Ice Melt

[EddieWalker]

Ah; everyone knows that all scientist are on the take and lie to us. They falsify the data to whatever they wish for grant money!

Makes one wonder how all those space missions or say the electronic devices came into being. Looking at the logistics and machinery of some of the recent manufacturing processes makes one wonder why only the climatologist scientific are considered not honest.

Great example of a "Straw Man" argument to prove a point using what appears to be an honest statement, but is in fact extremely misleading.

Nobody has said that "all scientist are on the take and lie to us." But of those that receive government funding in one form or another represent a very large percentage of those claiming global warming.

There is no denying that those in charge, or the leaders of global warming, have been caught lying about it over and over again.

NASA was a very respected agency that accomplished some amazing things. Nobody is denying that. But NASA became a political organization instead of a science organization, that pushed social justice ahead of science. Today, when NASA puts out something, it has to be verified to see how accurate and truthful it is based on it's political leaning.

I'm not sure what you are referring to in the manufacturing process comment, but it does make me think of how inefficient windmills are. Is there a windmill farm anywhere in the country that actually produces more energy then it uses? Is there a farm that can operate without government funding to make up the loss that they incur due to maintenance? GE made billions selling windmills that do not have the technology to create electricity for a profit. But because of politics, fueled by fake global warming claims, the government gives away money to everyone that is part of the windmill industry. Once the funding ends, the windmill farms fall apart and the power plants keep on generating electricity because they where never turned off or replaced.

 

[rekees4300]

Scientific Consensus | Facts Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

View attachment 618791

For the skeptics facts don't matter, emotions/money rule the day. Amazon forest is burning and Brazil's president refuses to put it out because the French president insulted him ... sad & unbelievable! :fire:

 

[CalG]

For the skeptics facts don't matter, emotions/money rule the day. Amazon forest is burning and Brazil's president refuses to put it out because the French president insulted him ... sad & unbelievable! :fire:

reality

Why Everything They Say About The Amazon, Including That It's The 'Lungs Of The World,' Is Wrong

 

[deezler]

Nobody has said that "all scientist are on the take and lie to us." But of those that receive government funding in one form or another represent a very large percentage of those claiming global warming.

There is no denying that those in charge, or the leaders of global warming, have been caught lying about it over and over again.

NASA was a very respected agency that accomplished some amazing things. Nobody is denying that. But NASA became a political organization instead of a science organization, that pushed social justice ahead of science. Today, when NASA puts out something, it has to be verified to see how accurate and truthful it is based on it's political leaning.

I'm not sure what you are referring to in the manufacturing process comment, but it does make me think of how inefficient windmills are. Is there a windmill farm anywhere in the country that actually produces more energy then it uses? Is there a farm that can operate without government funding to make up the loss that they incur due to maintenance? GE made billions selling windmills that do not have the technology to create electricity for a profit. But because of politics, fueled by fake global warming claims, the government gives away money to everyone that is part of the windmill industry. Once the funding ends, the windmill farms fall apart and the power plants keep on generating electricity because they where never turned off or replaced.

See, this is where your confirmation bias is kicking in. There is no clear pattern of "the leaders of global warming" (whatever that means) repeatedly lying about anything. What you have latched onto is a series of well funded attempts to intentionally discredit various scientists and organizations. You want to see that people have been lying to you about the very real evidence of climate change, so you seek out these manufactured stories, and believe them without researching them yourself.

The only reason that things at NASA have appeared to become at all politicized is because certain politicians chose to disagree with their real, scientific findings (GOP members whose campaigns were directly funded by fossil fuel industry). So now whenever NASA tries to publish their research, it is intentionally attacked by those who seek to profit from de-legitimizing it. They are still scientists trying to do real work.

Do you seriously think that a spinning wind turbine is not generating actual, usable electricity? Maybe go study some basic physics? Wind power generates 16% of the electricity in Texas, for pete's sake (~6% nationally). It's real and very effective. P.S. wind farms are not the only energy provider getting federal subsidies... just google it.

 

[gsganzer]

I believe it's changing, but whether it's from human activity or just a natural cycle, I can't make an educated decision. Unfortunately, for me, some of the science and their sources are questionable. Every time I see a claim that touts the "impact of climate change", it's all negatives. I never see anything that might "improve" with warmer temperatures. Certainly, with changing temperatures and rainfalls, some areas will no longer be fruitful for farming. But wouldn't there be areas that would become more fruitful? As CO2 levels increase and oceans warm, wouldn't algae and other photosynthetic organisms increase, which in turn would consume more CO2?


For me, do you try to stop climate change or are your efforts and resources better spent adapting too it? Because if you fail at stopping climate change, you'll still be paying to adapt to it anyway. So why not make the more cautious and fiscally responsible decision and focus your efforts solely on adapting to it? For our world leaders to be advocating otherwise, leaves a tiny voice in the back of my head that tells me this is really about making social changes in the modern world, NOT about combating climate change.

If you want to make some real impact on adapting to climate change, revise building standards for coastal areas and flood plains. Revise the flood plain maps and limit building in those areas. Revise storm water runoff and impermeable surface standards. Revise wind load standards. Revise electrical distribution and transmission standards so lines are underground where practical. These all seem like the cheapest and easiest things to fix.

 

[Snobdds]

If Climate change was real and our oceans will be rising any day now...why would the previous leader of the free world buy ocean front property that will soon be worthless? Should he not walk the walk for his his big talk.

 

[Snobdds]

Furthermore...if all the beach front property is going to be underwater, why are all the largest financial institutions still lending money to people buying property by the ocean. They aren't in the business of losing money...

 

[gsganzer]

I live 450 miles from the ocean at an elevation of 800ft above sea level. If I walk out into my backyard and dig a hole, I dig up coral fossils. My entire area was once a coral reef. Obviously, the sea levels were at one point in time 800+ feet higher than they are now, long before man ever walked the earth. I question research of 500 years (actually only about 100 years of actual scientific temperature measurements) and apply it to millennia.

Unfortunately, much of our skepticism of science and scientific research is the fault of scientists. How often are we bombarded with a new "scientific fact or study" only to have another study come out a year or so later that contradicts it? (Vaccines, drinking wine each day etc. etc.) Too many of our scientific studies are funded by a group shopping academia for a professor seeking grant money, who in turn cherry picks data to provide a favorable outcome for the benefactor.

Like I said, I'm not educated enough on the scientific data to make a determination. However, I do feel I'm educated enough to realize that in many instances science is anything but scientific.

 

[bigtiller]

See, this is where your confirmation bias is kicking in. There is no clear pattern of "the leaders of global warming" (whatever that means) repeatedly lying about anything. What you have latched onto is a series of well funded attempts to intentionally discredit various scientists and organizations. You want to see that people have been lying to you about the very real evidence of climate change, so you seek out these manufactured stories, and believe them without researching them yourself.

The only reason that things at NASA have appeared to become at all politicized is because certain politicians chose to disagree with their real, scientific findings (GOP members whose campaigns were directly funded by fossil fuel industry). So now whenever NASA tries to publish their research, it is intentionally attacked by those who seek to profit from de-legitimizing it. They are still scientists trying to do real work.

Do you seriously think that a spinning wind turbine is not generating actual, usable electricity? Maybe go study some basic physics? Wind power generates 16% of the electricity in Texas, for pete's sake (~6% nationally). It's real and very effective. P.S. wind farms are not the only energy provider getting federal subsidies... just google it.

37% in Iowa and breathing the difference.

 

[rekees4300]

Obviously, the sea levels were at one point in time 800+ feet higher than they are now, long before man ever walked the earth.

Perhaps land levels were 800- feet lower than they are today, thus explaining why coral fossils are found at 800+ feet. It's called "Plate Tectonics". 100 million years ago Texas was 2,500 feet deep. :scubadiver:

Western Interior Seaway - Wikipedia