Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-15-2018, 09:57 AM
 
25,445 posts, read 9,805,591 times
Reputation: 15337

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey View Post
No one denies that climates change. There is, however, no scientific evidence or proof based on the scientific method that supports the theory of man made global warming. As pointed out, our country is remarkably clean in terms of toxins and chemical waste in the environment. The warmer agenda is about redistribution of our country’s wealth, not the planet’s welfare.
You obviously haven't been following the scientific evidence. But that's okay. It's here and happening regardless of who believes it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-15-2018, 09:58 AM
 
25,445 posts, read 9,805,591 times
Reputation: 15337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thom Jenkins View Post
climate change has existed for 4.5 billion years. what people deny is the fake lib mumbo jumbo that we have to do this, this or this without any regard to the cost or knowing what the benefit will be. if there is a way to curb manmade climate change the ONE AND ONLY solution is population control - get the earth back down to 4-5 billion people would be a good start.
Most scientists and many who believe in climate change know we have jumped the shark and there is nothing we or anyone else can do to stop it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2018, 10:07 AM
 
Location: Posting from my space yacht.
8,447 posts, read 4,752,145 times
Reputation: 15354
The reality of climate change is irrelevant. Climate change is just a vessel the left uses to jam their pre-existing economic and social agendas down out throats with a sense of life and death urgency. If climate change was not tied in so closely to the left's political agendas we'd be able to have a much more productive discussion on the matter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2018, 10:34 AM
 
Location: OH->FL->NJ
17,004 posts, read 12,592,213 times
Reputation: 8923
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbdwihdh378y9 View Post

What's the point in admitting climate change? No one on the Left is willing to do anything about it.

I mean, obviously, the first step in addressing AGW is stopping immigration from too-many-children countries to negative-popuation-growth countries.

But y'all don't advocate that, which means you're scamming us.
Or preaching AGW while renting 400 foot yachts that go 50 feet to the gallon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2018, 10:39 AM
 
Location: PSL
8,224 posts, read 3,497,598 times
Reputation: 2963
Quote:
Originally Posted by dothetwist View Post
Rick Scott current GOP Florida governor (and current GOP candidate for US Senate) BANNED FL government workers from even using the words, climate change.

He compounded his denial of climate change by allowing private corporations to profit by releasing polluted water into Lake Okeechobee over the past several years under his administration.

Currently the enormous amounts of Okeechobee's green algae caused by Scott's catering to business interests, has runoff into the rivers and is feeding a horrible red tide on the west coast. Dead dolphins, manatees and even a whale (first time a whale has died in a red tide) along with literally TONS of dead fish litter the otherwise pristine shores of Sarasota and nearby areas.

While red tides are naturally occuring, scientists agree that it is the pollution in Okeechobee that has brewed this red tide into the monster it is.

I have redneck (trump) neighbors and workers in my part of Florida. They ALL fish for fun and food. I hope they turn their backs on GOP Scott this November.
Know what contributed to that?
Don't blame Rick Scott for that one. Blame all of the canals put in to keep points east west and south from flooding ever see the map of the canals that run to lake Okeechobee? Where do they run through?
And where do they back pump water from?

That lake were to flood? Kiss south Florida goodbye. That lake is big enough to be considered a sea.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2018, 10:43 AM
 
Location: NJ
23,556 posts, read 17,227,205 times
Reputation: 17591
What's the point?


Matters not if you embrace the fantasy of government intervention halting impending doom in time to save the earth, within the timeframe warmers have given before it is too late. Or if you don't embrace it.


The celestial dance in which the earth participates is independent of the creatures who found a temporary niche in an eddy on the river of change. If they cannot adapt, as opposed to fantasizing about intervention, they go away.


We have history repeating itself as egocentric driven warmers place themselves at the center of the universe and persecute non believers, as if the doubters will further offend the gods to bring their wrath down upon all humanity.


So when California demands memory cards used in camera's be labeled with a warning that exposure to it may cause cancer, it gives us all confidence the government is competent to be our savior and have enough influence to alter the dynamics of the balance of the universe which created conditions favorable to temporary human life on earth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2018, 10:46 AM
 
19,718 posts, read 10,124,301 times
Reputation: 13086
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawac34618 View Post
Instead of denying science and trying to convince everyone that global warming is a hoax for the sake of corporate interests or religious ideology, why not accept the science but make your case as to why laws and regulations to help combat it aren't a good idea? There are some legitimate cases that can be made on whether or not the benefit of a policy to help curb climate change would actually be effective at all and whether or not the benefit outweighs the cost (be it in terms of the deficit or a hit to the economy). It seems to me that would be more effective than trying to undermine the scientific community. I'm certain several of the responses I get will be stuff like "climate change is a leftist hoax" or something similar. However I am more apt to trust the science since its includes things we can measure over the conservative position that a deity, for whom no proof exists, controls the weather. When it comes to "scientific" reports that cast doubt on climate change, follow the money. Typically it will lead to either some corporation that benefits from lax climate laws or some religious organization.

