Morgan

Oh YEAH, they are the REAL SCIENTISTS...you Baffoons, hey I hear the dinner bell ringing, time to chow down more BS, I got news for you, the people barking at the moon are you! I'll still go with the 97-99% of the climate scientists and researchers around the WORLD! You must be another stable genius like Trump.

S. Maturin

"Oh YEAH, they are the REAL SCIENTISTS.."

Yup, hurts don't it. Go get another bowl of ice cream and all will heal.

Morgan

So, it's the old argument...it's the Jews fault...I see where you're coming from, clear as a bell now.

Morgan

That would be 300 years, guess they didn't teach basic math either where you're from.

Morgan

The reason why people, as you say, are screaming is from being ignored for half of a century, and nothing changes due to the very fact the industry who fights for things to remain the same, for their own self-interest and profit have been winning, and when they win Archie you, me and the world and following generations lose. It's just that simple, I'm sorry you don't see it and all you see is finding fault with the people trying to make the change.

cold iron Loc: White House

I do believe you are right!
Something has happened to America's....like becoming wimpy, for the most part.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Over 200 years was stated which 300 is. Get it?

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Simple question. What is more dangerous to future generations, climate change or our exploding debt?

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

I agree; just keep hearding the cattle.
Weather.com is an NBC station.
Anyone else notice the liberal slant they give to the weather?
I read somewhere, that by giving a weather occurrence a name; it gives that occurrence a change in political address. Federal funding?

S. Maturin

There's not much about other folks you like, is there, Morgan?

One other thing.. if people have been yelling/screaming for fifty (50) years as you say, why does a joker like AlGore tell you poorly-educated frightened idiots we have only a decade to "do something"? That the entire city of NYC is now--NOW!-- under twenty feet of sea water?

I think AlGore believes you and the rest of the ignorant masses who listen to his BS have some money left that he can con you out of while making you afraid of everything that moves.

cold iron Loc: White House

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

I would say you nailed it.!!. Polar vortex is not uncommon and in fact the only thing uncommon about this severe weather is it escaped sooner with more stength.. So say some .. im inclined to agree with that simple fact..

Look at the back lash Gore had had over his stupid analogy.. I mean really so now globalwarming is also global freezing... Brilliant~~

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Changes happen organically as technology improves, and new discoveries are made. Look at our vehicles now compared to even 20 years ago. Cummins now makes a diesel engine that puts out cleaner air than its breathing in when idling in downtown L.A.
Where I live, we are covered up with wind turbines. Thousands of them. Just those two combined do have an affect on the industries that you despise so much because they want to make a profit for themselves, and their investors. Cars use 1/2 as much gas, coal plants lose revenue from what little energy is produced by the windmills.
And I don't recall hearing a lot of screaming until Fat Al came up with his gold mine of a carbon credit plan, and made a ton of false claims and predictions. Then Obama turned it into a political issue, and he we are. Now it's Winter, and cold outside because it's too warm.

I'm gonna ask one more time just for fun. What happened to the glaciers that once covered a good portion of North America before my massive carbon footprint landed here? I know for damn sure my gas powered weedeater didn't cause it!

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Claiming something doesn’t make it righ t as we all know...I know you’ve read this many times before and disagree but it’s worth consideration of those who may not have read it before too..

The 97% scientific consensus on human-caused global warming is frequently cited as the justification for the imposition of carbon taxes and extreme climate change or greenhouse gas reduction targets “...to stop dangerous climate change” (Pembina Institute, City of Calgary GHG Reduction Plan 2011)i.

Realty~~

At least 5 separate surveys since 2004 claim a 97% consensus, or in the case of Oreskes (2004) – a 75% consensus saying “Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position.”

This seemed to be a statistical coincidence that so many surveys could arrive at exactly the same result. Upon closer examination, this seemed an even more impressive claim since there are no common scientific constants in any of these studies. These 97% consensus studies also claim an enormous pool of 1,000 or 10,000+ scientists surveyed. It is important to understand of those numbers, how many responded, which were selected, what criteria, and where they lie on a spectrum of “consensus” about the percentage of human impact on climate...which could be anything from 5% to 100%. In fact, Friends of Science deconstruction of these surveys reveals there is no such consensus. [Figure 1 below]

Ironically, greenhouse gas emissions are not the major obsession of all climate scientists. Many climate scientists believe that natural forces dominate climate change and that greenhouse gas emissions have caused less than half of the 20th century warming. Even at that, the warming was nominal.

Further, global warming stopped 16 years ago. The global average temperature rise during the 20th century of 0.75 °C was largely a natural recovery from the Little Ice Age, 1400 to 1900 AD, that corresponds to a period of low solar activity.1 The rapid warming from 1910 to 1940 occurred when CO2 emissions were low and could not have caused the warming. Few climate scientists see that as catastrophic, particularly since the current global temperature is similar to, or possibly cooler than previous warm periods like the Medieval Warm Period and the Roman Optimum, when Hannibal rode elephants over the Alps [Figure 2]. Likewise, there are also benefits to increased CO2, which is rarely spoken about. Professor Richard Tol finds that warming of the last century has increased economic output by 1.4%, equivalent to $1.2 Trillion per year. The CO2 fertilization effect (CO2 is plant food) adds $0.2 Trillion per year of benefit from higher crop yields. <snip>

< more to read should you wish .>..

https://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/97_Consensus_Myth.pdf

Likewise the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world.
In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period...

archie bunker Loc: Texas

That frigging grease pit spends more to heat one swimming pool for a month than my yearly electric bill, and he is the god of global warming!
We all have to cut back, do without, give him and the government our money so they can 'fix it'.
What a mfking joke!