• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. scientists officially declare 2016 the hottest year on record.

The 'the earth's climate changed before when humans weren't around, therefore human activities can't change the climate' has to be one of the dopiest arguments by science deniers.

It's a lazy argument. It's like saying we cannot explain x, therefore God did it. They seem to think that there are some kind of mysterious forces that control our climate, many of which exist completely outside all of our knowledge of thermal physics.
 
It's a lazy argument. It's like saying we cannot explain x, therefore God did it. They seem to think that there are some kind of mysterious forces that control our climate, many of which exist completely outside all of our knowledge of thermal physics.

What's ironic, is that the only reason they know that the earth's climate changed in the past is because of the research of scientists who are saying that human activity (increasing GHG's in the atmosphere, deforestation etc) is causing the earth's climate to change now.


Richard Alley - 4.6 Billion Years of Earth’s Climate History: The Role of CO2
-National Academy of Sciences 152nd Annual Meeting- 2015

Past Climate Cycles: Ice Age Speculations

IPCC AR5 WG1 Ch5 -Paleoclimate
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter05_FINAL.pdf
 
Last edited:
What's ironic, is that the only reason they know that the earth's climate changed in the past is because of the research of scientists who are saying that human activity (increasing GHG's in the atmosphere, deforestation etc) is causing the earth's climate to change now.


Richard Alley - 4.6 Billion Years of Earth’s Climate History: The Role of CO2
-National Academy of Sciences 152nd Annual Meeting- 2015


Fifth Assessment Report - Climate Change 2013

Paleoclimate: Ch 5
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter05_FINAL.pdf

The problem is that they are ideologically against the idea of AGW. Thus no amount of evidence will convince them otherwise.

They are like fundamentalist creationists in this regard. A creationist is a creationist for religious reasons. They then justify their beliefs on either pseudoscience, their ignorance of life sciences, or a combination of the two.

Similarly, an AGW denier is an AGW denier for ideological reasons. They justify their beliefs on either pseudoscience, their ignorance of modern climate science, or a combination of the two.

No amount of evidence will sway them. Moreover, the vast majority of AGW deniers (but not all) are also hostile to most environmental protections and conservation measures. I would be willing to bet that a solid 80% of AGW deniers don't like the Endangered Species Act. Most of them don't like the idea of protecting large swaths of public land from any and all development. They don't like CAFE standards. They talk about a "war on coal", ignorant or ignoring the fact that coal would be an extremely dirty fuel even if carbon emissions were not an issue as the mining and burning of it has resulted in greater environmental damage than any other human endeavor in all of our history. There is simply no winning them over.

That all said, I don't think we are going to do anything meaningful in regards to mitigating climate change anyway. Even without deniers, humans are terrible at mitigating long term risks. I just personally cannot stand science denial.
 
Then I guess you don't mind more summer days with triple-digit heat.

Better than freezing temps in April or May when a vegetable garden should be producing food

Global cooling is far worse than global warming could ever be
 
Better than freezing temps in April or May when a vegetable garden should be producing food

Global cooling is far worse than global warming could ever be

Your position is spectacularly dismissive of the larger reality. I guess you don't care whether all the refineries around the Houston Ship Channel permanently flood, for example.
 
Give us a call when the water reaches your lower lip... :)
 
Your position is spectacularly dismissive of the larger reality. I guess you don't care whether all the refineries around the Houston Ship Channel permanently flood, for example.
You do know that the Refineries are ether built above the 25 foot elevation line, or behind massive levies?
I believe less than half of the refineries in the area had any water issues, from the massive 15' storm surge from Hurricane ike.
At the current stated global sea level rise of 3.2 mm per year, (a little over a foot a century),
the refineries should be ok for a millennium or so.
 
It does seem particularly warm this year, however, I remain unconvinced by the never ending scheme of the radical left and their push to use this period in a re-distributive push not only within the US but beyond our own borders to a global socialist money scheme....If Global warming is something that poses a threat to human's on a global scale in the immediate, what are the solutions beyond that which we have seen fail? And don't give me the fiat currency "carbon credit" con....
 
It does seem particularly warm this year, however, I remain unconvinced by the never ending scheme of the radical left and their push to use this period in a re-distributive push not only within the US but beyond our own borders to a global socialist money scheme....If Global warming is something that poses a threat to human's on a global scale in the immediate, what are the solutions beyond that which we have seen fail? And don't give me the fiat currency "carbon credit" con....
Part of the problem is that the alarmist, have not identified to correct problem!
We do have a problem, in as much as the fossil fuels, which have enabled the current massive improvements in lifestyle,
are both finite, and of insufficient supply to allow the worlds population to follow our current path.
The only viable solution in the short term, is to ramp up the ability to store surplus energy as hydrocarbon fuels,
while in parallel expanding the amount of energy we extract from solar, wind and nuclear power.
The Government can help, by streamlining how home energy producers attach to the grid, and
simplifying the nuclear permitting process.
The government can also fund broad research, but should not select technology through the tax code.
 
