"Irrefutable." Let's talk about that for a moment. There is some statistic that 98% of scientists claim global warming is a real threat. Well a majority of those scientists are on the government roll, and get huge grants from tax payers. Who is more in favor for these grants? well the same politicians who scream about global warming. My thinking is the money doesn't roll in as lucratively unless these "scientists" tow the line.

Now I don't know about you but I do find that suspicious and thus don't think it is unreasonable to be skeptical of the "science" that imposes heavy economic burdens on us.

 

Actually global warming, or at least what is causing it if indeed it is true is more of a religion than it is a science filled with intolerant zealots.

 

I'm glad your 6th grade education helped you get to the interwebs.

Gold Star for you!!!

 

This doesn't even make any sense. So, what is causing man made global warming is a religion? Wrong. It's not a religious belief, it's the reault of using fossil fuels for energy since the start of the industrial revolution. The only debate is what the effects will be and how quickly they'll transpire. And in my experience the intolerant zealots always tend to be out on the right mesmerized by the silly softly spoken magic spells whispered in their ears every Sunday.

 

Actually the cause of climate change hasn't been correlated.

However the fact that you still think that petroleum still comes from fossils shows you are not up to speed. It was long ago shown that petroleum is abiotic in nature.

 

Are you for real? Attacking him for using a commonly accepted term for petroleoum fuels? You actually thought this would strengthen your position?

 

Source please? I've done research, even gotten a grant to conduct research (which doesn't always produce results btw), but I wasn't driving around in a Porsche and retiring to my mansion after partying all day on free money. Most research is conducted by poor grad and pjs students overseen by phd professors and specialists, often doing baxk breaking work collecting data, spending extended time in the field, this is especially true for climate, geology, bilology, and many similar fields. I mean the military gets all kinds of grants too, right? Just more money given by the government right?, and I bet you have a love affair with them and all soldiers/sailors/marines/airmen/etc. I served in the military too but what I see is that you simply don't agree with the conclusions of one group, so you attempt to marginalized them and ignore any findings, only choosing to acknowledge what might support your beliefs.

 

You used the magic phrase "man made global warming" rather than just global warming. The overwhelming cause of global warming is water vapor in the air. "fossil fuels" are a distant distant second as far as green house gases go. Only considering "man-made" impacts seems to me to considerably skew the position, and seems like a statistical manipulation made to advance an agenda rather than remain objective.

 

It's a religion because it always draws back to the, "is it real" debate, because no one on the left wants to have a conversation of the effects of climate change.

The human race is going to burn every bit of hydrocarbons on this planet eventually. Climate change is real, even without humnas, so what will the effect be? This is where the argument from the politics of the left falls apart. If you objectively look at the fossil record, the Earth thrives at much warmer temperatures. The left would have you believe the Earth will be scorched, the oceans an acid bath, so as to push their politics.

 

The fact that right wing religous simpletons who deny science keep bringing the whole issue back to a debate over whether or not it's really hapoening isn't the left's doing. The left and the othe reasonable people have moved on and are trying to mitigate the harmful effects of modern society on our home. We all know the Earth has been warmer. Well, at least those of us who aren't too far out on the right claiming it was all created six thousand years ago. Were there internal combustion engines and coal powered energy plants during the last age of warming? NASA knows that wasn't it and in fact it was because the Earth was closer to the sun. It does that. It's not a fixed distance in its orbit. But that spatial change closer to the sun doesn't explain our current rise in surface temperatures. Neither does water vapor in the atmosphere or any other natural cause Fox News spouts forth. But the centuries long lingering effects of CO2 surely does account for it. CO2 levels which have risen by over 25% since the '70s and which keep accumulating at exponentially greater rates in the atmosphere every year absolutely explains why everything is warming. And justified concern over the unknown long term impact of all that CO2 isn't a political party issue at all. Although it is humorous and not surprising that most of the deniers are to the right of the political spectrum. It's all just part of the Great Pumpkin's plan. We'll be fine. All ahead full.