Will Republicans take climate change seriously if they win in 2024?lternative to gas vehicles

[metis]

Simply put, scientists do not run things.

 

[F1fan]

How did our CO2 melt mars ice caps? If if did we really need to review how that happened as its a long ways off. If not is cast great doubt on it melting ours.

This illustrates how badly your understanding of science and reason is. That there might be two planets having similar phenomenon happening (melting ice) does NOT mean they are related. Your argument is absurd and poorly informed.

This is why we can't take you seriously.

 

[Truth in love]

This illustrates how badly your understanding of science and reason is. That there might be two planets having similar phenomenon happening (melting ice) does NOT mean they are related. Your argument is absurd and poorly informed.

This is why we can't take you seriously.

Right cause there is now way that a common factor could impact 2 planets in the same solar system at the same time in the same way. LOL Right I mean the idea that the SUN!!!! might be a factor is just crazy talk.

 

[Yerda]

How did our CO2 melt mars ice caps? If if did we really need to review how that happened as its a long ways off. If not is cast great doubt on it melting ours

The Earth's climate system depends on the sources and sinks of CO2 on Earth. We don't have to explain how an icecube melted in Venezuela to be able to say the increasing temperature of my drink (in Scotland) melted the icecubes in it.

How can we have the past massive warming time (like the mid evil warming) if there was almost no co2 being made and have massive record level ice at the pools when are CO2 is "scary off the charts too high

There are several drivers of climate. The output from the sun, volcanic activity, greenhouse gases etc.

In the climate record whenever CO2 increases, temperatures increases follow (as predicted from basic physical principles and worked out theoretically over decades). In the present system the driver that is increasing rapidly is CO2. Output from the sun is down slighlty over the century for example.

Its massive holes like this that have to be addressed. I've seen people deny, but never actually address these sort of issues

Hopefully you can now see why they aren't holes at all.

Now I'm a behaviorist. I study people. I find that behavior tells me more than words:

I've noticed that almost every climate scientist I've seen is terrified. They know what is coming and we need to listen to them.

The same people who demand renewable resources hate the timber industry. They find it better to have forests burn is bulk than to harvest and manage. Growing timber and making stuff out of it locks the CO2 in long term. But this method is hated by the save the earth folks.
Hydro electric dames reduce erosion, provide flood control and make green energy, but this is hated by the same save the earth folks.
The people claiming that Co2 is killing us fly in private jets (e.g John Kerry)
Mayer Pete got caught ridding in an SUV to make a short bike ride to a save the earth meeting in DC
The people who claim the oceans are about to rise often live on the coast.

Now if a person really believed what they claimed they would live it to a large degree (none of do this100%), but if you actually thought the entire eastern seaboard was going to be flooded out in oh say 2014 you would have moved away, sold your assists and started a life in a place that would keep you safe.

This are anecdotes rather than evidence.

In "totally unrelated news" We've been told for years that we need to change the economy (adopt some level of communism) with the push to go green. Is it not funny that we have government grants to be green that spend tax payer money on items made almost always in China (Solar panels wind mills etc). We have Chinese operatives working for and sleeping with the very people pushing these agenda items. But there is nothing to see here.

Before pushing laws members of congress buy stocks that will rise on the new contracts, buts its all legit.

Politics is messy and corrupt as hell. Even if we had 100% solid policy agreed upon by every person on Earth there would still be people trying to make money, obstructing, awarding contracts that suit themselves rather than policy goals etc. I'm afraid I can't fix that.

Climate science funding often comes from the government and they produce the "research" that justifies more power grabs and control in our lives, and more funding but there is no way that cycle could ever influence the research.

If this was the case it would be very easy for someone skilled in statistical analyses, physical science etc to point it out. Every scientific society on Earth agrees that the science is good.

I do think you got one thing right. There is overwhelming evidence, just not for the point you want.

How likely do you think it is that you are right and the entire planet's scientific community wrong?

We are talking tens of thousands of people with advanced skills in advanced fields. All of them are wrong but you're right?

I'd have to see some really solid evidence to believe that. You haven't posted any yet.

 

[Truth in love]

The Earth's climate system depends on the sources and sinks of CO2 on Earth. We don't have to explain how an icecube melted in Venezuela to be able to say the increasing temperature of my drink (in Scotland) melted the icecubes in it.