So for those that support the free market and don't think environmental laws are necessary, why don't you frame your argument that way instead of trying to deny the science?
It is denied because it isn't true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2018, 10:47 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,483,709 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawac34618 View Post
Instead of denying science and trying to convince everyone that global warming is a hoax for the sake of corporate interests or religious ideology, why not accept the science but make your case as to why laws and regulations to help combat it aren't a good idea? There are some legitimate cases that can be made on whether or not the benefit of a policy to help curb climate change would actually be effective at all and whether or not the benefit outweighs the cost (be it in terms of the deficit or a hit to the economy). It seems to me that would be more effective than trying to undermine the scientific community. I'm certain several of the responses I get will be stuff like "climate change is a leftist hoax" or something similar. However I am more apt to trust the science since its includes things we can measure over the conservative position that a deity, for whom no proof exists, controls the weather. When it comes to "scientific" reports that cast doubt on climate change, follow the money. Typically it will lead to either some corporation that benefits from lax climate laws or some religious organization.

So for those that support the free market and don't think environmental laws are necessary, why don't you frame your argument that way instead of trying to deny the science?
who is denying science??




so why are the liberfools denying science with their warped brains that cant figure out the environmental change is a natural cycle


just WHO are the SCIENCE deniers...the fascist liberals who are pushing the tax hoax of 'man-made' climate change

where has any conservative, or any other said that climate change is a myth??

actually 99% of the scientists and 99% of people understand that climate change always happens,,and the earth has warmed and cooled many,many,many, many times...all naturally


climate change is not a hoax or a myth.....but..."man-made" climate change is a hoax the FACT is man has extremely little to due with any climate change...99% of the scientists say that man's part is less than 4%

most rational people understand that climate change always happens,,and the earth has warmed and cooled many,many,many, many times...all naturally

1. science shows the climate changes naturally

2. science shows that climate change is natural with co2, methane, water vapor, sun cycles, rotation of the earth, earths core activity, and weather patterns all having play in it

3. science shows that the earth has warmed and cooled many, many times, with the cycles be for the most part regular....but never EXACTLY the same

4. science shows that the co2 has been much, much higher...even in cooler times

5. science (and botany ) shows that plants grow much better in higher co2....1200ppm is optimum

6. science shows that a warmer climate is not a desert climate, but a tropical wetter climate...

7. science shows that warming will be better for humans, as we will have longer growing seasons, with less need for irrigation

8 science (and botany) shows that if co2 goes below 200ppm plants stop growing

9. science shows that humans may have a SMALL part, in climate change (less than 10%)...therefore making the fascist mantra of ''man-made/man-caused"" a LIE

10. common sense shows that a carbon tax, will NOT reduce anyones carbon footprint, but will make the fascist liberal rich, richer


11. SCIENCE says that the climate changes NATURALLY....why do the big ego liberals think that man HAS TO BE the cause....especially when NOT ONE SCIENTIST has proven it to be man made/man caused


12. everyone knows (and its scientifically proven) that climate has changed many, many times

13.. and yet NOT ONE scientist has proven MANMADE global warming...science does show.. the globe evolves. The global environment changes..periodically...there have been WARMER TIMES..there have been cooler times..there have been times when C02 was MUCH, MUCH higher


14. guess what our co2 levels are currently around 380-390ppm.... co2 levels were over 700 ppm 20 thousand years ago....so what's the big deal


15. science shows us that plants would grow much better, and use less water if the co2 was HIGHER... .guess what, by science no less...the ideal co2 ppm for most plants is....900-1500 ppm.......


15a. Science shows plants exposed to elevated CO2 concentrations are likely to lose less water via transpiration, as they tend to display lower stomatal conductance.

15b. Science shows the amount of carbon gained per unit of water lost per unit leaf area - or water-use efficiency - should increase dramatically as the air's CO2 content rises.

15c. Scinece and the study of science shows In the study of Serraj et al. (1999), soybeans grown at 700 ppm CO2 displayed 10 to 25% reductions in total water loss while simultaneously exhibiting increases in dry weight of as much as 33%. So, elevated CO2 significantly increased the water-use efficiencies of the studied plants.

15d. science shows, that the typical outdoor air we breathe contains 0.03 - 0.045% (300 - 450 ppm) CO2. Research (SCIENCE) demonstrates that optimum growth and production for most plants occur between 1200 - 1500 ppm CO2.

