Voters send another warning shot to Democrats

[I_M4_AU 7,986]

49 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

They already have subtly changed their views over the past few decades. Back in the early 2000's the prevailing opinion of the right wing anti-climate change crowd was that either the entire thing is a hoax and nothing at all is happening, or that there are slight variations in temp and atmosphere, but humans aren't the cause of it and the entire thing in naturally occurring no matter what humankind does. 

Nowadays Im finding more that they've dropped that previous rhetoric and are readily willing to admit that the climate and temperature IS changing and that humans MAY have something to do with it, but they are still resistant to the idea that the changing climate will cause anything bad to happen and the earth will just re-regulate itself like it's done in the past. Some do still contend that this climate change is 100% naturally occurring though.

You must have missed @SLAG-91’s post about the change in narrative over the years. How can you blame the right wing when since the 70s’ it was global cooling, then in the 90’s it was global warming and when the left was called out on it the left changed it to climate change?  Climate Change is all encompassing so the left has both cooling and warming covered.  The left likes to change definitions when it suits them and can’t understand why the right doesn’t agree with them all the time.  We have seen this play out several times in the past.  At this moment in time the left is changing the definition of pronouns and believes the right are crazy for not going along with their insanity.

The COVID thing is a great example of the left (government control) believing things can be controlled by *the science* that has never been controlled by human intervention before.  Notice I said controlled, not mitigated.  The Spanish flu of 1918 mutated to different strands of the flu without *the science* getting involved.  Simple mitigations like washing hands and being aware of your surrounding worked as the pandemic became an endemic back then.  The new Omicron variant is more contagious, but a less severe variant and my signal the end of the pandemic to the horror of Fauci and friends.

The left likes to change definitions when it suits them and can’t understand why the right doesn’t agree with them all the time.  We have seen this play out several times in the past.  The climate has never been controlled by humans in the existence of the world, yet we are arrogant enough to believe now *the science* is smart enough to be trusted by the citizens of the world to solve Climate Change.  When *the science* believed the world was cooling back in the seventies *the science* now know they were wrong some 50 years ago.  I wonder what *the science* will think of *the science* 50 years from now.  Do I believe in science?  Well yeah.  Would I bet the world’s economy that they can control the climate?  No.

What humans are great at is adapting to their environment and you will probably see more strategies to mitigate through infrastructure while technology catches up without destroying the world’s economy for no good reason. JMO, I can’t speak for all Republicans/Conservatives.

[homersapien 11,440]

On 12/20/2021 at 1:08 PM, I_M4_AU said:

You must have missed @SLAG-91’s post about the change in narrative over the years. How can you blame the right wing when since the 70s’ it was global cooling, then in the 90’s it was global warming and when the left was called out on it the left changed it to climate change?  Climate Change is all encompassing so the left has both cooling and warming covered.  The left likes to change definitions when it suits them and can’t understand why the right doesn’t agree with them all the time.  We have seen this play out several times in the past.  At this moment in time the left is changing the definition of pronouns and believes the right are crazy for not going along with their insanity.

The COVID thing is a great example of the left (government control) believing things can be controlled by *the science* that has never been controlled by human intervention before.  Notice I said controlled, not mitigated.  The Spanish flu of 1918 mutated to different strands of the flu without *the science* getting involved.  Simple mitigations like washing hands and being aware of your surrounding worked as the pandemic became an endemic back then.  The new Omicron variant is more contagious, but a less severe variant and my signal the end of the pandemic to the horror of Fauci and friends.

The left likes to change definitions when it suits them and can’t understand why the right doesn’t agree with them all the time.  We have seen this play out several times in the past.  The climate has never been controlled by humans in the existence of the world, yet we are arrogant enough to believe now *the science* is smart enough to be trusted by the citizens of the world to solve Climate Change.  When *the science* believed the world was cooling back in the seventies *the science* now know they were wrong some 50 years ago.  I wonder what *the science* will think of *the science* 50 years from now.  Do I believe in science?  Well yeah.  Would I bet the world’s economy that they can control the climate?  No.

