USA Global warming issue. Naturally occurring or Man made?

[Joshua1Eight]

I’ve heard so many times that 97% of scientists say that global warming is real and that it’s man made. But I saw a Christian made documentary where dozens of scientists were interviewed, claiming global warming was naturally occurring and really had nothing to do with human activity. I found their argument to be more compelling. It sounded more scientific and more believable. But when I watched Al Gore’s documentary Inconvenient Truth, right off the bat he starts off his documentary with a scientific fallacy. He starts off showing ice cores and claiming the layers represent hundreds of thousands of years, which they don’t. Multiple snow/ice layers can form in one season; they’re not annual layers. And he didn’t even interview one single scientist in the whole film.

 

[Lamb]

I like to look at documents concerning other planets in our solar system (not from the past 4 years!) to see what's happening there. Guess what? They're going through changes in their climates as well and there are no humans living on those planets.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Climate change as a human induced phenomenon is pure buncombe. There is not a shred of evidence. It is purely to manipulate and control people, to destroy developed economies, and install totalitarian control. Highly recommended reading:

Amazon.com

 

[tango]

I like to look at documents concerning other planets in our solar system (not from the past 4 years!) to see what's happening there. Guess what? They're going through changes in their climates as well and there are no humans living on those planets.

Those pesky Martians and their oversized SUVs. It's their own fault the ice caps on Mars are melting....

 

[tango]

I think it's important to consider our environment but the current carbon craze is just getting silly. When California apparently thinks it's necessary to phase out gas powered cars but has no problem at all with private jets you know there's something going on that's not what it seems.

Considering the amount of carbon emitted by a transatlantic flight in a private jet it's remarkable the great and the good have any credibility left at all. If you fly a private jet across the Atlantic you probably emit as much carbon during that one flight as I will emit during every single flight I'm likely to take for the rest of my life. So frankly if you take a single flight in a private jet you lose any right to lecture me about my carbon emissions, ever.

It's also remarkable how much of the carbon movement expects people to act against their own self-interest and then gets surprised when people don't want to do it. It's pretty simply to present a lot of it as being in the interests of the people you're expecting to change. I keep the heat lower than many people in the winter - I don't care about reducing carbon emissions, I just care about reducing my heating bills. I usually drive fairly economically because it saves me money putting gas in my car. I recycle a lot of stuff because it means I put out less trash every week, which saves me money. For as long as I can dump my recycling in a communal spot that's convenient I might as well save the space in my trash bag, which gives me more space to get rid of the debris from my house project.

Frankly I find it comical when people do things like turn off their internet router overnight "to reduce carbon emissions". If you're really that serious about reducing carbon emissions leave the car at home and cycle to work.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

It is getting to the point of absurdity such as:

 

[Fritz Kobus]

I’ve heard so many times that 97% of scientists say that global warming is real and that it’s man made.

According to the book I posted earlier in the thread, hat consensus is among only the scientists (hand picked no doubt) in the International Panel on Climate Change.

 

[Stravinsk]

Climate change as a human induced phenomenon is pure buncombe. There is not a shred of evidence. It is purely to manipulate and control people, to destroy developed economies, and install totalitarian control. Highly recommended reading:

Amazon.com

The "global warming"/climate change scheme has been in the works for some time, and I believe it's likely a deliberate scapegoat and/or transition plan to move countries into a new interlocked economy with more control over citizens and less citizens in total (population reduction). However the destruction of the economy has been ongoing for a long time, since the birth of the Central Banking system, which to anyone who understands is part of a long term plan to destroy nation states and put the world in the control of the creditors. It is designed to fail over the long haul with catastrophic effects.

Anyone trying to understand the so called "greenhouse effect" should spend a little time studying the Carbon Cycle. Greenhouses do not accumulate CO2 and get warmer from it. Any C02 entering the greenhouse is converted to plant tissue of the host plants, and the gas released by plants is Oxygen.

 

[Josiah]

Trump's fault.



.

 

[Josiah]

Okay, I just don't have the information.... I have a doctorate but it's quite unrelated to the issue here. I SUSPECT (that's worth... um.... zip) that human activity has SOMETHING to do with it - but how much, I don't have a clue.

But here's the thing..... And I'm being very cynical here (quite unlike my personality)....

For liberals, it's ALWAYS SOMETHING. The sky is always falling. There SOME (ever changing) calamity, some horrific thing, something bound to kill us all - unless we give them a LOT of money and a LOT of power and a LOT of control over our lives. They'll save us... but before they do, there's a new calamity, a new crisis, a new reason to give them money and power.

Sorry if that sounds cynical. It sounds cynical because it is. But I've been around for 34 years and I'm catching on to them.



.

 

[tango]

Another interesting thing is the relentless push to "energy efficient" appliances. Which is all well and good, except for the built-in obsolescence in everything these days. Because nothing says "environmentally friendly" like planning to send your nice new fridge to the landfill within five years or less.

Just about every month I get an offer of some modest rebate if I trade in my old fridge for a new energy efficient fridge. My old fridge probably isn't very energy efficient, it's at least 40 years old. But it works, it continues to work, and it will probably still be working long after I'm not. Why would I trade it in for a new model that will cost me a few hundred $$$ now, maybe save me $10/month at most, and then in five years will cost me another few hundred $$$ to buy another one when this one breaks?

In the relentless push to shift our energy usage to this green approach or that green approach (because everybody loves the environmentally friendly process of having children mine cobalt in Africa), somehow we lost sight of the far more simple approach of just using less in the first place. Open the windows instead of reaching for the air conditioning. Put on an extra layer instead of reaching for the heater. Combine trips so you're not endlessly making the same journey in the car for different purposes. And, quite aside from any environmental benefits, any and all of these things starts saving you money the very moment you do them.

 

[Stravinsk]

The OP and readers of this thread may find the following worth watching. I'm a little surprised CorporateTube hasn't pulled it down:

(In case that does happen, the name of the doco is "The Great Global Warming Swindle" so should be able to be found on other media platforms).