Why you can't avoid the impact of climate change even if you can't handle the science

[Deplorable Yankee]

Loss of habitat and crop failure will drive human migration that will overwhelm bureaucratic barriers. Survival is a powerful incentive.

This is just one economic consequence:

​

The impact of climate change on property insurance is profound and multifaceted. As extreme weather events become more frequent and severe, insurers are facing higher payouts and increased risk. This has led to a significant increase in homeowners insurance premiums, with some insurers pulling back services and leaving high-risk areas...​

The crisis is not only affecting homeowners but also the broader economy, as it threatens the financial viability of entire regions. Without insurance, mortgages cannot be issued, and the home equity built in climate-risky markets is at risk. The U.S. housing market is already facing challenges, and climate change is exacerbating these risks, leading to a potential financial crisis if not addressed promptly.​

​

U.S. coastline is facing a significant challenge due to the rising sea levels. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has reported that seas are forecast to rise from 8 inches to 23 inches along the nation’s coasts by 2050. This rise is exacerbated by the melting of glaciers and ice sheets, which adds more water to the oceans. The higher sea levels are expected to flood all or parts of an estimated $34 billion worth of real estate along the coasts within just 30 years.​

​

​

How do vehement climate change deniers intend to mitigate the cost of climate change?

Left wing ideologically driven psuedo science is not science

 

[schmidlap]

Left wing ideologically driven psuedo science is not science

Please cite your scientific data, its analysis, and identify the scientific organizations involved.

I am under the impression that the science deniers are ideologues who do not conduct the required data-driven research and analysis.

If the science of scientists is"pseudo," please present your version of the real science, and identify the "real" scientists.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

Please cite your scientific data, its analysis, and identify the scientific organizations involved.

I am under the impression that the science deniers are ideologues who do not conduct the required data-driven research and analysis.

If the science of scientists is"pseudo," please present your version of the real science, and identify the "real" scientists.

I don't need any because you don't have anything real to present...
Ideologically driven drivel ..its not science

Even bill gates has pulled back

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You appear confused.

Climatologists have recorded the ongoing rapid rise in temperature that reflects the dramatic increase in carbon emissions

Ideologues don't like it.

Is it a “rapid rise” if it’s 25F in the morning and goes up to 40F by midday, 15F in a few hours?

Or 20F in January and 85F in July, 65F in 6 months?

 

[shockedcanadian]

I am sure there will be thousands of protesters out on the streets calling.for China to decrease their emissions. Maybe some complaining that the wealthy fly around too much?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"For example, I was a little surprised when I was talking to a friend who was going to go on the radio. He does work on cosmology and astronomy, and he wondered how he would explain what the applications of this work were. “Well,” I said, “there aren’t any.” He said, “Yes, but then we won’t get support for more research of this kind.” I think that’s kind of dishonest. If you’re representing yourself as a scientist, then you should explain to the layman what you’re doing—and if they don’t want to support you under those circumstances, then that’s their decision." - Richard Feynman

 

[schmidlap]

I don't need any because you don't have anything real to present...
Ideologically driven drivel ..its not science

Even bill gates has pulled back

That you have no scientific data on which you base your ideological dogma is hardy surprising.
What other branches of science besides climatology are you unable to accept?

Because it isn't dogma, science is continually amenable to additional data, of course.

None of that results in denial.

 

[Hafar1014]

Huma caused climate is 100% BS

 

[schmidlap]

Is it a “rapid rise” if it’s 25F in the morning and goes up to 40F by midday, 15F in a few hours?

Or 20F in January and 85F in July, 65F in 6 months?

Weather is not climate.

You seem hellbent upon denying the climatological data, yet have none to refute the scientific consensus.

 

[justoffal]

Loss of habitat and crop failure will drive human migration that will overwhelm bureaucratic barriers. Survival is a powerful incentive.

