President Biden is leaving Trump a shocking mess to clean up

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I never have put words in your mouth., so that is a false accusation.

If I think you are wrong or mistaken, that has nothing to do with me knowing what you do or don’t actually know.

Anyway, I am tired of your personal attacks so find something else to discuss, something not me as none of these threads are about me, okay?

Whatever

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Yes, "liberal buzzwords". Like LCOE, investment and pollution.

You linked to a random opinion piece from a non scientist, that draws its conclusions from information provided by two NOTORIOUS climate change deniers.

Firstly, the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Which has been denying the science and muddying the waters on climate change for more than 30 years. Most recently they got slapped by multiple authors of papers they referenced for ads, for deliberately misrepresenting the conclusions of the papers and cherry picking data. These are the 'no, CO2 is actually good' people.

I'll note that you didn't actually refute any of the points I made.

Yes liberal buzz words. It has been going on for over 50 years now. First it was global freezing...which never happened...then it was global warming, global flooding, cow farts or whatever and now the all inclusive catch phrase "climate change". The problem is that the earth has gone through many extreme climate change cycles, proven by science, that has absolutely NOTHING to do with humans. Nothing. That in and of itself refutes you. So every city IS a heat sink, but it is a local occurance and not global in any way.

 

[Bradskii]

Yes liberal buzz words.

And all those left wing liberal states just clamouring to sign the Paris Accord. Like Russia, China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia...shall I go on? There has never been any time in history, including two World Wars, where the whole world (bar Yemen, Iran and Libya) has agreed on a problem that needs everyone to address. There are now so few like you who actually deny the problem exists that it's now just a faint, barely audible background noise.

Maybe you hadn't noticed, but the only arguments now are how best to tackle the problem and who should be doing more.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

And all those left wing liberal states just clamouring to sign the Paris Accord. Like Russia, China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia...shall I go on? There has never been any time in history, including two World Wars, where the whole world (bar Yemen, Iran and Libya) has agreed on a problem that needs everyone to address. There are now so few like you who actually deny the problem exists that it's now just a faint, barely audible background noise.

Maybe you hadn't noticed, but the only arguments now are how best to tackle the problem and who should be doing more.

It is just a way to push the green agenda. I don't deny or disagree with everything but I don't agree with everything either.

 

[Bradskii]

It is just a way to push the green agenda.

I know, the greenies in North Korea and Saudi Arabia for example have been instrumental in getting their governments to sign up.

I don't deny or disagree with everything but I don't agree with everything either.

You don't agree that there's a global problem to solve. Period.

...it is a local occurance and not global in any way.

Your position doesn't even rise to the level of 'fringe' any more.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I know, the greenies in North Korea and Saudi Arabia for example have been instrumental in getting their governments to sign up.

It's the political correctness thing to do it would seem...

 

[Bradskii]

It's the political correctness thing to do it would seem...

Yeah. So much political correctness happening in North Korea. So woke you wouldn't believe it.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Yeah. So much political correctness happening in North Korea. So woke you wouldn't believe it.

I am sure it is not about being woke Einstein...more like trade agreements and such

 

[Bradskii]

I am sure it is not about being woke Einstein...more like trade agreements and such

So it's not political correctness any more. Just trade agreements? Sign this or we won't trade with you? Do a lot of business with Kim Jong Un do you? How many problems have there been where North and South Korea agree? Where Russia and the Ukraine agree, Where China and Taiwan agree? But don't worry, Trump is getting his white-out ready to blank out the US's signature next month. You can then join Libya, Iran and Yemen in being the 4 countries on the planet who are going to ignore whatever it is you think isn't happening.

What company you keep.

And please cut out the sarcastic insults if you could. I'm asking nicely.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

So it's not political correctness any more. Just trade agreements? Sign this or we won't trade with you? Do a lot of business with Kim Jong Un do you? How many problems have there been where North and South Korea agree? Where Russia and the Ukraine agree, Where China and Taiwan agree? But don't worry, Trump is getting his white-out ready to blank out the US's signature next month. You can then join Libya, Iran and Yemen in being the 4 countries on the planet who are going to ignore whatever it is you think isn't happening.

Correctness and trade agreements sometimes go hand in hand.

 

[Say it aint so]

Don't you find it very strange that Trump was never scrutinized until he got into the political realm? Trumps history you say? What was Trumps history before he entered politics? Pretty much liked and admired by everyone in both the political and celebrity realms.

And then there's the Russia Russia hoax that was proven to be devised by Clinton and propagated by the democratic party and the news media.

There is a lot to be considered ... hard to say ... we will have to see how it all shakes out ... or if it even does.

