America 1 Loc: South Miami

Right, throw out some more liberal BS and hope it sticks.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Of course there have been warmer times in earth history. no one says different..

But the main points... humans were not around for those extremes and the change was much, much slower in affect.. that has been posted many times.. you should have let that sink n by now..

Seems we can not even have a sit down to talk this out...

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

That is also not for sure. To compare .00000001% of geologic history (humanity's time) to hundreds of millions of years is a fools folly. The fluctuations are simply too numerous and too complex to be able to claim accuracy in that claim.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

The trend is readily apparent..

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

No, it isn't. Oh we can look at "pitures" of all sorts of amazing things but the trends are NOT apparent; only the emotional reaction of alarmists is. There is an equal apparentcy that removal of man and his impact on the environment and the warming will continue/or it won't.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

I know you will never change your mind on this, but these are some more facts for you to look over. follow the link if you wish, has a short but informative article..

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/c*****e-c****e-global-temperature#:~:text=Change%20over%20time&text=According%20to%20the%20NOAA%202019,more%20than%20twice%20as%20great.

Change over time
Though warming has not been uniform across the planet, the upward trend in the globally averaged temperature shows that more areas are warming than cooling. According to the NOAA 2019 Global Climate Summary, the combined land and ocean temperature has increased at an average rate of 0.07°C (0.13°F) per decade since 1880; however, the average rate of increase since 1981 (0.18°C / 0.32°F) is more than twice as great.

The 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 1998, and 9 of the 10 have occurred since 2005. The year 1998 is the only year from the twentieth century still among the ten warmest years on record. Looking back to 1988, a pattern emerges: except for 2011, as each new year is added to the historical record, it becomes one of the top 10 warmest on record at that time, but it is ultimately replaced as the “top ten” window shifts forward in time.

By 2020, models project that global surface temperature will be more than 0.5°C (0.9°F) warmer than the 1986-2005 average, regardless of which carbon dioxide emissions pathway the world follows. This similarity in temperatures regardless of total emissions is a short-term phenomenon: it reflects the tremendous inertia of Earth's vast oceans. The high heat capacity of water means that ocean temperature doesn't react instantly to the increased heat being trapped by greenhouse gases. By 2030, however, the heating imbalance caused by greenhouse gases begins to overcome the oceans' thermal inertia, and projected temperature pathways begin to diverge, with unchecked carbon dioxide emissions likely leading to several additional degrees of warming by the end of the century.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

You are simply restating the very same thing. The complexity is so enormous. I love these arguments where a bit of physics is thrown in for good measure. You should know that it is the heat capacity of water that accounts for the enormity of the complexity that I have mentioned. Add to that the chemistry of CO2. Do you understand the shear volume of water on the planet? Do you realize it overlies a still hot and still heating interior? We hardly amount to a bacterial growth on the surface of a piece of fruit, which are ubiquitous and without harmful effect. Consider this in the analogy, were you to scrub your skin to the point of near total exfoliation, there would still be more bacteria present on your skin than there are people upon the earth and if Gawd had placed a water molecule into a Gawd like test tube for every second the universe has existed, the resultant droplet would still be to small to be seen with the naked eye.

I would make this deal with the alarmists; get China and India to cut their carbon foot print to the extent the US has thus far and I might agree that this worry is worthy of action; but even then, only in a political sense.

wilpharm

in your dreams

RandyBrian Loc: Texas

Right. UH Huh. And quoting tree rings and core samples to "prove" anything is utterly ridiculous. Like carbon dating, people like you believe science has 'confirmed' such and such a thing has happened at such and such a time. What is the verification that studying core samples or tree rings or using carbon dating is accurate? Answer: there IS none. We can verify a few things going back a few thousand years, and that's pretty much it.
I am not saying that the science you quote is not accurate. I am saying that YOU DO NOT KNOW if it is, and neither do I. ALL science is a long history of 'best guesses' based on the knowledge of the time. Science has far more history of being wrong than being right. So basing world encompassing economic and political decisions on science opinions and current beliefs that CAN NOT BE verified, is stupid almost to the point of insanity. Especially decisions that will k**l, hurt, or impoverish millions of people.
You want me and others like me to stop fighting against the Green New Deal, the Climate Accords, and other l*****t attempts to battle g****l w*****g? Then prove your case. You have not even come close to beginning. The most reliable (deep prolonged belly laugh at this point) "evidence" is the biased opinions stated by some
scientists with vested interests in keeping up the idea, or the very real fear of losing funding and/or livelihood provided only by expressing concurring opinions with little evidence and no proof.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

It is clear you simply will not accept science.. OK.. do as you wish.. it would appear that even as the entire world has now long accepted the fact, near the only refusers are the republican far right in the united states..

I will post now and then the obvious facts and you can dispute them as much as ever.. you offer only opinion while the facts are backed by research and data from 1000s of hours. yet the f****l f**l disinformation is what you cling to..

have a nice day.. the air is clear and warm today.. much better times are coming.. as proved by the Ozone hole, the hard work will pay off.. only the inference must by countered..

China and India both are heavily invested in the effort, but have a long way to go to reach the stated goals..

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

As one more science denier, you have nothing to support your opinion, but we will bring you with to the newer better world we strive for.. even with your kicking and screaming.. rest assured.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Randy, if you follow the money trail, you will end up in the board rooms of the f****l f**l companies..

RandyBrian Loc: Texas

Perhaps. And perhaps if you follow the political money trail you will end up in Russia and China and others where the board rooms are indistiquishable from the governments. With a few side trips to all the colleges and universities that eliminate any science teachers, projects, or studies that do not toe THEIR political and funding goals.
The idea that China is "on board" with your GCC agenda is laughable. They are into it just enough to see America weakened as much as possible.
As for as being able to prove my case.....you are absolutely correct. Neither can you prove yours, and that is the point. I do not deny science, I am requiring YOUR side to provide strong solid credible evidence, as close to absolute proof as possible, before destroying our culture and sacrificing our livelihood. If you can. It sure hasn't been done so far.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

randy, the first paragraph is something we agree on..

I feel CC is a proven topic and mankind is the driver of the here and now..

but you are right not you and not I are apt to change our mind..

Stay safe, stay well and have a good day..

One more thing...

saltwind 78 Loc: Murrells Inlet, South Carolina

Wolf, This is the United States of America. I have been fortunate to see the corn fields of the mid-west, San Francisco along the coast to the Hurst Castle, and all over the east coast. , I traveled in the Dakotas, Wyoming, and Montana. I don't know of any " s**t " state. All are beautiful in different ways. Three beautiful coastlines, Two mountain ranges, many, many great rivers, what else can I ask for except good environmental laws to respect and restore the planet to what it once was, and can be again.