climate change

[rickc]

can those on the right please explain to me why they are so adamant that there is no global warming?

 

[Cardinal]

can those on the right please explain to me why they are so adamant that there is no global warming?

Well it's hopelessly tribalistic now, but a lot of the problem was how it was initially presented. When scientists et al say they "believe in" global warming, they were unintentionally using faith-based language. The result was (unintentionally) the idea that there was a group of people engaged in earth worship. It doesn't help that for the longest time, resistance to global warming also came from the energy lobby, which found the Republican Party to be the most sympathetic to their cause, thus adding to the tribalism aspect.

It's too late, anyway. Even if everybody corrected how they presented the issue right now, there's no reversing the fact that global warming now belongs to the Evil Liberal Tribe. There is literally no way to convince anyone on the Right that there is legitimate evidence to support global warming. You'd have as much luck convincing them that recreational abortion is a great idea.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I believe in global warming, climate change and/or AGW. I attribute it mainly to world popualtion growth.

The world's current (overall as well as natural) growth rate is about 1.14%, representing a doubling time of 61 years. We can expect the world's population of 6.5 billion to become 13 billion by 2067 if current growth continues. The world's growth rate peaked in the 1960s at 2% and a doubling time of 35 years.

https://www.thoughtco.com/population-growth-rates-1435469

 

[ttwtt78640]

Well it's hopelessly tribalistic now, but a lot of the problem initially was how it was presented. When scientists et al say they "believe in" global warming, they were unintentionally using faith-based language. The result was (unintentionally) the idea that there was a group of people engaged in earth worship. It doesn't help that for the longest time, resistance to global warming also came from the energy lobby, which found the Republican Party to be the most sympathetic to their cause, thus adding to the tribalism aspect.

It's too late, anyway. Even if everybody corrected how they presented the issue right now, there's no reversing the fact that global warming now belongs to the Evil Liberal Tribe. There is literally no way to convince anyone on the Right that there is legitimate evidence to support global warming. You'd have as much luck convincing them that recreational abortion is a great idea.

Farr too often 'the issue' is presented along with 'the solution' which is, IMHO, 'the problem'.

 

[Crovax]

I believe in global warming, climate change and/or AGW. I attribute it mainly to world popualtion growth.



https://www.thoughtco.com/population-growth-rates-1435469

That’s interesting how fast the growth rate has dropped, they expect it to hit 0 by 2070

 

[ttwtt78640]

That’s interesting how fast the growth rate has dropped, they expect it to hit 0 by 2070

Who, exactly, is "they"? A link to "them" would be most helpful.

 

[Crovax]

Who, exactly, is "they"? A link to "them" would be most helpful.

World population likely to peak by 2070 - 2014 - IIASA

 

[jeffchap]

Because the Earth's climate is cyclical. It has always been changing and it always will. Man has little or nothing to do with it and taking away our freedoms and throwing billions of tax dollars at it will not change this one iota.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[Tom Horn]

I have yet to see any greenie be able to explain why Shackleton was in sea ice before he crossed the Antarctic circle.

 

[ttwtt78640]

World population likely to peak by 2070 - 2014 - IIASA

That same link contains this:

Alternative scenarios included in the projections range from 7 billion to almost 13 billion by 2100.

That is the nature of 'projections' which are (always?) based on 'assumptions'. Being a simple sort of fellow, I tend to look at observed trends and to hold little hope that education (which is quite expensive) will suddenly spontaneously erupt in the poorest regions of this planet or that it will be financed (forced upon them?) by outside forces.

This is also one of the big problems with fighting climate change (by use of 'alternative' energy sources) in much of the 'developing' world - it always seems to depend on outside financing and the use of force to secure it.

 

[MAGAnificent]

can those on the right please explain to me why they are so adamant that there is no global warming?

Your poll and your question are seriously flawed. Those of us on the right are not claiming that there is no global warming. Climate change has occurred all through this planet's history as well as long before man industrialized the planet. It's quite natural and to be blunt, we cannot do anything about it other the adapting to it and making the best of it. What we do not agree with is the insane cult like claims of that left that man is bringing on climate change.

 

[bubbabgone]

can those on the right please explain to me why they are so adamant that there is no global warming?

What is "global warming" shorthand for in your mind?
I'll assume I know what you were really asking so I'll answer you that way.

Maybe it has something to do with them knowing that over the earth's history climate has always changed in large cycles of thousands of years with smaller cycles of hundreds of years within those larger cycles.
That would mean panic about warming of a couple hundred years duration is unwarranted.

But here's a further suggestion you likely won't want to hear.
Any time you hear of, or see, a graph that begins with year 1880 you should be suspicious.
Now, keep in mind that despite all that, it doesn't mean humans have had no affect whatsoever on climate.
It's just that they aren't the drivers of climate change.

 

[MrMike]

No doubt the Earth's climate is changing (evolving) just as it has since the planet was formed.

Did you think that evolutionary change would stop if humans weren't here? Why?

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Well it's hopelessly tribalistic now, but a lot of the problem was how it was initially presented. When scientists et al say they "believe in" global warming, they were unintentionally using faith-based language. The result was (unintentionally) the idea that there was a group of people engaged in earth worship. It doesn't help that for the longest time, resistance to global warming also came from the energy lobby, which found the Republican Party to be the most sympathetic to their cause, thus adding to the tribalism aspect.

It's too late, anyway. Even if everybody corrected how they presented the issue right now, there's no reversing the fact that global warming now belongs to the Evil Liberal Tribe. There is literally no way to convince anyone on the Right that there is legitimate evidence to support global warming. You'd have as much luck convincing them that recreational abortion is a great idea.

Fossil fuel companies massive disinformation campaigns during the last decades is a big reason.

https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warmi...siers-fossil-fuel-industry-memos#.W89YOUszbIU

While you at the same time have hope. For example that wind or solar are already the cheapest option in most Republican congressial districts.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshua...n-leaders-love-renewable-energy/#932d0503da79

Two thirds of Americans also give priority to developing renewables over fossil fuel.

Most in US say alternative energy takes priority over fossil fuels

While two thirds of Americans wanted US to stay in the Paris accord.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science...upport-staying-in-the-paris-agreement/528663/

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Your poll and your question are seriously flawed. Those of us on the right are not claiming that there is no global warming. Climate change has occurred all through this planet's history as well as long before man industrialized the planet. It's quite natural and to be blunt, we cannot do anything about it other the adapting to it and making the best of it. What we do not agree with is the insane cult like claims of that left that man is bringing on climate change.

All the world’s leading scientific societies acknowledge global warming from C02 and the urgent need for action. Take for example this letter from 31 leading American scientific societies.

http://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/06282016.pdf

While you also have this report from 13 federal agencies under Donald Trump that acknowledge manmade global warming from C02 and its negative effect.

https://science2017.globalchange.gov/

 

[rickc]

only people in the whole world that don't believe are America's blind and brainwashed righties

American cities, the military and all federal agencies are planning for it. hell the rest of the world is planning for it.

but those trumpies just eat up that rightwing propaganda. they can't even see what is happening right under their noses.

 

[Fenton]

only people in the whole world that don't believe are America's blind and brainwashed righties

American cities, the military and all federal agencies are planning for it. hell the rest of the world is planning for it.

but those trumpies just eat up that rightwing propaganda. they can't even see what is happening right under their noses.

Why some on the right believe the AGW alarmists are full of **** ? Here's a example

When Michael hit the panhandle of Florida, AGW alarmists said it was a unprecedented Storm.

These days that actually applies to any Hurricane that threatens the US.

