re: Questions for those that believe in man made climate change / global warming

Hopefully we can all agree that less pollution is better than more pollution.

We don't hear about holes in the ozone layer anymore because we took steps as a society to eliminate those processes that created the issues.

That took some regulation and it added some costs to the private sector, but we didn't have to raise taxes to do that.

I'm all for finding ways to be better environmental stewards. I'm all for cleaner air and water, etc. I'm all for trying to live more minimally.

But when you tell me the only way to solve this is to raise my taxes, go jump off a bridge.

quote:

---

I'm not really into one side or the other on this one. I guess for me, I've always read, been taught, etc about the "greenhouse effect" and how certain things that humans produce contribute to that.

I've always figured we probably contribute a little, but the people that act like "The Day After Tomorrow" is about to happen on Earth are overreacting extremely.

---

That's pretty much where I am and I hate it when people try to put everyone into one of two boxes: Climate change is 100% fact, or climate change is a hoax. Clearly the climate is changing. I'm sure it will change some more in the future. No doubt man has contributed to the change, although I doubt seriously if anyone knows how much. I'm for clean water and clean air, but I don't want to wreck the economy by taking drastic measures that may have little-to-no effect on the climate

Carbon monoxide from vehicles have been entertaining atmosphere for decades. Greenhouse effect is real.

quote:

---

Questions for those that believe in man made climate change / global warming
Without looking it up can you:

Explain the science behind your belief?

or

Name and provide the background info (experience, etc) for one climate scientist?

---

I listen to a podcast called "Skeptoid" - very short episodes intended to debunk popular myths. (He had a famous dust up with Joe Rogan.)

This episode contains "simple proof" on the matter. (The link contains the transcript also.)

quote:

---

I am only going to make two points today, and they are to share two of the "smoking guns" by which we know that this is happening. They are simple to understand, and they are based on basic science that everyone should remember from school. They do not depend on models or predictions, but upon simple direct observations. They are that the rising CO2 (carbon dioxide) in the atmosphere is definitely produced by human activity, and that that same CO2 is warming the planet. Nothing in this episode is disputed, or is subject to alternate explanations, but too few people are aware of these facts.

---

LINK

To me, it's silly to dispute that there is warming. I think it makes more sense to fight alongside Bjorn Lomborg in arguing that: a)we have to count the BENEFITS as well as the costs, b)destroying trillions of dollars of near-future human wealth for the prospect of causing maybe a half degree limiting is stupid c)we have current tech which can possibly ameliorate the situation without spending so much

In laymen's terms, greenhouse gases, etc. and aerosols affect
and/or retard the release of heat away from the earth, thereby causing a warming effect in the atmosphere. Something along those lines. I'm not a scientist, but I trust the scientific method. I think a lot of people deny the effect of human activity on climate for purely political reasons.

ETA: I don't necessarily believe Man is wholly responsible, but Man may substantially contribute to it.

quote:

---

How many people that say it is a man made crisis understand the facts or can explain them?

Which leads to the other question: How many of those people even know anything about the ‘experts’ who are promoting the facts?

Those people are having faith that things are as they think them to be, with their belief based on snippets heard in pop culture.

Make no mistake: This is effectively a religion for many people today with very little to differentiate from other faith based ideas.

---

There are so many logical deductions in this issue that it's actually quite easy to know what's right and what's wrong.

Which side has been proven dishonest the most?

The side that continually persists on using the "97% of scientists..." bullshite over and over and over, even to this day, even though this has been proven without a shadow of doubt to be a complete farce?

The side that continually exploits children to make emotional ploys?

The side that wants to tax and regulate the shite out of the US as a solution, while giving China, India, and a dozen other greenhouse gas emitting countries who emit upwards of 20x more gases than we do a free pass?

The side that continually insists it's "settled science", while being wrong about every damn warming, cooling, polar cap melting, sea rising, end of the world prediction they've ever made?

The side that ALWAYS resorts almost immediately to an ad hominem name-calling bold-faced denial and insult just to try and shut down the debate when they're over-matched with contradictory facts they can't disprove?

The side that continually uses subjectively manufactured modeled data and holds them as more reliable than actual real data?

The side that continually picks very convenient dates to begin presenting trends, but are consistently shot down when those trend line dates are expanded?

OR

The side that always says, "Yes, the climate is changing, but it's natural and cyclical, and humans are not only having an infinitesimal effect on it, but there is also no realistic change humans could make to reduce emissions that would make even a tiny bit of difference"?

The side that knows that the sun and/or water vapor could (and will many many times) negate, with overwhelming ease, any forced change humans attempted at any given moment, so why destroy our economy and way of life over something so absurdly futile?

The side that knows and asserts this is not "settled science", and many legitimate climate scientists do not agree that Anthropogenic Climate Change is the problem the Left makes it out to be?

The side that consistently busts the other side for fudging numbers and fabricating data in their models?

The side that understands that taxing and regulating the shite out of the US, who is already the least percentage per capita greenhouse gas emitter, is a complete waste when you're going to let the worst emitters not only keep doing 20x more emissions than us, but let them continue increasing their percentage of emissions year after year?

The side that actually presents innovative and America-centric solutions that don't involve useless taxes and business stifling regulations and don't fundamentally change our entire economic system while every other country pretty much gets a pass?

The side that doesn't continually exploit children because they don't need emotionally charged arguments to make their case?



Sorry, but it's quite easy logic to see who's full of shite on this issue.

I don't even need to get into how 400 ppmv of CO2 is obnoxiously insignificant and meaningless compared to the heat forcing from the sun and convection from water vapor in a 1.1 million ppm total volume atmosphere.

quote:

---

Clean air should be a priority

Clean water should be a priority

Proper disposal of toxic and biological waste should be a priority.

Halting the effects of natural shifts in planetary temperatures that has been occurring for a billion years should not be a priority.

---

Amen

I've always said clean water and air are way more important and why big business willingly spends so much to bind them with global warming. It happens at every political rally I've ever attended, as soon a water or air issue is asked a red herring staffer will quickly interject global warming while the speaker's stumbling for a politically correct answer (...Senator Shelby's got it mastered). It's kinda like how a thief might holler fire in a dept store, so the place can be robbed once everyone runs out the door.

Try talking clean air on this forum and see how well it's been ingrained. . . . etc:me grammer

quote:

---

This is effectively a religion for many people today with very little to differentiate from other faith based ideas.

---

You're projecting.

Since I’m an expert on global warming.....

1) it’s the fricking Sun

2) whatever sliver of a count hair that humans could possibly contribute....

Would be from the fricks in India and China.

So.....