Stop the "Climate Change is Real" brow beating

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_topics_characterized_as_pseudoscience#Earth_sciences

 

^^^^ Another meaningless post.

What he just did was put his fingers in his ears and go "La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La".

What his post means is that there is absolutely no source that he would find acceptable. Classic... that's what brainwashed people do.

 

There is - it's the norm with alarmists, and exemplified in the video.

 

There are a lot of people who reject climate change out right...right here on PF. They think it's fake science and the biggest hoax in all of human history.

 

it's like it goes in one ear and out the other. *ahem* LESS than one in eight deny climate change. There is wide support for many, many measures to address climate change, and many have passed with support.

 

That's the way it is with dogma and the new religion. Climb aboard or be rejected and called names.

 

Are you trying to cherry pick out of context? This is what I said in the exact same (very short) post you quoted: "There is no debate, even in the public, about whether or not climate change is real - only 12% say that it is not (per a 2016 Yale study)".

I thought it abundantly clear that by "no one" I meant "practically no one", not "literally not a single damned f***ing person in the world."

 

Oooooooooh I see.

You didn't read any of the sources. Kneejerk reactions often look silly (like when I mistakenly thought you said "posh poll" - that made me look silly").

 

We skeptics do not ever deny climate change. We reject the people that put the blame on humans.

I like to keep pointing out that Earth the magnificent planet is not a planet of one climate, it has multiples of climates.

 

Do you have a degree in Climate Science?

 

Do any of the true believers in the new religion here have a degree in Climate Science?

 

No, I do not.

But I can tell you that if I have issues with my heart, I'm not going to go to a podiatrist for advice.

With well over 97% of climate scientists in agreement, why should I place more weight on those who differ? Even more so when I see they are being funded by an organization like the Heartland Institute. It requires the illogical belief that ALL of these scientists are in collusion for some nefarious purpose, all the while ignoring who the backers are of these anti-AGW folks. Sorry, I just don't buy it.

But even IF I were to accept for the sake of argument the current rise in temperature is a natural cycle, it would still take a healthy dose of ignorance to not believe the added manmade greenhouse emissions would not exacerbate the situation. The simple reality is the earth has NEVER in all of history held a human population of 7 billion, in fact, it's been said there are more people alive today than have existed in all of human history.

It has taken over 4 billion years for this planet to create the bio diversity we see today. Our science has revealed the complex and delicate ecosystems that keep us alive and for us to play with those ecosystems is to endanger our own existence. While we spend all this time still arguing whether or not we are to blame, we are ignoring the work which needs to be done to protect human life from the coming changes. It is as if a portion of humanity's hubris has a suicidal wish.

 

The sun is gradually getting bigger in a few billion years the earth is going to be inside the sun, so what are you gonna do about that? Red Giant on the horizon.

 

You are relying on a percentage you don't understand and which is meaningless. Which scientists do you believe? The ones repeating the dogma or those that are not? For instance, solar scientists are predicting coming cooling due to solar activity since almost all warmth comes from the sun.

 

the cause of the problem is too much carbon in the atmosphere

reducing it will most assuredly help mitigate agw

"If we stop emitting today, it’s not the end of the story for global warming. There’s a delay in temperature increase as the climate catches up with all the carbon that’s in the atmosphere. After maybe 40 more years, the climate will stabilize at a temperature higher than what was normal for previous generations."

http://www.iflscience.com/environme...f-we-stopped-emitting-greenhouse-gases-today/

 

Incorrect, PopularTechnology.net has been referenced 11 times in the scholarly peer-reviewed literature.

 

so what?

 

What do you think if you keep on parroting the 97% myth over and over again do you hope it sticks? We are really getting tired of that propaganda...

.

 

And your statement itself is meaningless.

"Solar scientists"? You mean astronomers? Yeah, you're up to date alright.

 

the vast majority of working climate scientists, accept agw as a confirmed 'scientific theory'

do you understand what that means?

 

I have no doubt that solar activity plays a big role in the warming and cooling cycles of the planet. But, there has been a secular decline in both solar activity (sunspots) and solar irradiance since about 1960. That presents a big issue for me in trying to reconcile the warming that has occurred since then.

 

It's a lot better than taking the advice of the Society of Nematologists .. scientist who study frickin worms




31 Science Groups to Congress: Greenhouse Gases Emitted by Human Activities Is Primary Driver of Climate Change

.

 

If you do not understand what the scholarly peer-reviewed literature is than maybe you should not be involved in this conversation.

Please provide the objective criteria for determining who is a "climate scientist."

 

Vague, and really lame spin, Judith Curry is part of the so called 97% yet her peers like Jim Hansen and Michael "phony baloney" Mann call her a denier , why is that?


.

 

Let me comfort the posters that are so afraid of global warming.

We all have an idea of how huge Texas is. Texas was the largest state until Alaska became a state. So Take Alaska, it will hold two Texas sized states. But back to Texas ... the entire human population of planet earth can fit inside of Texas with more living space than they have in New York City.

We are talking of a huge state. If you prefer, cram the population into Alaska if you want them to have double the space or more.

Now, just how much damage to the entire planet can be done by humans living just in TX? Earth is huge.

Some speak of Earth as were it a particular climate.

Just in the SF Bay area, they have identified 9 climates. My climate next to San Jose is different by far than at the north end of the Bay. All seasons, we vary.

It boggles my mind the very idea one can simply average climate. It does not work like that. Even the seas vary a lot in ocean warming. Warming can take place and miles from that, you get cooling.

Climate is a complex subject. But when I read somebody wanting to average climate, I laugh. i mean laugh a lot.