Yeah right. Sell it to the fools, I, the wise, know better. Dazzle with data, bullsht with balderdash.
No predictions based on climate change hysteria? Poppycock https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/01/22/ocasio-cortez_the_world_is_going_to_end_in_12_years_if_we_dont_address_climate_change.http So, your are saying the weather will be the same in 50 years and AOC has lost her frigging mind? I Agree. And more: UN Warns: 12 years until destruction. https://amp.theguardian.com/environ...-must-not-exceed-15c-warns-landmark-un-report Influencing the planet? Changing the environment. On grand scale? I agree, and thank reason he has, and will continue to do so. Who in their right mind would want to live in the world of the Neanderthals, the Aborigines, or the Sentinelese? Not anyone with half a brain. Here’s a prediction: In 2150, the North will be cold and snowy in the winter, and the South will be warm and muggy in the summer. And LA will still be above water. Betcha. Climate change delusions and hysteria is fueled by the hatred of the Manmade, and the denial of metaphysical absolutes—Reality, Identity, and Causality.
So you base your evidence on an actor in Star Trek and a bartender/waitress. Perhaps you could say why they represent the scientific world?
Come again? https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-intermediate.htm Ah, I was there—ban the fluorocarbons, the ozone is being destroyed. and you agree, AOC is a political celebrity with no scientific foundation. And is nothing more than a fear monger vying for political power?
LOL You just posted an article that contradicted your posts. Here is just one conclusion from your link: "However, these are media articles, not scientific studies. A survey of peer reviewed scientific papers from 1965 to 1979 show that few papers predicted global cooling (7 in total). Significantly more papers (42 in total) predicted global warming (Peterson 2008). The large majority of climate research in the 1970s predicted the Earth would warm as a consequence of CO2. ."
Stuck in concrete, missing the abstraction. To pretend that hysteria about a coming ice age didn’t happen is to deny reality.
Climatologists predict nonsene https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/18-s...st-earth-day-in-1970-expect-more-this-year-3/
Fools and idiots being led by charlatans and witch doctors, who have postulated that because we love burgers on the grill, driving the family to Disney World, and sipping cokes through a straw with our best girl at McDonalds after enjoying a Marvel superhero movie, the Earth will spontaneously ignite, civilization will disappear, and humanity will go extinct. And those who question this hysteria are called selfish bastards. Well, I am mthrfkn selfish bastard, and I’m not surrendering my life, my loves, my happiness, my joy to a bunch of nincompoops. You see, that’s my right as a freeman. Get frigging real, people. Start thinking and stop fearing the bogeyman, climate change.
It may have been popular to you and the media, but it wasn't popular among scientists. It's actually the opposite. It's preposterous at best to believe scientist thought an ice age was imminent. https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1 Actually weather forecasts have skill out to 8-10 days. You can view the objective verification scores of various numerical weather prediction models here. https://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/gmb/STATS_vsdb/ Note that weather forecasting and climate forecasting are different things. In many respects it's actually easier to forecast average conditions over large spatial and temporal domains 50 years out then to predict exact conditions at exact locations and times more than 10 days out.
What are they going to predict in two hundred years when LA is still above water, the polar bears are still plodding around ice flows while drinking cokes, the polar ice caps are still white and cold, and Hawaii is still a tropical paradise. Easy. The meteors are coming, and it’s Man’s creative genius that’s the problem. All that spacing around in rocket-ships is disturbing the magnetic and radiation waves of the universe, thereby attracting meteors by altering their normal paths. Betcha. BTW the way, whose pushing climate change in culture now? Scientists, or the media? Greta comes to mind.
You need get your head off the trees and see the forest, to use the obvious cliche, but still appropriate to use to poke the dullards.
Can you show where the IPCC has ever predicted that "the Earth will spontaneously ignite, civilization will disappear, and humanity will go extinct."? Yes. We know your type. You expect your neighbors to mitigate the environmental harm that they cause plus whatever you cause as well. Because...it's your right as freeman to do whatever you want.
Well, at least some scientists think the coming mini ice will stop the hysteria over global warming-which would actually be a good thing—the global warming, not the coming mini ice age. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ha...t-earth-in-15-years-scientists-warn-1.5304281
Again, stuck with the head in the concrete while the abstraction flys overhead. Sad, but you’ve have many brethren.
I expect my neighbors to respect my individual rights as I respect theirs, without resorting to the government’s gun to make me obey and live as they wish, subservient to their delusions. If they aren’t willing to be rational, fk ‘em—they can rot in hell.
Nah, my problem is politicians using soothsayers to feed their empty souls with pseudo-morality and to fuel their appetite for power.
I read the article in the Guardian and what it says is that just a 0.5 degree C. increase in the global mean temperature can have a very significant affect on droughts, floods, extreme heat, and poverty for millions of people. Scientists who reviewed the 6,000 works referenced in the report, said the change caused by just half a degree came as a revelation. “We can see there is a difference and it’s substantial,” Roberts said. At 1.5C the proportion of the global population exposed to water stress could be 50% lower than at 2C, it notes. Food scarcity would be less of a problem and hundreds of millions fewer people, particularly in poor countries, would be at risk of climate-related poverty. At 2C extremely hot days, such as those experienced in the northern hemisphere this summer, would become more severe and common, increasing heat-related deaths and causing more forest fires. But the greatest difference would be to nature. Insects, which are vital for pollination of crops, and plants are almost twice as likely to lose half their habitat at 2C compared with 1.5C. Corals would be 99% lost at the higher of the two temperatures, but more than 10% have a chance of surviving if the lower target is reached.
Well it certainly is my right to think and do whatever I want. Isn’t that the whole purpose the nation was founded upon? A government that protects liberty from overbearing tyrannical authority? And isn’t that what the social engineering environmentalists and climatologists are? Why yes. It is. On both accounts.