You do know that the Refineries are ether built above the 25 foot elevation line, or behind massive levies?
I believe less than half of the refineries in the area had any water issues, from the massive 15' storm surge from Hurricane ike.
At the current stated global sea level rise of 3.2 mm per year, (a little over a foot a century),
the refineries should be ok for a millennium or so.

1. Sea level rise may have been underestimated due to the release of carbonic acid from the oceans and underground methane.
2. There are entire series of underground pipes for some distance away from the refineries. These do not need to be compromised.
3. Just the rise in sea levels is far from our only concern.
4. Parts of the Gulf Coast--notably Louisiana, which is losing at least one football field of land every hour.

But I guess we're just supposed to twiddle our thumbs at all of this, because, you know, big profits for Big Oil.
 
1. Sea level rise may have been underestimated due to the release of carbonic acid from the oceans and underground methane.
2. There are entire series of underground pipes for some distance away from the refineries. These do not need to be compromised.
3. Just the rise in sea levels is far from our only concern.
4. Parts of the Gulf Coast--notably Louisiana, which is losing at least one football field of land every hour.

But I guess we're just supposed to twiddle our thumbs at all of this, because, you know, big profits for Big Oil.
1.The Sea level rise may have been overestimated, because of linearity errors between the tide gauges and the satellites.
2.The underground pipes are already in the ground, the water level does not effect them, (they also cross under rivers)
3. There are other concerns, but we are discussing the claims you made in post #131,
Your position is spectacularly dismissive of the larger reality. I guess you don't care whether all the refineries around the Houston Ship Channel permanently flood, for example.
4.Louisiana has a known subsidence issue, which is man caused, just not CO2, and there refineries are well protected as well.
 
And why should we do that? The world runs on fossil fuels.

The earth is going to warm and cool over time, so it'll do what it wants. The question is, can we actually do anything about it? What effect can we have compared to the Sun and other factors, which have a huge effect on the climate? Should we even try, and to what end? If someone screwed around with the Earth's climate years ago, we might not even be here.

You appear not to understand the issue at all. I'll leave it at that.
 
Ignorance and science denial takes over the White House. All references to climate change have been removed from Whitehouse.gov.
 
You appear not to understand the issue at all. I'll leave it at that.

Oh, I know the issue, that's for sure. And it really isn't about us saving the Earth from our presence. I'll leave it at that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Oh, I know the issue, that's for sure. And it really isn't about us saving the Earth from our presence. I'll leave it at that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Earth will warm and cool as it sees fit? As if the Earth has intentions?
You seem to think that the current warming trend is a natural occurrence. Scientific reference would be appreciated.

I'm not really interested in your personal take on things, but rather the source of your assumptions as pertains to science not politics.
 
The Earth will warm and cool as it sees fit? As if the Earth has intentions?
You seem to think that the current warming trend is a natural occurrence. Scientific reference would be appreciated.

I'm not really interested in your personal take on things, but rather the source of your assumptions as pertains to science not politics.

Yes, as in Mother Nature. You are aware that the Earth has not had a constant climate, aren't you? It changed all on it's own, before we were even here. Somehow, we are now in control of the climate? But with no evidence of it. And of course, the solution is bigger government and higher taxes. That's a strange solution.
 
Yes, as in Mother Nature. You are aware that the Earth has not had a constant climate, aren't you? It changed all on it's own, before we were even here. Somehow, we are now in control of the climate? But with no evidence of it. And of course, the solution is bigger government and higher taxes. That's a strange solution.

Dont like the solutions, so you deny the problem.

Classic.
 
Yes, as in Mother Nature. You are aware that the Earth has not had a constant climate, aren't you? It changed all on it's own, before we were even here. Somehow, we are now in control of the climate? But with no evidence of it. And of course, the solution is bigger government and higher taxes. That's a strange solution.

The climate has changed on it's own, without the help of man? Do you really think people and especially people with a scientific background such as myself are not aware of that fact? Your arguments are so rudimentary and shallow. Just admit it, because it's plain for everyone to see, you don't know the issue well and you don't know what you are talking about.

Now, that's not really a condemnation of you. Most people lack the background knowledge in the sciences needed to understand complex issues such as this. However, that being the case how is it that you can hold such a strong opinion such as you do? What is it based upon? Clearly not the science itself.
 
Same here... I live in the desert and the last 3 summers have been very mild.

The entire Earth's near surface, which includes the land and oceans is about 0.2C degrees warmer than it was 10 to 15 years ago. That's what is important, not how warm or cool it seems at any single place. It's about 1C warmer than it was 100 years ago in the global mean.

If we averaged those figures out over the entire Earth, which is what they in fact represent, you would see that the difference from place to place would vary much more than those amounts. You can detect the short term variability, and you have, but you will not detect the global average. Chances are that 3 years ago you would have said the winter was very cold, because over much of the continental U.S. it was. This winter is looking to be on the mild side overall while over Siberia it's been super cold. The whole Earth though, remains warmer than it was even just 10 years ago.
 
We have had an unseasonably warm January here in the flyover country. Thank you, global warming. January is usually miserable. If it keeps up I will be able to plant some coconuts.
 
Back
Top Bottom