[MorTech]

0.04% atmospheric CO2 is barely adequate for BioLife...Below 0.02% there will be mass BioLife extinction. Optimal CO2 level is 0.08%-0.15% which is where the Sahara Desert becomes the Sahara Forest again...Like is was 90% of the time on Earth. At 0.15%, the Earth could easily support maybe 100B people.

In physical reality, a Boeing jet is "Green" (CO2 and H20 makes plants green) and a Tesla is Brown...The Dunning-Kruger TeeVee watchers (who can barely do basic math) can't even figure that one out.

[mickey100]

TOTV - A bunch of retired old people who are now all environmental experts. It reminds me of the pandemic when the same people were medical experts.

[dougjb]

These speakers at Villages forums who cast doubt on "global warming" seem to be living on a different planet. They offer their "opinion" that the whole global warming issue is fraught with fraud, poor science and innuendo. Some claim that there is NO climate warming. Yet, when asked, these "global warming deniers" have yet to provide even one single peer review science article supporting their viewpoint. In the meantime there are literally scores of thousands of peer review articles (the gold standard in science) that support the impact of human activities as one cause of global warming. The response of these deniers is that the peer review system is full of fraud.

If you go to one of these seminars, please ask the presenter (politely) for a list of peer review articles that support their incessant neigh saying. They can't produce even one. It kind of leads me to believe that these presenters are also charter members of the flat earth society! Then ask them what their expert qualifications are. I do not believe any of them can claim to be climatologists. One is a metiorologist (i.e. weather forecaster...and we know how wrong most of them are on a regular basis) and another has a doctorate in an unrelated field.

While many of the presenters at Villages seminars are from highly educated and informed professionals, these "global warming deniers" are basically charlatans!

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by dougjb

These speakers at Villages forums who cast doubt on "global warming" seem to be living on a different planet. They offer their "opinion" that the whole global warming issue is fraught with fraud, poor science and innuendo. Some claim that there is NO climate warming. Yet, when asked, these "global warming deniers" have yet to provide even one single peer review science article supporting their viewpoint. In the meantime there are literally scores of thousands of peer review articles (the gold standard in science) that support the impact of human activities as one cause of global warming. The response of these deniers is that the peer review system is full of fraud.

If you go to one of these seminars, please ask the presenter (politely) for a list of peer review articles that support their incessant neigh saying. They can't produce even one. It kind of leads me to believe that these presenters are also charter members of the flat earth society! Then ask them what their expert qualifications are. I do not believe any of them can claim to be climatologists. One is a metiorologist (i.e. weather forecaster...and we know how wrong most of them are on a regular basis) and another has a doctorate in an unrelated field.

While many of the presenters at Villages seminars are from highly educated and informed professionals, these "global warming deniers" are basically charlatans!

I guess you didn't read post #15, which explains why.

[Blueblaze]

The most obvious point of this entire discussion is that there is one side that knows the facts and another side that merely seems to know that the "consensus" exists. Everyone here will draw their own conclusions -- the same ones they came to the discussion with.

And we will all ignore the real issue -- if human progress beyond our normal state of existence (dire poverty under the heel of some tyrant) causes "climate change", then the only solution is return to the dark ages, and thereby dial down the population by about 7 billion human beings. And that is exactly the prescription ordered by what passes for "science" when politics becomes involved. Windmills and solar cells. If you do the math, you will discover that simply replacing the current US energy demands with "green energy" would require bulldozing the entire states of Texas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico to turn them into energy farms. Which is absurd.

Therefore, unless we're willing to sacrifice billions of lives to dial back our energy use, we're just going to have to deal with it. A warmer, greener planet is obviously better for 8 billion humans than the colder, undeveloped planet we had before.

But it sure would be nice if we could talk about how best to deal with whatever changes may be coming (if they actually are), without trying to using it for political gain.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

The most obvious point of this entire discussion is that there is one side that knows the facts and another side that merely seems to know that the "consensus" exists. Everyone here will draw their own conclusions -- the same ones they came to the discussion with.

And we will all ignore the real issue -- if human progress beyond our normal state of existence (dire poverty under the heel of some tyrant) causes "climate change", then the only solution is return to the dark ages, and thereby dial down the population by about 7 billion human beings. And that is exactly the prescription ordered by what passes for "science" when politics becomes involved. Windmills and solar cells. If you do the math, you will discover that simply replacing the current US energy demands with "green energy" would require bulldozing the entire states of Texas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico to turn them into energy farms. Which is absurd.

