Nature accomplished what Science couldn't accomplish

My main contribution is to try to get ignorant people off the back of those whose job it is to try to do something about it and save some lives.

 

Oh my. Such arrogance. The more I read your posts, the less I believe you know anything about science or AGW.

 

My opinion is that we've gone past the tipping point, years ago. There is precious little man can do at this point, but I would support actions that would at least attempt to slow it down.

 

Who would have predicted 20 years ago that they would go up, I wonder...

But yeah... a lot of things went up....like global temperatures, the number and intensity of weather-related disasters, ocean levels, population displacement, disease-transmitting insect populations ... all the things that Scientist told us 20 years ago might happen

Forget CO2. For you, it's too late for that. All you need to do now is pay attention to what was predicted decades ago would happen. Because it's happening.

 

I thought the floods were caused by rain, not by global warming.

 

Ya and they never get it wrong All they have to do is pick hot or cold and rake in the tax payer money and rewards for fear mongering..

 

Almost anyone with a brain would have predicted that. And most would have predicted co2 levels would be even higher given the rapid industrialization of India and China. Hell I'm still not convinced we're not grossly understating urban heat island effects in our temp calculations, especially where Europe is concerned.

 

I already told you that the time to convince deniers of man made global warming is over. If after 20 years they didn't get it, they will never get it. Now we just need them to get out of the way and not interfere with the efforts by informed folk to save lives.

 

Books have been written on solutions.

 

You should show my whole quote, not just my first sentence. I put in bold that very important part which you ignored.
"The most ridiculous bit about this OP is the claim it will convince the deniers of man made global warming. It does not even fit any of the events the alarmists are warning us about. It is not a severe storm nor is the damage due to rising sea levels. It is a tropical storm which has not reached hurricane conditions and which became quasi-stationary in a particularly bad location. As a result, it has dumped a lot of rain. The fact that it became stationary at this location is not due to man made conditions. It is due the geography of the region which has been there for hundreds of thousands of years or more."

 

It's amazing that you say this. Because the whole purpose of modern science is precisely to disassociate scientific fact from what scientists believe. This is exactly why there is a scientific method. As we have, step by step, learned to eliminate what scientists believe (subjectivity) from the object of research (objectivity), the faster and better scientific progress becomes. The Scientific Method is not perfect yet, but it has become more and more efficient since it's origins (Descartes, Galileo, Newton,...) and less prone to errors.

I can't get over my amazement at your statement. I think that what you have learned from this post should remove a large number of the misconceptions that you have about how Science works. But I can't be sure. So I would advice you take a long breather and ponder about this for a while. And don't respond with your gut, but instead with your brain.

 

You wouldn't recognize an informed scientist if they came up and bit you on the a$$.

Let me explain how it works in the real world. Climate and weather will occur according to all the forces involved irregardless of what scientists think.

Some scientific theories are basic and there is no dispute such as laws of motion and conservation of energy and momentum. However, when you get into such complex areas as weather and climate, the number of forces involved are beyond scientists grasp. They try to simplify them in such a way as to approximate the outcome. On the subject, of AGW, there is no consensus among scientists on the best way to accomplish this. It is not a settled science and probably never will be. It is those doubters who improve the science, not the scientists who accept those approximations as is.

There is no consensus among scientists on AGW. All or most will agree man has an influence and that CO2 and other gases are greenhouse gases. What they do not agree on is the accuracy of the forecasts or how much man can change the outcome. Going to alternate energy sources is a good thing. I love to see those windmills turning as I drive across Kansas and Colorado. However, it will never be the soul source. Wind and solar is simply not that reliable. I would much rather see an orderly transition to alternate energy sources rather than the crash programs.

 

There was a time to explain this to you. But now that time is gone.

I addressed this a couple of pages back on this same thread. Here...

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ldnt-accomplish.561802/page-3#post-1070988045

 

Sometimes. The rest of your post was addressed a couple of pages back on this same thread.

Here

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ldnt-accomplish.561802/page-3#post-1070988045

 

Great! That's the definition of Anthropogenic Global Warming. So we're good! Now you can help us get people who deny what you just said get out of the way of those who just want to find ways to mitigate the effects of what you describe.

 

No it's not. Most people would also have predicted that Hollywood movies would have increasing levels of sex and violence as well and more CGI. You thing those cause global warming too?

 

You’d be more effective I think if you didn’t confuse independent thought with ignorance. And how would an ignorant person hinder whoever’s job it is to do something about it? Who’s job is it anyway? And what exactly are they supposed to be doing that will save lives? Seems odd to me nobody has specific solutions that are workable. If we don’t, then shouldn’t great minds be working on solutions, not trying to convince people there is a problem?

Steve Jobs didn’t spend years convincing people they had problems only he could fix. He innovated solutions to problems people didn’t even need to recognize they had and then those solutions sold themselves because of their brilliance. If you ever get frustrated with selling fear, try the better way.

 

Nobody is denying that man doesn't contribute some to climate change but man contributes to so little to climate change that if everyone in the world were eaten by a one eye purple people eater nothing would change.

It's the climate change wackos who deny that the sun has more to do with climate change than mexicans farting after eating a burrito.

If man contributes so much to climate change why aren't the wackos calling for mass reduction of the world's population ?

I have watched the world population double in my life time from 3 billion to 7 billion.

The only thing that's going to save the world are one eye purple people eaters.

 

Nobody has solutions. Everyone wants government to take more money to fix it without the slightest clue of how giving money to government will fix this or anything else. My faith is always with the private sector.

 

By any chance did you attend public schools in the L.A. Unified School District ?

 

The Chi-Coms are the biggest polluters of the world along with most shithole countries in Africa and Central America and Mexico and East L.A. and San Fanshithole too.

 

Well pardon me if I don't subscribe to the full kettle of bullshit, I just scroll like a pro and when I see something exceedingly runny I stop and scatter bentonite clay on it before any gets on my desk!

 

China is first, which makes sense because of their much larger population it takes more fuel to keep a billion+ people warm.

The United States is the second largest polluter overall. But if you base it on the amount of pollution per capita, we pollute alot more than china.

 

America ****ed up big time when America failed to cap it's population at 170 million.

The Chi-Coms tried to cap their population with just allowing one birth per family.

China will be the main source for Soylent Green in the near future.

 

I have no idea what "alarmists" you're talking about or what they warned you about. And you provide no quotes or references to either who those so-called "alarmists" you rant against are or what they said. So I couldn't care less.

What I know is that it fits exactly to what Scientists told us about. And my response does not change: the time to explain it to denialists has passed. Denialists missed the boat, and now they need to get out of the way of those who are going to deal with it.