re: Educate me on Climate Change

1) It is a fact that climate changes. There is no debate that the Earth has been MUCH colder, and MUCH warmer than we are today, all without human interference

2) Scientists began asking for grants to study mans effect on the environment. The more dire the predictions, the more grants were awarded. Problem was, their computer models weren't even remotely close to the actual temps, 20 years later

3) Around 1998, temp data began leveling off, and in some areas got cooler. Despite the massive increase of CO2 in the atmosphere

3) So . . . . NOAA, THE SINGLE organization responsible for collecting data, began adjusting that data. And data that they had already archived. They don't deny it

4) They assigned temps to areas that have never had temps recorded. They changed actual temps recorded in historic newspaper accounts. They exchanged buoy temps for ship collected temps (known to include the heat from the ships engines). They created the theory of oceans as 'heat sinks', despite having no, zero, nada historic data on ocean temps at the depths they are claiming. They assigned sea ice levels, and thickness to a time when men were incapable of collecting such data

5) Scientists whose only access, was to the adjusted data released by NOAA, began raising alarms

6) But then, Hackers exposed emails from UK climatologists that proved they were undermining, and actually bullying skeptic climatologists

7) US govt scientists, working in US govt labs, refused to turn over raw data and methodology used in adjusting the raw data to the US Congress that pays them to do that work

8) A NOAA scientist upon his retirement blew the whistle on the US Paris presentation, And now it was knowingly and falsely written to show recent increases in warming. NOAA has admitted the need to revise the paper, in order to reflect more accurate data

So, in conclusion. The climate is changing, it always has. And those that support that man is responsible has admitted to assigning non-existent data, changing historic data, bullying skeptics, rebuffing scrutiny, and falsifying reports


Why would they need to do that? Unless they know its not actual conclusions, reached from the actual data?

quote:

---

So my knowledge on this is basically limited to what you hear on the mainstream news. For those who think climate change is not an issue or is not real or not a big deal can you explain why you feel this way and what information you have to back up your sentiments. I'm MAGA big time, the environment is the one area where I lean liberal but I want to get better educated on this issue. What ya got?

---

So, I believe in climate change, I believe that it is almost entirely caused by man, and I believe the effects are going to be unknown but most likely be very bad. (FYI, I also believe in nuclear energy, vaccines, and GMO crops.) So why do I believe in man-made climate change?

1) You do have to take one thing on faith. Scientists across a vast spectrum of disciplines (Forestry, Glaciology, Botany, Oceanography, Agriculture, Zoology, Geology and many others) are not lying to us that the earth is warming up at an unnatural rate just so they can trick out their Honda Civics. And the vast majority believe that the earth is warming up.

2) The reason why the earth is warming up is CO2. For well over 100 years scientists have known that extra CO2 in the atmosphere causes warming. It's such a well-established scientific principle, thousands of high school students prove it every year in science fair projects.

3) Ever since the industrial revolution, a butt-load of extra carbon dioxide has been added into the atmosphere and humans can be easily identified as the source. The reason is that burning fossil fuels give off a unique carbon isotope which can be easily spotted.

4) Scientists have ruled out every other plausible reason for the Earth's warming so far. It's not changes in the sun, the earth's orbit, volcanos, or deforestation. And until the climate skeptics come up a better answer, man made climate change is the best answer we have right now.

It's fake news designed to cuckhold the United States.

Based on the responses you have received thus far you should see that this was the wrong place to ask for unbiased insight on human caused climate change. The repeated myths and examples of ignorance really demonstrate the mental laziness that exist in our society. You'll be better off seeking unbiased views on it like that of corporations and entities that do not profit from climate change directives and infact will lose money if they get it wrong. Hell, watch a debate between scientist on the subject.

even though you asked for

quote:

---

... those who think climate change is not an issue or is not real or not a big deal can you explain why ...

---

... everyone will be an expert, everyone will offer an opinion, and no one will be able to definitely prove any of it. Nor will any amount of arguing effect this issue any more than talking about water change the way a boat floats.

Me, myself, (IMHO) I tend to look at this as more a global warning (rather than warming) argument. Where it's more about environmental destruction (than simply temperature swings) and is being used by producers of CO2 in an attempt to circumvent (or prevent) laws concerning environment protection. It's an assault on a much bigger issue, and by breaking down the serious discussion into bite sized talking points, they've diluted the main issue through misdirection. It's a tactic, it's divide and conquer. And by focusing on what's the hardest to comprehend or see, we're avoiding the rest of what we might need to take a hard look at.

Temperature change is one merely one facet of environmental concern, one single issue that has become a mantra. IT'S THE LUMPING TOGETHER OF ALL THINGS ENVIRONMENTAL. Until now all the rest is lost in headlines.

Serious issues like allowing our water resources to become like those of Europe, where you are told not to even brush you teeth with the stuff from a tap, are being pushed aside or lumped into a large winner take all basket. It's become a be-all to end-all stance, in order to avoid the larger discussion, to avoid talking pollution in general. To avoid discussing deforestation, or biodiversity, or of over fishing, or genetic modifications in the environment.... It's the catch all phrase of our day and the guys with the most to gain or loose (us) are being herded into inaction because we've allowed big business to define the argument for us. It's like a felon hollering 'THIEF' in a crowded mall and then stuffing his pocket when everyone is looking somewhere else. It's part bait and switch -n- part shell game combined.

In an isolated global atmospheric system as that of Earth, in hydrostatic equilibrium in the cosmic vacuum, heat is transmitted only in accordance with the laws of thermodynamics, the thermal and conductive properties of different components, such as ocean waters, soils, and atmospheric gases, and the atmospheric adiabatic gradient.

Therefore, the so-called "greenhouse effect" and pseudo-mechanisms, such as "back radiation," have no scientific basis and are contradicted by all laws of physics and thermodynamics, including calorimetry, yields of atmospheric gases’ thermodynamic cycles, entropy, heat flows to the Earth's surface, wave mechanics, and the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics.

Would you require more details or is this sufficient?

at best?...pure bullshite....at worst?...the means to extort a lot of money for a very few people...

quote:

---

Educate me on Climate Change

---

Start with a good thermo class. Follow with heat transfer.

This isn't the place for it.