What humans are great at is adapting to their environment and you will probably see more strategies to mitigate through infrastructure while technology catches up without destroying the world’s economy for no good reason. JMO, I can’t speak for all Republicans/Conservatives.

The *science* did not believe the world was cooling 50 years ago.  You totally misunderstood  what the *science* said then, and what it is saying now. 

(But thanks for demonstrating the real reasons why the "right" believe as they do - shear ignorance.)

Please, educate yourself.

 

 

 

THE MYTH OF THE 1970s GLOBAL COOLING SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS

Climate science as we know it today did not exist in the 1960s and 1970s. The integrated enterprise embodied in the Nobel Prizewinning work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change existed then as separate threads of research pursued by isolated groups of scientists. Atmospheric chemists and modelers grappled with the measurement of changes in carbon dioxide and atmospheric gases, and the changes in climate that might result. Meanwhile, geologists and paleoclimate researchers tried to understand when Earth slipped into and out of ice ages, and why. An enduring popular myth suggests that in the 1970s the climate science community was predicting “global cooling” and an “imminent” ice age, an observation frequently used by those who would undermine what climate scientists say today about the prospect of global warming. A review of the literature suggests that, on the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking as being one of the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales. More importantly than showing the falsehood of the myth, this review describes how scientists of the time built the foundation on which the cohesive enterprise of modern climate science now rests.

https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/89/9/2008bams2370_1.xml

 

 

How the "Global Cooling" Story Came to Be

Nine paragraphs written for Newsweek in 1975 continue to trump 40 years of climate science. It is a record that has its author amazed

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-global-cooling-story-came-to-be/

 

Ask NASA Climate | July 12, 2019, 14:49 PDT

Nope, Earth Isn't Cooling

https://climate.nasa.gov/ask-nasa-climate/2893/nope-earth-isnt-cooling/

 

 

My 1975 'Cooling World' Story Doesn't Make Today's Climate Scientists Wrong

It's time for deniers of human-caused global warming to stop using an old magazine story against climate scientists.

Image

https://www.insidescience.org/news/my-1975-cooling-world-story-doesnt-make-todays-climate-scientists-wrong

 

 

10 myths about climate change

With the climate crisis becoming a hot topic in mainstream media - there's a lot of confusion around what climate change actually is. That's why we've tried to clear up some of the most frequently heard myths, so that you can tell fiction from fact!

https://www.wwf.org.uk/updates/10-myths-about-climate-change

 

etc., etc., etc......

Edited December 24, 2021 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,440]

PS, You also completely misunderstand why the term global warming was replaced by the far more accurate "climate change". 

It's because AGW leads to radical changes in WEATHER including freak winter storms and blizzards.  This is largely due to shifts in the jet stream.

This is very confusing to people who don't really know much about the subject.

 

How global warming can cause Europe's harsh winter weather

Climate deniers are using a spell of unusually cold weather in Europe to incorrectly argue that CO2 emissions are not warming the planet.

https://www.dw.com/en/cold-winter-global-warming-polar-vortex/a-56534450

 

Why Global Warming Can Mean Harsher Winter Weather

Scientists look at the big picture, not today's weather, to see the impact of climate change

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earthtalks-global-warming-harsher-winter/

 

Record cold, intense storms and tornadoes amid global warming: Could there be a connection?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/02/17/global-warming-record-cold-intense-storms-tornadoes/6780433002/

 

...... and many more. Search {how global warming can induce winter weather} or something similar.

Edited December 24, 2021 by homersapien

[I_M4_AU 7,986]

55 minutes ago, homersapien said:

The *science* did not believe the world was cooling 50 years ago.  You totally misunderstood  what the *science* said then, and what it is saying now. 

(But thanks for demonstrating the real reasons why the "right" believe as they do - shear ignorance.)

Please, educate yourself.

