Question about climate change

They’re are many places to find the answer to these questions. Try one. They’re all free.

 

major research centers are paid politicians. Countries do not have views. Trump is proof of that. I am careful never to deny climate changes. Still the liars constantly accuse me of just that.

Why does this famous man come to his conclusions?

 

Your tool is your access to the internet and web site of every relevant institution.
I’m not a democrat. But they are on the right side of more issues then the gop, which is absolutely an insane group dedicated only to collecting money from wealthy people.

 

Sure, all 3500 hundred universities and every major communications corporation in the world...they’re all politicians.

 

I can answer any question about climate change you could possibly ask. I simply go to the sources I have indicated and get it. Why should I deny you the same opportunity.

 

Here we hear from a Climate person. So what does he claim?

 

So you rely on the fallacy that 3500 "hundred" universities teach a course that says man is to be blamed for climate?

By the way, the math works out you said that 350,000 universities all chant the same thing.

 

So you are still learning?

Here is something to learn. And from one of those university scientists.

 

More nothing. There's a pattern here.

 

That's just too hilarious. More nothing.

 

No it does not

The fact that climate was influenced by other factors in the past does not prove that co2 is not influencing climate now

Scientists are not responsible for what alarmists say.

There is no way to know for sure.

 

Ha ha
You have no interest in hearing any answers. You only care about playing gotcha
AGW Deniers come into the discussion in the bubble.

 

The current warming started before CO2 emissions became significant and the rate of temperature rise in the 30’s through the 40’s (when CO2 emissions were low) was the same as the temperature rise in the 80’s through the 90’s (when there was significantly more CO2 emissions).

Who is claiming that CO2 emissions don’t produce some global warming ??? Based on natural history of the Holocene and generally the entire time the earth has existed the effect of human CO2 emissions cannot be a significant contributor to our current global warming.

There is no way to tell ??? So the science is NOT settled. Shouldn’t scientists be working on answering this question ??? Why isn’t the government funding research in this area ??? Global warming policies cause significant economic harm. Don’t you think that science should justify that damage ???

 

And more nothingness. Why are you not answering my questions ??? The reason is obvious.

 

Deniers of AGW don’t even know what the basic premise of AGW is. How could anyone expect them to formulate a ligitimate question around it. They need to educate themselves first before pretending they know more then dedicated researchers. It’s just a lot of woo woo on their part.

 

Who is denying that CO2 emissions result in warming ??

And again the faith based global warming alarmist groupthink is exposed. The basic questions which show that there is no correlation between global warming and CO2 increase remain unanswered by the followers. The incessant name calling and insults show conclusively that they have no argument. What's sad is that the alarmists will not acknowledge that CO2 has never driven very similar warming before but today it's driving the entire global warming process. What's equally sad is that their policies will do nothing to significantly reduce CO2 emissions and will not significantly reduce their projections of temperature increase based on climate sensitivity assumptions. Their policies however will do significant regressive economic harm to low income families. That's immoral and unethical.

 

Pretending the co2 is the single driving factor in all warming of the earth is wrong. It’s the sun, dah. Co2 through the green house effects interacts with the sun, the angle of its rays and other gasses and situations including volcanoic eruptions and dramatic meteorite hits during different times in the earth’s history. To pretend that anyone can collate co2 over millions of years and think the temps should follow suit, without an awareness if these other factors, is uninformed.

NAME calling ? How is a denier of AGW being called a denier of AGW name calling ? . It’s fact. The biggest complainers of name calling are the name callers. Precious. Sorry it hurts anyone’s little feelings. You can call many here Fox BS deniers and alarmist if anyone wishes ....don’t mind at all. Agw deserves to be something that alarms everyone.

 

Btw, there are more good jobs being created in clean energy then coal and all fossil fuel industry combined. That hurts the poor ? Maybe we should go back to whale oil and increase digging coal by hand....that should be good for health insurance for the poor.

 

How does increasing the price of energy help low income families ?? Spain implemented a green energy economy which severely damaged their economy. The price of electricity in Germany and Denmark is triple of what we pay in the US. Btw Germany is replacing nuclear with coal (lignite is the lowest energy content form of coal).

 

Then what percentage of the current warming is due to CO2 ???

 

Why is the price of energy going up.
It’s been stabilized ever since the Govt. and industries got together an pushed for alternative resources. Every windmill or solar system that goes on line,
Renewable energy is consistently cheaper then fossil fuels. Once set up, other then maintenance, these systems are all self “fueling”. Sunlight, wind, tides are all there for the taking.....
Every major industry gets it.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/domini...ost-effective-fossil-fuels-2020/#17c188084ff2
Bogus claim...on your part.

 

https://www.climate.gov/news-featur...ate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide

Have at it. You have any more questions, use the search engine.

 

Wrong question. It shows a lack of understanding what AGW is. This is why deniers are incapable of carrying on an AGW debate. They are devoid of facts.

 

Where’s your source for bogus claim ?