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.
We know the fossil fuel industry has a large stake in the predictions but what exactly would NASA or any other organization have to gain.
As I said earlier, their funding is predicated on there being an imminent climate crisis.
Billions of dollars every single year to study the climate that is not based on desire for knowledge no matter where it leads but is based on this notion of understanding and averting a crisis.
So, in that environment, how welcoming or accepting do you think the people who direct the allocation of funding or the publishers who select studies for peer review would be to any research that might cast doubt or call into question the more alarmist conclusions?
Once climate change is no longer seen as a threat...
Billions of dollars of research funding would be allocated elsewhere. Careers would end. Political organizations who enjoy tremendous power and influence, like the IPCC would no longer be relevant or likely even exist. For those who make millions on the speaking circuit, like James Hansen and Al Gore, that gravy train would end. People and companies who make billions on carbon credits and green energy would see their profits dry up.
People frame this argument as altruism versus greed but there is plenty of greed and self-interest on the alarmist side as well.
We will see if Trump changes his mind that this is just a Chinese conspiracy. So far 16 of the 17 hottest years on record have occurred since 2000. This will likely come up with his EPA appointee.
The earth is getting warmer.
So what?
Climate has been changing long before humans walked this planet, and it will continue to do so long after we are gone. We are nothing in the grand scheme of things.
Although I believe global warming is real unlike many on the right, I believe the warmer temperatures could be a good thing. Too much of the planet is way too cold.. those who get too hot in tropical climates can simply move to a more temperate climate.. people tend to flock to warm climates and people who like a Minneapolis type climate are fruitcakes. These leftists tend to talk about global warming but many don't want to do anything in their own lives to help.. they'd rather just throw other people's money at it while they continue to build sprawling mcmansions and drive huge vehicles, fly around the world on vacation multiple times a year, etc.
Add in all the nations that are developing like China, India, etc. and it's a recipe for higher CO2 levels for sure. Caring about the environment starts with not flying 100,000+ miles per year all over the world and staying put. I love confronting lefties on this because they are all about seeing the world, experiencing everything life has to offer, etc... but that takes resources.. fuel.. produces greenhouse gases... meanwhile though I voted for Trump my carbon footprint is probably lower than the majority of Hillary voters because of my lifestyle, and certainly the uber wealthy, radical left in Hollywood that fly all over the place, consuming mass resources to make their films.. though admittedly less so lately where most movies can be made entirely on computer now.. I suppose that's an improvement there. Viva le technology!
3 feet of snow in the Sahara desert, Spain and Italy get a blizzard, Alaska is 40 degrees below zero. If everybody cherry picks weather and temperature data, we can say its getting hotter or colder.
We were talking about palm trees in Antarctica, presumably because you were making the case that it was warmer in the past. No one is denying that currents have an impact on climate but to claim that they were the reason that there are palm trees at the poles is unsubstantiated.
I noticed you still haven't answered my question, you don't believe the current science that CO2 is responsible, so what's your theory for the warming in the last century.
Topic isn't about me and line by line rebuttals only mean you can't address what was said in context.
On the first point I was answering your question which apparently was a fallacious attempt to discredit what was said. It's obvious that you didn't want the answer when it was actually answered with science.
And now you attempt to shift the goal post again to talk about CO2. The topic is about global warming, not CO2. If you think they are linked that is your burden to prove. It's obvious you don't have proof as evidenced by your lack to hold an honest discussion on the matter.
You stated there were palm trees in Antarctica at one time, I simply asked you the physical changes that caused that, specifically. Also you might want to add in the reason that you believe we have the hottest year on record since you believe that it's other than man, or maybe you just don't know.
"Average surface temperatures over land and the oceans in 2016 were 0.94 degrees Celsius above the 20th-century average of 13.9 degrees Celsius, according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)."
Well they're records while we've been recording temperatures. I doubt it's the warmest it has ever been on Earth. The Earth is billions of years old...
We will see if Trump changes his mind that this is just a Chinese conspiracy. So far 16 of the 17 hottest years on record have occurred since 2000. This will likely come up with his EPA appointee.
This isn't a forum of scientists who study climate change. As you have seen you will receive in retort sound bites and emotional banter. "Fake News!", etc...
I work in Oil and Gas. I have every incentive to *believe* fossil fuel usage is not a problem. However, humans being a cause of the current global warming phenomenon is agreed upon by over 97% of scientists whom study climate change. This is about the same percentage as the percentage of doctors whom agree that smoking causes lung cancer.
Therefore I think with almost no shadow of a doubt that we are causing global warming. The debate is... what will happen and what could we realistically do about it? Unfortunately however with Trump we are back to the question of whether or not global warming is real, which should not be a question at all at this point. It's like going back to whether or not the world is round.
This isn't a forum of scientists who study climate change. As you have seen you will receive in retort sound bites and emotional banter. "Fake News!", etc...
I work in Oil and Gas. I have every incentive to *believe* fossil fuel usage is not a problem. However, humans being a cause of the current global warming phenomenon is agreed upon by over 97% of scientists whom study climate change. This is about the same percentage as the percentage of doctors whom agree that smoking causes lung cancer.
Therefore I think with almost no shadow of a doubt that we are causing global warming. The debate is... what will happen and what could we realistically do about it? Unfortunately however with Trump we are back to the question of whether or not global warming is real, which should not be a question at all at this point. It's like going back to whether or not the world is round.
Our own government is imposing a nation-wide carbon tax at $10/tonne all while approving pipelines for an industry that's subsidized by the taxpayer at $19/tonne. The tax will go up annually until it reaches $50/tonne, but it just shows how far behind our country is and where our priorities really lie for the foreseeable future.
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.
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.
These leftists tend to talk about global warming but many don't want to do anything in their own lives to help.. they'd rather just throw other people's money at it while they continue to build sprawling mcmansions and drive huge vehicles, fly around the world on vacation multiple times a year, etc. 
Viva le technology!
