• 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!

NYT: U.S. Report Says Humans Cause Climate Change, Contradicting Top Trump Officials

Why don’t we urge our top scientists to study the issue and write peer reviewed articles on the topic. Then compare US findings with what other countries’ scientists have found. Then maybe we could have an international conference and recommend suggested practices for countries to implement voluntarily. I presume they might suggest — assuming the consensus is that human activity affects the climate negatively— that we cut back on emissions from coal and other fossil fuels, which actions might have benefits beyond addressing possible climate change. They could also get to the bottom of the allegations of fraud by China that the president revealed.

Who could argue with that?
 
Nickyjo said:
Why don’t we urge our top scientists to study the issue and write peer reviewed articles on the topic. Then compare US findings with what other countries’ scientists have found. Then maybe we could have an international conference and recommend suggested practices for countries to implement voluntarily. I presume they might suggest — assuming the consensus is that human activity affects the climate negatively— that we cut back on emissions from coal and other fossil fuels, which actions might have benefits beyond addressing possible climate change. They could also get to the bottom of the allegations of fraud by China that the president revealed.

Who could argue with that?
Click to expand...

I thought that had already been done. I believe Judith Curry had a part in it.
 
jc456 said:
I thought that had already been done. I believe Judith Curry had a part in it.
Click to expand...

Her conclusion is that “we can’t tell” if humans are behind warming. Ok, get a grant from some right leaning foundation and have your results peer reviewed. We’ll count you among those who disagree.

Meanwhile let’s cut emissions while we wait for you to overcome all the evidence others have gathered.
 
Nickyjo said:
Her conclusion is that “we can’t tell” if humans are behind warming. Ok, get a grant from some right leaning foundation and have your results peer reviewed. We’ll count you among those who disagree.

Meanwhile let’s cut emissions while we wait for you to overcome all the evidence others have gathered.
Click to expand...

Nir Shaviv:

People say that we should at least curb the emissions as a precautionary step.However, resources are not infinite. Most people in developed nations can pay twice for their energy, but for third world nations? It would mean more expensive food, hunger and poverty, and many in the developed world actually freezing in winter. So in fact, taking unnecessary precautionary steps when we know they are unnecessary is immoral. It is even committing statistical murder. . . .
 
Nickyjo said:
Why don’t we urge our top scientists to study the issue and write peer reviewed articles on the topic. Then compare US findings with what other countries’ scientists have found. Then maybe we could have an international conference and recommend suggested practices for countries to implement voluntarily. I presume they might suggest — assuming the consensus is that human activity affects the climate negatively— that we cut back on emissions from coal and other fossil fuels, which actions might have benefits beyond addressing possible climate change. They could also get to the bottom of the allegations of fraud by China that the president revealed.

Who could argue with that?
Click to expand...

The international conference will kick off, next week, in Bonn, Germany.
Unofficial U.S. delegation prepares to defy Trump at Bonn climate summit

Republican Mayor Jim Brainard from conservative Carmel, Ind., will travel to Bonn next week to deliver a blunt message to the world: that many American cities, states and businesses remain committed to the Paris climate accord despite President Donald Trump's decision to pull the United States out of the climate-change deal.
(. . .)
Mr. Brainard, the Carmel mayor, will be part of an unofficial American delegation in Bonn being organized around groups such as the We Are Still In coalition, which represents 2,500 mayors, governors, university presidents and other civic leaders that have all committed to the Paris deal.

In Bonn, they aim to reassure world leaders that, despite the administration's position, there is bipartisan commitment in the country to address global warming. Mr. Brainard hails from Vice-President Mike Pence's home state of Indiana; his city council is Republican and his county voted 56 per cent in favour of Mr. Trump in the 2016 presidential election.
(. . .)
The We Are Still In coalition was founded by former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg and California Governor Jerry Brown in the aftermath of Mr. Trump's formal notice in June that the United States would withdraw from Paris in three years. It includes nine states and 252 cities and counties, including major cities in deeply Republican states such as Kansas, Georgia and Texas. Corporate members include Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Target Corp., Nestlé SA, Apple Inc. and Google Inc.
Click to expand...

The 'official' American delegation of course will attempt to present a slightly different view during the conference.
American negotiators at the two-week United Nations' climate summit, which starts Monday in Bonn, Germany, will reflect the Trump administration's position on climate change – touting the benefits of coal, oil and natural gas, and questioning the broad consensus of climate science.
Click to expand...
 
Jack Hays said:
Nir Shaviv:

People say that we should at least curb the emissions as a precautionary step.However, resources are not infinite. Most people in developed nations can pay twice for their energy, but for third world nations? It would mean more expensive food, hunger and poverty, and many in the developed world actually freezing in winter. So in fact, taking unnecessary precautionary steps when we know they are unnecessary is immoral. It is even committing statistical murder. . . .
Click to expand...

Good point, so we make adjustments for poorer nations... but note that poor people are already losing out due to climate and are moving north as survival becomes more difficult due to drought.
 
