Originally Posted by Pugchief (Post 2263428)

You disproved your own point. The Patriots stink once again as the cycle reverts.

Originally Posted by cjrjck (Post 2263395)

Good points but I am still confused why it matters that some people don't believe in climate change. How is it important what someone else thinks or believes?

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2263430)

Do you mean the system recovered when the abnormal influence was removed? That is exactly what those concerned about climate change would like to see happen: remove/limit/lessen the CO2 so that the cycle can revert.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 2262875)

No idea, but logically if the Eurasian and African plates were moving closer to each other, the width of the Mediterranean would narrow and raise the water level. Of course, plates move quite slowly (except in earthquakes, but that is a release of tension and not continental drift), and can be measure in millions of years, so 2,000 years, appears, at least empirically, to be too short a time frame.

Originally Posted by blueash (Post 2262810)

This graph uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 2263210)

Amazing. This has been explained by myself and others multiple times. I guess some things take longer to sink in than others.

First, the "deniers" are those that ignore the last 4.5 million years of climatology and instead embrace this false narrative of "climate change" being shoved down our throats by the media and government policies, all designed to spend up to 130 trillion on a fool's errand that will enrich very few.

Secondly, it does not require a "conspiracy", it only requires knowing which side your bread is buttered on. If you lived in N Korea and "dear leader" said the sky is yellow, you would also state the sky is yellow. If you are a climatologist at a university or working in government and your livelihood depends on grants and tenure, you know better than to oppose the false climate change agenda.

Third, where did anyone get "irate"?

And lastly, rather than cite a few articles, here is the opinion of 500 respected climatologists and scientists:

"The video above is from Friends of Science, a Canada-based “non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals.” On the same day last week that Greta Thunberg made an impassioned speech to the United Nations about her fears of a climate emergency, a group of 500 prominent scientists and professionals, led by the CLINTEL co-founder Guus Berkhout, sent this registered letter to the United Nations Secretary-General stating that there is no climate emergency and climate policies should be designed to benefit the lives of people. Here’s the press release, here’ the list of 500 signees, and here’s the opening of the letter:

A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors. The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose.

Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions of dollars on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy. We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation

Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in the letter:

1 Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming.
2. Warming is far slower than predicted.
3. Climate policy relies on inadequate models.
4. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is a plant food that is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
5. Global warming has not increased natural disasters.
6. Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities.
7. There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic.


MP: What about that “consensus” and “settled science” about climate change we always hear about? How can there be a consensus when there’s a global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields who challenge the “settled science”?

Actually, challenging the consensus among the scientific community is nothing new, but those the voices of those challenging the consensus are always drowned out by the tsunami of climate hysteria from the climate alarmists. For example, in 2012 a group of more than 125 scientists sent an open letter to the United Nations warning that scientific evidence refuted UN Secretary-General’s Ban Ki-Moon repeated assertions on weather and climate. Those warnings of climate hysteria unsupported by the scientific evidence were ignored in 2012, just like the letter from the 500 prominent scientists and professionals will be ignored in 2019. In other words, it’s “deja vu all over again.”

Originally Posted by Driller703 (Post 2263383)

Terrible! I’m so amazed that they can tell all this, and they can’t predict the weather next week! It would be so easy to fix this if we just paid more taxes!! I feel bad for the people who live where the power grid will be so over loaded because of all the electric cars that they won’t be able to run their A/C in the 120 degree heat!! And then, the thermal shock of the following freezing winter! Lucky we weren’t around 15,000 years ago when this happened before.

Originally Posted by sounding (Post 2263347)

Correct. All data shows it was hotter during the Dust Bowl years - the 1930s. A primary driver was and is the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) - which shows it was hottest in the 30s and coolest in the 70s (when it snowed in Miami in '77). This year is warm due to the AMO, Tonga volcano, peaking sunspots, and increasing El Nino -- and yet we are still in a 9-year cooling trend.

Originally Posted by Byte1 (Post 2263488)

I can't be charged with being a "denier" since I don't deny that the climate changes. It always has and it always will. I have doubts that anything that we do can change our climate from changing. Perhaps a giant bubble (like the one over the Villages?) situated over each populated area in the world, with a giant climate control like my car has, will make it all better?
First off, why should I agree that we should throw trillions of bucks into studies on how to fix the weather patterns; ie, man made climate control? When someone suggests that anyone that does not agree with them is ignorant and uneducated, it makes me wonder how idiotic some folks are to waste trillions on studies to find solutions for something that would take hundreds or thousands of years to prove and initiate. I doubt that man will exist in a thousand years, so I really don't care about the weather changes. Even if I was concerned about the weather, no matter what I do, I could not make any difference in my lifetime. If the younger generation feels it can improve it's future, let them handle it. Personally, I am retired and enjoy the hot weather. The only problem I have is the rising cost of utilities and insurance; oh, and the cost of food, and .....inflation. Take for instance, the great fuel tax holiday this month. Did anyone notice the lower price of gasoline at the pumps? Neither did I. The price went up so that they could discount it by 25 cents a gallon. Same price I paid for it the last fill up. Then, they have an excuse to have a high price after the tax holiday is over. But, I digress again.
Like I said, I am not a denier. I believe in climate change. But, I don't get all hysterical like a school girl (oops) and believe that by running out and purchasing a EV or stop eating beef and switching to mystery meat, that I am going to change the temperature in my lifetime. Sorry, if that hurts anyone's feelings. And by the way, if being a believer in the Almighty and His Son for salvation makes me a "denier" then, just add that to my other label if being a "deplorable."
That said, I have no problem with lowering my contribution to air pollution....IF it's a reasonable request. I like clean air as much as anyone else. I am very happy with how much cleaner our air has become, compared to what it was like when I was a kid.

Originally Posted by mtdjed (Post 2263472)

Not taking sides but remember that the Mediterranean is not self-contained.

Originally Posted by oldtimes (Post 2263608)

The real problem is conspicuous consumption. The earth’s resources are being depleted creating ever new cars and boats and private jets and huge mansions that are lived in sometimes for only weeks in a year. Pushing EVs and more efficient appliances is nothing but a bandaid. Instead of trying to change climate change we should be learning how to deal with it, like not building right on the water. The only thing I am denying is the proposed “solutions” which are not solving anything but just shifting it to different problem.