Conservatives and climate change (a poll)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The climate is always changing and on a much longer time scale than humans have been around to impact. Educate yourself on the Milankovitch cycles - https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2948/milankovitch-orbital-cycles-and-their-role-in-earths-climate/#:~:text=These%20cyclical%20orbital%20movements%2C%20which,and%20south%20of%20the%20equator)

You heard it here first summer 2023 temperatures for most if not all of the US will be the lowest on record.

I think it’s so adorable that conservatives always think it’s some ground breaking news that the earth’s climate has AlWaYs ChAnGeD. It wasn’t habitable by humans for much of that time.

And for you, dear sweet summer child. It’s just a cartoon so perhaps you’ll grasp its implications: https://xkcd.com/1732/

This is really well done. Thank you, PP.

Can a conservative comment on this?

I'll bite. The first thing that struck me is the smoothing. They are operating on larger time scales in the early part, so any jumps will be averaged out more, while recent temperatures with the solid black line is better known. They notes say they are using Shakun and Marcott. I don't recognize Shakun, but I remember there was a lot of objection to the methods used by Marcott at the time of publication. Search site:climateaudit.org Marcott and Shakun's name comes up in the results. You can look at that if you want to review more technical details. However, generally I think you get similar results in almost every reconstruction, but a little wavier with certain parts approaching modern temperatures, instead of a smooth growth.
People argue the Holocene was either a warmer time period or about the same temperature as now, as well as some other time periods, that are erased in this cartoon.

It says Medieval Warm Period was regional and not enough to affect global temperatures. This is disputed, and there is evidence of this warm period in many places.
There is rumors of an e-mail went out among IPCC from I think Jonathan Overpeck,'We have to erase the Medieval Warm Period.' There was a chart of global temperatures that appeared in an earlier IPCC report by Lamb that was inconvenient for the narrative, leading people to the conclusion that maybe this is just natural warming.
A counterargument that is used, is that if it were warmer in Medieval Times, that just makes global warming more of a problem, as it means temperatures are even more sensitive to forcing changes than scientists generally conclude.

Another detail is that most of the warming shown at the end is predicted, not actual. It has been 7 years since that chart, so maybe there would be a little more, but three or four of those color blocks would not appear on the actual temperature line.

So this is my favorite kind of con rebuttal. Works in math - statistician, maybe? But we all know that there’s a lot of massaging that can be done with numbers, especially professionally - and doesn’t really understand the science behind global warming but is definitely all in on the right wing garbage pipeline and gets all the mailers, so to speak, so can speak to minutiae of arguments within the climatology community, at least from the right wing perspective. Likes to think of himself as “thoughtful” and as someone with a lot of common sense.

But is also someone who is absolutely paddling hard to ignore the scientific conclusion: we’re killing this planet. From our species’ perspective, anyway, as well as for most of the species currently on this beautiful blue marble. I’m never sure if you people just aren’t super observant or if you’re just happily oblivious just so long as shareholders are making bank, but even forty years ago when I was a child there were a ton more birds and insects. Industrial scale farming has done insane damage to the ecology of everywhere it’s used, and it’s also a massive contributor to global warming, too, and not just the cattle. What do you think soil is compromised of? Largely carbon. And when it blows off you can see its contribution.

We didn’t used to have fires every summer that choked off the air in random cities hundreds of miles away.

“Common sense” people like you are content to piddle little arguments just so long as you can arguably keep missing the point. You and I aren’t likely to suffer. You’re Mr. Whitecollar; it’s not you out there harvesting food and choking on Canadian smoke or living in a flood prone and poverty stricken country where people will suffer from global warming. Our kids will have health insurance and a nice, clean house we can close off and use air conditioning for if their lungs can’t take the smog. For people like you and I, we will get to rise above most of the complications, but where you and I differ is that I want to change things so that all those other poor people aren’t suffering unnecessarily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The climate is always changing and on a much longer time scale than humans have been around to impact. Educate yourself on the Milankovitch cycles - https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2948/milankovitch-orbital-cycles-and-their-role-in-earths-climate/#:~:text=These%20cyclical%20orbital%20movements%2C%20which,and%20south%20of%20the%20equator)

You heard it here first summer 2023 temperatures for most if not all of the US will be the lowest on record.

I think it’s so adorable that conservatives always think it’s some ground breaking news that the earth’s climate has AlWaYs ChAnGeD. It wasn’t habitable by humans for much of that time.

And for you, dear sweet summer child. It’s just a cartoon so perhaps you’ll grasp its implications: https://xkcd.com/1732/

This is really well done. Thank you, PP.

Can a conservative comment on this?

I'll bite. The first thing that struck me is the smoothing. They are operating on larger time scales in the early part, so any jumps will be averaged out more, while recent temperatures with the solid black line is better known. They notes say they are using Shakun and Marcott. I don't recognize Shakun, but I remember there was a lot of objection to the methods used by Marcott at the time of publication. Search site:climateaudit.org Marcott and Shakun's name comes up in the results. You can look at that if you want to review more technical details. However, generally I think you get similar results in almost every reconstruction, but a little wavier with certain parts approaching modern temperatures, instead of a smooth growth.
People argue the Holocene was either a warmer time period or about the same temperature as now, as well as some other time periods, that are erased in this cartoon.

It says Medieval Warm Period was regional and not enough to affect global temperatures. This is disputed, and there is evidence of this warm period in many places.
There is rumors of an e-mail went out among IPCC from I think Jonathan Overpeck,'We have to erase the Medieval Warm Period.' There was a chart of global temperatures that appeared in an earlier IPCC report by Lamb that was inconvenient for the narrative, leading people to the conclusion that maybe this is just natural warming.
A counterargument that is used, is that if it were warmer in Medieval Times, that just makes global warming more of a problem, as it means temperatures are even more sensitive to forcing changes than scientists generally conclude.

Another detail is that most of the warming shown at the end is predicted, not actual. It has been 7 years since that chart, so maybe there would be a little more, but three or four of those color blocks would not appear on the actual temperature line.

Climateaudit just looks like a rehash of the bogus Tony Watts pseudoscience climate denial mumbo jumbo IMHO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:B? I think if we can have normal temps followed by an ice age then swing back to normal temps naturally, then things can swing the other way as well. I'm not convinced it's man made.

Also H.

The last time an ice age was followed by "normal temps" it took 10,000 years. We've warmed up that much in 150 years.

Great. I'm still skeptical, partially due to H as supporting evidence. I just feel if the enlightened billionaires really believed what they're preaching then their actions would speak louder than words.

DP I guess I don’t understand this way of thinking. Who cares about the handful of “enlightened billionaires” and whynare you giving them such power? “Enlightened billionaires” seems like an oxymoron anyway. Anyone who is truly enlightened wouldn’t be hoarding billions, so clearly these people are not setting examples for humanity.

Follow the science. That is what we should be listening to. Stop getting distracted by celebrities. No celebrity has the gravitas that makes them worth listening to. Listen to the experts.

I'm sorry, you really discredited yourself a couple of years ago with the whole "follow the science" thing.

You're really naive if you think the "enlightened billionaires" don't have any influence on the government and corporations. Again, just a few years ago many were pushing a different kind of "follow the science" propaganda that people like you were all too happy to follow, yet the tell it was a sham was that they were not following what they preached when the cameras were off. This is no different, mark my words. You're being bamboozled again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:B? I think if we can have normal temps followed by an ice age then swing back to normal temps naturally, then things can swing the other way as well. I'm not convinced it's man made.

Also H.

The last time an ice age was followed by "normal temps" it took 10,000 years. We've warmed up that much in 150 years.

Great. I'm still skeptical, partially due to H as supporting evidence. I just feel if the enlightened billionaires really believed what they're preaching then their actions would speak louder than words.

DP I guess I don’t understand this way of thinking. Who cares about the handful of “enlightened billionaires” and whynare you giving them such power? “Enlightened billionaires” seems like an oxymoron anyway. Anyone who is truly enlightened wouldn’t be hoarding billions, so clearly these people are not setting examples for humanity.

Follow the science. That is what we should be listening to. Stop getting distracted by celebrities. No celebrity has the gravitas that makes them worth listening to. Listen to the experts.

I'm sorry, you really discredited yourself a couple of years ago with the whole "follow the science" thing.

You're really naive if you think the "enlightened billionaires" don't have any influence on the government and corporations. Again, just a few years ago many were pushing a different kind of "follow the science" propaganda that people like you were all too happy to follow, yet the tell it was a sham was that they were not following what they preached when the cameras were off. This is no different, mark my words. You're being bamboozled again.

If you were listening to billionaires for your covid info, that’s on you.

[Anonymous]

Since I noticed the CDC had no issue with unvaccinated people flooding over the Border in a supposed “pandemic” I don’t trust the government regarding “science”. The government also isn’t aware Joe has dementia while I am more scientifically aware in that highly related to national security scientific fact.

The science of the government believes Covid came from “wet markets” while I’m more scientifically inclined to believe it came from Wuhan gain of function leaks.

