Reply With Quote
Memes trump decades of research
Memes trump decades of research
happens every time it gets chilly.
Ok. Very good Chris. You can go to the bathroom for yourself, nice.
Do you believe in biological evolution?
Does evolution occur in populations of living organisms?
inb4 micro evolution and kent hovind youtubes
yeah, we beat that to death years ago. Evolution is real, and best explains how life arose to the forms it has taken today.
I remember reading 30+ years ago that AGW would result is much greater, more extreme weather instability
Jet stream changes since 1960s linked to more extreme weather
https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0112091209.htm
Does evolution occur in populations of living organisms?
Wow, you ARE one of those idiots who thinks the theory of evolution is fake.
Which came first... The chicken, or the egg?
What if the changing jetstream is due to something else, and patterns of temperature change with it, instead?
My kids schools are closed tomorrow
because global w climate change
but did you take a thermometer to 2 different classrooms to disprove the theory?
It’s an undisproveable theory, evidently
of course it isn't. just that it probably takes more than walking around the block with a thermometer
CHEVRON’S LAWYER, SPEAKING FOR MAJOR OIL COMPANIES, SAYS CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL AND IT’S YOUR FAULT
In a court hearing in San Francisco, oil companies publicly backed the science of climate change
major oil companies concurred with the “scientific consensus,” saying it was “extremely likely” that human activity has been driving global warming since the middle of the 20th century. They just don’t think they can be sued for it.
“Chevron accepts what the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] has reached consensus on concerning science and climate change,”
said Theodore Boutrous, who represents Chevron and is heading up the assorted legal team for the five oil companies that are defendants in this lawsuit.
But, he said, that didn’t mean that a civil lawsuit was the right way to address climate change.
“It’s a global issue that requires global action,” he said.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/22/17151532/climate-tutorial-san-francisco-oakland-lawsuits-judge-alsup-chevron-exxon
Leaked EPA email tells staff to play up climate denial, ignore actual data
https://www.yahoo.com/news/leaked-ep...195158971.html
It's no secret that Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Scott Pruitt disagrees with the overwhelming evidence tying human emissions of greenhouse gases to increasing global average temperatures, sea level rise, and a host of other problems for humanity.
He has, after all, moved to scuttle the Obama administration's regulations that would limit such emissions from power plants, ordered the EPA's climate change websites to go dark, and advocated for a televised debate on climate science, among other actions.
Now comes word that on Tuesday, EPA officials distributed talking points about climate science to its top public affairs staff throughout the country, providing eight talking points about the agency's work on helping America adapt to a warming planet.
SEE ALSO: In court, oil company admits reality of human-caused global warming, denies guilt
The talking points, first reported by the HuffPost, are contradicted by both the agency's previous climate science website as well as a federal climate report that EPA scientists contributed to.
The email including the new talking points was sent on behalf of Joel D. Scheraga, the agency's senior advisor for climate adaptation — a program that, ironically, Pruitt has sought to eliminate.
Kate Marvel
@DrKateMarvel
I think it’s only fair that if climate scientists have to explain AGAIN why we’re warming the planet, physicists should have to explain how come stuff falls down https://twitter.com/brady_dennis/sta...44838594236416 …
12:48 PM - Mar 28, 2018
183
97 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
According to the email in the HuffPost report, which the EPA confirmed to them as authentic, two of the bullet points outright contradict and distort the findings of mainstream climate scientists, saying:
"Human activity impacts our changing climate in some manner. The ability to measure with precision the degree and extent of that impact, and what to do about it, are subject to continuing debate and dialogue."
"While there has been extensive research and a host of published reports on climate change, clear gaps remain including our understanding of the role of human activity and what we can do about it."
A federal report published in November, known as the Climate Change Special Report, states clearly and unequivocally that the burning of fossil fuels for energy and other human activities cause global warming.
The report — which is the most which is the most up-to-date and comprehensive guide to climate science findings — states (original emphasis included):
(In the language of the report, "extremely likely" means a greater than 95 percent chance.)
Merchants of Doubt
Exxon knew in the '70s, and S did later
Damning internal do ents show S knew about climate change causes in the 1980s
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/4/5/1754623/-Damning-internal-do ents-show-S -knew-about-climate-change-causes-in-the-1980s?detail=emaildkre
===================
HATE TO SAY I TOLD YOU SO
S predicted it would get sued over climate change back in ’98.
Now, those lawsuits are here, and that prediction could bite the multinational oil company in the ass.
https://grist.org/briefly/s -pred...ge-back-in-98/
====================
S Faces Unprecedented Legal Challenge For Its Failure To Combat Climate Change
Friends of the Earth Netherlands has announced that it will take British–Dutch multinational oil and gas company S to court if it does not immediately act on demands “to stop its destruction of the climate”
which, if won, could significantly limit the company’s investments in oil and gas around the world.
https://cleantechnica.com/2018/04/05...eanTechnica%29
same happened in the tobacco industry. cigarette manufacturers knew about the health risks back when they were still publicly denying it
Does Al Gore have enough money yet to combat this devastating predicament?
I want to believe it's true. Convince me.
Better yet - give me solutions.
that's next to impossible, imho, since you think its a liberal globalist marxist hoax. your political agenda will dominate any scientific discussion.Convince me.
if the problem is increased CO2 concentrations due in large part to increased emissions, the goal would be to reduce emissions to prevent further ac ulation, while then seeking technology to safely remove large quan ies of atmospheric CO2 safely. i personally dno if the latter is even plausible... ignorant as to that field of research, tbhBetter yet - give me solutions.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions