The New Climate Reality

Even your link doesn't support your assertion. Sorry, you don't just get to invent facts today.

 

Lol, Wrightstone is a con artist that loves to cherry-pick information and come to conclusions not supported by science.

here read this. Hopefully it opens your eyes a little bit by that fraud you like to quote:
https://willardm22.medium.com/its-easy-to-be-tricked-by-a-climate-denier-a87ba4b4a087

 

lol, ok, what percentage of publishing climate scientists support your point of view then?

 

Unless you plan to dispute the IUCN data cited in #1799 your post is not of interest.

 

well, luckily neither are yours, seeing as how it is made up of lies and misinformation.

 

You do not trust the IUCN?

 

Here is what the IUCN is saying. You look through that and let me know if it supports your points of view.

https://www.iucn.org/theme/climate-change

 

Sure.
Summary Statistics
All reassessments on The IUCN Red List include a record of the ...
Tables 3 & 4: Summaries by taxonomic group
Tables 3 and 4 are organized by taxonomic group. These should be used to see, for example, the numbers of globally threatened mammals, birds and amphibians (Table 4 is an expanded version of Table 3).

These tables include number of species tagged as 'Possibly Extinct' (CR(PE)) and 'Possibly Extinct in the Wild' (CR(PEW)). These figures are included to give an upper estimate for total number of recently extinct species on The IUCN Red List. Combining the total numbers of EX and EW species gives the total number of actual extinctions recorded (since 1500 AD); when CR(PE) and CR(PEW) species are also included, the resulting figure is an estimate of number of recent extinctions when uncertainty is taken into account.

Tables 3 and 4 are interactive. Each column can be ordered (descending or ascending), and the numbers include links to search results on the website showing the lists of species represented in the tables.

• Table 3 - Number of species in each IUCN Red List Category by kingdom and class.
  
  
• Table 4a - Number of animal species (kingdom: Animalia) in each IUCN Red List Category by class and order. . . .

 

then unless you are blind, you can see there are serious problems occurring, and they are getting worse, not better.

 

Obviously brighter than you.

 

How do you figure that ?

 

What utter hogwash. If scientists agree on something they aren't scientists. Jeez do you really believe this cr+p.

 

that’s totally wrong.
Obviously the word consensus doesn’t appear to me to mean much to deniers of GW. It’s general agreement on GW like general agreement on gravity. It doesn’t mean scientist all agree on specifics and minutia just like not all scientist agree with all aspects of gravity.

 

I could cite something like you have and claim 97%. If you look at where the original statistic came from, the sample was less than 3% of which 97% expressed and opinion.

I'd suggest that ALL climate scientists express my opinion. Climate changes. It has, it does, it will. Period. Perhaps a minority of scientists are actually willing to express the opinion that man has the ability to add to whatever natural forcing happens, and then again, I cannot fathom a reason that they would given the paucity of actual repeatable experimentation that demonstrates the position that you've taken. We can quibble over the ~5-6% of additional man made contribution, but so far, no-one has actually demonstrated that that contribution has any additional forcing value at all.

Perhaps you should have done some research before you engaged.

 

Lol, if you are hell bent on denying reality, I doubt I’ll be able to change your mind.

 

Wow. The only one here denying anything is you. Try harder. Do some basic research. This is why every time I see how much we spend on public education these days, I feel I deserve a refund.

 

BTW, the hole in the ozone doesn't cause climate change catastrophe, either.

 

No thanks to initial deniers of the depleting ozone layer.
Ozone layer denial….please do some research before you post anymore on the ozone layer. Even conservatives came around and though not completely gone, man’s actions paid big dividends

 

Uh huh. It doesn’t matter how much we throw at you all, you’ll deny to the end. I’m around doctors in the fields of earth sciences, ecology, biology, etc all the time at my university. I have yet to find one who didn’t agree that climate change is heavily influenced by man and is having serious negative effects on ecosystems because of it.

oh, I forgot, you know better than all of them, because universities are obviously corrupted by the leftist agenda, and trump told you so, etc etc. keep living in your fantasy land while the adults deal with the mess we have made.

 

That’s because universities don’t teach critical thinking, just the science depts, ah, just the climate science departments.

 

Nope. The figures are in line with Wrightstone's presentation.

 

I'm with Einstein.
“Why 100? If I were wrong, one would have been enough. [In response to the book "Hundred Authors Against Einstein"]”

― Albert Einstein

 

lol, well, I guess there is nothing more to say. You are an unshakeable denier. Bravo.

 

I just follow the numbers.

Below, all 529 species available from the Red List with a known extinction date are shown below in Figure 2 by decade of extinction. This chart reveals quite a different story than that advanced by the new report. Instead of a steady increase in the number and rate of extinctions we find that extinctions peaked in the late 1800s and the early 20th century, followed by a significant decline that continues today. It is thought that this extinction peak coincides with introduction of non-native species, primarily on islands (including Australia).

 

Wrightstone is a fraud.