely glossed over.

 

[jillian]

this has become a most divisive political hot potato in America, and the world.

a couple of quick question please.

1. what do the global activists want to happen ? (specifically)

2. have people signed on to this without knowing anything about it ?


WASHINGTON — A majority of Republicans — including 54 percent of self-described conservative Republicans — believe the world’s climate is changing and that mankind plays some role in the change, according to anew survey conducted by three prominent Republican pollsters.



Democrats, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, have sought to paint Republicans who question climate change as deniers of science who are out of touch with the mainstream.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/u...-majority-believe-in-climate-change.html?_r=0

to paraphrase neil degrasse Tyson, your "belief" doesn't matter. science exists whether you believe in it or not

i like him, but he also respects the nexus of faith science and religion, they can coexist. also, if our beliefs don't matter, what's the point of anything really.

i don't think global warming or climate change will amount to much now. there are so many more pressing things to worry about.

there has to be someone on this board that can speak to these charges of hoax, with math and physics. the warmalists are trying to seperate the scientists (e.g. the physicists from the climatologists... and so forth). that's odd. that and the idea they don't want any more discussion, that's a super red flag, especially coming from the left. gone are the days of question authority.

Do you question the authority of:

- the law of gravity
- the Earth revolves around the sun
- germs cause disease and we can't see them with the naked eye
- the Earth is 4.5 billion years old
- the moon revolves around the Earth
- we can split the atom

If you are REALLY looking for the facts about Global Warming, do so at your local university. Any number of physicists, chemists, geologists, climatologists, oceanographers, and biologists will explain it to you.

THERE ISN'T ANY DEBATE AMONG SCIENTISTS ANYMORE, THAT ENDED 15 YEARS AGO. THEY DEBATED AND DISCUSSED IT FOR THE LAST 100 YEARS AND THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED.

See why there is no discussion? Its because there is no discussion among the scientists of the world. They settled it and agree.

You can debate the law of gravity with people all you want, and that would qualify as discussion. But if you come to any conclusion that the law of gravity is wrong the discussion is meaningless. The discussion is settled already.

The denier cult is beginning to fade out as reality begins to set in for the human race. And the people that propped up the phoney hoax crap, the Koch brothers and the fossil fuel industry, will likely face charges for crimes against humanity at some point. This is no game.

Nothing is settled.

i agree, merely glossed over.

there is no dispute based on current scientific knowledge.

how's that?

 

[sealybobo]

this has become a most divisive political hot potato in America, and the world.

a couple of quick question please.

1. what do the global activists want to happen ? (specifically)

2. have people signed on to this without knowing anything about it ?


WASHINGTON — A majority of Republicans — including 54 percent of self-described conservative Republicans — believe the world’s climate is changing and that mankind plays some role in the change, according to anew survey conducted by three prominent Republican pollsters.



Democrats, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, have sought to paint Republicans who question climate change as deniers of science who are out of touch with the mainstream.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/u...-majority-believe-in-climate-change.html?_r=0

We want zero carbon by 2050

 

[Unkotare]

....
We want zero carbon by 2050

Too bad, you're not getting it.

 

[IsaacNewton]

....
We want zero carbon by 2050

Too bad, you're not getting it.

You sound like your 13.

 

[sealybobo]

....
We want zero carbon by 2050

Too bad, you're not getting it.

You sound like your 13.

Unkotard has never added one thing to a conversation on usmb other than to chime in and tell you he doesn't like your opinion. But what's his opinion? All I know is he disagrees with everything I say.

A true conservative prick. An asshole.

 

[IsaacNewton]

....
We want zero carbon by 2050

Too bad, you're not getting it.

You sound like your 13.

Unkotard has never added one thing to a conversation on usmb other than to chime in and tell you he doesn't like your opinion. But what's his opinion? All I know is he disagrees with everything I say.

A true conservative prick. An asshole.

Yeah he seems to be a stone thrower, hides in the basement and throws rocks out the little open window down there at people that pass by.

 

[sealybobo]

....
We want zero carbon by 2050

Too bad, you're not getting it.

You sound like your 13.

Unkotard has never added one thing to a conversation on usmb other than to chime in and tell you he doesn't like your opinion. But what's his opinion? All I know is he disagrees with everything I say.

A true conservative prick. An asshole.

Yeah he seems to be a stone thrower, hides in the basement and throws rocks out the little open window down there at people that pass by.

Never says in detail why you're wrong. Never explains his position so I don't even treat him like a serious conservative worthy of conversation.

