User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: Climate skeptics corner

  1. #1
    Points: 138,693, Level: 89
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 757
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    SocialOverdrive50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran
    Bob's Avatar Banned
    Karma
    1132
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Fremont. CA
    Posts
    36,458
    Points
    138,693
    Level
    89
    Thanks Given
    2,956
    Thanked 4,335x in 3,667 Posts
    Mentioned
    932 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Climate skeptics corner

    Check this Cspan presentation out.

    Pay close attention to Dr. Patrick Moore, former cofounder of GreenPeace

    He makes climate clear and compelling and understandable.

    in my chats with Dr. Richard Lindzen, we both agree that clouds and not CO2 is the factor to watch. That no model invented accurately predicts clouds.

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?320339-...nge-skepticism

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Bob For This Useful Post:

    Peter1469 (09-01-2014)

  3. #2
    Points: 32,395, Level: 43
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 55
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    CreepyOldDude's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    45012
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,410
    Points
    32,395
    Level
    43
    Thanks Given
    700
    Thanked 760x in 514 Posts
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    Check this Cspan presentation out.

    Pay close attention to Dr. Patrick Moore, former cofounder of GreenPeace

    He makes climate clear and compelling and understandable.

    in my chats with Dr. Richard Lindzen, we both agree that clouds and not CO2 is the factor to watch. That no model invented accurately predicts clouds.

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?320339-...nge-skepticism
    I note that he's not a climatologist. Nor does he appear to have any training in climatology.

    That being the case, why would I give weight to his opinion that clouds, and not CO2, are the driving factor in climate change?

    Or is that not what he's saying?

  4. #3
    Points: 39,654, Level: 48
    Level completed: 69%, Points required for next Level: 496
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    VeteranTagger First Class25000 Experience PointsSocial
    waltky's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    5662
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    8,859
    Points
    39,654
    Level
    48
    Thanks Given
    2,515
    Thanked 2,140x in 1,616 Posts
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Red face

    Good one!...

    Climate Change Skeptics Believe 'Extra Water is Just Going to Spill Over the Sides of a Flat Earth'
    September 16, 2016 | Secretary of State John Kerry says, climate change skeptics believe that with “the melting of the ice and the rise of sea level, all that extra water is just going to spill over the sides of a flat Earth.”
    Kerry made the comments Wednesday at the Global Fishing Watch reception in Washington, D.C. “We now have the highest rate of increase of acidity in the ocean in 50 million years,” Kerry said. “And believe it or not scientists have the ability to measure that.”

    “And that acidity changes the capacity of particularly crustaceans to be able to grow. I’ve seen tests that show what happens with clams when they’re exposed to higher levels of pH, and you see the diminished size of the clams.”

    “So, lobsters could conceivably lose the hard shell – I mean, you can run the list of these challenges – and none of them exaggerated, except perhaps to that small group of people in America who still block things from happening because they somehow believe that with global climate change and the melting of the ice and the rise of sea level, all that extra water is just going to spill over the sides of a flat Earth,” Kerry said.

    http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...ing-spill-over

  5. #4
    Points: 39,654, Level: 48
    Level completed: 69%, Points required for next Level: 496
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    VeteranTagger First Class25000 Experience PointsSocial
    waltky's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    5662
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    8,859
    Points
    39,654
    Level
    48
    Thanks Given
    2,515
    Thanked 2,140x in 1,616 Posts
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Red face

    Granny says, "Dat's right - it's gonna be just awful if we don't stop climate change...

    Obama Predicts Submerged Cities, Mass Migrations, Food Supplies Decimated ‘If We Don’t Act Boldly’ on Climate Change
    September 20, 2016 | In a speech to the United Nations Tuesday, President Barack Obama said if the world does not “act boldly” on climate change, there will be "mass migrations," submerged cities and "decimated" food supplies.
    “If we don’t act boldly, the bill that could come due will be mass migrations and cities submerged and nations displaced and food supplies decimated and conflicts born of despair,” said Obama.

    “The Paris agreement gives us a framework to act but only if we scale up our ambition, and there must be a sense of urgency about bringing the agreement into force and helping poorer countries leapfrog destructive forms of energy,” he added. “So for the wealthiest countries, a green climate fund should only be the beginning,” Obama said.