Nickyjo said:
Good point, so we make adjustments for poorer nations... but note that poor people are already losing out due to climate and are moving north as survival becomes more difficult due to drought.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. I think that's a myth.
 
Jack Hays said:
Nir Shaviv:

People say that we should at least curb the emissions as a precautionary step.However, resources are not infinite. Most people in developed nations can pay twice for their energy, but for third world nations? It would mean more expensive food, hunger and poverty, and many in the developed world actually freezing in winter. So in fact, taking unnecessary precautionary steps when we know they are unnecessary is immoral. It is even committing statistical murder. . . .
Click to expand...

Posting a blog again? I wonder if this guy knows more than the authors and reviewers of the National Climate Assessment. Here's a list...

The National Climate Assessment summarizes the impacts of climate change on the United States, now and in the future. A team of more than 300 experts guided by a 60-member Federal Advisory Committee produced the report, which was extensively reviewed by the public and experts, including federal agencies and a panel of the National Academy of Sciences.
 
Jack Hays said:
I don't believe you have any experience or knowledge of construction.
Click to expand...

Well I do, but regardless, you weren't specific with what statement you don't believe.
 
Media_Truth said:
Posting a blog again? I wonder if this guy knows more than the authors and reviewers of the National Climate Assessment. Here's a list...

The National Climate Assessment summarizes the impacts of climate change on the United States, now and in the future. A team of more than 300 experts guided by a 60-member Federal Advisory Committee produced the report, which was extensively reviewed by the public and experts, including federal agencies and a panel of the National Academy of Sciences.
Click to expand...

He just might. The quoted passage is an excerpt from his Cambridge notes.
 
Jack Hays said:
I said I don't believe you.
Click to expand...

About as specific as most of your posts. Does it make any difference if it costs $50K or $100K to raise a house and put dirt underneath it? The poster said that it's no big deal if the sea level rises 12" by the year 2100. I pointed out the severe damage that a mere 2" of floodwater can do to a home. And he said they can make their home flood-proof. If you take exception to a particular point, bring it on, otherwise you're babbling.
 
Jack Hays said:
He just might. The quoted passage is an excerpt from his Cambridge notes.
Click to expand...

Wow! Cambridge! You should have said that before. I'm sure none of the National Academy Scientists have such credentials. And those IPCC authors - their education must pale in comparison. And let's not forget the NOAA and NASA. Heck, I'll bet this guy can send a rocket into space.
 
Thread: NYT: U.S. Report Says Humans Cause Climate Change, Contradicting Top Trump Officials
​

In 1989 the New York Times said:

U.S. Data Since 1895 Fail To Show Warming Trend

WASHINGTON, Jan. 25— After examining climate data extending
back nearly 100 years, a team of Government scientists has
concluded that there has been no significant change in average
temperatures or rainfall in the United States over that entire period.​
 
Media_Truth said:
About as specific as most of your posts. Does it make any difference if it costs $50K or $100K to raise a house and put dirt underneath it? The poster said that it's no big deal if the sea level rises 12" by the year 2100. I pointed out the severe damage that a mere 2" of floodwater can do to a home. And he said they can make their home flood-proof. If you take exception to a particular point, bring it on, otherwise you're babbling.
Click to expand...

LOL...

Few houses are not replaced before reaching 100 years old.
 
Steve Case said:
Thread: NYT: U.S. Report Says Humans Cause Climate Change, Contradicting Top Trump Officials
​

In 1989 the New York Times said:

U.S. Data Since 1895 Fail To Show Warming Trend

WASHINGTON, Jan. 25— After examining climate data extending
back nearly 100 years, a team of Government scientists has
concluded that there has been no significant change in average
temperatures or rainfall in the United States over that entire period.​
Click to expand...

Did you think nobody would analyze your thread. That was published in 1989!!! You must be old, like me:)
 
Media_Truth said:
About as specific as most of your posts. Does it make any difference if it costs $50K or $100K to raise a house and put dirt underneath it? The poster said that it's no big deal if the sea level rises 12" by the year 2100. I pointed out the severe damage that a mere 2" of floodwater can do to a home. And he said they can make their home flood-proof. If you take exception to a particular point, bring it on, otherwise you're babbling.
Click to expand...

I simply don't put credence in anything you have to say. Too many clear examples when your claims weren't matched by your posting content.
 
Media_Truth said:
Wow! Cambridge! You should have said that before. I'm sure none of the National Academy Scientists have such credentials. And those IPCC authors - their education must pale in comparison. And let's not forget the NOAA and NASA. Heck, I'll bet this guy can send a rocket into space.
Click to expand...

I specified the Cambridge notes because of your mention of his blog.
A review of Shaviv's CV might give you pause. As Chairman of the Raccah Institute of Physics at Hebrew University and a Fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study i don't think he needs to take a back seat to anyone in terms of scientific credibility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom