- Joined
- Jan 3, 2014
- Messages
- 16,501
- Reaction score
- 3,829
- Location
- Sheffield
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
1. No surprise, really!
2. We all know that only "woke" opinions are allowed at the universities and on the Internet.
3. So most of us simply keep our mouths shut at school, at work, and censor ourselves on the Internet.
That's just how the cookie crumbles.
Dr. Susan Crockford is a crock. She's not even an expert on polar bears or climate change, has no peer reviewed articles on the subject and is a climate change denier. Worse yet, she is the only source that the deniers use about polar bears. But don't dare challenge her work or you'll end up getting harassed by online deniers. Well, these scientists have simply had enough of Dr. Crock and the denier bloggers and trolls.
Climate Change Denialists Say Polar Bears Are Fine. Scientists Are Pushing Back. - The New York Times
She's a fraud. She wasn't even fired from her job because it wasn't a paying position to begin with...and she admits it in that video. The university simply didn't renew her position...and rightly so.
Do you work in accedemia?
What does the data on polar bear numbers say?
I think it says that they are increasing.
If that is right would you change your view? If you found out that polar bear numbers were increasing would that alter your attitude to this?
What would change your view on the threat of CO2?
Please name the scientists in the IPCC or NASA who happen to have doctorates in climatology.Dr. Susan Crockford is a crock. She's not even an expert on polar bears or climate change
Please name the scientists in the IPCC or NASA who happen to have doctorates in climatology.
Does this change your mind on the threat of co2?
Effects | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet
No.
Maybe I am not seeing the really bad bit of all that. What would you see as the worst bit of it?
I see all of it.
You refuse to see the facts
Then why will you not answer the question?
What question?
Maybe I am not seeing the really bad bit of all that. What would you see as the worst bit of it? [2]
The worst bit of what? The worst effect of AGW?
The worst bit of what? The worst effect of AGW?
Originally Posted by vegas giants View Post
Does this change your mind on the threat of co2?
Effects | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet
Effects | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet
No.
Maybe I am not seeing the really bad bit of all that. What would you see as the worst bit of it?
It is truely unbelieveable how adverse you are to thinking at all.
[3]
Well that depends where you are in the world. Let's start with the US
Northeast.*Heat waves, heavy downpours and sea level rise pose growing challenges to many aspects of life in the Northeast. Infrastructure, agriculture, fisheries and ecosystems will be increasingly compromised. Many states and cities are beginning to incorporate climate change into their planning.
Northwest.*Changes in the timing of streamflow reduce water supplies for competing demands. Sea level rise, erosion, inundation, risks to infrastructure and increasing ocean acidity pose major threats. Increasing wildfire, insect outbreaks and tree diseases are causing widespread tree die-off.
Southeast.*Sea level rise poses widespread and continuing threats to the region’s economy and environment. Extreme heat will affect health, energy, agriculture and more. Decreased water availability will have economic and environmental impacts.
Midwest.*Extreme heat, heavy downpours and flooding will affect infrastructure, health, agriculture, forestry, transportation, air and water quality, and more. Climate change will also exacerbate a range of risks to the Great Lakes.
Southwest.*Increased heat, drought and insect outbreaks, all linked to climate change, have increased wildfires. Declining water supplies, reduced agricultural yields, health impacts in cities due to heat, and flooding and erosion in coastal areas are additional concerns.
A lot of that is water damage to the earth. Why don't you aspire to prevent water damage to the earth?
Yes...Is that what you aspire to <to prevent water damage to the earth>?
Yes...
EDIT: One doesn't necessarily limit or monitor CO2 to limit water damage to the earth.
Well that depends where you are in the world. Let's start with the US
Northeast.*Heat waves, heavy downpours and sea level rise pose growing challenges to many aspects of life in the Northeast. Infrastructure, agriculture, fisheries and ecosystems will be increasingly compromised. Many states and cities are beginning to incorporate climate change into their planning.
Northwest.*Changes in the timing of streamflow reduce water supplies for competing demands. Sea level rise, erosion, inundation, risks to infrastructure and increasing ocean acidity pose major threats. Increasing wildfire, insect outbreaks and tree diseases are causing widespread tree die-off.
Southeast.*Sea level rise poses widespread and continuing threats to the region’s economy and environment. Extreme heat will affect health, energy, agriculture and more. Decreased water availability will have economic and environmental impacts.
Midwest.*Extreme heat, heavy downpours and flooding will affect infrastructure, health, agriculture, forestry, transportation, air and water quality, and more. Climate change will also exacerbate a range of risks to the Great Lakes.
Southwest.*Increased heat, drought and insect outbreaks, all linked to climate change, have increased wildfires. Declining water supplies, reduced agricultural yields, health impacts in cities due to heat, and flooding and erosion in coastal areas are additional concerns.
Can you manage to read the link you posted and answer what you see as the worst thing in it? [5]