This is just one economic consequence:

​

The impact of climate change on property insurance is profound and multifaceted. As extreme weather events become more frequent and severe, insurers are facing higher payouts and increased risk. This has led to a significant increase in homeowners insurance premiums, with some insurers pulling back services and leaving high-risk areas...​

The crisis is not only affecting homeowners but also the broader economy, as it threatens the financial viability of entire regions. Without insurance, mortgages cannot be issued, and the home equity built in climate-risky markets is at risk. The U.S. housing market is already facing challenges, and climate change is exacerbating these risks, leading to a potential financial crisis if not addressed promptly.​

​

U.S. coastline is facing a significant challenge due to the rising sea levels. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has reported that seas are forecast to rise from 8 inches to 23 inches along the nation’s coasts by 2050. This rise is exacerbated by the melting of glaciers and ice sheets, which adds more water to the oceans. The higher sea levels are expected to flood all or parts of an estimated $34 billion worth of real estate along the coasts within just 30 years.​

​

​

How do vehement climate change deniers intend to mitigate the cost of climate change?

YAWWWWWN....

Retreating ice caps will expose hundreds of millions of acres of new agricultural development for food growth. The globe is now greener than it has been in over 100,000 years. The increased CO2 concentration has caused a massive outcropping of foliage all over the world.

This will translate into more productive gardens and a more abundant food source.

 

[schmidlap]

YAWWWWWN....

Retreating ice caps will expose hundreds of millions of acres of new agricultural development for food growth. The globe is now greener than it has been in over 100,000 years. The increased CO2 concentration has caused a massive outcropping of foliage all over the world.

This will translate into more productive gardens and a more abundant food source.

Your belief that you know more about the consequences of anthropogenic climate change than experts who have compiled and analyzed the data is taken for what it's worth.

https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/climate/climate-change-impacts

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Weather is not climate.

You seem hellbent upon denying the climatological data, yet have none to refute the scientific consensus.

You don't seem to understand it, but that's OK neither does anyone else in the AGW Cult

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Weather is not climate.

You seem hellbent upon denying the climatological data, yet have none to refute the scientific consensus.

Consensus is a cult word, it's not a scientific word

 

[Hafar1014]

Climate change denial is a perplexing and multifaceted phenomenon that seems to defy the weight of scientific evidence. Despite an overwhelming consensus among climate scientists regarding human-induced climate change, a significant number of individuals and groups persist in rejecting this reality. The roots of climate change denial run deep, intertwining scientific misunderstanding, psychological tendencies, and socio-political influences. It’s essential to unravel these layers to understand why this denial exists in the first place...​

​

When confronted with the dire implications of climate change, some people may struggle to reconcile the need for urgent action with their existing beliefs or lifestyle choices. Instead of embracing the unsettling truth, many opt for denial as a coping mechanism. This psychological strategy allows them to maintain their daily routines without facing the anxiety and guilt associated with climate change and its consequences...​

​

Our beliefs about climate change often reflect our social identities. In many places, beliefs about climate science have become associated with political affiliations, particularly in the United States. For instance, individuals who identify with conservative ideologies may reject climate change findings because accepting them could challenge their group’s values. This social identity plays a significant role in perpetuating denial. People may prioritize conformity and trust within their communities over accepting scientific consensus, fearing they may be ostracized for diverging from their group’s stance.​

​

Understanding Why Climate Change Denial Persists - MAWEB

Climate change denial is a perplexing and multifaceted phenomenon that seems to defy the weight of scientific evidence. Despite an overwhelming consensus

maweb.org

​

There is no valid science that supports human caused climate change. CO2 doers not make the earth warmer. CO2 makes the earth green and creates O2 and we need more of it. The climate change global warming hox was a plan to expand the power of governments by using fear. It created green energy industrial complex that produced high cost unreliable energy that cant meet the demand of AI and data banks which drive up energy costs and will lead to a catastrophic power failure that will destroy the economy.

 

[schmidlap]

You don't seem to understand it, but that's OK neither does anyone else in the AGW Cult

Your need to pretend that analytical, data-driven climatological science is a cult is unfortunate.

Of what other scientific disciplines are you in denial and need to dismiss as a cult?

Have yo concocted any explanation why you believe that the soaring level of CO2 in the atmosphere has no impact on the atmosphere?

June 5, 2025​

​

CO2 levels have broken through 430 parts per million, an indication that human-caused global warming will continue to warp the environment.​

​

Earth’s atmosphere now has more carbon dioxide in it than it has in millions — and possibly tens of millions — of years, according to data released Thursday by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and scientists at the University of California San Diego.​

​

For the first time, global average concentrations of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas emitted as a byproduct of burning fossil fuels, exceeded 430 parts per million (ppm) in May. The new readings were a record high and represented an increase of more than 3 ppm over last year...​

​

Earth's atmosphere hasn't had this much CO2 in millions of years

New data shows that CO2 levels have broken through 430 parts per million, an indication that human-caused global warming will continue to warp the environment.

www.nbcnews.com

​

 

[schmidlap]

Consensus is a cult word, it's not a scientific word

In what scientific discipline is the consensus of scientists dismissed?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

In what scientific discipline is the consensus of scientists dismissed?

All of them!

Science requires rigorous falsification, Climate Change Hocus pocus, not so much

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Your need to pretend that analytical, data-driven climatological science is a cult is unfortunate.

Of what other scientific disciplines are you in denial and need to dismiss as a cult?

Have yo concocted any explanation why you believe that the soaring level of CO2 in the atmosphere has no impact on the atmosphere?

June 5, 2025​

​

CO2 levels have broken through 430 parts per million, an indication that human-caused global warming will continue to warp the environment.​

​

Earth’s atmosphere now has more carbon dioxide in it than it has in millions — and possibly tens of millions — of years, according to data released Thursday by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and scientists at the University of California San Diego.​

​

For the first time, global average concentrations of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas emitted as a byproduct of burning fossil fuels, exceeded 430 parts per million (ppm) in May. The new readings were a record high and represented an increase of more than 3 ppm over last year...​

​

Earth's atmosphere hasn't had this much CO2 in millions of years

New data shows that CO2 levels have broken through 430 parts per million, an indication that human-caused global warming will continue to warp the environment.

www.nbcnews.com

​

CO2 is a byproduct of warming and has never driven temperature on planet Earth.

If your theory is correct, how do you explain plummeting temperature after CO2 spikes?

 

[marvin martian]

Loss of habitat and crop failure will drive human migration that will overwhelm bureaucratic barriers. Survival is a powerful incentive.

This is just one economic consequence:

​

The impact of climate change on property insurance is profound and multifaceted. As extreme weather events become more frequent and severe, insurers are facing higher payouts and increased risk. This has led to a significant increase in homeowners insurance premiums, with some insurers pulling back services and leaving high-risk areas...​

The crisis is not only affecting homeowners but also the broader economy, as it threatens the financial viability of entire regions. Without insurance, mortgages cannot be issued, and the home equity built in climate-risky markets is at risk. The U.S. housing market is already facing challenges, and climate change is exacerbating these risks, leading to a potential financial crisis if not addressed promptly.​

​

U.S. coastline is facing a significant challenge due to the rising sea levels. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has reported that seas are forecast to rise from 8 inches to 23 inches along the nation’s coasts by 2050. This rise is exacerbated by the melting of glaciers and ice sheets, which adds more water to the oceans. The higher sea levels are expected to flood all or parts of an estimated $34 billion worth of real estate along the coasts within just 30 years.​

​

​

How do vehement climate change deniers intend to mitigate the cost of climate change?

Remember "The Science", people!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In what scientific discipline is the consensus of scientists dismissed?

The one where we're forced to waste trillions of dollars on more expensive, less reliable energy.

If CO2 is such a threat, why are you greentwats still against nuclear power?

Where is the scientific consensus against nuclear?