    “We need to invest in research and provide market incentives to develop new technologies and then make these technologies accessible and affordable for poorer countries and only then can we continue lifting all people up from poverty without condemning our children to a planet beyond their capacity to repair,” he said.

    http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...d-nations-food

  6. #5
    Points: 39,654, Level: 48
    Level completed: 69%, Points required for next Level: 496
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    VeteranTagger First Class25000 Experience PointsSocial
    waltky's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    5662
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    8,859
    Points
    39,654
    Level
    48
    Thanks Given
    2,515
    Thanked 2,140x in 1,616 Posts
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Red face

    Obviously, AlGore, Kerry don't have their thumbs on the pulse of the public...

    Pew: Only 27% of Americans Believe There is Consensus That Human Activity Causes Climate Change
    December 7, 2016 – A recent survey by the non-partisan Pew Research Center found that a large majority of Americans are skeptical about the prevailing scientific understanding of climate change, with only 27 percent saying they believe there is a consensus that human activity is its main cause.
    That belief is at odds with the scientific community, Pew noted, citing a 2013 report from the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that concluded “with 95% certainty that human activity is the dominant cause of observed warming since the mid-20th century.” The Pew survey was conducted between May 10 and June 6 as a part of an examination of public attitudes about scientific research related to climate change and genetically modified foods. The survey found that only 28% of Americans surveyed believe that climate scientists understand the causes of climate change “very well’- compared to 32% who said that scientists had a "not at all well" understanding of the causes of climate change

    It also suggested that despite their skepticism over the cause of climate change, Americans still tend to trust information on it provided by climate scientists over other sources, including the energy industry, the news media, and elected officials. Pew reported that 39% of those surveyed said that they trust climate scientists “a lot to give full and accurate information”, while only 7% answered that they trust energy industry leaders and the news media to do so. Only 4% of survey respondents said they trusted elected officials to provide accurate information on climate change.

    The study also found a deep divide between conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats, with 54% of liberal Democrats saying they believe that climate scientists understand the causes of climate change “very well” - a view supported by only 11% of conservative Republicans. Moderate- to- liberal Republicans and moderate- to- conservative Democrats fell somewhere in between that wide 43% gap. However, roughly two-thirds of those surveyed (67 percent), believe climate scientists should have a major role in making policy decisions about climate change, compared to 56% of Americans who believe that the general public should have a major role.

    http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...climate-change

  7. #6
    Points: 39,654, Level: 48
    Level completed: 69%, Points required for next Level: 496
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    VeteranTagger First Class25000 Experience PointsSocial
    waltky's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    5662
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    8,859
    Points
    39,654
    Level
    48
    Thanks Given
    2,515
    Thanked 2,140x in 1,616 Posts
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Question

    Mebbe the weather was too bad?...

    Climate Change Study Canceled Because of Impact of Climate Change
    June 16, 2017 - The University of Manitoba has terminated its project to study climate change in the Hudson Bay area because of hazardous ice conditions caused by a change in the climate.
    The canceled part of the $17 million, four-year study involved the Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker Amundsen, which was scheduled to sail through the area making scientific measurements and observations.


    But the southward flow of Arctic sea ice, caused by climate change, led to unusually severe ice conditions along the northern coast of Newfoundland, where the Amundsen is involved in marine safety operations. That meant the ship could not depart for Hudson Bay, a huge ocean basin in northeastern Canada, in time to meet the research objectives.



    A male polar bear walks along the shore of Hudson Bay near Churchill, Manitoba



    Forty scientists from five Canadian universities planned to study the impact of climate change on Arctic marine and coastal ecosystems. However, the reminder of the study will continue, and scientists say results so far indicate that climate change already affects environments and communities, not only in the north but also in the south of Canada.


    https://www.voanews.com/a/climage-ch...-/3903710.html

  8. #7
    Points: 43,849, Level: 51
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 1,401
    Overall activity: 13.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    Hoosier8's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    10229
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    13,730
    Points
    43,849
    Level
    51
    Thanks Given
    1,421
    Thanked 10,220x in 6,442 Posts
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CreepyOldDude View Post
    I note that he's not a climatologist. Nor does he appear to have any training in climatology.

    That being the case, why would I give weight to his opinion that clouds, and not CO2, are the driving factor in climate change?

    Or is that not what he's saying?
    My question would be, why would you think CO2 drives the climate, it never has before?

  9. #8
    Points: 34,789, Level: 45
    Level completed: 56%, Points required for next Level: 661
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    SocialTagger First ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points
    midcan5's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    71956
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    5,955
    Points
    34,789
    Level
    45
    Thanks Given
    1,333
    Thanked 2,498x in 1,842 Posts
    Mentioned
    303 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Agnotology may be one of the greatest achievements of 'Citizens United' and 'Dark Money'. Fossil fuel pays for these pretend advocates kinda funny if it wasn't so serious an issue for humankind.

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...land_Institute

    Should you really like to understand and not make complex topics partisan baloney see: 'Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming' Naomi Oreskes, Erik M. M. Conway

    "By some accounts, the Koch brothers invested approximately $88 million between 1997-2011 into fighting studies on climate change and environmental regulations of the fossil fuel industry. We submit that the CKF’s history of supporting specious anti-science research and organizations, aimed to protect the profit of their own industries, potentially damages Wake Forest’s academic reputation, scholarly credibility, and Pro Humanitate commitment to social justice."https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdPLqHmQLw8JZRHlVcTaaF4vQSLXwu76opjBJasllqV RubfLg/viewform
    Wanna make America great, buy American owned, made in the USA, we do. AF Veteran, INFJ-A, I am not PC.

    "I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to midcan5 For This Useful Post:

    Crepitus (06-19-2017)

  11. #9
    Points: 43,849, Level: 51
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 1,401
    Overall activity: 13.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    Hoosier8's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    10229
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    13,730
    Points
    43,849
    Level
    51
    Thanks Given
    1,421
    Thanked 10,220x in 6,442 Posts
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by midcan5 View Post
    Agnotology may be one of the greatest achievements of 'Citizens United' and 'Dark Money'. Fossil fuel pays for these pretend advocates kinda funny if it wasn't so serious an issue for humankind.

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...land_Institute

    Should you really like to understand and not make complex topics partisan baloney see: 'Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming' Naomi Oreskes, Erik M. M. Conway

    "By some accounts, the Koch brothers invested approximately $88 million between 1997-2011 into fighting studies on climate change and environmental regulations of the fossil fuel industry. We submit that the CKF’s history of supporting specious anti-science research and organizations, aimed to protect the profit of their own industries, potentially damages Wake Forest’s academic reputation, scholarly credibility, and Pro Humanitate commitment to social justice."https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdPLqHmQLw8JZRHlVcTaaF4vQSLXwu76opjBJasllqV RubfLg/viewform
    LOL, the usual green activist propaganda. So you think the Koch brothers are paying all the solar scientists and climate scientists that produce inconvenient science?

  12. #10
    Points: 668,262, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.8%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433960
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    198,207
    Points
    668,262
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    32,237
    Thanked 81,549x in 55,058 Posts
    Mentioned
    2014 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by midcan5 View Post
    Agnotology may be one of the greatest achievements of 'Citizens United' and 'Dark Money'. Fossil fuel pays for these pretend advocates kinda funny if it wasn't so serious an issue for humankind.

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...land_Institute

    Should you really like to understand and not make complex topics partisan baloney see: 'Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming' Naomi Oreskes, Erik M. M. Conway

    "By some accounts, the Koch brothers invested approximately $88 million between 1997-2011 into fighting studies on climate change and environmental regulations of the fossil fuel industry. We submit that the CKF’s history of supporting specious anti-science research and organizations, aimed to protect the profit of their own industries, potentially damages Wake Forest’s academic reputation, scholarly credibility, and Pro Humanitate commitment to social justice."https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdPLqHmQLw8JZRHlVcTaaF4vQSLXwu76opjBJasllqV RubfLg/viewform

    Seems to me you're trying to say skepticism in science is evil.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts