re: 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, declare climate 'emergency' a myth

quote:

---

The Earth's climate is constantly changing. As such the term 'climate change' is real and is happening, but the focus should be pinning changes to human influences. There is not any data out there that can support this. And the human influence piece is what the left has invested in.Changing terms such as high pressure systems to 'heat domes' is just one example.

---

quote:

---

The atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide have increased significantly since the Industrial Revolution began. In the case of carbon dioxide, the average concentration measured at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii has risen from 316 parts per million (ppm) in 1959 (the first full year of data available) to more than 411 ppm in 2019 [Figure B2]. The same rates of increase have since been recorded at numerous other stations worldwide. Since preindustrial times, the atmospheric concentration of CO2 has increased by over 40%, methane has increased by more than 150%, and nitrous oxide has increased by roughly 20%. More than half of the increase in CO2 has occurred since 1970. Increases in all three gases contribute to warming of Earth, with the increase in CO2 playing the largest role. See page B3 to learn about the sources of human emitted greenhouse gases. Learn about the sources of human emitted greenhouse gases.

Scientists have examined greenhouse gases in the context of the past. Analysis of air trapped inside ice that has been accumulating over time in Antarctica shows that the CO2 concentration began to increase significantly in the 19th century [Figure B3], after staying in the range of 260 to 280 ppm for the previous 10,000 years. Ice core records extending back 800,000 years show that during that time, CO2 concentrations remained within the range of 170 to 300 ppm throughout many “ice age” cycles - learn about the ice ages - and no concentration above 300 ppm is seen in ice core records until the past 200 years.

Measurements of the forms (isotopes) of carbon in the modern atmosphere show a clear fingerprint of the addition of “old” carbon (depleted in natural radioactive 14C) coming from the combustion of fossil fuels (as opposed to “newer” carbon coming from living systems). In addition, it is known that human activities (excluding land use changes) currently emit an estimated 10 billion tonnes of carbon each year, mostly by burning fossil fuels, which is more than enough to explain the observed increase in concentration. These and other lines of evidence point conclusively to the fact that the elevated CO2 concentration in our atmosphere is the result of human activities.

---

quote:

---

You need to have a look at who they are.

It is an overwhelming group.

---

quote:

---

Rather, they said, the post seems to be the latest iteration of a broader disinformation campaign that for decades has peddled a series of arguments long discredited by the scientific community at large. Furthermore, the experts told me, the vast majority of the declaration’s signatories have no experience in climate science at all, and the group behind the message—the Climate Intelligence Foundation, or CLINTEL—has well-documented ties to oil money and fossil fuel interest groups.

“Looking at the list of signatories, there are a lot of engineers, medical doctors, and petroleum geologists and almost no actual climate scientists,” said Zeke Hausfather, a longtime research scientist at Berkeley Earth, a non-partisan nonprofit that specializes in analyzing climate data, and the former director of climate and energy programs at the Breakthrough Institute, another independent environmental research firm.

In fact, Ivar Giaever, who has been promoted as a kind of poster child for the declaration in what some believe is meant to give it credibility, won his Nobel with another scientist in 1973 for their discovery of electron tunneling in superconductors, not for anything remotely related to the study of global warming. Other signatories of the petition, as noted by climate journalist Dave Vetter, included at least eight current or former employees of oil giant Shell.

---

quote:

---

“There are millions of scientists worldwide, so I’m not sure getting 1,000 people to sign a petition is particularly meaningful,” Hausfather said, “particularly when balanced against the massive scientific agreement around climate change, including the national academies of science in pretty much every major country.”

In fact, the term “massive” in this context could be considered an understatement. A 2013 study found that some 97 percent of peer-reviewed research on climate change was in agreement: rapid climate change is happening beyond what would be considered resulting from natural causes, and humans are largely responsible. And in 2021, another study, this one published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, analyzed 88,125 peer-reviewed studies on climate change and found that a jaw-dropping 99.9 percent of them came to the same conclusion as the 2013 study.

---

quote:

---

Besides, one part of the HOAX that you dont yet understand apparently:

There is almost no such thing as a "climate scientist" and all of this list are highly qualified the the realm of understanding climate

---

quote:

---

This thread is becoming bizarre though I guess people who know nothing about it except propaganda dont understand even the basics of the lies they have been told.

---

quote:

---

See my previous post. Part of it: LINK

---

quote:

---

Experts Debunk Viral Post Claiming 1,100 Scientists Say ‘There’s No Climate Emergency’

---

quote:

---

As far as what he wrote, no it’s not accurate that there is zero evidence of mankind’s contribution

---

quote:

---

There is zero evidence of a climate "emergency," either at present, or impending d/t human cause. Not a smidgen of a scintilla of scientific evidence in that regard. NONE!

---

quote:

---

To the contrary, we currently reside atop an interstadial maximum. The climate alternative would indeed constitute an "emergency." Unless and until we determine why our ice age climate variances occur, we haven't the foggiest clue WTF we should be doing, even if we could substantially influence global climate.

---

quote:

---

You're starting to get it. Even the beginnings of this most recent of Earth's ice ages predate man. Yet the graph represents MASSIVE climate change. Far more so than anything even MSNBC's most extreme climate "experts" would portend.

---

quote:

---

Nobody argues the present temperature. The delta in it is all that matters, and if it’s accelerating and by how much. And ultimately what is driving it.

---

quote:

---

Ah. So let's be clear, you don't believe there is a climate crisis or a climate emergency demanding our immediate attention?

Because if that is your stance, it separates you from virtually every so-called climate expert out there promoting the "science" of anthropogenic global warming.

---