Krenum
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2005
- Messages
- 19,193
Whose fault was it 800K years ago?
Exactly. Except 800K years ago you couldn't make money from an agenda.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Whose fault was it 800K years ago?
Climate change is a fact. There is no more discussion. Humans adding to climate change is a fact. There is no more discussion. The science is there. I have, over and over again across many threads, shown all legitimate science sites and papers while you "flat Earthers" keep just saying that it is not fact. You say you have all these scientists, which by the way would be tens of thousands of people that show that climate change isn't happening, and that humans cannot possibly add to the change but you never ever show any proof. You never show one scientist, and not places like skepticalscience.com and stuff that is run by economists (their head of science works and studies economy not climate), but you keep saying it over and over. Show the math, show the models, show the measurements. NOAA has. NASA has. The world weather organization has. MIT.edu has. ETC. But it is all a conspiracy so you will just continue to ignore it and point the finger back.
I'm also going to assume you believe the Earth is flat, evolution isn't real and water is not wet. Because at the end of the day, it is the same. You personally are taking a non fact, and propagating that non fact as a fact to others. I'm not going to argue and hand hold the information exchange, because it has been done a thousand times or more. I guess lets just agree to disagree because you obviously will not do the due diligence on something you obviously feel passionate about.
Im sure these two will not be enough for you to really believe there is very real consensus, but here goes:
http://www.pnas.org/content/107/27/12107.full.pdf
https://arstechnica.com/science/201...ies-finds-strong-agreement-on-climate-change/
I don't know about the other poster, but I did call 10000 climate-scientists and 9758 are in consensus that we are fucked it we don't do anything and humans caused it.
Is that good enough?
Fixed.S/
Climate change is a scam of the Democratic party, which Donna Brazille just came out and said the primary election was RIGGED by Hillary Clinton to sack Bernie, through using her embezzled Uranium One money to bail out the broke DNC, because of all the money spent on the election of the Kenyan president.
The Democrats=left=socialists=communists are just a bunch of prejudice, thieving, con artists that dupe naive people into believing the government can solve all their problems. Climate change is just one of many scams to increase government control.
There is no man made climate change. Anyone who takes a SECOND to look at the science would actually realize that.
1. Fact: It is statistically impossible to predict temperature levels for 4,700,000,000 years of the planet's history based on 30 years of temperature readings. ...even if the instruments were perfectly accurate. ...and even if there was no local variation. ...and even if all the climate models weren't based on lying scientists' models who's grant money depends on maintaining the lie.
2. Fact: The ice core data shows temperature increases ~800 years before CO2 increases! You cannot show CO2 causes temperature change, if temperature change occurs first. Did CO2 invent a time machine??? This disproves the theory right here.
3. Fact: We are at one of the lowest levels of CO2 in our planet's history. The largest animals on earth lived when it was near the highest (~30x higher). Tell me again how CO2 is going to kill us all???
4. Fact: The Geocarb III model was plotted against the temperature model of our planet's history. It shows temperature increases BEFORE CO2 rises and their is no correlation. If you really wanted to definitively prove climate change, why would you not look at the geological record where you could gather meaningful data points? Why are these academics wasting time on useless temperature points that can never hope to be statistically significant? Maybe because it already disproves this BS?
5. Fact: Decreased sun activity resulted in the little ice age 500 years ago. It had nothing to do with CO2 levels. If sun activity causes climate change, ya think maybe it is THE reason for past climate change? /S
Climate change is a scam of the Democratic party, which Donna Brazille just came out and said the primary election was RIGGED by Hillary Clinton to sack Bernie, through using her embezzled Uranium One money to bail out the broke DNC, because of all the money spent on the election of the Kenyan president.
The Democrats=left=socialists=communists are just a bunch of prejudice, thieving, con artists that dupe naive people into believing the government can solve all their problems. Climate change is just one of many scams to increase government control.
There is no man made climate change. Anyone who takes a SECOND to look at the science would actually realize that.