Personally I don't trust much of anything that goes on in government ... no doubt there is corruption going on (many levels) ... who knows what will and will not be fully exposed.

Lies of deception go around the world at lightening speed .... while truth barely gets of the ground.

We never really know what's truly going on with anything. So ... we are just an ill informed audience in the theater of life ... and every day is a new day.

I don't get up tight about politics ... I just watch the movie. When things come out ... I have a maybe or maybe not attitude.

No I don't find it odd. When you run for president, anybody and everybody's life is gone through with a fine tooth comb. With that said, his city paper, the NYTimes, has been running articles of him years before. In example screwing contractors on a regular basis prior to his announcement. His bankrupt casinos. His six bankruptcies. His racial discrimination at his hotel. The Trump U fraud lawsuits started six years before he declared. The man use to call into newspapers faking to be someone else, clumsily disguising his voice to talk about how rich he was. He was mocked, not admired. And no, come Russian, Trump officials were working with Russians regarding the election. Paul Manafort point blank admitted it. Roger Stone was working with a Russian cutout. Don Jr was in Trump tower with Russians working to obtain Russian info helpful to the campaign. Those are facts, not propaganda.

 

[rambot]

Huh? I said it is unreliable and not cost effective. You make fun of FOX NEWS and the post a NPR article LOL! The reason is that "climate change" is the buzz of the left. Cause celebre. You can't even get an unbiased article because all the search engines are left leaning and only provide left biased info. The scientists that signed against it are real.

LOL!
You search online and everything is biased against what I believe.

You read all the scientific literature and it's biased against what I believe.

You listen to the scientists and what they say and they're biased against what I believe.

And you never think what you believe is misguided.

 

[DaisyDay]

Don't you find it very strange that Trump was never scrutinized until he got into the political realm? Trumps history you say? What was Trumps history before he entered politics? Pretty much liked and admired by everyone in both the political and celebrity realms.

It simply isn't true that Trump has not been extensively scrutinized until he became political. Perhaps it is because you don't live in New York or pay attention to the financial page that you are unfamiliar with his shenanigans? No, he was not pretty much liked or admired by those of us familiar with him before he became a reality TV star.

Wayne Barrett from the Village Voice covered his time in NY pretty extensively. Barrons & the Wall Street Journal covered his finance deals and how he had an analyst fired for properly analyzing his casino deals (predicting that they were unsustainable). Spy Magazine covered his social climbing (famously labeling him not a term of admiration). The NYPost Page 6, their gossip/society page, covered him a bit more fawningly - he was known to pretend to be his own publicist calling in "tips" so he could read about himself.

Just because you were unaware of his history doesn't mean it didn't exist.

And then there's the Russia Russia hoax that was proven to be devised by Clinton and propagated by the democratic party and the news media.

Not a hoax, not devised by Clinton or the Democratic Party or the news media. Have you not read the Mueller Report (redacted by Minion Barr)?
Are you not aware of all the convictions that came out of the investigation?

There is a lot to be considered ... hard to say ... we will have to see how it all shakes out ... or if it even does.

Personally I don't trust much of anything that goes on in government ... no doubt there is corruption going on (many levels) ... who knows what will and will not be fully exposed.

Lies of deception go around the world at lightening speed .... while truth barely gets of the ground.

We never really know what's truly going on with anything. So ... we are just an ill informed audience in the theater of life ... and every day is a new day.

Seek and ye shall find?

I don't get up tight about politics ... I just watch the movie. When things come out ... I have a maybe or maybe not attitude.

This movie?

 

[rambot]

Many climate change scientists do not agree that global warming is happening - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Wow. That is not a study. That was a letter signed by 50 climatologists.

Do you know how many climatologists there are NOW or how many there were in 1998?

50 wouldn't even be a FULL percentage point of the total number of climatologists. Oil companies don't need to DISPROVE anything; they only need to sow the seeds of doubt. And if they can do that by convincing layfolk that "50 whole scientists agree", well that's going to be cheaper than actually funding research that would actively disprove something that is unable to be disproven.

Not only that, the article was written like a child.

Most members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change believe that current climate models do not accurately portray the atmosphere-ocean system.

This kind of statement without a citation or data to support it, makes the whole piece seem like it was written by a hack.

Dr Seitz, the ONLY name mentioned in the article is a laughably transparent shill; going all the way back to his time on the Oregon Petition. A petition not based on any science, many who's signers were not informed or researchers in the field of climate sciences. Nevermind the facts that many of the scientists could even have their existence confirmed.
700 Club anchor touted global warming skeptics' petition reportedly signed by non-scientists, fictitious characters

I find it sad that people think that the "Green Energy lobby" has their nefarious talons in your economy. Talk about a plank in the eye.

 

[Gene2memE]

Yes liberal buzz words. It has been going on for over 50 years now.

Longer. The term 'climate change' really entered the scientific lexicon in the mid 1950s, although the concept of significant and long term changes to the global climate is at least a century older.

First it was global freezing...which never happened...

It wasn't. "Global freezing" was never a consensus scientific view, and neither was global cooling. Even in the heyday of research on the topic - in the early to mid 1970s - the number of papers forecasting global warming outnumbered those forecasting global cooling by ~4:1.

then it was global warming, global flooding, cow farts or whatever and now the all inclusive catch phrase "climate change".

Global warming is multi-factoral and its outcomes manifold. It's telling that you're dismissing well established facts around climate change as "whatever". Very telling.

The problem is that the earth has gone through many extreme climate change cycles, proven by science, that has absolutely NOTHING to do with humans. Nothing.

Yes. So what? That was then, this is now.

The current climate change were going through is substantially more than 90% the result of anthropogenic causes. Proven by science.

Climate researchers are wholly aware of past climate cycles. They're the ones who told us about them. And, because of that knowledge that's WHY they're so worried about the current climate change. The pace and extent of change that we're causing by warming the globe through the release of greenhouse gases

That in and of itself refutes you.

It really doesn't. And, if you knew what you were talking about, you wouldn't be saying that.

So every city IS a heat sink, but it is a local occurance and not global in any way.

And? The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect is well known and researched. Climatologists have been modeling it since the 1960s. The IPCC report has included a dedicated UHI impacts section since (at least) 2001.

Does UHI account for oceanic warming? Does UHI account for atmospheric warming? Does UHI account for rural area land warming?

Even if we exclude cities and urban areas - which are warming about 25% faster than rural areas - the globe is still warming at somewhere around 0.16-0.175 degrees per decade.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

LOL!
You search online and everything is biased against what I believe.

You read all the scientific literature and it's biased against what I believe.

You listen to the scientists and what they say and they're biased against what I believe.

And you never think what you believe is misguided.

you can lol all you want. Scientists get grants many times because of these agendas! Google is known to be liberally biased.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Longer. The term 'climate change' really entered the scientific lexicon in the mid 1950s, although the concept of significant and long term changes to the global climate is at least a century older.

The current climate change were going through is substantially more than 90% the result of anthropogenic causes. Proven by science.

Climate researchers are wholly aware of past climate cycles. They're the ones who told us about them. And, because of that knowledge that's WHY they're so worried about the current climate change. The pace and extent of change that we're causing by warming the globe through the release of greenhouse gases

And? The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect is well known and researched. Climatologists have been modeling it since the 1960s. The IPCC report has included a dedicated UHI impacts section since (at least) 2001.

Does UHI account for oceanic warming? Does UHI account for atmospheric warming? Does UHI account for rural area land warming?

Even if we exclude cities and urban areas - which are warming about 25% faster than rural areas - the globe is still warming at somewhere around 0.16-0.175 degrees per decade.

yes that IS what I said "OVER 50 years now" which means "longer than". 90% lol proven...no it isn't. 100% of climate change occurs because it has occurred previously (proven through science) and will continue....cycles in the sun....it is natural. The earth has heating and cooling periods throughout history. Like I said, HUMAN change like city smog is a LOCAL thing, not global.

 

[DaisyDay]

It wasn't. "Global freezing" was never a consensus scientific view, and neither was global cooling.

Well, the next ice age is due in about 50,000 years.

 

[rambot]

you can lol all you want. Scientists get grants many times because of these agendas! Google is known to be liberally biased.

You said "every search engine".
And I don't believe you have the first clue of how the scientific community works if you are quoting something from the mid90s and assume it is "as relevant today as it was 30 years ago".

 

[rambot]

yes that IS what I said "OVER 50 years now" which means "longer than". 90% lol proven...no it isn't. 100% of climate change occurs because it has occurred previously (proven through science) and will continue....cycles in the sun....it is natural. The earth has heating and cooling periods throughout history. Like I said, HUMAN change like city smog is a LOCAL thing, not global.

Considering the mountains of factual evidence you were provided with, I'm curious why you didn't really make an effort to address it.

Repeating yourself isn't addressing anything and the Dunning Kruger level of knowledge you are showing could be easily resolved if you addressed the points previously made.


There is 0 precedent in trackable natural history that shows temperature changes on earth on THIS TIMEFRAME (ie....decades). Nothing even close really.