US officially quits Paris climate accord

[leov]

I'm pretty sure climate change is bull**** anyway, but to be frank the parties that cause most of the pollution weren't even involved in the accord. So, it's just a bunch of nations who barely contribute to the total problem standing around and giving each other handies. Mind you, not that I necessarily fault the countries that are doing it greatly -- except for China (which certainly has access to modern technology/solutions), as most of them are developing nations.

The other thing worth noting is pollution is decreasing rapidly and at a 50 year low, and we've seemed to be getting colder than warmer. But, evidence doesn't matter.

I think that there may be a climate change due to mostly orbital reasons and it is a great opportunity to shake populations, gain control and redistribute wealth.

 

[Howard Is]

You would expect the POTUS to know well enough to say that backwards or forward as one pleases.

But apparently not. Or more likely, he does not care enough to even think about the matter.

I have stated a few times in sober seriousness that I believe Trump has a major personality disorder.

Over the years I have wondered about the effects of abstracting from physical reality into the electronic dreamworld of TV and devices, for hours every day, even in preference to real interaction. The data is coming in, and it’s not good.

We have a population in the grip of infantilism, literacy is consistently dropping, and most people have no experience of immersion in nature.

That is the perfect storm. Nacissistic leaders and a psychologically disconnected population, and the planet undergoing a variety of potentially catastrophic crises.

I work hard each day not to feel overwhelmed by the seriousness of the situation. It’s like I woke up and found myself in an undeclared Psychological World War.

Excuse me, I’m just going to pour some shiraz and roll a cigarette.

 

[metis]

I have one word for it: "dumb"; especially since it goes 100% against what climate scientists, the NAS, NASA, and even our own DoD have concluded.

 

[Howard Is]

I think that there may be a climate change due to mostly orbital reasons and it is a great opportunity to shake populations, gain control and redistribute wealth.

What do you mean by orbital reasons ?

 

[metis]

I think that there may be a climate change due to mostly orbital reasons

Cosmologists tell us not in this case.

What the research has shown is that both CO2 and methane gas levels are up, and we well know that this has helped lead to the greenhouse effect that we are now increasingly experiencing.

 

[leov]

What do you mean by orbital reasons ?

Minor (?) changes in Earth - Sun relationship.

 

[Howard Is]

Minor (?) changes in Earth - Sun relationship.

What evidence is that based on ?

 

[leov]

Cosmologists tell us not in this case.

What the research has shown is that both CO2 and methane gas levels are up, and we well know that this has helped lead to the greenhouse effect that we are now increasingly experiencing.

Sequestered gases releases due to temperature changes?

 

[leov]

What evidence is that based on ?

E.g. : NASA admits that climate change occurs because of changes in Earth's solar orbit, and NOT because of SUVs and fossil fuels
recently I have seen many articles talking about orbital issues, honestly, I think, they really do not know for sure, but orbital reasons is very probable.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

E.g. : NASA admits that climate change occurs because of changes in Earth's solar orbit, and NOT because of SUVs and fossil fuels
recently I have seen many articles talking about orbital issues, honestly, I think, they really do not know for sure, but orbital reasons is very probable.

NaturalNews is, to say the least, not a reliable source. Can you find any independent evidence that this is true?

 

[leov]

NaturalNews is, to say the least, not a reliable source. Can you find any independent evidence that this is true?

What is reliable source? There is no one.

 

[leov]

What is reliable source? There is no one.

Science is studying history of climate changes, so far, I understand, climate is constantly changes, reasons? We may never know for sure.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

What is reliable source? There is no one.

Then why are you using NaturalNews as a reference?

Or, you could just go read some actual NASA sources and see if what NaturalNews says about them is true.

Spoiler: It isn't. NASA never said any such thing.

 

[Mindmaster]

How dare you bring facts into this argument!

It's sort of funny about the climate change people ignoring things. For example, they like to selectively cut the time of temps they talk about to like 2,000 years and the reason they do that is because of the Minoan "warm up" period at or before 3,000 b.c.e.. It was two degrees F warmer globally at that time, and in all this time we still haven't caught up to their average temperatures. But, if you cut the data at 2,000 years it only looks like a warming trend (other than the mini-ice age, lol) instead of a peak, a drop, and a climb slightly toward the peak. Deceptive as all hell...

Let's face it, climate change is about politicians trying to get control over people. They're going to tax your car because it polluted the air that they're not even spending the money fixing and so on. It's a scam, and it's bull****. All of the politicians involved in the climate change accord were China-buddies... So, why do you think they want to stand around circle jerking about that? Oh, yeah, it's because they want to export your jobs. China can destroy the environment since it has a free pass from the globalist douche-bags to do so. However, there is great irony that no on else can economically exploit the environment in their mind. Who are they working for anyway? Us, or China? Doesn't seem like us...

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Science is studying history of climate changes, so far, I understand, climate is constantly changes, reasons? We may never know for sure.

American Association for the Advancement of Science
"The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society." (2006)

American Chemical Society
"Comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem." (2004)

American Geophysical Union
"Human‐induced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes." (Adopted 2003, revised and reaffirmed 2007, 2012, 2013)

American Medical Association
"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2013)

American Meteorological Society
"It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide." (2012)

American Physical Society
"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now." (2007)

The Geological Society of America
"The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s." (2006; revised 2010)

International academies: Joint statement
"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies)

U.S. National Academy of Sciences
"The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere." (2005)

U.S. Global Change Research Program
"The global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat-trapping gases. Human 'fingerprints' also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice." (2009, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies)

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen.”
“Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems.”

SOURCE: Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Scientific Consensus

 

[ImmortalFlame]

It's sort of funny about the climate change people ignoring things. For example, they like to selectively cut the time of temps they talk about to like 2,000 years and the reason they do that is because of the Minoan "warm up" period at or before 3,000 b.c.e.. It was two degrees F warmer globally at that time, and in all this time we still haven't caught up to their average temperatures. But, if you cut the data at 2,000 years it only looks like a warming trend (other than the mini-ice age, lol) instead of a peak, a drop, and a climb slightly toward the peak. Deceptive as all hell...

Please provide facts to back this up.

Let's face it, climate change is about politicians trying to get control over people.

Ah, yes, the perfect sign that somebody is reasonable: asserting that "X is just a result of politicians trying to 'control people'". Politicians such as NASA and the overwhelming majority of the world's scientific authorities and educators, for example. Those kinds of politicians.

They're going to tax your car because it polluted the air that they're not even spending the money fixing and so on. It's a scam, and it's bull****. All of the politicians involved in the climate change accord were China-buddies... So, why do you think they want to stand around circle jerking about that? Oh, yeah, it's because they want to export your jobs. China can destroy the environment since it has a free pass from the globalist douche-bags to do so. However, there is great irony that no on else can economically exploit the environment in their mind. Who are they working for anyway? Us, or China? Doesn't seem like us...

Would you like some wax for that tin foil hat?

 

[leov]

Then why are you using NaturalNews as a reference?

Or, you could just go read some actual NASA sources and see if what NaturalNews says about them is true.

Spoiler: It isn't. NASA never said any such thing.

In my book NASA is not a reliable source - it has an agenda. I just gave that reference as example, and that news was reprinted many times, fake or not, real life news is that US , for example, ramping up oil production big time without much concern...

 

[Mindmaster]

Apparently evidence doesn't matter to you: Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Evidence does, it's just the evidence I care about doesn't have a 2,000 year "cap". I've studied some data as old as 10,000 years. We're still cooler than then, so to me "climate change" is hype. If anything the Sun has far more impact on these events than what we're doing.

You must have heard that from the Trumpett himself. He's the only one of late who's been lying about CO2 levels.
.

NASA and NOAA, in particular, are political and not scientific bodies anymore. You really cannot trust their information, so I wouldn't. Information from other places around the world refute almost anything they say in regard to the weather and environment, so I'd take every release they make with utmost caution. That opinion has nothing to do with Trump, BTW, I've been interested in the subject for years. Both NASA and NOAA have lied about things like the polar caps, ozone holes, and you name it. They're not trustworthy sources of information in this regard.

 

[leov]

Please provide facts to back this up.


Ah, yes, the perfect sign that somebody is reasonable: asserting that "X is just a result of politicians trying to 'control people'". Politicians such as NASA and the overwhelming majority of the world's scientific authorities and educators, for example. Those kinds of politicians.


Would you like some wax for that tin foil hat?

You barking a wrong tree.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

In my book NASA is not a reliable source - it has an agenda.

And what is that agenda and what is the evidence of it?

I just gave that reference as example, and that news was reprinted many times, fake or not, real life news us that US , for example, ramping up oil production big time without much concern...

Where is the evidence that NASA actually said this?