US Pulls out of Paris Climate Accords

[schwarzkopf]

So, no proof only guesses?

No - lots of PROOF. However, I feel the following expresses the frustration of the rational folk on this topic:

[Endus]

You're confusing the science that was paid to dispute climate change with actual science. If you disregard bad studies funded by companies like Exxon all reasonable scientists have been on board with global warming for well over 2 decades(closer to 4). Your original position is we basically all agreed in 1997, that's just wrong. We basically knew and had consensus a decade before that that not only was there global warming, but humans were having an affect on the rate at which it was happening. So, no, we didn't just decide climate change was happening 2 decades ago.

Case in point, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change was pulled together in 1988, because even then it was pretty crystal clear that there was a massive issue and they needed to collate as much data as possible to get as clear a picture of what was going on as was possible.

And that was when governments were mobilizing on the issue; scientists were pretty thoroughly certain well before that.

[Sharein]

I'm outside the US and the AGW scepticism is loud and strong. Dismiss those with a different view as crackpots if that makes you feel superior, it doesn't change the fact that there is no consensus and the science isn't settled.

I guess your bubble is also discussing whether the Earth is flat or not?

[schwarzkopf]

So, no proof only guesses? Can you at least define "not too long" please? What is that: a year, two years, 50 years from now?

If you had any understanding of the problem, you would realise how ridiculous a comment that is.

Here is a simple analogy:

Get a bottle of sugary fizzy drink/pop/soda (what ever you call it) shake it up and put it in your freezer.

Now tell me EXACTLY when the bottle will explode?

Does not knowing the exact time, change the outcome?

No - not at all.

Well - we know the bottle is in the freezer RIGHT NOW in terms of climate change, we know the bottle WILL explode unless we take it out.

[Lokryn]

Lots of nation bashing in this thread. Not every conservative likes Trump and are climate change deniers.

[Orlong]

You're confused.

Climate change isn't a partisan issue. Climate change denial is a wackadoodle conspiracy theory akin to flat-eartherism, and is largely only held by a small fraction of the American right wing, specifically.

Move outside of the USA, and nobody's denying the basic facts, regardless of their ideological bent.



Case in point; he doesn't have an argument and is straight-up denying basic facts because he doesn't like what those facts represent.

They are NOT facts. Facts are 100% true and provable beyond any doubt

[Kujako]

I'm outside the US and the AGW scepticism is loud and strong. Dismiss those with a different view as crackpots if that makes you feel superior, it doesn't change the fact that there is no consensus and the science isn't settled.

The science is settled, the denyers just don't accept it. Of course they can't disprove it either, so they just scream and yell about how it's all a conspiracy or science is all lies. (shrug)

in simple terms, all science starts with "all current evidence shows" and ends with "but we could be wrong". Where the denyers mess up is they don't offer anything to counter the evidence.

Disprove any of the following...
1. CO2 and other "greenhouse" gasses can increase atmospheric temperatures.
2. Mankind contributes significantly to aforementioned greenhouse gasses.
3. Increases in atmospheric temperature results in more extreme weather events, resulting in both higher and lower temperatures by region.
4. Increases in atmospheric temperature results in rising ocean temperatures.
5. Increases in ocean temperatures results in rising sea levels due to increased volume and ice melt.
6. Melting ice results in lower salinity in the oceans.

[Torto]

You're confusing the science that was paid to dispute climate change with actual science. If you disregard bad studies funded by companies like Exxon all reasonable scientists have been on board with global warming for well over 2 decades(closer to 4). Your original position is we basically all agreed in 1997, that's just wrong. We basically knew and had consensus a decade before that that not only was there global warming, but humans were having an affect on the rate at which it was happening. So, no, we didn't just decide climate change was happening 2 decades ago.

Endus chastises us as crackpots and yet we get this drivel. Evil oil corporations? Seriously, could you be more cliché?

Oh, and climate change only became a thing when charlatans like Al Gore saw a chance to make a buck out of it. Prior to that no one had heard of it.

[Orlong]

You can determine sea levels by looking at several historical records, including location and type of human settlement, sedimentation, fossilisation records and drill cores.

- - - Updated - - -



Well, not exactly - we have had significant evidence and 'common sense' assumptions about global warming for half a century, but science has a far higher bar to meet and that has only been met in the last 2 decades.