Recorded History of US Hurricane landfall in the US began in 1900, when a Cat 4 Hurricane hit Galveston Island killing over 6000 people.
The storm was so powerful, it literally wiped the Island clean
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Galveston_hurricane

The strongest storm ever on record was the 1979 Typhoon Tip. A massive storm with sustained 300km winds and a diameter so large if it was superimposed over the East coast, it's diameter would have reached from Dallas to New York.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhoon_Tip

FFS, Hurricane Andrew was a Cat 5 Hurricane that tore through South Florida in 1992. No one blamed AGW, because I guess people were just more intelligent back then and realized hurricanes have been slamming the East coast and the Gulf coast since time immemorial.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Andrew

Unprecedented storms.....:roll:

If the " Science is settled " , people like YOU wouldn't be forced to rely on bull **** exaggerations, scare tactics and apocalyptic predictions that never come true to sell your propaganda.

Oh, are the Polar bears extinct yet ???

Global Polar bear population on the rise....
https://www.google.com/amp/s/polarb...arger-than-previous-thought-almost-30000/amp/

 

[Fenton]

Oh, Fun Fact !

The barometric pressure at Typhoon Tips center was the lowest ever recorded at 870 mb.

Isn't science fun

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Oh, Fun Fact !

The barometric pressure at Typhoon Tips center was the lowest ever recorded at 870 mb.

Isn't science fun

Then you should listen to what scientists have to say about climate change and the urgent need for action.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/10/181008075147.htm

 

[Eriech]

can those on the right please explain to me why they are so adamant that there is no global warming?

As succinctly as I can for you, man can not control the climate for better or for worse.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[Bergslagstroll]

As succinctly as I can for you, man can not control the climate for better or for worse.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

That we can only effect but not control the climate is a big reason for urgent action to reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases. That increasing global temperatures from human emissions of C02 and other greenhouse gases will have devastating effects that we can’t control.

 

[gfm7175]

can those on the right please explain to me why they are so adamant that there is no global warming?

I voted "because I really don't think it is happening", since there was no better option to choose from... I would have actually chosen, if it was offered as a choice, "because it is a void argument" (argument from buzzword).


First, in order for me to believe in global warming, you would need to stop using the term as a buzzword, by defining "global warming" in a way which doesn't define the term with itself (in other words, in a way that doesn't amount to being a circular definition). --- This alone stops me from believing in it, since it is a void argument (which is a logical fallacy).


Second, "global warming" (which has yet to be adequately defined) denies various laws of science, such as the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics as well as the Stefan-Boltzmann Law. --- To think that a colder [insert your favorite magick gas here] could somehow heat up a much warmer surface is completely asinine. Heat does not flow from cold to hot; it flows from hot to cold. To think that [insert your favorite magick gas here] could somehow "trap heat" on Earth, which somehow raises temperatures on Earth, is also asinine... This would be reducing radiance, and reducing radiance must also reduce temperature, according to the SB Law. "Global Warming" (yet to be adequately defined) outright denies these currently standing laws of science. It also denies statistical mathematics.


I could keep going on, but I think that makes my point.

 

[antiquity]

Until China and India get their pollution under control nothing can be done, that will matter, by the US to tide world wide Climate change.

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Until China and India get their pollution under control nothing can be done, that will matter, by the US to tide world wide Climate change.

US have the world's second biggest C02 emissions and also have much higher C02 emissions than India. US have also much higher emission than China per capita. So US of course have both a need and opportunity to reduce its C02 emission. US is also one of the world's most innovative country, so US can create profitable innovations that helps both US and the rest of the world reduce their C02 emissions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions

While of course all the countries in the world have to combate climate change. So it's therefore example good that India plans to get nearly 60 percent of their electricity from non fossil fuel sources by 2027.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/21/india-renewable-energy-paris-climate-summit-target

 

[Tim the plumber]

can those on the right please explain to me why they are so adamant that there is no global warming?

Can you put a poll answer that is not a gross missrepresentation of the Skeptic view?

The Skeptic view is one of these;

1, Global warming has happened. It is to some extent due to human activity. This is slight and will cause no significant trouble to humanity.

2, Global warming has happened and will continue to happen. It will not cause much of a problem.

3, The science presented to support this global warming is clearly biased or fraudulent. Make it better and I may be convinced that it is of any concearn.

Try those answers.

Stop with the straw men.