There are several drivers of climate. The output from the sun, volcanic activity, greenhouse gases etc.

In the climate record whenever CO2 increases, temperatures increases follow (as predicted from basic physical principles and worked out theoretically over decades). In the present system the driver that is increasing rapidly is CO2. Output from the sun is down slighlty over the century for example.

Hopefully you can now see why they aren't holes at all.

I've noticed that almost every climate scientist I've seen is terrified. They know what is coming and we need to listen to them.

This are anecdotes rather than evidence.

Politics is messy and corrupt as hell. Even if we had 100% solid policy agreed upon by every person on Earth there would still be people trying to make money, obstructing, awarding contracts that suit themselves rather than policy goals etc. I'm afraid I can't fix that.

If this was the case it would be very easy for someone skilled in statistical analyses, physical science etc to point it out. Every scientific society on Earth agrees that the science is good.

How likely do you think it is that you are right and the entire planet's scientific community wrong?

We are talking tens of thousands of people with advanced skills in advanced fields. All of them are wrong but you're right?

I'd have to see some really solid evidence to believe that. You haven't posted any yet.

Lol you did not address the issue ms and hand you made a call for authority.
Many many scientists don’t but the narrative, but with jobs on the line and the not subtitle threat to comply or else there is not much debate (kind of ad right. If the science was that iron clad there would be no need for scare tactic).

I love evidence and it keeps pointing to our current situations being within historical norms. The climate NOT as predicted by a great many fear mongers (See Al Gores mockumentary for just how far off they are).


So yeah I’ll stick with what the evidence says not a “cool kids club” of panic and destroying liberty.

 

[Subduction Zone]

How did our CO2 melt mars ice caps? If if did we really need to review how that happened as its a long ways off. If not is cast great doubt on it melting ours.
How can we have the past massive warming time (like the mid evil warming) if there was almost no co2 being made and have massive record level ice at the pools when are CO2 is "scary off the charts too high"

Its massive holes like this that have to be addressed. I've seen people deny, but never actually address these sort of issues.

Now I'm a behaviorist. I study people. I find that behavior tells me more than words:

The same people who demand renewable resources hate the timber industry. They find it better to have forests burn is bulk than to harvest and manage. Growing timber and making stuff out of it locks the CO2 in long term. But this method is hated by the save the earth folks.
Hydro electric dames reduce erosion, provide flood control and make green energy, but this is hated by the same save the earth folks.
The people claiming that Co2 is killing us fly in private jets (e.g John Kerry)
Mayer Pete got caught ridding in an SUV to make a short bike ride to a save the earth meeting in DC
The people who claim the oceans are about to rise often live on the coast.

Now if a person really believed what they claimed they would live it to a large degree (none of do this100%), but if you actually thought the entire eastern seaboard was going to be flooded out in oh say 2014 you would have moved away, sold your assists and started a life in a place that would keep you safe.

In "totally unrelated news" We've been told for years that we need to change the economy (adopt some level of communism) with the push to go green. Is it not funny that we have government grants to be green that spend tax payer money on items made almost always in China (Solar panels wind mills etc). We have Chinese operatives working for and sleeping with the very people pushing these agenda items. But there is nothing to see here.

Before pushing laws members of congress buy stocks that will rise on the new contracts, buts its all legit.

Climate science funding often comes from the government and they produce the "research" that justifies more power grabs and control in our lives, and more funding but there is no way that cycle could ever influence the research.

I do think you got one thing right. There is overwhelming evidence, just not for the point you want.

Growing timber is nice, but it is not enough. You could try to run the numbers yourself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Lol you did not address the issue ms and hand you made a call for authority.
Many many scientists don’t but the narrative, but with jobs on the line and the not subtitle threat to comply or else there is not much debate (kind of ad right. If the science was that iron clad there would be no need for scare tactic).

I love evidence and it keeps pointing to our current situations being within historical norms. The climate NOT as predicted by a great many fear mongers (See Al Gores mockumentary for just how far off they are).


So yeah I’ll stick with what the evidence says not a “cool kids club” of panic and destroying liberty.

No, you do not understand evidence. You probably do not even understand the concept. All scientific evidence points towards serious global warming caused by man.

 

[Yerda]

Lol you did not address the issue ms and hand you made a call for authority.

I addressed your points directly.