15e. Plants under effective CO2 enrichment and management display thicker, lush green leaves, an abundance of fragrant fruit and flowers, and stronger, more vigorous roots. (this is why companys and governments SELL CO2 generators for greenhouses)


15f. science shows it is clear that as the CO2 content of the air continues to rise, nearly all of earth's agricultural species will respond favorably by exhibiting increases in water-use efficiency... which means, one can expect global agricultural productivity to rise in tandem with future increases in the atmosphere's CO2 concentration.

so more co2 is actually GREENER...its not theory, its scientific fact

16. science shows that humans use oxygen and expel (exhale) co2

17. science shows that greenery (plantlife) uses co2 and expels o2

18. science shows us that ANTARTICA was once a lush fertile land, not covered in ice

19. science shows us that Greenland was once a green lush fertile land, not covered with ice, in fact tropical like

20.. science shows us that GLACIERS created many of the geographical features that we look at today (ie Long Island was made by the lower reaching of glaciers, the great lakes were created by glaciers, the grand canyon was created by glacial melting)


21. world greenhouse gas levels lower today than 1992......and thats with the US population increasing 70 million..and world population increasing 1.6 Billion since 1992


22. cleaner air, is causing alot of the warming
Why cleaner air could speed global warming - latimes




In what must rank as the mother of all unintended consequences, and in a finding certain to have effects on international policy, NASA scientists have found that a decrease in airborne sulfates—dirty smokestack particles caused by burning coal and regulated by the Clean Air Act since the 1970s to prevent acid rain and air pollution—may account for as much as 45% of Arctic warming. Dr. Drew Shindell of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies reports:

"Sulfates, which come primarily from the burning of coal and oil, scatter incoming solar radiation and have a net cooling effect on climate. Over the past three decades, the United States and European countries have passed a series of laws that have reduced sulfate emissions by 50%. While improving air quality and
aiding public health, the result has been less atmospheric cooling from sulfates."


Cleaner air, one of the signature achievements of the U.S. environmental movement, is certainly worth celebrating. Scientists estimate that the U.S. Clean Air Act has cut a major air pollutant called sulfate aerosols, for example, by 30% to 50% since the 1980s, helping greatly reduce cases of asthma and other respiratory problems.

But even as industrialized and developing nations alike steadily reduce aerosol pollution -- caused primarily by burning coal -- climate scientists are beginning to understand just how much these tiny particles have helped keep the planet cool. A silent benefit of sulfates, in fact, is that they've been helpfully blocking sunlight from striking the Earth for many decades, by brightening clouds and expanding their coverage. Emerging science suggests that their underappreciated impact has been incredible.

Researchers believe that natural greenhouse gases such as CO2 have committed the Earth to an eventual warming of roughly 4 degrees Fahrenheit, a quarter of which the planet has already experienced. Thanks to cooling by aerosols starting in the 1940s, however, the planet has only felt a portion of that greenhouse warming. In the 1980s, sulfate pollution dropped as Western nations enhanced pollution controls, and as a result, global warming accelerated.

There's hot debate over the size of what amounts to a cooling mask, but there's no question that it will diminish as industries continue to clean traditional pollutants from their smokestacks. Unlike CO2, which persists in the atmosphere for centuries, aerosols last for a week at most in the air. So cutting them would probably accelerate global warming rapidly.

In a recent paper in the journal Climate Dynamics, modelers forecast what would happen if nations instituted all existing pollution controls on industrial sources and vehicles by 2030. They found the current rate of warming -- roughly 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit per decade -- doubled worldwide, and nearly tripled in North America.










and finally ....common sense states that as the earths population expands, so does the need for more plantlife...to keep our oxygen levels up.......yet the global warming liberals only want to talk about car/industry exhaust; man created co2,.... and how to tax it

its the liberfools, that are LYING on the subject

99% of the scientists believe in climate change...and 99% belive man's contribution is LESS THAN 4%

how can LESS THAN 4% be called ''man-made''?? if you were selling a piece of furniture... and 96% was made by machine, would you advertise "hand-made" for this piece of furniture????


so endeth the lesson

the biggest thing is why do the fascist brown shirt liberals deny science, and the fact , that the truth is it is a natural occurrence , and that NOTHING WE DO will change or speedup, or slow, or stop the natural climate change
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2018, 11:01 AM
 
Location: Central Washington
1,663 posts, read 876,610 times
Reputation: 2941
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
China is doing a lot more than the US to mitigate climate change, as you would know if you ever read anything other than local news....Here try it.

https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/con...enewable-ener/
That must explain why, 2017 American carbon emissions were 794 million tons lower than 2007, and are at their lowest point since 1992. While in the same time frame, Chinese emissions rose over two billion tons, and are higher than they have ever been, up 120 million tons last year alone. But I'm sure you already read all that in "globalcitizen".

https://www.bp.com/en/global/corpora...emissions.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2018, 11:10 AM
 
Location: USA
18,492 posts, read 9,161,666 times
Reputation: 8526
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeerGeek40 View Post
Nobody's denying that the temperatures have gone up. We just don't think there's much if anything that can be done about it, without taking the world economy back to the 1600's.
Unfortunately, you are probably correct. Right now, the only economical alternative to fossil energy is energy derived from nuclear fission. As we all know, nuclear fission has its own environmental risks. Solar and wind are severely limited by their intermittency, and the cost is still too high if the cost of backup generation is taken into account.

I personally think that nuclear fission is less risky than increasing the temperature of the entire planet by 4 degrees Celsius by the end of this century. But that’s just my opinion; I’m no expert in nuclear safety or environmental science.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:31 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top