[Two Bills]

It has been proven that Greta Thunberg is making a real difference to climate change.
Every time she comes on the TV approximately 1 million people switch it off.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by zendog3

Wow! I was aware there were still people who disagreed that global climate change was a fact and that people were the primary cause, but I am amazed by the passion of some readers.

Your opinion was common in the '70s, but the consensus among scientists studying climate has moved. Perhaps you should take another look at the science.

It is not reasonable to expect any reader of this list to read all the primary science. Instead, we must select our sources and evaluate not the scientific research but the authority of the source. Bush, Gore, Trump, Hannity, Biden, etc., are not the people we should trust in matters where there is a scientific answer. Because the stakes are so high, we need to consider the words and writings of scientists researching this field.

I refer you to Wikipedia for a summary, where a long and meticulously documented article is waiting.

Surveys of scientists' views on climate change - Wikipedia

People violently opposed to the idea of global warming will not read an article that attacks their fundamental beliefs. People skeptical may look at the charts and graphs. However, anyone with faith in science who reads the report can not help but be persuaded by the consensus statement quoted here:

Academic studies of scientific agreement on human-caused global warming among climate experts (2010–2019) reflect that the level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science.[302][303]
There is an overwhelming scientific consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused mainly by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases, with 90–100% (depending on the exact question, timing and sampling methodology) of publishing climate scientists agreeing.[304] The consensus has grown to 100% among research scientists on anthropogenic global warming as of 2019.[305] No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view.[306] Consensus has further developed that some form of action should be taken to protect people against the impacts of climate change, and national science academies have called on world leaders to cut global emissions.[307]

The Wikipedia article is backed with pages and pages of citations to original scientific papers.

Most of us will die in a world where the earth's temperature is still rising and climate catastrophe is growing. It is for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren that we need to act now.

I agree with the contents of this post.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by zendog3

Many folks on this list have said the developer is only interested in money. I could not disagree more.

The lot my house is built on backs to a golf course and pond. I paid about $100,000 for that view. I drive about one-quarter of a mile on Hillsborough beside the same view when I leave my home. The developer is not stupid. They knew they could have moved the street and sold every sixty feet of that view for $100,000. The developer, long ago, made more money than they will ever spend. Some rich man once said, “After a certain amount, money is only a way to keep score.”

I believe one of the primary interests of the developer is their legacy. When the members of the family, like their parents before them, die, I think they want to be remembered, not for their immense wealth, but for the community they created. That is why tie idea of a solar village is a possibility.

More money is the key to MORE POWER. Was Bezos satisfied, was the Kock Bros satisfied, was Jack Welsh, what about S. Adelson? Power, power, and more power!!!!!!!!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Number 10 GI

Tell me how the ocean can be higher in the Atlantic and the other oceans aren't. Approximately 71% of the world is covered by water. All these oceans are connected to each other, so if one rises so will the rest. If 50 people go into a swimming pool at one end does the water not rise equally at the other end?
That 97% of all scientists is total BS, it is an invented number. There is no way you are going to get 97% of any group to agree on anything.

True about the together rise. I only know that measurements were taken on the Atlantic side..I am sure that someone has done it on the Pacific side. Please.....that was just a throw-away detail.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Two Bills

It has been proven that Greta Thunberg is making a real difference to climate change.
Every time she comes on the TV approximately 1 million people switch it off.

I love Greta. She IS the future and we will be "blowing in the wind".

[irishwonone]

Originally Posted by zendog3

This year we have experienced stronger storms, more frequent floods, droughts, forest fires, rising seas, melting glaciers, etc. Most people will agree that global warming, caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the air, is a primary driver of catastrophic weather events that will seriously impact the quality of life our children and grandchildren will inherit from us. The Villages is uniquely positioned to lead the nation in remediating the harmful effects of ongoing carbon dioxide pollution.

It would be a source of pride for all Villagers if the developer of The Villages, the preeminent builder in central Florida, and an enormously profitable business, would announce one of its forthcoming villages would be a “Solar Village.” Every house and public building in the solar village could be partially solar-powered.

As it has led in planned community development, The Villages can lead the nation in sustainable community development.

Ha, what an original idea. Maybe President Obama could head up the committee along with the former President of Solyndra. They have a proven record!

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

I love Greta. She IS the future and we will be "blowing in the wind".

Well, there is certainly a lot of "hot air" blowing in this thread...