It's a basic standard of rational behaviour to seek out the knowledge of an expert if you are not an expert. The experts are the climate science researchers. The expertise is contained within the scientific literature.

Many many scientists don’t but the narrative, but with jobs on the line and the not subtitle threat to comply or else there is not much debate (kind of ad right. If the science was that iron clad there would be no need for scare tactic).

There are a few. They all have jobs. Some of them are handsomly rewarded by oil funded think tanks and far right anti-science media outlets. There are a few fringe scientists with models that don't involve CO2 but they (the models) are completely unreliable.

I love evidence and it keeps pointing to our current situations being within historical norms. The climate NOT as predicted by a great many fear mongers (See Al Gores mockumentary for just how far off they are).

Within historical norms doesn't mean a lot. It was much hotter on Earth when the dinosaurs were doing their thing. This doesn't imply that the Earth isn't being heated by human emissions. This is simple logical reasoning.

So yeah I’ll stick with what the evidence says not a “cool kids club” of panic and destroying liberty.

This is childish. Can't we do this like adults?

 

[Truth in love]

I addressed your points directly.

It's a basic standard of rational behaviour to seek out the knowledge of an expert if you are not an expert. The experts are the climate science researchers. The expertise is contained within the scientific literature.

There are a few. They all have jobs. Some of them are handsomly rewarded by oil funded think tanks and far right anti-science media outlets. There are a few fringe scientists with models that don't involve CO2 but they (the models) are completely unreliable.

Within historical norms doesn't mean a lot. It was much hotter on Earth when the dinosaurs were doing their thing. This doesn't imply that the Earth isn't being heated by human emissions. This is simple logical reasoning.

This is childish. Can't we do this like adults?

Calling me childish because I reject the cult?
Seriously?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Calling me childish because I reject the cult?
Seriously?

What are you talking about? You embrace the cult. Your beliefs are very cultic.

 

[metis]

the increasing temperature of my drink (in Scotland) melted the icecubes in it.

Hey, say "Hi" to my long-lost relatives on the Isle of Skye and the adjacent highlands, OK? MacDonald of Clan Ranald.

 

[TheBannerofHomuraAkemi]

Given the rise in extreme weather in the USA and around the world will the Republicans acknowledge that climate change is real and causing serious problems and effects? If so, will they have the will to set policies that will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions to further protect the planet, or will they fear a backlash from their base after decades of being told climate change is a hoax? We still see conservatives post anti-renewable energy production, or pushback on EVs as a viable alternative to gas vehicles.

So if the Republicans take back the House, the Senate, and the White House in 2024 will they set policies to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, or not?

They don't care. They want us to die and suffer. It part of their end time religion.

 

[Yerda]

Calling me childish because I reject the cult?
Seriously?

Hi.

I called the statement I was responding to childish. "Cool kids club", "cult" also.

Are you suggesting that people paid by the organisations that are the major cause of the rise in CO2 are part of the "cult"?

From Shell (in 1991):

Exxon Knew about Climate Change almost 40 years ago

 

[Truth in love]

Hi.

I called the statement I was responding to childish. "Cool kids club", "cult" also.

Are you suggesting that people paid by the organisations that are the major cause of the rise in CO2 are part of the "cult"?

From Shell (in 1991):

Exxon Knew about Climate Change almost 40 years ago

I find the tactics employed to push the narrative fail basic science protocols.

The efforts to silence any opposition and critique are unacceptable .

The many causes of fraud are also a great concern.

The feverish zeal to make everyone do "green things" while trying to stop logging, end hydro dams, not use nuclear power etc. to be totally at odds with the stated concerns and goals.

 

[Yerda]

I find the tactics employed to push the narrative fail basic science protocols.

The efforts to silence any opposition and critique are unacceptable .

The many causes of fraud are also a great concern.

The feverish zeal to make everyone do "green things" while trying to stop logging, end hydro dams, not use nuclear power etc. to be totally at odds with the stated concerns and goals.

This is dodgeball.

Are you able to explain why researchers at Exxon, Shell, etc who are outside of academia are making the same findings and predictions as the "cult"?

 

[Truth in love]

This is dodgeball.

Are you able to explain why researchers at Exxon, Shell, etc who are outside of academia are making the same findings and predictions as the "cult"?

Well lets see, money and political pressure leap to mind.