Why anybody listens to inane “climate scientists” aka the short bus of the science disciplines is beyond me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The climate is always changing and on a much longer time scale than humans have been around to impact. Educate yourself on the Milankovitch cycles - https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2948/milankovitch-orbital-cycles-and-their-role-in-earths-climate/#:~:text=These%20cyclical%20orbital%20movements%2C%20which,and%20south%20of%20the%20equator)

You heard it here first summer 2023 temperatures for most if not all of the US will be the lowest on record.

I think it’s so adorable that conservatives always think it’s some ground breaking news that the earth’s climate has AlWaYs ChAnGeD. It wasn’t habitable by humans for much of that time.

And for you, dear sweet summer child. It’s just a cartoon so perhaps you’ll grasp its implications: https://xkcd.com/1732/

This is really well done. Thank you, PP.

Can a conservative comment on this?

I'll bite. The first thing that struck me is the smoothing. They are operating on larger time scales in the early part, so any jumps will be averaged out more, while recent temperatures with the solid black line is better known. They notes say they are using Shakun and Marcott. I don't recognize Shakun, but I remember there was a lot of objection to the methods used by Marcott at the time of publication. Search site:climateaudit.org Marcott and Shakun's name comes up in the results. You can look at that if you want to review more technical details. However, generally I think you get similar results in almost every reconstruction, but a little wavier with certain parts approaching modern temperatures, instead of a smooth growth.
People argue the Holocene was either a warmer time period or about the same temperature as now, as well as some other time periods, that are erased in this cartoon.

It says Medieval Warm Period was regional and not enough to affect global temperatures. This is disputed, and there is evidence of this warm period in many places.
There is rumors of an e-mail went out among IPCC from I think Jonathan Overpeck,'We have to erase the Medieval Warm Period.' There was a chart of global temperatures that appeared in an earlier IPCC report by Lamb that was inconvenient for the narrative, leading people to the conclusion that maybe this is just natural warming.
A counterargument that is used, is that if it were warmer in Medieval Times, that just makes global warming more of a problem, as it means temperatures are even more sensitive to forcing changes than scientists generally conclude.

Another detail is that most of the warming shown at the end is predicted, not actual. It has been 7 years since that chart, so maybe there would be a little more, but three or four of those color blocks would not appear on the actual temperature line.

So this is my favorite kind of con rebuttal. Works in math - statistician, maybe? But we all know that there’s a lot of massaging that can be done with numbers, especially professionally - and doesn’t really understand the science behind global warming but is definitely all in on the right wing garbage pipeline and gets all the mailers, so to speak, so can speak to minutiae of arguments within the climatology community, at least from the right wing perspective. Likes to think of himself as “thoughtful” and as someone with a lot of common sense.

But is also someone who is absolutely paddling hard to ignore the scientific conclusion: we’re killing this planet. From our species’ perspective, anyway, as well as for most of the species currently on this beautiful blue marble. I’m never sure if you people just aren’t super observant or if you’re just happily oblivious just so long as shareholders are making bank, but even forty years ago when I was a child there were a ton more birds and insects. Industrial scale farming has done insane damage to the ecology of everywhere it’s used, and it’s also a massive contributor to global warming, too, and not just the cattle. What do you think soil is compromised of? Largely carbon. And when it blows off you can see its contribution.

We didn’t used to have fires every summer that choked off the air in random cities hundreds of miles away.

“Common sense” people like you are content to piddle little arguments just so long as you can arguably keep missing the point. You and I aren’t likely to suffer. You’re Mr. Whitecollar; it’s not you out there harvesting food and choking on Canadian smoke or living in a flood prone and poverty stricken country where people will suffer from global warming. Our kids will have health insurance and a nice, clean house we can close off and use air conditioning for if their lungs can’t take the smog. For people like you and I, we will get to rise above most of the complications, but where you and I differ is that I want to change things so that all those other poor people aren’t suffering unnecessarily.

You are correct on certain parts, but forest fires are down not up.
Also, I think global warming policy is largely about having poor people not develop energy and not enjoy the standard of living of the West.
You are right about expertise. I was able to follow an argument and evaluate code written by climate scientists to see they used some data upside down.
You are right about manipulating data, and the point is that climate scientists do this as well. Other instances they introduce new statistical techniques without consulting statisticians or first introducing them in a statistics journal. This produces errors that they will sometimes correct and other times they adopt the attitude you express here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Climate change deniers are on the wrong side of history. And younger generations know it. This will affect elections.