 

 

 

THE MYTH OF THE 1970s GLOBAL COOLING SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS

Climate science as we know it today did not exist in the 1960s and 1970s. The integrated enterprise embodied in the Nobel Prizewinning work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change existed then as separate threads of research pursued by isolated groups of scientists. Atmospheric chemists and modelers grappled with the measurement of changes in carbon dioxide and atmospheric gases, and the changes in climate that might result. Meanwhile, geologists and paleoclimate researchers tried to understand when Earth slipped into and out of ice ages, and why. An enduring popular myth suggests that in the 1970s the climate science community was predicting “global cooling” and an “imminent” ice age, an observation frequently used by those who would undermine what climate scientists say today about the prospect of global warming. A review of the literature suggests that, on the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking as being one of the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales. More importantly than showing the falsehood of the myth, this review describes how scientists of the time built the foundation on which the cohesive enterprise of modern climate science now rests.

https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/89/9/2008bams2370_1.xml

 

 

How the "Global Cooling" Story Came to Be

Nine paragraphs written for Newsweek in 1975 continue to trump 40 years of climate science. It is a record that has its author amazed

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-global-cooling-story-came-to-be/

 

Ask NASA Climate | July 12, 2019, 14:49 PDT

Nope, Earth Isn't Cooling

https://climate.nasa.gov/ask-nasa-climate/2893/nope-earth-isnt-cooling/

 

My 1975 'Cooling World' Story Doesn't Make Today's Climate Scientists Wrong

It's time for deniers of human-caused global warming to stop using an old magazine story against climate scientists.

Image

https://www.insidescience.org/news/my-1975-cooling-world-story-doesnt-make-todays-climate-scientists-wrong

 

 

 

10 myths about climate change

With the climate crisis becoming a hot topic in mainstream media - there's a lot of confusion around what climate change actually is. That's why we've tried to clear up some of the most frequently heard myths, so that you can tell fiction from fact!

https://www.wwf.org.uk/updates/10-myths-about-climate-change

 

etc., etc., etc......

 

 

 

 

Just like you, I lived during the global cooling period.  I don’t need your revisionist history to know what was said back in the day.  I would guess your articles state what was wrong with the assumptions of yesteryear, but they were promoting cooling of the earth back then.  It’s just like leftist to change what was said thinking that no one would remember.

[homersapien 11,440]

On 12/22/2021 at 3:44 PM, I_M4_AU said:

Just like you, I lived during the global cooling period.  I don’t need your revisionist history to know what was said back in the day.  I would guess your articles state what was wrong with the assumptions of yesteryear, but they were promoting cooling of the earth back then.  It’s just like leftist to change what was said thinking that no one would remember.

What was said by popular magazines, NOT by the scientific journals or the scientific community in general.

What you were "believing" back then was rubbish that was understandably hyped by the "popular press".  (That's how they make their money.) 

You were too scientifically ignorant then to appreciate it for what it was, which was a completely unverified theory (small "t").   Now its become a "myth".  You apparently bought into that myth - and more troublesome - continue to do so, even when presented with the facts. 

You are sooo typical of the "right", who believe only what they want to believe, evidence to the contrary be damned.

Furthermore, you refuse to educate yourself even when presented with an easy opportunity to do so - also typical of the right wing character.

  

 

Edited December 24, 2021 by homersapien

[jj3jordan 2,060]

10 minutes ago, homersapien said:

What was said by popular magazines, NOT by the scientific journals or the scientific community in general.

What you were "believing" back then was rubbish that was understandably hyped by the "popular press".  (That's how they make their money.) 

You were too scientifically ignorant then to appreciate for what it was, which was a completely unverified theory (small "t"), aka "myth".  Not surprisingly, you consequently bought into the myth and continue to do so.

And I see you didn't even try to educate yourself about that myth even when presented with the opportunity. 

That's also unsurprising. 

Didn’t know Al Gore was running popular magazines. I too was there and seems like he was their point man. So we should NOT believe scientists now who literally make their money hyping climate change and collecting grants to keep hyping it? Creating computer models programmed to support their cause? Faking and “adjusting” data that doesn’t fit?

And co-opting  the phrase “climate change” to use as a weapon when we all know what climate is and that it changes, has always changed, and will always change, regardless of what we do or how much money we liberate from taxpayers around the world.