Global Warning/Climate Change

[Robert]

THE FACTS: This is false. The endangerment finding was adopted in 2009 by the EPA after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases are air pollutants that can be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

CO2 is a natural occurring gas and not a pollutant. It is essential for plant growth. Plants feed us, so it is essential for us. Water vapor and clouds have much more affect on weather and temperature than co2.

[JohnL]

CO2 is a natural occurring gas and not a pollutant. It is essential for plant growth. Plants feed us, so it is essential for us. Water vapor and clouds have much more affect on weather and temperature than co2.

At last real science! Not lobbyists version of “science”.

[JimFoxvog]

CO2 is a natural occurring gas and not a pollutant. It is essential for plant growth. Plants feed us, so it is essential for us. Water vapor and clouds have much more affect on weather and temperature than co2.

At last real science! Not lobbyists version of “science”.

This sounds like the lobbyist version of "science" to me. This is the version sold by fossil fuel interests. The real scientists that I know understand that human-caused catastrophic climate change is occurring.

Yes, CO2 is natural; so are many poisons. NaCl is natural, also, and we need it, but too much is very harmful. Water vapor and clouds are in equilibrium with ground water; the only change would be because the globe is warming. Warmer air holds more moisture.

[Robert]

This sounds like the lobbyist version of "science" to me. This is the version sold by fossil fuel interests.

This is what I have personally found by my research. I have little fossil fuel interests.

The real scientists that I know understand that human-caused catastrophic climate change is occurring.

Many are moving away from that word.

[JohnL]

CO2 is a natural occurring gas and not a pollutant. It is essential for plant growth. Plants feed us, so it is essential for us. Water vapor and clouds have much more affect on weather and temperature than co2.

At last real science! Not lobbyists version of “science”.

This sounds like the lobbyist version of "science" to me. This is the version sold by fossil fuel interests. The real scientists that I know understand that human-caused catastrophic climate change is occurring.

Yes, CO2 is natural; so are many poisons. NaCl is natural, also, and we need it, but too much is very harmful. Water vapor and clouds are in equilibrium with ground water; the only change would be because the globe is warming. Warmer air holds more moisture.

Are your “real scientists” on the payroll of windmill companies or EV companies or solar panel companies? If they are then I don’t buy what they’re selling.
Then there’s the China lobby pushing EVs because the batteries use the rare earth materials found mostly in China. China doesn’t have oil resources like the rest of the world. So they’re all in pushing for batteries to operate everything and keeping up the demand for their rare earth materials just to make them wealthy. If the environment is your concern I recommend looking up the massive Chinese mining operations and the havoc they’re creating on the environment. It makes the US mining look like a toddler’s sandbox.
Yep too much of anything material is bad except for researching ALL the motivations to see the whole picture. And there’s no such thing as too much of a relationship with Jesus.

[JimFoxvog]

And there’s no such thing as too much of a relationship with Jesus.

We agree on the most important part!

The three scientists I know personally are not climate scientists--a biologist, a physicist, and a computer scientist. All are well aware of what goes on in the world and the climate controversy. They understand it is not a debate over science--the science is clear--but a question financed by the fossil fuel industry and political motives.

It looks like there is good progress being made on batteries without the rare earth materials and capacitors that take the place of batteries.

[Robert]

The three scientists I know personally are not climate scientists--a biologist, a physicist, and a computer scientist. All are well aware of what goes on in the world and the climate controversy. They understand it is not a debate over science--the science is clear--but a question financed by the fossil fuel industry and political motives.

If they are not climatologists, how do they know the science is clear when I have presented climatologists and geologists that show that there is not crisis as they look back into history.

All the doom predictions are not coming true. Why keep holding to those who predicted that? They were wrong. Evidently, the "facts" they were holding on to were misinterpreted. Why keep trusting them when they clearly got it wrong?

[JohnH]

Had to dodge flooded roads in California a few days ago. (Admittedly this area used to be a big lake.)

Predictions of doom and gloom from droughts aren’t coming to pass.

[JimFoxvog]

All the doom predictions are not coming true.

Over the last few years, the global temperature has increased more than the models have predicted. A few years do not make a definite trend, but maybe the real predictions were too conservative.

Maybe it was some popularized prediction that hasn't come true. Nations are planning regular traffic in the NW passage now, expecting it to be free every year.

At this point, we don't know if we've passed an irreversible tipping point. With the US rejecting the science that most of the rest of the world knows, we will soon.

At least let's work on being ready to welcome tens of millions of climate refugees.

[Robert]

Over the last few years, the global temperature has increased more than the models have predicted. A few years do not make a definite trend, but maybe the real predictions were too conservative.

Last I heard, the models were expecting 3-5 degree raise(worldwide) by now, melted polar caps and extinct polar bears.