67% of Gen Z and 71% of Millennials believe that the climate should be a top priority to ensure a sustainable planet for future generations.
https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/05/26/gen-z-millennials-stand-out-for-climate-change-activism-social-media-engagement-with-issue/

Yes they will have to move polling stations to high ground as a result of global warming.

Those in college now and just graduating are learning the lessons of high inflation, uncontrollable crime in the cities and a failure to protect the border. They will join the older and wiser Americans in voting for moderate and conservative candidates in 24. The pendulum has swung too far and is headed back to the center right.

You are dreaming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:B? I think if we can have normal temps followed by an ice age then swing back to normal temps naturally, then things can swing the other way as well. I'm not convinced it's man made.

Also H.

The last time an ice age was followed by "normal temps" it took 10,000 years. We've warmed up that much in 150 years.

Great. I'm still skeptical, partially due to H as supporting evidence. I just feel if the enlightened billionaires really believed what they're preaching then their actions would speak louder than words.

DP I guess I don’t understand this way of thinking. Who cares about the handful of “enlightened billionaires” and whynare you giving them such power? “Enlightened billionaires” seems like an oxymoron anyway. Anyone who is truly enlightened wouldn’t be hoarding billions, so clearly these people are not setting examples for humanity.

Follow the science. That is what we should be listening to. Stop getting distracted by celebrities. No celebrity has the gravitas that makes them worth listening to. Listen to the experts.

I'm sorry, you really discredited yourself a couple of years ago with the whole "follow the science" thing.

You're really naive if you think the "enlightened billionaires" don't have any influence on the government and corporations. Again, just a few years ago many were pushing a different kind of "follow the science" propaganda that people like you were all too happy to follow, yet the tell it was a sham was that they were not following what they preached when the cameras were off. This is no different, mark my words. You're being bamboozled again.

If you were listening to billionaires for your covid info, that’s on you.

Where in my post did you get the idea I was? I'm clearly making fun of the "2 weeks to stop the spread/wear a damn mask/follow the science" morons like you who are making the same mistake again with climate change.

Just a note- by billionaires, I'm not exclusively speaking of Bill Gates but any of our wealthy hypocritical politicians: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/elected-officials-criticized-covid-19-advice/story?id=74486861

[Anonymous]

G + use it as another excuse to redistribute income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Since I noticed the CDC had no issue with unvaccinated people flooding over the Border in a supposed “pandemic” I don’t trust the government regarding “science”. The government also isn’t aware Joe has dementia while I am more scientifically aware in that highly related to national security scientific fact.

The science of the government believes Covid came from “wet markets” while I’m more scientifically inclined to believe it came from Wuhan gain of function leaks.

Why anybody listens to inane “climate scientists” aka the short bus of the science disciplines is beyond me.

Because there is money to be made. Money from the sale of solar panels that we will need to recycle at great cost 20 years from now. Money to be made on offshore windmills that cause whales to beach.

Sooner or later the US wakes up to a network of Molten Salt reactors that can’t melt down and the wide-spread use of hydrogen power in transportation due to ability to scale up to locomotives, ships and planes, which is not possible with lithium powered electric vehicles. Not to mention the environmental issues with lithium mining and disposal.

Cults and their leaders are always in it for the money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Since I noticed the CDC had no issue with unvaccinated people flooding over the Border in a supposed “pandemic” I don’t trust the government regarding “science”. The government also isn’t aware Joe has dementia while I am more scientifically aware in that highly related to national security scientific fact.

The science of the government believes Covid came from “wet markets” while I’m more scientifically inclined to believe it came from Wuhan gain of function leaks.

Why anybody listens to inane “climate scientists” aka the short bus of the science disciplines is beyond me.

Do you have a citation for how many "unvaccinated people flooded across the border?" Because WHO data shows that people from Mexico, Central America and other places which made up the majority of migrants showing up at the border typically had higher vaccination rates than many deep red counties right here in the US.

And where do you have clinical evidence that Biden "suffers from dementia?" All you have is a cherrypicked collection of 5 second sound-bite clips from hour-long speeches that you've somehow contorted into meaning Biden has dementia, yet when Trump babbles incoherently for minutes on end it's somehow not dementia?

Your takes on things are so bad you aren't even qualified to say what's the "short bus of the science disciplines."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:B? I think if we can have normal temps followed by an ice age then swing back to normal temps naturally, then things can swing the other way as well. I'm not convinced it's man made.

Also H.

The last time an ice age was followed by "normal temps" it took 10,000 years. We've warmed up that much in 150 years.

Great. I'm still skeptical, partially due to H as supporting evidence. I just feel if the enlightened billionaires really believed what they're preaching then their actions would speak louder than words.

DP I guess I don’t understand this way of thinking. Who cares about the handful of “enlightened billionaires” and whynare you giving them such power? “Enlightened billionaires” seems like an oxymoron anyway. Anyone who is truly enlightened wouldn’t be hoarding billions, so clearly these people are not setting examples for humanity.

Follow the science. That is what we should be listening to. Stop getting distracted by celebrities. No celebrity has the gravitas that makes them worth listening to. Listen to the experts.

I'm sorry, you really discredited yourself a couple of years ago with the whole "follow the science" thing.

You're really naive if you think the "enlightened billionaires" don't have any influence on the government and corporations. Again, just a few years ago many were pushing a different kind of "follow the science" propaganda that people like you were all too happy to follow, yet the tell it was a sham was that they were not following what they preached when the cameras were off. This is no different, mark my words. You're being bamboozled again.

If you were listening to billionaires for your covid info, that’s on you.

Where in my post did you get the idea I was? I'm clearly making fun of the "2 weeks to stop the spread/wear a damn mask/follow the science" morons like you who are making the same mistake again with climate change.

Just a note- by billionaires, I'm not exclusively speaking of Bill Gates but any of our wealthy hypocritical politicians: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/elected-officials-criticized-covid-19-advice/story?id=74486861

We never did anything to stop the spread. Maybe you forgot about how barely a week into trying to stop the spread, right wing nutjobs were at state capitol buildings with AR-15s freaking out because they couldn't go to Hooters and any serious attempt to stop the spread was abandoned. You forgot, but we didn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Since I noticed the CDC had no issue with unvaccinated people flooding over the Border in a supposed “pandemic” I don’t trust the government regarding “science”. The government also isn’t aware Joe has dementia while I am more scientifically aware in that highly related to national security scientific fact.

The science of the government believes Covid came from “wet markets” while I’m more scientifically inclined to believe it came from Wuhan gain of function leaks.

Why anybody listens to inane “climate scientists” aka the short bus of the science disciplines is beyond me.

Because there is money to be made. Money from the sale of solar panels that we will need to recycle at great cost 20 years from now. Money to be made on offshore windmills that cause whales to beach.

Sooner or later the US wakes up to a network of Molten Salt reactors that can’t melt down and the wide-spread use of hydrogen power in transportation due to ability to scale up to locomotives, ships and planes, which is not possible with lithium powered electric vehicles. Not to mention the environmental issues with lithium mining and disposal.

Cults and their leaders are always in it for the money.

Everything needs to be recycled at some point, so what. And, there is no proven connection between offshore windmills and whale beachings. And, scientists have found ways to cost-effectively extract lithium from seawater. https://electrek.co/2021/06/04/scientists-have-cost-effectively-harvested-lithium-from-seawater/

Meanwhile there hasn't been any meaningful scientific breakthroughs or advances made in fossil fuel in generations.

Your talking points are lame and outdated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Since I noticed the CDC had no issue with unvaccinated people flooding over the Border in a supposed “pandemic” I don’t trust the government regarding “science”. The government also isn’t aware Joe has dementia while I am more scientifically aware in that highly related to national security scientific fact.

The science of the government believes Covid came from “wet markets” while I’m more scientifically inclined to believe it came from Wuhan gain of function leaks.

Why anybody listens to inane “climate scientists” aka the short bus of the science disciplines is beyond me.

Because there is money to be made. Money from the sale of solar panels that we will need to recycle at great cost 20 years from now. Money to be made on offshore windmills that cause whales to beach.

Sooner or later the US wakes up to a network of Molten Salt reactors that can’t melt down and the wide-spread use of hydrogen power in transportation due to ability to scale up to locomotives, ships and planes, which is not possible with lithium powered electric vehicles. Not to mention the environmental issues with lithium mining and disposal.

Cults and their leaders are always in it for the money.

Everything needs to be recycled at some point, so what. And, there is no proven connection between offshore windmills and whale beachings. And, scientists have found ways to cost-effectively extract lithium from seawater. https://electrek.co/2021/06/04/scientists-have-cost-effectively-harvested-lithium-from-seawater/

Meanwhile there hasn't been any meaningful scientific breakthroughs or advances made in fossil fuel in generations.

Your talking points are lame and outdated.

Not PP but once you realize everyone and everything is for sale, things become a lot more clear.

[Anonymous]

Something I find interesting is that every car commercial features electric cars but dealers complain that no one comes in looking for electric cars. Maybe all the climate change disciples are here on DCUM.