[Blackie]

Maybe the future looks bright.

You Are Stealing Our Future: Greta Thunberg, 15, Condemns the World’s Inaction on Climate Change - YouTube

[Topspinmo]

I’m sure the 15 years old don’t do without there electronics, designer clothes , and mommy’s MB SUV gas guzzlers. All contributors also

[manaboutown]

It is very sad she has been mislead.

Climate Change Videos - Nobel Laureate in Physics; "Global Warming is Pseudoscience" | Heartland Institute

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

It is very sad she has been mislead.

Climate Change Videos - Nobel Laureate in Physics; "Global Warming is Pseudoscience" | Heartland Institute

Went to this site, wow!
Their endorsements explains it all:

Endorsements
The Heartland Institute is endorsed by some of the top scholars, thinkers, and politicians in the world – including many members of congress and state elected officials and the leaders of other conservative and libertarian think tanks such as Americans for Tax Reform’s Grover Norquist, The Leadership Institute’s Morton Blackwell, The Heritage Foundation’s Jim DeMint, and many more.

[Boomer]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

Went to this site, wow!
Their endorsements explains it all:

Endorsements
The Heartland Institute is endorsed by some of the top scholars, thinkers, and politicians in the world – including many members of congress and state elected officials and the leaders of other conservative and libertarian think tanks such as Americans for Tax Reform’s Grover Norquist, The Leadership Institute’s Morton Blackwell, The Heritage Foundation’s Jim DeMint, and many more.

Thank you, Bogie,

You have illustrated here how it is not only important to cite sources but to recognize the need to back source cited sources.

In other words -- who said what, when, and why did they say it?

As a nation we are awash in disinformation and propaganda.

I actually change the channel sometimes, just to see what is being said. But too many people are not willing to look at anything other than what taps into whatever it is they need to think, for whatever reason.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Boomer

Thank you, Bogie,

You have illustrated here how it is not only important to cite sources but to recognize the need to back source cited sources.

In other words -- who said what, when, and why did they say it?

As a nation we are awash in disinformation and propaganda.

I actually change the channel sometimes, just to see what is being said. But too many people are not willing to look at anything other than what taps into whatever it is they need to think, for whatever reason.

Few people I know doubt the reason and the fact of climate change but certainly debate how to stop it or slow it down or whether much can be done at all. I don't see people giving up their engines or their livelihood that depends on them and it would require that and the diligent reuse of possessions and the discontinued use of plastics. People think they understand the situation but most are far too simplistic and far to accusatory.

And many are just plain unrealistic. Define the problem, gather facts, come to trial conclusion, check trial conclusion come to final conclusion. Mine is that no one can make all people in the world do what needs to be done to stop greenhouse gases. I think the answer will lie in a scientific discovery not yet made. Humans will continue to act like humans.

[eweissenbach]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

Went to this site, wow!
Their endorsements explains it all:

Endorsements
The Heartland Institute is endorsed by some of the top scholars, thinkers, and politicians in the world – including many members of congress and state elected officials and the leaders of other conservative and libertarian think tanks such as Americans for Tax Reform’s Grover Norquist, The Leadership Institute’s Morton Blackwell, The Heritage Foundation’s Jim DeMint, and many more.

I find it amazing and perplexing how many people who, because of the initial following their name, follow the line without thought. If you own a petroleum or coal company, or a pipeline, or anything else that supports fossil fuels, I understand your position. I can think of no rational reason, other than that, which would cause you to think that cleaning the environment was anything other than vital. I'm sure this post and probably this thread, won't last long unfortunately.

[eweissenbach]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Few people I know doubt the reason and the fact of climate change but certainly debate how to stop it or slow it down or whether much can be done at all. I don't see people giving up their engines or their livelihood that depends on them and it would require that and the diligent reuse of possessions and the discontinued use of plastics. People think they understand the situation but most are far too simplistic and far to accusatory.