Therefore, unless we're willing to sacrifice billions of lives to dial back our energy use, we're just going to have to deal with it. A warmer, greener planet is obviously better for 8 billion humans than the colder, undeveloped planet we had before.

But it sure would be nice if we could talk about how best to deal with whatever changes may be coming (if they actually are), without trying to using it for political gain.

Unfortunately, not going to happen. Not with $100 TRILLION at stake and not while the dark side appears to be winning. Although it is a misquote, perhaps their ignorance IS bliss

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by dougjb

These speakers at Villages forums who cast doubt on "global warming" seem to be living on a different planet. They offer their "opinion" that the whole global warming issue is fraught with fraud, poor science and innuendo. Some claim that there is NO climate warming. Yet, when asked, these "global warming deniers" have yet to provide even one single peer review science article supporting their viewpoint. In the meantime there are literally scores of thousands of peer review articles (the gold standard in science) that support the impact of human activities as one cause of global warming. The response of these deniers is that the peer review system is full of fraud.

If you go to one of these seminars, please ask the presenter (politely) for a list of peer review articles that support their incessant neigh saying. They can't produce even one. It kind of leads me to believe that these presenters are also charter members of the flat earth society! Then ask them what their expert qualifications are. I do not believe any of them can claim to be climatologists. One is a metiorologist (i.e. weather forecaster...and we know how wrong most of them are on a regular basis) and another has a doctorate in an unrelated field.

While many of the presenters at Villages seminars are from highly educated and informed professionals, these "global warming deniers" are basically charlatans!

You have that right. And they, mainly he, pushes the same cherry picked charts.

[Whitley]

Originally Posted by mickey100

TOTV - A bunch of retired old people who are now all environmental experts. It reminds me of the pandemic when the same people were medical experts.

You are so right. Unless you hold a phd in a subject, shut your mouth and do what you are told.

[Blueblaze]

I just find it a little weird to discover so many climate alarmists retired in Florida in 2023, since Al Gore told us almost 20 years ago that it would be underwater for the past 7 years. It's almost like they didn't really believe the "consensus" or something! What a gutsy move, betting your life savings that Al Gore was wrong (while still believing he was right)!

[MrChip72]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

I guess you didn't read post #15, which explains why.

That explains nothing. You're stuck on confirmation bias as many of the conspiracy style posts on this subject have been on TOTV.

Post #15 claimed that someone's career ended because they had particular findings about climate change. First of all, you shouldn't base any argument on an anecdote. Maybe they were just bad at their job? Maybe they were a nutjob that values cultist politics over science.

Why were they unable to find a job at one of the many other fine universities in the world that do climate research? It's a field where there's plenty of demand for jobs and government funding by many countries has been higher than ever.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

I just find it a little weird to discover so many climate alarmists retired in Florida in 2023, since Al Gore told us almost 20 years ago that it would be underwater for the past 7 years. It's almost like they didn't really believe the "consensus" or something! What a gutsy move, betting your life savings that Al Gore was wrong (while still believing he was right)!

I now know of two users who somehow believed the vice president was also a climate scientist. There are many others to choose from who actually have degrees in the field.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by MrChip72

That explains nothing. You're stuck on confirmation bias as many of the conspiracy style posts on this subject have been on TOTV.

Post #15 claimed that someone's career ended because they had particular findings about climate change. First of all, you shouldn't base any argument on an anecdote. Maybe they were just bad at their job? Maybe they were a nutjob that values cultist politics over science.

Why were they unable to find a job at one of the many other fine universities in the world that do climate research? It's a field where there's plenty of demand for jobs and government funding by many countries has been higher than ever.

You really believe that?????

Who's the "denier" now??????

[Whitley]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

I now know of two users who somehow believed the vice president was also a climate scientist. There are many others to choose from who actually have degrees in the field.

Please, VP Gore could not be a climate scientist. Where would he have found the time, with everything he had to do to invent the internet. SuperSerious.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by Whitley

You are so right. Unless you hold a phd in a subject, shut your mouth and do what you are told.

Yavol, mien herr!

[Normal]

Originally Posted by Whitley

Please, VP Gore could not be a climate scientist. Where would he have found the time, with everything he had to do to invent the internet. SuperSerious.

Global warming kooks need to introduce true science into the subject, not Al Gore wanna bees who only do google searches and look for campaign dollars. There are two plausible causes mentioned in most articles. The orbital path of the Earth and carbon emissions. Neither has been proven, although there can’t be much argument against Earth’s history and orbital concerns. Then you have spinning with the conflation of terms like “warming”, “climate change” and “weather” interchanged with “climate”. Fortunately most are aware of the ploys.