Congratulations to our new 45 President Donald Trump....................................
so let me get this straight. Climate Depot is run by a guy named Marc Morano, who claims to be a journalist while, at the same time he works as the communications director for CFACT, a DC non-profit that lobbies against climate change.
Now that's real journalism.
Screw the Washington Post and all those fact checkers.
LOL! Oh, the irony!!
so let me get this straight. Climate Depot is run by a guy named Marc Morano, who claims to be a journalist while, at the same time he works as the communications director for CFACT, a DC non-profit that lobbies against climate change.
Now that's real journalism.
Screw the Washington Post and all those fact checkers.
(tu)(tu)(tu)
In case you missed this daveb722.
In “Before the Flood,” Leonardo DiCaprio documents the horrors of climate change and what we can do to reverse the effects—before it's too late.
Read more at [www.craveonline.com]
Leonardo DiCaprio at the UN: 'Climate change is not hysteria – it's a fact'
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/23/leonarodo-dicaprio-un-climate-change-speech-new-york
Here's something you'll like:
Just for you Dave!
[www.amazon.com]
Be sure to read the reviews!
Again, your reaching.. Leonardo, the same guy jet setting all over the world talking about climate change, how ironic and he's such an expert in the field. I don't read the links you post, most of us don't. So don't waste my time and I won't yours. Have a great rest of your thanksgiving, time to go to bed, gotta work in the morning. Peace.
Aren't you going to check out the Amazon link?
You'll love it!
Trump adviser proposes dismantling NASA climate research
Judith A. Curry is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She is a member of the National Research Council's Climate Research Committee.
She has this to say about Global Warming.
"The definition of ‘dangerous’ climate change is ambiguous, and hypothesized catastrophic tipping points are regarded as very or extremely unlikely in the 21st century. Efforts to link dangerous impacts of extreme weather events to human-caused warming are misleading and unsupported by evidence. Climate change is a ‘wicked problem’ and ill-suited to a ‘command and control’ solution. It has been estimated that the U.S. national commitments to the UN to reduce emissions by 28% will prevent three hundredths of a degree centigrade in warming by 2100... The articulation of a preferred policy option in the early 1990’s by the United Nations has marginalized research on broader issues surrounding climate variability and change and has stifled the development of a broader range of policy options. We need to push the reset button in our deliberations about how we should respond to climate change. We should expand the frameworks for thinking about climate policy and provide a wider choice of options in addressing the risks from climate change. As an example of alternative options, pragmatic solutions have been proposed based on efforts to accelerate energy innovation, build resilience to extreme weather, and pursue no regrets pollution reduction. Each of these measures has justifications independent of their benefits for climate mitigation and adaptation. Robust policy options that can be justified by associated policy reasons whether or not human caused climate change is dangerous avoids the hubris of pretending to know what will happen with the 21st century climate."
Living in the Caribbean we always looked forward to the Hurricane Forecasts every year. These would always be generated by William M. Gray, one of the worlds foremost atmospheric scientists. Before his death he had this to say about global warming.
"Following Gray's retirement from CSU's faculty, he became a controversial figure in the discussion on climate change, particularly his stance against anthropogenic global warming. Gray was skeptical of current theories of human-induced global warming, which he said is supported by scientists afraid of losing grant funding and promoted by government leaders and environmentalists seeking world government. Although he agreed that global warming was taking place, he argued that humans were only responsible for a tiny portion and it was largely part of the Earth's natural cycle. In June 2011, Gray wrote a paper directed at the American Meteorological Society, criticizing their advocation of anthropogenic global warming. He said that members were following a political agenda rather than a scientific one as well as working for special interests rather than the scientific community at large."
The 97% “consensus” study, Cook et al. (2013) has been thoroughly refuted in scholarly peer-reviewed journals, by major news media, public policy organizations and think tanks, highly credentialed scientists and extensively in the climate blogosphere. The shoddy methodology of Cook’s study has been shown to be so fatally flawed that well known climate scientists have publicly spoken out against it.
http://climatechangedispatch.com/97-articles-refuting-the-97-consensus/
3 Things Scientists Need to Know About the IPCC
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2015/09/01/3-things-scientists-need-to-know-about-the-ipcc/
I think Trump is correct on these changes.