[ttc1991@aol.com]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Please tell me that is a tongue in cheek joke, please. No one, perhaps with the exception of Al Gore, should believe any of this "global warming" garbage that is being shoved down our throats, although PT Barnum was right when he said that there is one born every minute. I have explained at least a dozen times that we have been in an ice age for 4+ million years with cyclical periods of glaciation and thaws (and therefore periods of warming and cooling). We have been through both the warming and cooling limbs of this cycle at least 2 dozen times in that period and 2 things are true-----
1) we are still here
2) It HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SUV'S OR ANY OTHER ACTIVITY OF MAN

Our kids and grandkids?????? Not likely, although our descendants in about 15,000 years will live at the peak of the warming cycle and our coastal cities will be under 100 feet of water. But don't break out the sunscreen and swim trunks just yet, because 30,000 years after that, NY City will again be under 2 miles of ice.

But, if anyone doesn't understand the simple science behind paleoclimatology, then by all means let's spend 100 trillion dollars over the next 40 years to combat "global warming" What a joke!

PS: This is not to denigrate solar power---it is a good thing and there are plenty of reasons to utilize it. However "global warming" is NOT one of them

You took the words right out of my mouth!

[Laker14]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Please tell me that is a tongue in cheek joke, please. No one, perhaps with the exception of Al Gore, should believe any of this "global warming" garbage that is being shoved down our throats, although PT Barnum was right when he said that there is one born every minute. I have explained at least a dozen times that we have been in an ice age for 4+ million years with cyclical periods of glaciation and thaws (and therefore periods of warming and cooling). We have been through both the warming and cooling limbs of this cycle at least 2 dozen times in that period and 2 things are true-----
1) we are still here
2) It HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SUV'S OR ANY OTHER ACTIVITY OF MAN

Our kids and grandkids?????? Not likely, although our descendants in about 15,000 years will live at the peak of the warming cycle and our coastal cities will be under 100 feet of water. But don't break out the sunscreen and swim trunks just yet, because 30,000 years after that, NY City will again be under 2 miles of ice.

But, if anyone doesn't understand the simple science behind paleoclimatology, then by all means let's spend 100 trillion dollars over the next 40 years to combat "global warming" What a joke!

PS: This is not to denigrate solar power---it is a good thing and there are plenty of reasons to utilize it. However "global warming" is NOT one of them

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

the above link cites the following organizations as supporting the claim that the climate is warming, and that human activities are a major, if not THE major drivers:
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Meteorological Society
American Physical (Physics) Society
The Geological Society of America

So what is it that makes you so sure your science is more accurate and reliable than the science of these organizations ?

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Laker14

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

the above link cites the following organizations as supporting the claim that the climate is warming, and that human activities are a major, if not THE major drivers:
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Meteorological Society
American Physical (Physics) Society
The Geological Society of America

So what is it that makes you so sure your science is more accurate and reliable than the science of these organizations ?

Common sense

[Laker14]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

Common sense

Wow. That is a really weak answer. If that's all you got, you got nothing, especially not common sense.

You may as well have said "because I say so".

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Laker14

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

the above link cites the following organizations as supporting the claim that the climate is warming, and that human activities are a major, if not THE major drivers:
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Meteorological Society
American Physical (Physics) Society
The Geological Society of America

So what is it that makes you so sure your science is more accurate and reliable than the science of these organizations ?

You link references that well debunked "97%", multiple times... Proving it's not a serious piece...

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Laker14

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

the above link cites the following organizations as supporting the claim that the climate is warming, and that human activities are a major, if not THE major drivers:
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Meteorological Society
American Physical (Physics) Society
The Geological Society of America

So what is it that makes you so sure your science is more accurate and reliable than the science of these organizations ?

Easy. I'm not taking grant money from a federal government that clearly has a political agenda to purport, and I'm citing pure paleoclimatology and experts who are not supported by the government as well. Try reading the rather simplistic summary by ABC news (hardly a conservative media outlet) that I posted a link to a page or two back.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Laker14

Wow. That is a really weak answer. If that's all you got, you got nothing, especially not common sense.

You may as well have said "because I say so".

I do have common sense. It tells me that, if the planet needs to be saved, it needs to be a global initiative. But, all of the organizations you cited have "America" in their name. Our country only represents about 5 percent of the planet's population. So, where do the rest of the countries stand on the issue?

[golfing eagles]

[QUOTE=retiredguy123;2014744]I do have common sense. It tells me that, if the planet needs to be saved, it needs to be a global initiative. But, all of the organizations you cited have "America" in their name. Our country only represents about 5 percent of the planet's population. So, where do the rest of the countries stand on the issue?[/QUOTE]

Another softball question... Since all the "climate accords" have the U.S. footing a disproportionately large share of the cost, I think everyone can easily guess where other countries stand.