And still bitter his ancestors shared a cell with Sulu oh my

 

[sealybobo]

George takai

 

[Vigilante]

They want to CONTROL YOUR LIFE AND BUSINESS!

 

[Unkotare]

....
We want zero carbon by 2050

Too bad, you're not getting it.

You sound like your [sic] [ 13.

...

 

[Unkotare]

And still bitter his ancestors shared a cell with Sulu oh my

What the hell are you talking about, fish?

 

[mamooth]

What I believe is that the speeches given that day reflected what the scientists giving them believed was actual science.

Or perhaps they didn't believe it. Perhaps it was, as seems in hindsight most likely, all a political ruse right from the beginning.

Or perhaps your heard the conservative urban legends, and have adjusted your memories to fit in with your peers.

Earth Day 1970 wasn't talking about global warming or cooling. It was talking about air and water pollution, DDT, litter, recycling, nuclear power, poverty, the Viet Nam war. But climate, very little. Here's the original speech by Gaylord Nelson, founder of Earth day. Not a word about climate.

Gaylord Nelson's first Earth Day Speech

This long ABC video from the era shows some of the DC rally. Maybe you're in it. The only climate topic discussed (in the Boston rally) is a brief mention of concern with how the SST would increase stratospheric water vapor, which would cause ... warming.

Video: 4/22/1970: First Earth Day

After much searching, I can find many denier urban legends, but only one single person who actually talked about cooling. A professor of Zoology (with no climate science experience) named Kenneth E F Watt made a prediction of catastrophic cooling at a California Earth Day rally, claiming that smog and pollution would lead to cooling. Given that Kenneth E F Watt is currently a hardcore global warming denier, that confirms how failing at science is no impediment to success in Denierstan.

So, there are bits of climate talk going both ways at Earth Day 1970, but absolutely no evidence that everyone was predicting global cooling. That nonsense is entirely a denier urban legend.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

What I believe is that the speeches given that day reflected what the scientists giving them believed was actual science.

Or perhaps they didn't believe it. Perhaps it was, as seems in hindsight most likely, all a political ruse right from the beginning.

Or perhaps your heard the conservative urban legends, and have adjusted your memories to fit in with your peers.

Unlikely, as I have never been a conservative.

Earth Day 1970 wasn't talking about global warming or cooling. It was talking about air and water pollution, DDT, litter, recycling, nuclear power, poverty, the Viet Nam war. But climate, very little. Here's the original speech by Gaylord Nelson, founder of Earth day. Not a word about climate.

It was not "Gaylord Nelson Day". There were many speakers.

Question: Were you there?

This long ABC video from the era shows some of the DC rally. Maybe you're in it. The only climate topic discussed (in the Boston rally) is a brief mention of concern with how the SST would increase stratospheric water vapor, which would cause ... warming.

Nine minutes of an all day affair, loaded with crowd shots and stage acts. Not terribly efficient of you.

 

[SwimExpert]

You are tiring.

That's what happens when you get called out and you have nothing to support your position.

I know the science.

So then you're aware that the total "temperature record" is 100% inadequate to draw inferences about geologic timescale events, right?
You know that the concept of an "average global temperature" is pure bollocks, completely useless, and lacks the normal rigor of most scientific study, right?
You know that according to the data CO2 does not drive climate change and at best is merely one of several various feedbacks, right?
You know that the single most prominent contributor to the greenhouse effect is water vapor, right?
You know that the planet is currently in an ice age and that that ice age has probably been drawing to an end for thousands of years already, right?

It isn't brain surgery even though some aspects are complicated, the general idea is not.

Which really undercuts your who insistence that only scientists are capable of making sense of it and that we should simply accept their conclusions, without bothering to analyze the foundations upon which they claim to be built.

But more importantly, this statement underscores the fact that your entire position is based on looking for easy answers based on simple ideas. You don't know the science. You probably don't know any science at all. You just know what someone else told you. You've never once looked below the surface.

The fact that you would deny Global Warming is real and it is accelerating shows YOU do not know the science.

And this is a perfect example of how you've come to conclusions about my position without even knowing what it is!

I never denied the existence of global warming. Not once. I reject your alarmist hissy fits.

I don't want you to take my opinion. Go to your local university and talk to the geologists, chemists, and biologists there.

I've done even better than that. I've explored it for my own self. I've got a perfectly good brain, and a 99.8 percentile IQ. Science has always been my number one passion. I know more about this than you because I studied it for myself, where all you've done is read someone else's headlines.

 

[mamooth]

So then you're aware that the total "temperature record" is 100% inadequate to draw inferences about geologic timescale events, right?

