Climate scientists routinely advocate for policy.
Just to be clear, as you seem to not be understanding, I don’t disagree the climate changes. Quite the opposite.
The Environment
- Thread starter Mierin
- Start date
Just to be clear, as you seem to not be understanding, I don’t disagree the climate changes. Quite the opposite.
ZRod
Active member
ZRod
Active member
There is no content. No links to research papers, no citations. It's basically a guy's opinion. For a supposed Academic it's a terrible article. As I pointed out, it's no surprise because, the sources is dubious on all fronts.
Last edited by a moderator:
teachercd
Active member
I mean, this entire site is everyone thinking they know everyone else's job better. Are we stopping that now?
Last edited by a moderator:
ZRod
Active member
First he doesn't state what paper is drawing the 97% conclusion. Not that we should be hung up on that number to begin with when it's always an overwhelming majority, but it'd be nice to know
Then he's specific about one survey by AMS, and it's extremely important to note that meteorologist are not necessarily climate scientists. However, they overwhelming say that climate change is happening and it's man made. Only 6% definitely said climate change was not influenced by man.
Finally he talked about some Dutch survey, but then points out the survey doesn't really include only climate scientists aka climate experts. So, why did he bother bringing up the AMS survey then???
Last edited by a moderator:
Guy Chamberlin
Active member
This is what you do when Exxon pays you to find whatever bits and pieces you can, proclaim yourself an expert, and angrily declare that the snowball in your hand is equivalent to the glacier of evidence against you.
Guy Chamberlin
Active member
You clearly have no idea what our brave fireman go through, trying to decide what to wear or not wear for their charity calendars.
Guy Chamberlin
Active member
teachercd
Active member
"Hey, Tad, Brenner, Ollie, do I go with one strap up over my shoulder and topless or do I go just in the boots with a firehose covering my junk"
Guy Chamberlin
Active member
You don't believe that the 375 billion tons of carbon released from previously non-existent vehicles and factories since the Industrial Revolution has created a greenhouse effect, replicable though peer reviewed modeling and experiment.
That's the science part. The scientists who think we can do something about it is a slightly different story, with a greater divergence of opinion.
I get where you're going with "I don't disagree the climate changes" but everything you're saying remains in the "climate change hoax" camp. I don't think you'll find many smart people there, but you will find a lot of angry people who want to cast this as another tree-hugger issue. It's not.
JJ Husker
Donor
Everyone knows the climate changes. The problem is, you seem to attribute the negative changes to random chance like it will start trending in a better direction given enough time and you refer to overwhelming scientific consensus as alarmism.
So the question becomes, do you believe man and emissions are negatively impacting climate change? Yes or no? If yes, why do you choose to refer to it as alarmist rather than actionable information?
You can’t say you believe the science but then do nothing but cast aspersions on the science. It’s not consistent and it’s not credible.
Sorry for the delay, just getting back to this.
1) yes, man has had a slight effect on climate change.
2). It’s alarmist because the dire predictions from even the 80’s haven’t come true and we have plenty of time to allow technological advances to get us to another source of energy. It’s gotten so bad that just recently, national media are blaming obesity on climate change!!
BigRedBuster
Active member
[No message]