Washington Post says Trump is 'complicit' in Hurricane Florence

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

And why does the high priest of the movement, Al Gore, have one of the largest environmental footprints ever?

As to the predictions, I'm exaggerating, but wasn't North Dakota supposed to be exporting pineapples by now?

Pour a ton of money into the science and research. A ton. But I don't feel the need to sell my house and raise my kids in a yurt, while the only thing Al Gore has unplugged in the last 25 years, is his treadmill, ba-dum-bum-pssh.

Do you believe that after you die, you will have a better life than you do now?
If so... you’ve been duped as well.
I see a strong correlation between climate change deniers being religious and vice versa.
#sad
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Do you believe that after you die, you will have a better life than you do now?
If so... you’ve been duped as well.
I see a strong correlation between climate change deniers being religious and vice versa.
#sad
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Do you believe that after you die, you will have a better life than you do now?"

Yes.

"If so... you’ve been duped as well. "

We'll see. I'd rather hold my view (and behave accordingly) and be wrong, than be an atheist, and find out I'm wrong when it's too late. I'm confident. If we meet on the other side, you can tell me how wrong you were.

"I see a strong correlation between climate change deniers being religious and vice versa."

I don't deny it's changing. But before I impose hardship on me and my family, I need to see more facts. There are way too many unknowns, we have no idea what the atmosphere's ability is to absorb all the crap that we dump. We don't know what effect the oceans have. The models are based almost entirely on assumptions, which explains why the outputs of those models (for example, Philadelphia soon being oceanfront) haven't come true.

Spend the money, do the research. I like nature and the planet at least as much as some Manhattan dilatant who lives in a condo. And I'm very persuadable by facts and common sense. But not by liberal hysteria.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I don't deny it's changing. But before I impose hardship on me and my family, I need to see more facts. There are way too many unknowns, we have no idea what the atmosphere's ability is to absorb all the crap that we dump. We don't know what effect the oceans have. The models are based almost entirely on assumptions, which explains why the outputs of those models (for example, Philadelphia soon being oceanfront) haven't come true.

Good luck on the facts, it's why we have scientific methods. Models aren't based on assumptions as much as empirically validated hypothesis. Any way the science isn't and never will be perfect but there is consensus that the human impact is significant.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Good luck on the facts, it's why we have scientific methods. Models aren't based on assumptions as much as empirically validated hypothesis. Any way the science isn't and never will be perfect but there is consensus that the human impact is significant.

what a pile of crap

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Good luck on the facts, it's why we have scientific methods. Models aren't based on assumptions as much as empirically validated hypothesis. Any way the science isn't and never will be perfect but there is consensus that the human impact is significant.

well given that many of the outcomes predicted by that community’s scientific method have not come true, at what point is it appropriate to conclude that they don’t have a lot of credibility?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

well given that many of the outcomes predicted by that community’s scientific method have not come true, at what point is it appropriate to conclude that they don’t have a lot of credibility?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim,
I am not wading into this again with you. We have rehashed these points too many times.

Can you please point to the scientific community's* (NOT AL GORE) predictions of what you speak? (*Scientific community, meaning a published scientific study, not a movie or a random blog)...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Jim,
I am not wading into this again with you. We have rehashed these points too many times.

Can you please point to the scientific community's* (NOT AL GORE) predictions of what you speak? (*Scientific community, meaning a published scientific study, not a movie or a random blog)...

i can’t say that i can point i a scientific paper that has predicted disaster. i’m responding to the hysterics i seenon tv. but right around the time i was born, the consensus was that the earth was cooling and we needed to act to stop that. then it was global warming. then it switched to climate change. they can’t even decide what’s happening, let alone figure out the causes or what the effects might be.

you don’t care more about the environment than i do, i promise. but we need to acquire additional knowledge, and rely a bit less on wild speculative assumptions, before we disrupt people’s lives, before we tell third world nations that they can’t have heat and air conditioning and cars like we do. and we need to figure out why the hell the alternative energy sources are still so stupudly expensive. that’s what i don’t understand. why is it 30k to cover my roof with solar panels? i leased, butbthats what it would have cost to buy. that price isn’t coming down.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Jim,


Can you please point to the scientific community's* (NOT AL GORE) predictions of what you speak? (*Scientific community, meaning a published scientific study, not a movie or a random blog)...

settled science backed by consensus....yawn...is al gore still alive?

here's a recent one..... .5 degrees of warming will cause large increases in deaths worldwide....

“Our projections suggest that large increases in temperature-related deaths could be limited in most regions if warming was kept below 2°C,” explains Ana Maria Vicedo-Cabrera, the first author of the study. “Under extreme changes in climate, large parts of the world could experience a dramatic increase in excess mortality due to heat. This would not be balanced by decreases in cold-related deaths. Efforts to limit the increase in global temperature to below 1.5°C could provide additional benefits in tropical or arid regions, including the most populous and often poorest countries.”

Vicedo-Cabrera, A. M. et al (2018). Temperature-mortality impacts under and beyond Paris Agreement climate change scenarios, Climatic Change Letters DOI: 10.1007/s10584-018-2274-3

https://link.springer.com/article/10...584-018-2274-3


if we just spend enough money we can hold the global temperature down....

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Do you believe that after you die, you will have a better life than you do now?
If so... you’ve been duped as well.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I plan to battle climate change in the afterlife....guess you won't be much help

[Got Stripers]

Trump is no more complicit in Florence than I am, but the moves he is making and his denial that climate change is happening, will not lessen the impact. Unless you just never ever watch national geographic or any of the outstanding documentaries that have air and documented what is happening, then keep believing climate change is a hoax. It won't impact you, it might not impact your children, but there will be significant implications down the road if the ice packs and glaciers continue to melt. Where do you think all the fing water is going?

Trump is complicit in the poor effort in the after math of Hugo in Puerto Rico, oh wait I'm sorry it was outstanding A+ job, he will likely do better in the Carolina's because they aren't some dirt bag island he doesn't give a sh*t about.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Trump is no more complicit in Florence than I am

profound