Study Confirms Climate Models are Getting Future Warming Projections Right

You're going to have to source the "much better" claim.

 

~ As are you ... "May the nonsense begin ! " `

 

Scientists can tell why certain events occur in the past.

 

It is already affordable.
A Renault Zoe aint that expensive to buy.
And in general, electric cars are cheaper to maintain.
They simply have less moving parts.
And the electricity is cheaper than gas.
So you know.

 

The only reason they are affordable is because of government subsidies. Those who purchase electric cars are having their neighbors partially pay for them.

 

Everything is taxes and/or subsidized.

Farmers for instance get billions in aid in the US, while the overproduce like mad and so the US is the biggest exporter of food in the world. The EU does it too. Dunno why you want to draw the line for electric cars. They are simply affordable just like a loaf of bread is affordable.

 

My cars were not paid for by my neighbors. But I am paying for their solar panels.

 

If you knew anything about this you wouldn’t ask.

 

lol Do you even know what dogmatic means because it applies a heck of a lot more to your experts than mine. You are the one who claimed humans are the primary source for climate change while your own links admit its only "likely" and further admit that likelihood is not even global but regional specific.

Face reality, you cannot prove your claim.

 

Certain events, but not all, and the accuracy somewhat depends upon things like in this debate such as bias.

Physics simply doesn't seem to approve of Velikovsky's "Worlds in Collision," the earth standing still, Sagan extremely most likely right, but the text of Homer when Zeus was screwing his wife reads a lot like a climate event, so the historian may hypothesize that a climate event blotted out the sun or something lit up the night sky so they could keep fighting (as if the earth stood still), then it is up to science to figure out if some volcano or something happened then. Maybe what happened is recorded in other histories, if it was a global event, and then you get into problems of timelines that are vague and distorted for other purposes or simply what is written was once oral and later written down...

Yes there were warm and cool periods, that shaped empires too, but why exactly isn't all that easy to tell when it involves digging up the past.

 

The why is not however increasing and decreasing atmospheric CO2 concentration. Alarmists would have everyone believe that the current warming is due to increasing human CO2 emissions and that the current warming is a threat to humanity. Warming is beneficial and there is no threat other than reduced economic growth due to artificially increasing the cost of energy which is regressive as it adversely affects low income people. A sub threat to the western democracies is that communist totalitarian China will not foolishly weaken their economy resulting eventually in global domination by China. What could go wrong with that ??? Chinese scientists ~ 20 years ago were producing papers showing that global warming was not as bad as western alarmists were claiming. They then switched 180 degrees to adopting the alarmist meme. Western democracies claimed that China was now committed to reducing their CO2 emissions but only decades in the future. In effect what China did was manipulate the west into polcies reducing their economic growth while China steamed full speed ahead. China now is pulling the plug on their solar and wind programs by eliminating their subsidies. Does that sound like commitment to green energy by the Chinese ?? In this sense Trump was right about a hoax - the hoax was implemented by the Chinese that global warming was a threat to them and that they would do something to reduce CO2 emissions. All they wanted to accomplish is to damage western economies and they have succeeded.

 

They help pay for the gas in your car.

 

....I do know about this and that is why I am asking you to source your claim.

 

Do you want your experts to issue dogmatic statements?

"It is extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in GHG concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together (Figure 1.9)."

 

I pay for the gas in my car. If you are going to to bogus federal government subsidies of the oil industry based on depletion allowances and depreciation rules you are on a fool’s errand.

 

That ^^^ is opinion. But only half - what was responsible for the other half ???

 

It is an opinion based on thousands of peer reviewed articles.

And that specific claim is for "more than half." In other parts of the report, they note that humans are likely responsible for nearly all of the observed warming.

 

Are you partially paying for those federal government subsidies?

 

Opinion is not science. “Likely” is meaningless. What do those claiming half is AGW believe that the cause of the other half ???

 

Expensing capital equipment changes only the taxation time table. The total tax paid is the same. Depletion allowance acknowledges the fact that as oil is removed from a reserve their is less remaining. Those are not subsidies. And those policies help small producers not big oil.

 

And what happens when they die? You aren't concerned about the massive superfund sites the batteries will create? Or the toxicity to the environment in their remanufacture or recycling? I suppose the horror of cobalt mining in africa escapes your notice too, but sure, electric cars.... When you look at the rape of the land necessary to produce them, they don't look that environmentally friendly anymore...

 

Read the words. "extremely likely", because that's a non provable correlation, not formulaic fact. I know, you didn't know the difference. You're welcome...

 

It’s a hunk snow, not a living entity—obviously, humanity has lost all reason—the universe is ending because snow melted. God fkn forbid.

What the fk are we going to do now? Snow has melted and the human species is going extinct. (Wonder what Neanderthal man would have felt about global warming and climate change. I’d dare say he’d like it—because it did happen.)

 

Having voted for just about Republican since Raygun, even went to a fundraiser for him in 76 at the Regency Hyatt House in Atlanta, I don’t think I fit the alarmist mold.

I do believe the warming is due to increasing human CO2 emissions and that such warming can be a threat to humanity, certainly a threat to delicate eco systems.

I also believe that more efficient vehicles and cleaner energy should be manufactured by us, and NOT China.

There is more money to be made by us going more green than by not, if we manufacture it, if we sell it.

Considering the state of China, as a supplier, when the Population Bomb book came out, and that old issue of global cooling from National Geographic I have, I doubt very much that they created any “hoax” with regard to Climate Change or Global Warming.

That kind of “long view” that a Chinese roommate introduced me to, before the Kelly Barnes Dam broke, is as far back as my China worries go.

I am with Trump with regard to dealing with China. We’ve dropped the ball on it for too long.

The Population Bomb, somewhat alarmist, but still, increase populations, increase wealth, increase greenhouse gases, get problems.

If we let China…have all the technology and manufacturing of a solution to Global Warming (whatever), because we believe it is a hoax and do nothing, we are going to be so screwed you can put Trump…(the Republican Party as whole) up there with Septimius Severus, as the principle author of our decline and fall.

 

Still, the Polar Bears are multiplying, maybe not like rabbits, but faster than elephants.