It is difficult and complicated to reverse the situation, but many don't even care to begin the process, and try to use disinformation to back their arguments. Our grandchildren and their children and grandchildren will one day be asking "what were they thinking?"

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Boomer

Thank you, Bogie,

You have illustrated here how it is not only important to cite sources but to recognize the need to back source cited sources.

In other words -- who said what, when, and why did they say it?

As a nation we are awash in disinformation and propaganda.

I actually change the channel sometimes, just to see what is being said. But too many people are not willing to look at anything other than what taps into whatever it is they need to think, for whatever reason.

My parents have a certain station on often so I do not have a choice with my hearing other viewpoints even if to me that station sounds like disinformation and propaganda of the worst kind. Journalists are supposed to me to be critical explorers into the facts no matter what those facts turn out to really be. Diggers for the truth in other words and not disseminators of BS.

[tuccillo]

A bit disingenuous as the magnitude of the problem is far from known. As I have stated previously, this is an area of ongoing research and is hardly settled science. The homogenization of certain observational datasets and the lack of fidelity in the treatments of certain physical processes in numerical models makes any conclusions suspect. Well respected scientists such as Lennart Bengtsson have expressed the opinion that we simply don't know the magnitude of anthropogenic warming nor the time scale. 40 years ago the concern was about global cooling. Full disclosure: undergraduate and graduate degrees in atmospheric science, researcher and numerical model developer for NASA and the National Weather Service.

Originally Posted by Blackie

Maybe the future looks bright.

You Are Stealing Our Future: Greta Thunberg, 15, Condemns the World’s Inaction on Climate Change - YouTube

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

I find it amazing and perplexing how many people who, because of the initial following their name, follow the line without thought. If you own a petroleum or coal company, or a pipeline, or anything else that supports fossil fuels, I understand your position. I can think of no rational reason, other than that, which would cause you to think that cleaning the environment was anything other than vital. I'm sure this post and probably this thread, won't last long unfortunately.

Ed. Forest Fires and Volcano's and animals and humans belch contamination too. As I say. It isn't as political as some assume. World hunger has been cut in half since 1990 because of industrialization. Please check that fact. It isn't simple. Nothing ever is and sometimes there are no answers for difficult issues. .

[PersonalChoice]

What happened to global cooling, acid rain, depletion of the ozone layer, global warming . . . ? Now we have global climate change blamed on CO2, which is a necessary gas for life on this planet, along with oxygen. Follow the money trail? Who would gain from selling carbon credits? How do we control solar flares, sun activity, which I am sure has a major effect on our weather? The computer models do not include the sun's effect on our planet. Hmmm.

[manaboutown]

I love Ben Stein and his sensible analysis of many situations. Ben Stein: What if manmade climate change is a fraud? | On Air Videos | Fox News

[tuccillo]

Disinformation springs from both sides. The worst, in my opinion, comes from those who are convinced they completely understand a problem that is still being researched.

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

It is difficult and complicated to reverse the situation, but many don't even care to begin the process, and try to use disinformation to back their arguments. Our grandchildren and their children and grandchildren will one day be asking "what were they thinking?"

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by tuccillo

A bit disingenuous as the magnitude of the problem is far from known. As I have stated previously, this is an area of ongoing research and is hardly settled science. The homogenization of certain observational datasets and the lack of fidelity in the treatments of certain physical processes in numerical models makes any conclusions suspect. Well respected scientists such as Lennart Bengtsson have expressed the opinion that we simply don't know the magnitude of anthropogenic warming nor the time scale. 40 years ago the concern was about global cooling. Full disclosure: undergraduate and graduate degrees in atmospheric science, researcher and numerical model developer for NASA and the National Weather Service.

Most real science has a lot of unknowns especially something as complicated as the weather and long term patterns in it. But what is very obvious is that something needs to be done no matter the extent of scientist's knowledge of what the "cycles" or whatever are really like.

If your house is getting too uncomfortable for you then you turn down the thermostat or turn it up or open some windows or actually do something to fix it. Or try to change the conditions.

An interesting link-- Climate Change