CO2 levels higher than any time in last 800,000 years

None of that makes a bit of sense.

This means you force the public using laws to do what they otherwise do not wish to do. This is a major problem with Democrats alarmists. They can't do what they want and not punish the public. Green tech is well known and so far too expensive. And the bang for the buck is not there.

First try to prove any climate change really harms the planet.

That takes a lot of effort but thus far none of you alarmists move to explain why you wet the bed over this so called problem.

I tell you all. We are enjoying the rain we are getting in CA and if this be climate change, I am sure happy.

I have lived here so long I have seen rain like this in the past many times.

 

If prsidnts take physics, math and science classes, they need not. One book gives you one idea. One class gives you 40 hours of classes and labs and let's you experience science, math and physics. A single person always has an agenda. Education in the sciences and math frees you.

 

OK if that is your best

 

Thank you for your opinion. The scientific community disagrees with you so the rest of the world will move on without you. Believe anything you like

 

Actually, if they really believed the things you believe, a massive change would now be underway.

But sadly guys like you don't see such changes.

 

A massive change is under way. Changing the world takes time. But the change has started.....and it will continue despite what you believe

 

Reading one minority opinion is perhaps the best possible way to become uninformed while thinking one is NOT uninformed - a real disaster.

I'd point out that Richard A Muller (the author and physicist) says science shows that we are warming and that human sources are an important factor.

He's created and participated in organizations to counter the deniers with scientific honesty. For example, he's disputed certain models that tend to emphasize the hockey stick - while the best analysis still shows warming of a very serious nature.

 

I said that California is turning into a desert not that it is a desert. You didn't read my post very well.

 

California not a desert, especially the top half. The drought is reducing water levels across the western US and California are going to be in big trouble if those water levels get too low. Come on, think this through.

They are already desert. You have an interesting sense of humor.

 

agree, however earth and venus are very different planets. Most likely we will be extinct before any rebalancing occurs, which may or may not be an outcome of climate change. but I suspect thats a bit much to grasp for many.

 

California was a desert over parts of it. Water changed a lot. A Desert qualifies as one due to low water sources.

Actually in the Sierra mountains, from Mammoth Lakes north, rivers show up. As well we have rivers from the north to the south to the SF Bay Area.

I would claim that North California is a vast water source for the entire state.

So, only part of the state can be called desert.

Even LA gets an average of 18 inches of rain so clearly it does not qualify as a true desert.

 

Actually most of us believe that the temps you are so worried about are a tiny bit changed by man.

But Democrats blame most if not all of this on man.

Ask them to explain the events of Africa and they don't know.

 

Is it your fault?

It is not my fault.

This happens all the time to Earth.

 

this has been discussed numerous times already. Maybe do a search of some of the earlier discussions on this issue.

It might also pay to read up on what is being done.

the major problem is that EVERYBODY basically wants a chance at the lifestyle you've got, which makes it more fifficult for democratic governments to introduce changes, but the reality is that as new technologies gain a greater share of the market, old dinosaurs will become ugly baby investments. In the west we have the resources to be market leaders in new technologies, but if we are slow to act, china will not miss the opportunity.

 

most of who?

Global surveys show that even in a backward place like the US more than 50% acknowledge that anthropogenic climate change is real.

 

If you ask a man on the street about specific events, yes, you aren't going to get much. We're just not that educated in science nor do we as a society watch actual scientific results.

So, I really don't see that as an important point. The thing is, we need to be listening to experts on issues such as this, and far too much of our society hates educated thought - even proposing that our universities are hotbeds of evil!!

Today, even deniers such as Dr. Judith Curry state that we need to be taking action on climate. Her preferred focus would probably be more weighted toward the known RESULTS of warming. She points to impending water supply disasters in several locations, including a major river being diverted by China, probably leaving Bangladesh in much more serious agricultural disaster than they already are.

I might point to the drought that is one of the roots of the disaster in Syria - years long drought causing millions to move to cities, where the administration could not possibly address their needs - thus leading directly to starvation and hugely increased repression.

 

I saw on another post that you are 77 years old, so I guess its been some time since you attended an educational institution.

For years, kids have been learning about climate change from primary school up. By the time they enter high school, kids will have learnt the difference between climate and weather, which you don't seem able to grasp.A first year units in a basic science degree will cover more climate science than you seem to have picked up.

in my country, even though there are climate deniers on the conservative side of politics, both left and right are committed to science education in schools, and basic climare science is part of that.

are you suggesting that american domestic politics is driving school and university education around the globe?

 

The issue is global, and the lag time is decades. Even if we all cut our emissions by half today, things would get much worse before they will get better, just because there has been such a rapid increase in carbon emissions over the last fifty years.

sorry if I said you personally said the climate is not changing. Years ago, the denialist line was that the climare wasn't changing, then they started to look at ghe science and learnt that climate changes naturally, so now they acknowledge that it changes, just deny anthropogenic influence.

mind you, with your confusion over weather and climate, obviously you think the weather (oops, climate) changes.

no I am not a democrat. I am not american and I don't think much of either of your political parties.

 

you are so misinformed it is not funny.

democrats are not driving this. The world is not america.

green tech is not too expensive. The rapid takeup of green tech in my country is creating a problem for electricity suppliers ... forcing the cost of energy for households DOWN. In any case, as more options come on board, they become cheaper.

There is plenty of evidence that climate change harms the planet, or makes life difficult for many people and impacts on species survival. If you know how to post on internet forums, there is no excuse for you not knowing this.

I started this thread in 2012, and I also started many others which talk about the impact. Seems your the one wetting the bed because you are either too lazy to get up or don't understand the signs of a full bladder.

yeah and we have had wet weather here in summer, which we don't usually get, but only a fool would take that as evidence that supports the denialist position.

 

Most likely "we" will be extinct long before climate change does anything significant regardless. It's hard for deniers to get that. It isn't about them.

 

Burp !

 

Why worry about a thing that is so small?

You really need a hobby.

And stop claiming I don't know weather vs climate.

 

You simply are not credible.

 

My first formal study of weather was in 1980 and if your memory was longer than a mouse's, you would recall me saying this. You have no basis at all for claiming I don't understand climate.

You are on notice to stop telling untrue things.
My two years in college science courses prepared me to be inquisitive.

 

Lols, that must be hard to digest!