1. Fact: It is statistically impossible to predict temperature levels for 4,700,000,000 years of the planet's history based on 30 years of temperature readings. ...even if the instruments were perfectly accurate. ...and even if there was no local variation. ...and even if all the climate models weren't based on lying scientists' models who's grant money depends on maintaining the lie.
2. Fact: The ice core data shows temperature increases ~800 years before CO2 increases! You cannot show CO2 causes temperature change, if temperature change occurs first. Did CO2 invent a time machine??? This disproves the theory right here.
3. Fact: We are at one of the lowest levels of CO2 in our planet's history. The largest animals on earth lived when it was near the highest (~30x higher). Tell me again how CO2 is going to kill us all???
4. Fact: The Geocarb III model was plotted against the temperature model of our planet's history. It shows temperature increases BEFORE CO2 rises and their is no correlation. If you really wanted to definitively prove climate change, why would you not look at the geological record where you could gather meaningful data points? Why are these academics wasting time on useless temperature points that can never hope to be statistically significant? Maybe because it already disproves this BS?
5. Fact: Decreased sun activity resulted in the little ice age 500 years ago. It had nothing to do with CO2 levels. If sun activity causes climate change, ya think maybe it is THE reason for past climate change?
Name calling and the claim that there is no more discussion pretty much kills any message.
The Trump administration released a dire scientific report Friday detailing the growing threats of climate change. The report stands in stark contrast to the administration’s efforts to downplay humans’ role in global warming, withdraw from an international climate accord and reverse Obama-era policies aimed at curbing America’s greenhouse-gas output.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/t...tion-for-climate-change/ar-AAupvvD?li=BBnb7Kz“It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century,” the document reports. “For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence.”
uhh ok, so what?Trump administration releases report finding 'no convincing alternative explanation' for climate change
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/t...tion-for-climate-change/ar-AAupvvD?li=BBnb7Kz
See the part at the end there about observational evidence? For the deniers out there, you have to provide evidence that contradicts the overwhelming evidence showing human's are the primary factor. You can't just say "volcanoes are to blame" or "wildefires are to blame" or "climate naturally changes over time" because every one of those factors are considered in the climate change models, yet there is still an unexplainable change in our climate.
The Earth's climate does change naturally, but slowly, over hundreds of thousands or millions of years. Those types of changes are facts, are not denied, and are predictable. However, when you take all of those changes into account and still cannot explain a significant difference in climate over the past 150 years there really is not another option than humans.
The correlation to increased C02 in the atmosphere and the industrial revolution sure does look pretty damning when you are trying to find "the missing piece". Who would of thought unnaturally pumping CO2 into the atmosphere would do such a thing ...
Oh I think you'll find there's endless discussion. Something being a fact or not has no bearing on that.Climate change is a fact. There is no more discussion. Humans adding to climate change is a fact. There is no more discussion.
Exactly, which is why the topic was not even discussed during the presidential debates; since it's so outside the realm of politics.Also, this has nothing to do with politics.
People tend to "take sides" on this issue aligning with their political party rather than the evidence.Exactly, which is why the topic was not even discussed during the presidential debates; since it's so outside the realm of politics.
Oh I think you'll find there's endless discussion. Something being a fact or not has no bearing on that.
I was just being snide about it, my point is the issue has become OVERWHELMINGLY political, which is why we've had debates on this for decades now. The science is about as close to verified as you can get, but if you've been conditioned to associate your stance on the issue with your tribal identity, then the evidence for or against something doesn't actually matter, it's just window dressing then.Which is why we have these arguments about the Earth being flat I suppose.
As for the politicizing, while I understand what you are saying, I have never brought politics into it, and in my opinion, the original topic was not a political one. Just several people keep saying that it is a left, communist, socialist lie, when it is in fact a fact. We need to start dealing with it now, or continue to spend hundreds of billions on rebuilding peoples houses that will just continue to flood every year. We need to start being proactive as a species instead of political.
I was just being snide about it, my point is the issue has become OVERWHELMINGLY political, which is why we've had debates on this for decades now. The science is about as close to verified as you can get, but if you've been conditioned to associate your stance on the issue with your tribal identity, then the evidence for or against something doesn't actually matter, it's just window dressing then.