Scientist meets US republicans

Originally posted by Metal Brain
"Climate change deniers" is a silly term. How many people do you know that claim the ice age never happened?
"If you believe in the science of climate change then you should probably move away from coastal areas and take whatever actions you want to mitigate the situation."
That would be very foolish. Sea levels have risen about 14 cm in the last 100 y ...[text shortened]... he ice age and the ice age was much worse than this warming. What is your source of information?

Have you sought therapy to learn to deal with your anger issues ??
It might help, lol. 🙄🙄🙄

Originally posted by Metal Brain
"do you understand what 97% of the science community means?"

I can read. What about 97% of the science community? How does it differ from the other 3%?

"there is no "other side". the "other side" has as much merit as evolution deniers."

Deniers? What do you think they are denying? I have no idea what you are talking about. People deny all sorts ...[text shortened]... tting warmer."

What is wrong with the earth getting warmer? What damage? Where is the damage?

"What is wrong with the earth getting warmer? What damage? Where is the damage?"
no damage. except for the ones living on the coastlines. and for the majority of farmland being under water. and class a zillion hurricanes. and mass extinctions.


other than that, no damage

Originally posted by caissad4
We need to accept that climate change deniers will never change their minds. If you believe in the science of climate change then you should probably move away from coastal areas and take whatever actions you want to mitigate the situation. After all, in a worst case scenario only 15% to 20% of the world population will perish. Forget the silly notion that ...[text shortened]... t need or want it. Take care of yourself and your own family and friends. Life will still go on.

only 15% to 20% of the world population will perish


does that count those who will starve to death? or those who will die in the inevitable wars for resources that will follow?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"What is wrong with the earth getting warmer? What damage? Where is the damage?"
no damage. except for the ones living on the coastlines. and for the majority of farmland being under water. and class a zillion hurricanes. and mass extinctions.


other than that, no damage

At 14 cm per century I doubt your claim. What is your source of information?

Originally posted by caissad4
Have you sought therapy to learn to deal with your anger issues ??
It might help, lol. 🙄🙄🙄

What anger issues? Calling a term silly is anger to you? You must be very sensitive. 🙄

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
only 15% to 20% of the world population will perish


does that count those who will starve to death? or those who will die in the inevitable wars for resources that will follow?

I have heard silly predictions like that before. They are all based on climate models that have a very poor record of predictions.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2011/06/09/model-behavior-in-climate-science-its-all-about-the-computers/

Also, the 97% you cited earlier only agree that man is contributing to climate change and that is all. There is no consensus among climate scientists believing in those alarmist views and the scientists that pretend their computer models are reliable have. They just want to get more funding from the government and government is not in the habit of funding more studies that indicate uncertainty, so they pretend they are more sure than they really are. The rest of climate scientists (the majority) do NOT pretend that computer models prove anything. They are aware how wrong they have been so far.
97% of climate scientists do not predict starvation, increased natural disasters and all that bunk you were fooled into believing. It is a common myth though.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I see two basic problems:
1. Democracy doesn't typically result in the best educated leaders, but rather the best politicians.
2. The US system relies heavily on funding from interested parties resulting in big business running the show and not the electorate.

For comparison, see this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egeMAIXYIvI

So, why does the UK also resist doing something about Global warming?

Erm... essentially the same political system? The USA inherited their two-halves-of-one-party plutocracy from the UK in the first place, after all.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"What is wrong with the earth getting warmer? What damage? Where is the damage?"
no damage. except for the ones living on the coastlines. and for the majority of farmland being under water. and class a zillion hurricanes. and mass extinctions.


other than that, no damage

The sky is falling. Chicken Little.