A Historian Looks at Climate Change

[can2man]

I’ll go with NASA.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Notice not one of the alarmists can correctly discuss the more recent and very alarming warm cycle, yes it produced the dust bowl in the 1930s.
Nor can they explain with the same alarmism why is it that the Death Valley hottest record is in 1913 and not now?

 

[Robertinfremont]

I’ll go with NASA.

Fair enough.

I will go with the Galileo types for discussing the truths of science.

 

[Robertinfremont]

If the NASA web site is too overwhelming for those of you who didn't do well in science class, start here: Coloring Page: The Water Cycle – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Then move up to here: Coloring Page: The Carbon Dioxide Cycle – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Isn't learning fun!?!

And the great thing is, these aren't crackpots! It's real science!

I bet that you believe a modest 2 degrees is dangerous. Do you think this tiny amount is dangerous?

 

[watsup]

Who to believe, NASA and NOAA and climate researchers on a worldwide basis....or a paid shill for big oil.
That one is easy.

 

[vegas giants]

Well you always show up uninformed. Now we see your admission.

Most polar bears to disappear by 2100, study predicts

Melting Arctic sea ice could cause starvation and reproductive failure for many as early as 2040, scientists warn

www.google.com

 

[vegas giants]

Who to believe, NASA and NOAA and climate researchers on a worldwide basis....or a paid shill for big oil.
That one is easy.

Tough call

 

[jpn]

Should be required reading:
Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

So paradigms shift. That doesn't mean science is fatally flawed, as many would like to believe.

 

[jpn]

He is from Canada. He has his Doctors degree. And he looks at Climate as a historian.

Great. Know any one who looks at climate as an artist? How about as an astrologer? Carpenter?

 

[AlphaOmega]

He has no degree in climatology. Therefore his opinions on it are worthless.

At least that's what I'm toll whenever there is a skeptic with say an economics or physics degree.

Says the Greta Thunberg crowd with a straight face.

 

[watsup]

Says the Greta Thunberg crowd with a straight face.

Greta Thunberg accepts the solid science of climate researchers. We are very proud of her for standing up for her generation. Why are you right wingers so hateful towards your grandchildren that you are willing to leave them a world of environmental destruction?

 

[AlphaOmega]

Greta Thunberg accepts the solid science of climate researchers. We are very proud of her for standing up for her generation. Why are you right wingers so hateful towards your grandchildren that you are willing to leave them a world of environmental destruction?

What level is her climate degree?

 

[Tim the plumber]

There is a 0.0% chance I will watch this video

Who is surprised by that?

That you will refuse to look at the otehr side of teh argument?

That such ideas are far too threatening for your delicate mind is such a non-shock.

 

[vegas giants]

Who is surprised by that?

That you will refuse to look at the otehr side of teh argument?

That such ideas are far too threatening for your delicate mind is such a non-shock.

The other side of HIS argument. Lol

 

[watsup]

Who is surprised by that?

That you will refuse to look at the otehr side of teh argument?

That such ideas are far too threatening for your delicate mind is such a non-shock.

There is no "other side of the argument among mainstream climate scientists. They have determined that the primary reason for present climate change is the excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere due to manmade machines of various sorts. Period. No matter how much political-based ranting and raving you right wing deniers wish to do.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

He is from Canada. He has his Doctors degree. And he looks at Climate as a historian.

What do you have to lose being educated?

Excellent video. Ofcourse the chicken little man made climate change cult will disagree.

 

[watsup]

Excellent video. Ofcourse the chicken little man made climate change cult will disagree.

There is no "chicken little" or alarmism to it. In matter of fact, the effects of manmade global warming are occurring even faster in many cases than predicted but the climate scientists. It is a fact that it will cause huge economic and environmental problems in the long run. Why shouldn't man attempt to fix that which he is causing instead of a head in the sand approach.

 

[Jack Hays]

So paradigms shift. That doesn't mean science is fatally flawed, as many would like to believe.

Science is not flawed. Kuhn explains how science works.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

There is no "chicken little" or alarmism to it. In matter of fact, the effects of manmade global warming are occurring even faster in many cases than predicted but the climate scientists. It is a fact that it will cause huge economic and environmental problems in the long run. Why shouldn't man attempt to fix that which he is causing instead of a head in the sand approach.

Because man is not causing climate change. Only left wing cultists buy into man made climate change. Even the scientists pushing it are only after government grant money.

 

[Jack Hays]

There is no "chicken little" or alarmism to it. In matter of fact, the effects of manmade global warming are occurring even faster in many cases than predicted but the climate scientists. . . .

Actually, they are not.

 

[watsup]

Yes, you are all very good at denier talking points.

 

[Jack Hays]

Yes, you are all very good at denier talking points.

Be sure to hold your cross in front of you while you chant that.

 

[jpn]

Science is not flawed. Kuhn explains how science works.

I wonder if you think NASA understands how science works.

 

[jpn]

Yes, you are all very good at denier talking points.

And none can handle this directly: https://climate.nasa.gov/

 

[Jack Hays]

I wonder if you think NASA understands how science works.

And none can handle this directly: https://climate.nasa.gov/

"Generally speaking, we can observe that the scientists in any particular institutional and political setting move as a flock, reserving their controversies and particular originalities for matters that do not call into question the fundamental system of biases they share."
—Gunnar Myrdal, Objectivity in Social Research

“And even when the apparatus exists, novelty ordinarily emerges only for the man who, knowing with precision what he should expect, is able to recognize that something has gone wrong.”
― Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions