More Americans and most Republicans now believe in climate change

Oh! Please!

As soon as I see the complaint about the so called conspiracy to change the name of global warming I know I am talking to someone who has not bothered to look past a right wing shock jock for information


It is out there and it is real

 

How many?

How many scientists and people do you think are involved in producing the data sets for temperatures across the world?

How many were involved in writing the IPCC reports?
https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ar5/ar5_authors_review_editors_updated.pdf

 

Are these the people in charge of replacing the raw data with altered data and presenting it as accurate?

 

Exactly right. Sometimes, I get the feeling that support in AGW is simply tied to that angst of folks feeling insignificant and the corresponding need to feel like you can do something about it...

 

Fake news. I don't know anybody that doesn't think climate changes

 

With age comes wisdom. Kids are easy to scare and manipulate

 

Climate change?

Yes

The earths climate has constantly changed and always will

But the liberal man-made-global-warming-doomsday hoax?

Not on your life

 

It's the same feeling that moved people in Obama rallys ("We are the one's we've been waiting for"), and now in Trump rallys where he speaks to the forgotten and ignored people.

Add to that the Liberal and Progressive mindsets that both, in different amounts, replace God with Government as the center of power.

 

These people are still beating the same strawman...

 

“Your footprint is 1.83 metric tons per year
The average footprint for people in United States is 16.49 metric tons
The average for the industrial nations is about 11 metric tons
The average worldwide carbon footprint is about 4 metric tons
The worldwide target to combat climate change is 2 metric tons”
https://calculator.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx?tab=8


My two bikes, just the motorcycles, produce all that. Please help me save the planet and buy me a Zero FX motorcycle.

The problem with climate change, when we are no longer warming, we are climate changing.

Help me climate change for the better, Quickly, before it is too late, this:

https://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-fx/

 

These same leaders that move a small city of staff around the country, collecting millions of dollars to speak about "climate change" and how we need to change our ways; all the while they are pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere talking about CO2 than 1000 of the average Americans? Those same leaders?

 

No.

 

Let me ask you something: Is there any amount of evidence that could ever convince you that humans are a significant contributor to the currently warming climate?

 

There atmosphere weighs about 5,500,000,000,000,000 tons. The carbon footprint AGW alarmists whine about is a microscopic area of a mite on a tick on a bird on an Elephant.
The 2 ton "Target" is BS, in part because largest producers are exempted from compliance.
The AGW elitists are among the biggest personal contributors of Carbon, which either means they don't believe it, or they don't care.

 

Yes.

If the AGW alarmists get some evidence, let us know.

 

No.

 

Are these the same people that have been wrong for the last 40 years? If not, have they denounced the people before them that were wrong?

 

Please. "Get some evidence?"

The IPCC is currently on it's 5th addition and it includes hundreds of citations to peer-reviewed articles.

Now, try to answer my question. Is there any amount of evidence that could ever convince you that humans are a significant contributor to the currently warming climate? If you don't think it is possible, then just say so and I will place your comments in the appropriate bin.

 

Why do you think they have been wrong for the last 40 years? Do you disagree with the assertion that the last 25 years have been the hottest quarter century on record? That the last 10 years have been the hottest decade on record? That the hottest 3 years have occurred within the last 5 years?

And yes, scientists have denounced previously inaccurate predictions. You personally have quoted several of their articles.

 

I wonder how many scientists who don't study climate are still able to disprove climate change?

I think it's mandatory if you study physics as a major you still take chemistry courses and I don't hear a lot of chemists challenging global climate change.

Just a thought.

 

There is. Like demonstrating that Man was producing a significant enough amount of inputs necessary to change the climate or otherwise induce a change in the environment. To date, nothing. Man produces something like ~<4% of all of the global CO2 output for the planet. So ignoring that the planet naturally produces ~>96% of all CO2 in the ecosystem is, well, challenging at best. Of course, we are adding. The question is why our very small version of that total contribution is in fact significant. So far, NOBODY can demonstrate this.

 

Tree huggers had to change “global warming” to “climate change” when their conferences and expeditions embarrassingly kept getting snowed and iced in

 

Earth isn’t the only planet grappling with climate change, although this other orb doesn’t have much in the way of fossil fuel emissions or a 97 percent of scientific “consensus” on global warming.

Newly published evidence suggests Mars is experiencing global warming as it emerges from an ice age.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/31/mars-also-undergoing-climate-change-ice-age-retrea/

Imagine that. Doesn't matter since the "final warning" was issued weeks ago.

 

Please tell me you don't think this study is evidence of anything other than mars is getting slightly warmer compared to ten thousand years ago.

 

This has been addressed a number of times. Here is an article on the topic: https://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions.htm

I will summarize and address the glaring problem with your point. You forget the natural CO2 cycle. Yes, the Earth naturally produces something like 10 times as much CO2 each year when compared to that produced by humans (~300 gigatons vs ~30 gigatons. But it also absorbs roughly 10x as much CO2 each year. Think of it this way: Each year, in the fall and winter, leaves drop off of trees and plants die. That is a massive amount of CO2 that gets pushed into the atmosphere. And then, in the spring and summer, trees grow leaves and plants grow out of the ground. That is a massive amount of CO2 that gets absorbed each year.

The human contribution of CO2 each year does not get accounted for by that natural cycle. And that amount gets added - and stays there - each and every year. And while each year, the amount that humans add to the global concentration is very, very small, that amount does stay there for decades - at least - and when you add decades of very small contribution, then you get to significant amounts of contribution.

And scientists can prove it by measuring the isotopes of the CO2 found in the atmosphere as well as measuring the total CO2 concentration in the atmosphere over time. Each year, the CO2 concentration increases (even though it goes up and down every year as part of the natural cycle I just described) and the overwhelming amount of the new CO2 that is being added to the atmosphere each year is made up of the type of CO2 that is created by the combustion of fossil fuels.