Obviously not, being that's such an absurd claim.

You know that the concept of an "average global temperature" is pure bollocks, completely useless, and lacks the normal rigor of most scientific study, right?

No, because that's conspiracy nonsense.

You know that according to the data CO2 does not drive climate change and at best is merely one of several various feedbacks, right?

No, because the directly measured evidence says that's wrong.

You know that the single most prominent contributor to the greenhouse effect is water vapor, right?

Yes, and the level of water vapor is determined by the temperature, which is determined by the CO2. That's some major scientific ignorance you just displayed.

You know that the planet is currently in an ice age and that that ice age has probably been drawing to an end for thousands of years already, right?

The earth had been slowly _cooling_ for the past six thousand years. It was supposed keep cooling right until the next glaciation. Instead, it suddenly started warming quickly. So, you got the basics wrong again.

Which really undercuts your who insistence that only scientists are capable of making sense of it and that we should simply accept their conclusions, without bothering to analyze the foundations upon which they claim to be built.

I've analyzed the foundations of your claims, and found them to be paranoid conspiracy theories.

But more importantly, this statement underscores the fact that your entire position is based on looking for easy answers based on simple ideas. You don't know the science. You probably don't know any science at all. You just know what someone else told you. You've never once looked below the surface.

Smells like ... projection.

And this is a perfect example of how you've come to conclusions about my position without even knowing what it is!

I never denied the existence of global warming. Not once. I reject your alarmist hissy fits.

You should avoid the word "alarmist", as along with the term "CAGW", it instantly reveals the speaker as a denier. Another giveaway is that it's a standard denier tactic to whine about being called a denier, as an excuse to avoid discussing the science. And you also parrot so many debunked denier talking points.

So, it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. But if it doesn't want to be called a duck, that's not really important.

I've done even better than that. I've explored it for my own self. I've got a perfectly good brain, and a 99.8 percentile IQ. Science has always been my number one passion. I know more about this than you because I studied it for myself, where all you've done is read someone else's headlines.

You've certainly studied conspiracy blogs, but you show no signs of having looked at any real science.

 

[washamericom]

You are tiring.

That's what happens when you get called out and you have nothing to support your position.

I know the science.

So then you're aware that the total "temperature record" is 100% inadequate to draw inferences about geologic timescale events, right?
You know that the concept of an "average global temperature" is pure bollocks, completely useless, and lacks the normal rigor of most scientific study, right?
You know that according to the data CO2 does not drive climate change and at best is merely one of several various feedbacks, right?
You know that the single most prominent contributor to the greenhouse effect is water vapor, right?
You know that the planet is currently in an ice age and that that ice age has probably been drawing to an end for thousands of years already, right?

It isn't brain surgery even though some aspects are complicated, the general idea is not.

Which really undercuts your who insistence that only scientists are capable of making sense of it and that we should simply accept their conclusions, without bothering to analyze the foundations upon which they claim to be built.

But more importantly, this statement underscores the fact that your entire position is based on looking for easy answers based on simple ideas. You don't know the science. You probably don't know any science at all. You just know what someone else told you. You've never once looked below the surface.

The fact that you would deny Global Warming is real and it is accelerating shows YOU do not know the science.

And this is a perfect example of how you've come to conclusions about my position without even knowing what it is!

I never denied the existence of global warming. Not once. I reject your alarmist hissy fits.

I don't want you to take my opinion. Go to your local university and talk to the geologists, chemists, and biologists there.

I've done even better than that. I've explored it for my own self. I've got a perfectly good brain, and a 99.8 percentile IQ. Science has always been my number one passion. I know more about this than you because I studied it for myself, where all you've done is read someone else's headlines.

thank you s e , you nailed it. on one hand you have people saying it was settled 15 years ago. then why the need for expensive research (the last fifteen years) ? they speak of co2 as a greenhouse gas, but they know not how much there is what it does, or that it follows warming trends, not the other way around (you mentioned).

climate change is moving from junk science to joke science, obama still pushes it like he did the video that caused the attacks in benghazi.

climate change people are uninformed, ignorant and closed minded. yet they follow obama on this like sheep. soon over the climate change cliff i hope.

it's so absurd the way this has progressed, hysteria, of, for and by the political & science industrial complex. they can even get a consensus on this forum, as to whether or not there is a consensus. look at my poll question response, that says it all. the science of climate change is about as defined or settled as "natural born".

 

[IsaacNewton]

Deniers, go hide in your basement. Reality is too scarwwy for you. The adults will handle it.