In other words estimations and guesses. I didnt see any scientific instruments listed there (thermometer)

[Endus]

I'm outside the US and the AGW scepticism is loud and strong. Dismiss those with a different view as crackpots if that makes you feel superior, it doesn't change the fact that there is no consensus and the science isn't settled.

I really don't understand why you feel the need to lie about this stuff.

No science is "settled". The entire concept of science is constant peer review and confirmation. That said, the science backing AGCC is incredibly thoroughly reviewed and concrete. Denying its conclusions is like denying that gravity exists, or claiming the Earth is flat; it's that level of willful ignorance of basic fact.

And yes; there is consensus, no matter how many times you folks lie about it. Most scientists who engage in denial aren't crackpots, they're just liars who are paid by the oil industry to spread misinformation. There's a few crackpots in the mix, but it isn't the majority; most are just dishonest. That you choose to believe the tiny minority of propagandists over basically the entire planet's population of climate scientists is just . . . spectacularly wrongheaded.

[Stormspellz]

Pro-Trump people....there is no way you can defend this latest act of stupidity from your idiot-in-chief.

climate change is a china conspiracy!!!!! Trump said so!

[Machismo]

And who was around to record sea levels using accurate equipment 7000 years ago or re we just using estimates again based on soil samples which have no proof the methods are 100% accurate

Do you believe in God?

If you do not believe the evidence behind human-caused global warming, then there is no logical reason to believe that a god exists, when there is absolutely zero verifiable evidence to support such a claim.

I just want to know how far your hypocrisy goes.

[Endus]

They are NOT facts. Facts are 100% true and provable beyond any doubt

Right. They're facts. You're just wrong and can't admit it.

[Daelak]

I'm outside the US and the AGW scepticism is loud and strong. Dismiss those with a different view as crackpots if that makes you feel superior, it doesn't change the fact that there is no consensus and the science isn't settled.

More unsubstantiated allegations and relying on how "loud and strong" the skepticism is. It's easy, show the evidence, and become the most critically acclaimed scientist in the history of humankind by showing falsifiable data showing AGW doesn't exist.

[Endus]

Endus chastises us as crackpots and yet we get this drivel. Evil oil corporations? Seriously, could you be more cliché?

Oh, and climate change only became a thing when charlatans like Al Gore saw a chance to make a buck out of it. Prior to that no one had heard of it.

You mean you hadn't heard about it. Like I said; the IPCC was formed in 1988. Al Gore didn't get involved for over a decade. Your own deliberate ignorance does not reflect global reality.

Folks like yourself are "crackpots" because you're literally refusing to accept basic, easily-verifiable facts, because you'd rather believe there's a massive global conspiracy despite having no evidence of any collusion, no evidence of any compensation or motive, and not even a valid explanation for what the purpose would be.

[Radaney]

That feel when North Korea takes the climate more seriously than America.

Imagine being more backwards than North Korea...that's quite something. I'm glad I will never feel that way.

[schwarzkopf]

They are NOT facts. Facts are 100% true and provable beyond any doubt

Actually - facts are not stated in that fashion, if they were the word fact would have no use.

In reality, we know more about the mechanics of climate change now than we do about the mechanics of gravity.

As it stands, in the last 20 years we are factually certain of climate change, but only 99.97% or so sure that it is human caused.

[Sharein]

Oh, and climate change only became a thing when charlatans like Al Gore saw a chance to make a buck out of it. Prior to that no one had heard of it.

Uh-huh.

And before you come with "yeah, but winter was cold this year, so climate change doesn't exist"; cold periods still exist in a warming climate, just like they have always have, they are just increasingly less common and less cold than they used to be.

[Daelak]

Endus chastises us as crackpots and yet we get this drivel. Evil oil corporations? Seriously, could you be more cliché?

Oh, and climate change only became a thing when charlatans like Al Gore saw a chance to make a buck out of it. Prior to that no one had heard of it.

Deniers have to cling on non-scientists because they aren't conducting their own research, they manufacture doubt to delude non-educated or apathetic people, exactly what you are doing now. In fact, you have already been deluded and are doing their propaganda for them, for free.

[schwarzkopf]

In other words estimations and guesses.

No - evidence, you know actual stuff that can be measured etc...

Same stuff that is used to power your phone, GPS, car, computer and chair - science.