Trump’s advisers have been very open in recent weeks about plans to cut NASA’s climate research and transfer the money into attempts to send astronauts to Mars.
“NASA should be focused primarily on deep-space activities rather than Earth-centric work that is better handled by other agencies,” Walker and Peter Navarro, another senior adviser to the Trump campaign, wrote in an opinion piece published in SpaceNews in October. “Human exploration of our entire solar system by the end of this century should be NASA’s focus and goal.”
NOAA is a more appropriate agency to handle climate change research.
Screw the Washington Post and all those fact checkers.
Fact checkers... hahaha! great!
NOAA is a more appropriate agency to handle climate change research.
That's mostly what they do now, I agree.. NASA should be focused on extra planetary colonies and asteroid mining / asteroid defense (since the only thing that we know for sure to cause abrupt mass extinction are large meteoroid impacts... we've had hundreds on the planet already).
I don't disagree with you on this issue. Correlation is not causation, after all.
Climate change - a perfect PR spin term - is a way to make lots of money. Scientists are paid grant money (private and federal) to prove what ever they are paid to prove.
Movie stars, past VPs and web-mongers like the ones linked to previously all get richer from making the idea of climate change into a politicized and monetized construct.
It is unfortunate the global need for clean air and water has become caught up in this spin.
It's unfortunate that we continue to need clean air to breathe and water to drink while allowing deforestation, corporations to continue to pollute our lands and waters with their numerous oil spills, injection of toxins into the land that continues to contaminate ground water, allowing dumping of toxic chemical waste into our rivers and streams, (France/Germany have both banned fracking, are discontinuing coal as an energy source and going to renewable energy sources) while we rely heavily on pesticides usage to produce our food. Many of the pesticides used in the U.S. have been banned in European countries.
It's unfortunate that that areas around the globe are experiencing record temperature increases, severe droughts, increases in the intensity of typhoons and hurricanes and other weather phenomena while arctic ice melts.
It's unfortunate that a majority of sea life are impacted by plastic pollution and that there are huge areas in our oceans that are garbage patches.
It's unfortunate that sea birds and fish are killed and contaminated by ingesting plastic particles.
It's unfortunate that we are experiencing warmer ocean temperatures that increase acidification and threaten sea life and corals.
It's unfortunate that we are seeing wildlife, plant species disappear at a rate previously unheard of which some say heralds the sixth extinction.
Yes, it's unfortunate that we cannot or will not take care and protect the environment on the only planet that is habitable for human existence.
102 million dead California trees 'unprecedented in our modern history,' officials say
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-dead-trees-20161118-story.html
How Trump could reverse progress on climate and energy
http://wilderness.org/blog/how-trump-could-reverse-progress-climate-and-energy
Perils of climate change could swamp coastal real estate
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/24/science/global-warming-coastal-real-estate.html?_r=0
Plastic pollutants entering Santa Monica Bay
Our real problem is not climate change, it is human overpopulation.
It doesn't take a village to raise a child. It takes responsible parents.
Agreed.
But it also takes awareness on many levels.
Now that we got all that nasty political hooyaballoo out of the way, we can go back to being friends again.
mike
(tu)
Here you go - for those of us trying to understand the language used by our neighbors and friends who live in their "conservative" bubbles. Now we can all dance to Bob Marley.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-pol-alt-right-terminology-20161115-story.html
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-conservatives-guide-to-the-alt-right/
Now that we got all that nasty political hooyaballoo out of the way, we can go back to being friends again.
mike
Now that's not being friendly, you just need a hug Gator's mom.
mike
Personally, I'm hoping the electoral college comes to its senses and doesn't certify him as president. If they do, I won't be watching the inauguration. I will be mourning for America and Americans.
- 4 Forums
- 32.9 K Topics
- 272.5 K Posts
- 326 Online
- 42.4 K Members