Are There Any 'Liberal' Justices On The...
News2 mins ago
Us Notifies Un Of Paris Climate Deal Pullout
http://
Trump would appear to be a climate-change denier !
Would any of Trump's dwindling band of groupies, here on AB, like to comment ?
Trump would appear to be a climate-change denier !
Would any of Trump's dwindling band of groupies, here on AB, like to comment ?
Answers
Trump has asserted that it is a hoax in public, on his own twitter feed and elsewhere, multiple times. http://
06:23 Sat 05th Aug 2017
Naomi....you said what you did after I had posted the original thread, but before I had posted the Atlantic link, so you must have thought the Trump WASN'T a climate denier at that point.
What I and others are saying is that a very small amount of research by you, could easily have unearthed ample evidence of all the occasions when Trump has made it clear his scepticism and disbelief in climate change.
But instead of that, you choose to imply that I was making it up !
What I and others are saying is that a very small amount of research by you, could easily have unearthed ample evidence of all the occasions when Trump has made it clear his scepticism and disbelief in climate change.
But instead of that, you choose to imply that I was making it up !
1) There is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man’s activity.
2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.
3) Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.
4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.
5) Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher - more than ten times as high.
6) Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.
7) The 0.7°C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.
8) The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favourable reviewers not the 4,000 usually cited.
9) Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists - in a scandal known as “Climate-gate” - suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming
10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of global warming.
and so it goes on
2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.
3) Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.
4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.
5) Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher - more than ten times as high.
6) Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.
7) The 0.7°C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.
8) The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favourable reviewers not the 4,000 usually cited.
9) Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists - in a scandal known as “Climate-gate” - suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming
10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of global warming.
and so it goes on
Mikey, you misunderstood my implication. I implied that in order to further your cause you were making use of something that in this instance wasn’t mentioned or relevant - but what's new with Trump-bashers? Jim has at least twice in the past few days dragged up stuff Trump is reputed to have said ten or more years ago, but every little helps I suppose, so nothing surprises me.
1) Just stating that without citations is misleading and meaningless.
2) That's comparing what happened over billions of years with what happened over the last 200 years or so... are you serious in thinking that this statistic carries any meaning?
3) True, but needs to be placed in some context, which you transparently haven't done.
4) Funnily enough, this is exactly what is seen in the graph from "mike" from Twitter, that you dismissed as "rubbish" a page ago. Make up your mind as to whether you accept those data or not. See also https:/
5, 6) True but meaningless.
7) Citation needed.
8) The IPCC isn't, in itself, the entire community of Climate Scientists, so whether it's made of 60 scientists or 4,000 is hardly relevant. There's plenty of quality research being done beyond the IPCC; and, at this point, I shouldn't be surprised to find that there are thousands of (often highly-respected) scientists actively researching Climate Change.
9) "Climategate" represented one research group, and although it's a sad chapter in the story doesn't serve to undermine the research field as a whole.
10) Citation needed.
2) That's comparing what happened over billions of years with what happened over the last 200 years or so... are you serious in thinking that this statistic carries any meaning?
3) True, but needs to be placed in some context, which you transparently haven't done.
4) Funnily enough, this is exactly what is seen in the graph from "mike" from Twitter, that you dismissed as "rubbish" a page ago. Make up your mind as to whether you accept those data or not. See also https:/
5, 6) True but meaningless.
7) Citation needed.
8) The IPCC isn't, in itself, the entire community of Climate Scientists, so whether it's made of 60 scientists or 4,000 is hardly relevant. There's plenty of quality research being done beyond the IPCC; and, at this point, I shouldn't be surprised to find that there are thousands of (often highly-respected) scientists actively researching Climate Change.
9) "Climategate" represented one research group, and although it's a sad chapter in the story doesn't serve to undermine the research field as a whole.
10) Citation needed.
Naomi, you'd have to refer me to the specific examples you have in mind, but to the best of my knowledge I haven't brought up stuff Trump is "reputed" to have said, but stuff he's *actually* said; and I am also fairly sure that most of my (recent) examples date to the last five years at most. Within this thread I also mentioned the transgender military stuff, I think, and that was a week ago.
If, Khandro, the broader point you are making, such as it is, is that the Earth can "cope" with temperature variations, then yes I accept that of course, but with the caveat that temperature changes have also been associated with large-scale extinction events.
But there's a great deal of what you say that seems to be based on (very) cursory reading. I'm reminded not a little of when you warned of the risks that the LHC would destroy the Universe, quoting Stephen Hawking, but without any real appreciation of what the threat was and why it wasn't actually a threat. While, in this thread, you wondered aloud if the changes in Earth's orbit were the cause -- a factor that has been discussed, analysed extensively, and, in the present context, understood as irrelevant.
But there's a great deal of what you say that seems to be based on (very) cursory reading. I'm reminded not a little of when you warned of the risks that the LHC would destroy the Universe, quoting Stephen Hawking, but without any real appreciation of what the threat was and why it wasn't actually a threat. While, in this thread, you wondered aloud if the changes in Earth's orbit were the cause -- a factor that has been discussed, analysed extensively, and, in the present context, understood as irrelevant.
Jim I wrote No. 10 from memory, it should have read; as follows with a few more with citations you want;
10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.
11) Politicians and activists claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago
12) Philip Stott, Emeritus Professor of Biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London says climate change is too complicated to be caused by just one factor, whether CO2 or clouds
13) Peter Lilley MP said last month that,
“fewer people in Britain than in any other country believe in the importance of global warming. That is despite the fact that our Government and our political class - predominantly - are more committed to it than their counterparts in any other country in the world”.
14) In pursuit of the global warming rhetoric, wind farms will do very little to nothing to reduce CO2 emissions
15) Professor Plimer, Professor of Geology and Earth Sciences at the University of Adelaide, stated that the idea of taking a single trace gas in the atmosphere, accusing it and finding it guilty of total responsibility for climate change, is an “absurdity”
16) A Harvard University astrophysicist and geophysicist, Willie Soon, said he is “embarrassed and puzzled” by the shallow science in papers that support the proposition that the earth faces a climate crisis caused by global warming.
17) The science of what determines the earth’s temperature is in fact far from settled or understood.
18) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas, unlike water vapour which is tied to climate concerns, and which we can’t even pretend to control
19) A petition by scientists trying to tell the world that the political and media portrayal of global warming is false was put forward in the Heidelberg Appeal in 1992. Today, more than 4,000 signatories, including 72 Nobel Prize winners, from 106 countries have signed it.
10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.
11) Politicians and activists claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago
12) Philip Stott, Emeritus Professor of Biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London says climate change is too complicated to be caused by just one factor, whether CO2 or clouds
13) Peter Lilley MP said last month that,
“fewer people in Britain than in any other country believe in the importance of global warming. That is despite the fact that our Government and our political class - predominantly - are more committed to it than their counterparts in any other country in the world”.
14) In pursuit of the global warming rhetoric, wind farms will do very little to nothing to reduce CO2 emissions
15) Professor Plimer, Professor of Geology and Earth Sciences at the University of Adelaide, stated that the idea of taking a single trace gas in the atmosphere, accusing it and finding it guilty of total responsibility for climate change, is an “absurdity”
16) A Harvard University astrophysicist and geophysicist, Willie Soon, said he is “embarrassed and puzzled” by the shallow science in papers that support the proposition that the earth faces a climate crisis caused by global warming.
17) The science of what determines the earth’s temperature is in fact far from settled or understood.
18) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas, unlike water vapour which is tied to climate concerns, and which we can’t even pretend to control
19) A petition by scientists trying to tell the world that the political and media portrayal of global warming is false was put forward in the Heidelberg Appeal in 1992. Today, more than 4,000 signatories, including 72 Nobel Prize winners, from 106 countries have signed it.
I had seen your post at 12:53 and was going to reply directly to it, but got sidetracked (in part by ymb's post afterwards, and in part by actual work I've been doing today).
Anyway...You might be right that more serious changes than we are capable of are needed, but then isn't that half of the reason Trump's attitude is such a problem? Climate Change is a global problem, requiring a global approach, but Trump has clearly decided that national, short-term, interests are more important. To him, to coal miners, whoever it is he has in mind.
It does seem that he might be open to a different deal but there's no real mechanism for that within the Paris agreement, and as a sceptic/denier in the first place what exactly do you think Trump would be looking to get out of a new deal? Presumably not a more stringent deal that places tighter restrictions on US emission levels; more likely the opposite.
Trump's whole approach, then, is part of the problem. We have to take Climate Change as a long-term issue seriously if we are going to do anything about it, and Trump clearly doesn't; sadly plenty of other world leaders don't. The curse, perhaps, of politics, as it forces politicians to think more of the short-term (ie when they are next up for election) at the expense of longer time scales.
Anyway...You might be right that more serious changes than we are capable of are needed, but then isn't that half of the reason Trump's attitude is such a problem? Climate Change is a global problem, requiring a global approach, but Trump has clearly decided that national, short-term, interests are more important. To him, to coal miners, whoever it is he has in mind.
It does seem that he might be open to a different deal but there's no real mechanism for that within the Paris agreement, and as a sceptic/denier in the first place what exactly do you think Trump would be looking to get out of a new deal? Presumably not a more stringent deal that places tighter restrictions on US emission levels; more likely the opposite.
Trump's whole approach, then, is part of the problem. We have to take Climate Change as a long-term issue seriously if we are going to do anything about it, and Trump clearly doesn't; sadly plenty of other world leaders don't. The curse, perhaps, of politics, as it forces politicians to think more of the short-term (ie when they are next up for election) at the expense of longer time scales.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Stuck On The Last 3 Clues Of Crossword
Crosswords14 mins ago
Computers21 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles23 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.