Adlerdriver

97% huh? Ok..... let's go with that even though it's complete BS. 97% of some vague "scientific community" (whatever that is ) is telling us climate change is real.

That means the climate is changing and of that, I have no doubt. It's changed in varying ways lots of times over the millennia. But, that's not what you really mean is it?

You want us to believe...... (cue the angelic chorus and golden beams of enlightenment from Al Gore's general direction wherever that might be - probably on his G-5 enroute from another boondoggle)... that's right, believe with all our heart that humans are the cause of "climate change", right? That for good or bad, we actually have the ability to control the climate on a global scale (cue the Bond villain wringing his hands in evil anticipation of the chaos he'll cause).

Get 97% of whatever "scientific community" has been promised enough research grant dollars courtesy of Uncle Sugar to agree to that premise much less prove it.

No one can or will prove that with real science because it's complete BS and your 97% of whatever knows it.

deadseal

There is so much non politicized info out there. Start with NASA. read from an un biased and un emotional mind frame. Please take a second to read the facts.

look at carbon dioxide levels. There is clear scientific proof of the rise of carbon dioxide since the industrial revolution.

97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities.

im not sure why people get so much heart burn about this.
if you fart in a room it stinks
if you pump massive amounts of particulates into a closed system something is going to happen and that is where 97% of the people who are educated on this agree that it is linked to global warming....

it is literally like 97 out of 100 pilots tell some dude he needs more airspeed or he's going to crash and someone who doesn't know **** about airplanes still goes with the 3% crowd cause their favorite news anchor told them to

but you are right, republican politicians know best

deadseal

why? you cant fly a plane and be allowed to read science journals (of course not in flight, i only read 757 vol 2 for 4 hours straight when in the seat)

if anything it makes me a hypocrite for staying in a job that i believe contributes to the unknown potential consequences of particulate distribution in our atmosphere

ive blown more dinos out the back of a 1.3 sortie than i would use in a year of driving. and that's one guy flying around by himself so you can up your stupid nonsensical red herring of an arguement to tens of thousands per hour

Adlerdriver

ooooooooops......
Now don't you mean "climate change"? The whole warming thing wasn't lining up with the narrative and reality so it made it easier to call it climate change a while back...... 'member?

Yeah, we're all so dumb. If only we were as enlightened as you of the 97% (that number again ). It's just common sense, right? I like your fart in the room analogy. I've read lots of stuff, NASA, et al. There's no such thing as an un-politicized source on this. So, get back to me when some of the dire predictions of the future actually come to pass. Hint.... they won't. Al Gore and his ilk have been so spot on so far with those. If they make enough maybe they'll get lucky.

Bozo the pilot

Why so angry? Relax- we have a few hundred years before the seas rise

deadseal

i honestly dont even know the difference between global warming and climate change...its just makes sense to me that we have altered our particulate output dramatically and no one knows what the hell is going to happen, but ill trust the 97% of published climatologist....if you have a different number please say what it is instead of just standing there saying "no!!" louder and louder
maybe ease off the fox news dude, you'll live longer

Bozo the pilot

What do the "published climatologists" say about reversing climate change. Can they quantify the results from mandating 35mpg over the average of 25 now?
How has the Earth heated and cooled for several billion years before man?
My point is not to impugn your opinion, just to show how science is a best guess only. Be careful how you tout the findings of guessers.
I agree that we have contributed to climate change, but you and your hero "climatologists" are still unable to explain mans' exact ownership of the problem.
Future studies may prove something,but keep an open mind to differing perspectives. Liberals have a nasty habit of being elitist bullies regarding their opinions.
Good luck with your studies.

GatorHog

Yeah, you're probably right. Scientists couldn't have possibly figured out with any degree of certainty that CO2 affects the atmosphere and, as a result, the climate. Oh, wait. They have. Just one example is cited below...unless you want to tell all of those idiots at NASA that they're wrong. All those engineers and rocket scientists are pretty dumb.

So, assuming you're willing to graciously admit that CO2 can affect the climate, take the following into consideration: there are 7+ BILLION people in the world; they have 1+ BILLION working automobiles, and every single one produces 4.7 metric TONS of CO2 every year; the vast number of military and civilian jets in the world that fly every single day; the tens of thousands of factories in the world; and the reduction in CO2-absorbing trees and plants from the growth and spread of the population. With all of that, uh, yeah, it's very easy to see how the global population of earth could affect the atmosphere and, by result, the climate.

I doubt any of that will make you change your mind, though. Because you don't want to. No amount of evidence in the world can make someone believe something they simply don't want to believe. They'll simply discount the evidence, no matter how strong or numerous, or discount the source of the evidence as biased, even if it's very clear and likely that it's not.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Fe...ycle/page5.php
World Population Clock: 7.5 Billion People (2017) - Worldometers
World Vehicle Population Tops 1 Billion Units | News & Analysis content from WardsAuto
https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/gr...nger-vehicle-0

Lemons

That nonsense had been debunked time and time again. Only 65 papers out of thousands say AGW is the issue.

http://www.cfact.org/2014/05/30/the-...nge-consensus/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexeps.../#7fb23e593414

GatorHog

If the climate changes for the warmer, and that warming is high enough long enough, you don't think that would cause the globe to warm? It's really not that tough to put together.