ADVERTISEMENT

Keep politics out of olympics

It's a fact the earth is getting warmer. The debate is why.

They were focusing on the polar ice melting due to it. Which again is a fact.

No politics here that I can see. If we can come up with a way to reverse it, we probably should or rio and Florida will end up under water.
 
It's a fact the earth is getting warmer. The debate is why.

They were focusing on the polar ice melting due to it. Which again is a fact.

No politics here that I can see. If we can come up with a way to reverse it, we probably should or rio and Florida will end up under water.
It's also a fact that temperatures cycle regardless of human intervention.
 
Yes, 97% are funded by nut jobs who to spout this crap, namely politicians to get their agenda taken care of.
And exactly what agenda is that? What does a politician have to gain from trying to stop climate change? On the contrary, politicians that OPPOSE climate change have much more to gain, as oil companies have deep pockets. Not sure many polar bears have contributed politically this cycle. But if you have evidence of Big Ice making large contributions, feel free to share.
 
And exactly what agenda is that? What does a politician have to gain from trying to stop climate change? On the contrary, politicians that OPPOSE climate change have much more to gain, as oil companies have deep pockets. Not sure many polar bears have contributed politically this cycle. But if you have evidence of Big Ice making large contributions, feel free to share.


Al Gore is on line one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tiger orange
Good one. Let me ask you. Do you have a degree? If so, from where?
Why, yes, in fact I have several. Is that important to you? Does that somehow validate my opinion? Will it impress you? If so, you are pathetic. Would you like to know where I got my bachelor's degree and two advanced degrees and respective fields? Would you like to know which top instituitons they came from? I am happy to compare d!cks. Bet I come out on top.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grazhoppa
Please people, look back at history, first global cooling, then global warming, then climate change. In the end man will adjust, don't need to be taken back to the dark ages for power to solve our so called climate problems.

More polar bears now than 30 years years ago so suck it Al Gore!
 
And exactly what agenda is that? What does a politician have to gain from trying to stop climate change? On the contrary, politicians that OPPOSE climate change have much more to gain, as oil companies have deep pockets. Not sure many polar bears have contributed politically this cycle. But if you have evidence of Big Ice making large contributions, feel free to share.
You do realize that the climate has been changing for ever don't you? Ask yourself who is really profiting from all of this global warming crap. Check out Mr Al Gore's financial interest. The money for the research to find these "facts" is coming from companies that just so happen to be profiting the most. Many politicians have found a way to get rich off of it too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nealchick
Ok, I'll play along. How, exactly, does taxing carbon dioxide emissions solve the problem? Assuming the hypothesis that climate change, which can mean anything mind you, is either caused by or exacerbated by the actions of humans, what exactly are we to do about it? Battery powered cars? Joke. Solar? Wind? Hydro? HA. What exactly is a cost effective solution? The only plausible solution to everyday electricity is nuclear, but that's been shot down by every liberal since 1976.

So I'll ask my question again. How does the government raising money fix the problem? Are they supposed to invest it in alternative research...already a failed endeavor. I'm all for a reasonable discussion/debate, but come to me when all of the raw data is released to the public. Until then, there is too much skin in the game to stop the "research" now.
 
It's a fact the earth is getting warmer. The debate is why.

They were focusing on the polar ice melting due to it. Which again is a fact.

No politics here that I can see. If we can come up with a way to reverse it, we probably should or rio and Florida will end up under water.

Ah, don't think so.
I think in the last couple of years the polar caps have gotten BIGGER!
Remember all that news a couple of years ago about the ship stuck in tbe ice at the North Pole?
You know who was on that ship?
Scientists investigating global warming! !!!
The irony of it all#
They were stuck because the polar csp had become MUCH BIGGER than they anticipated, and they got trapped in it..
 
  • Like
Reactions: nealchick
Ok, I'll play along. How, exactly, does taxing carbon dioxide emissions solve the problem? Assuming the hypothesis that climate change, which can mean anything mind you, is either caused by or exacerbated by the actions of humans, what exactly are we to do about it? Battery powered cars? Joke. Solar? Wind? Hydro? HA. What exactly is a cost effective solution? The only plausible solution to everyday electricity is nuclear, but that's been shot down by every liberal since 1976.

So I'll ask my question again. How does the government raising money fix the problem? Are they supposed to invest it in alternative research...already a failed endeavor. I'm all for a reasonable discussion/debate, but come to me when all of the raw data is released to the public. Until then, there is too much skin in the game to stop the "research" now.
I couldn't have said it any better. Global warming is a shake down of the US taxpayers plain and simple.
 
The irony of all of it tonight is this - Brazil is one of the worst offenders in the world. From the devastation of Amazonia because of rampant deforestation (legal and otherwise), to horrific water pollution issues and land degradation from mining, to the widespread poaching and illegal animal trade tosome of the worst air pollution in the world in urban centers like São Paulo, a city that adds about 1,000 cars a day to its streets, Brazil has little room to lecture, especially in light of the condition of some their facilities.
 

Survey taken in 1991. Some fun tidbits, in their own words:
The major disadvantage of the method was that it did not necessarily produce a sample that was representative of the community of scientists involved in global climate change research.
By the end of January 1992, 118 questionnaires had been returned.
That's 118 respondents representing 97%?
Since the sample cannot be considered representative of all scientists who work on issues related to global climate change, population estimates should not be made from this sample.
Oh.
The 118 scientists who responded were largely North American. 91% were from the U.S.(98 respondents) or Canada (9 respondents).
TIL the science community resides in the US

That's from the first 4 pages. Wasn't worth going any further.
 
Didnt answer the question.

Okay - I will give you an answer in spite of the fact that I am suspicious that you are trolling and not really clueless. Here you go....

The climate change hysteria is a ready made issue for politicians to act like super heroes with grandiose claims of saving the planet, but it always comes with a catch - more government control and less freedom. Politicians can and do use this as a way to funnel money to questionable enterprises run by friends and donors - see Solyndra or the GE green initiatives circa 2009. This helps politicians stay in power.

However for many, it is not self-enrichment like it is with Al Gore, it is purely ideological and is used to bring capitalist countries down a notch or three. The climate change movement is where a lot of the old Marxists landed and has often been compared to a watermelon - green on the outside and red on the inside. Climate change fits into the Marxist playbook of the bourgeoisie bogeyman against the poor oppressed proletariat - but on a global level.

Here is a five minute video you should check out if you really are interested in the topic:

https://www.prageru.com/courses/environmental-science/climate-change-what-do-scientists-say
 
  • Like
Reactions: grazhoppa
It's a fact the earth is getting warmer. The debate is why.

They were focusing on the polar ice melting due to it. Which again is a fact.

No politics here that I can see. If we can come up with a way to reverse it, we probably should or rio and Florida will end up under water.
Aha! Finally. Yes, the solution will not be 75 million acres of wind farms. It will be man altering the atmosphere further to reverse warming. Particulate. Get ready for the sunsets!
 
Why, yes, in fact I have several. Is that important to you? Does that somehow validate my opinion? Will it impress you? If so, you are pathetic. Would you like to know where I got my bachelor's degree and two advanced degrees and respective fields? Would you like to know which top instituitons they came from? I am happy to compare d!cks. Bet I come out on top.
First of all, degree wise, I bet not. Second of all, dick wise, I also bet not. The only thing pathetic here is your intollerance for science. I feel sorry for anyone that has to deal with the drivel your spew.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT