All Forums | Politics

The science behind global warming /climate change is settled. ...

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 2845
Posts: 152
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 6288
Posted: #26
Quote Originally Posted by cave0707:


I'm not sure you can control it either.  Maybe you can ... maybe you can't.  I'm just not willing to let my money ride in high risk areas (rising sea levels) when it comes to long-term real estate investments for my family when I'm long gone.  I don't know much about Florida but Galveston is an absolute no brainer ... "don't even think about it" type areas I would never consider.  I just can't take that risk for my loved ones but if it's your money ... by all means go for it.  


If the sea rises - deal with it. Perhaps owning property on the water is a bit of a risk, not only from storms but from long term changes that the earth always makes... Who owns the beachfront property? Answer: Wealthy people. So I'm supposed to pay $6 for a gallon of gas (if the environmentalists got their way) to help protect the wealthy that own property in The Hampton's. I know their little scam is wealth redistribution (like it always is) and this is just a method to achieve it, and it's tied to the environment and we already know theirs enough on board with that. Rich countries giving to poor countries blah blah blah.

And as far as all that research... It's the best money can buy. You don't go along with this scam and see how fast your grant money goes away... Hard to do research with no one paying for it, it's not very profitable.

Here's a solution - stop building sh*t by the water.
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2003
Posts: 32362
Posted: #27

People always buy waterfront.

Oceanfront, Lakefront, Riverfront.

People gravitate to water.
~~~~~ZOSO~~~~~
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2005
Posts: 3675
Posted: #28
Buy land that will become waterfront property when sea levels rise. 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 1521
Posted: #29
Quote Originally Posted by Killer_B:



If the sea rises - deal with it. Perhaps owning property on the water is a bit of a risk, not only from storms but from long term changes that the earth always makes... Who owns the beachfront property? Answer: Wealthy people. So I'm supposed to pay $6 for a gallon of gas (if the environmentalists got their way) to help protect the wealthy that own property in The Hampton's. I know their little scam is wealth redistribution (like it always is) and this is just a method to achieve it, and it's tied to the environment and we already know theirs enough on board with that. Rich countries giving to poor countries blah blah blah.

And as far as all that research... It's the best money can buy. You don't go along with this scam and see how fast your grant money goes away... Hard to do research with no one paying for it, it's not very profitable.

Here's a solution - stop building sh*t by the water.

Stop building by the water?  Most of the world population lives by the water.  I think it's too late for that.  I almost wish I hadn't posted in this thread cause I went off point.  And usually in the politics section ... there's just no reasoning once one has made up their mind.  
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2015
Posts: 21593
Posted: #30
Quote Originally Posted by HockeyTeeth:

Buy land that will become waterfront property when sea levels rise.

Well in this logic with the sea level was during the Jurassic era and no ice locked anywhere there will certainly be a lot more ocean front property the three island rapids in Montreal will be a new reversing falls
Hong Kong will look like Venice. Bayou in Louisiana will return to a shallow archipelago as most of eastern va nc and sc
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2017
Posts: 334
Posted: #31
Quote Originally Posted by mattbrot:

Nature - I in fact do. Not in climate change but I also understand the process of science vs uniformed opinions.


Yet you ignored the FACTS I posted in post #20.

Six warming trends and 6 cooling trends in the last 6500 years with one mini ice age that is most recent.

I certainly don't believe anyone that pushes a climate change agenda while they fly around in a private jet. IE Al Gore and Leo Di Caprio to name a couple.

If the oceans do become too encroaching then just pump some into the African desert where it once was before anyway. No big deal.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2005
Posts: 9413
Posted: #32
Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaSlim:



Koonin claims Obama administration often uses “misleading” news releases about climate data to influence public opinion.

Press officers work with scientists within agencies like the National Oceanic Administration (NOAA) and NASA and are responsible for crafting misleading press releases on climate, he added.

Koonin is not the only one claiming wrongdoing. House lawmakers with the Committee on Science, Space and Technology, for instance, recently jumpstarted an investigation into NOAA after a whistleblower said agency scientists rushed a landmark global warming study to influence policymakers...



Scientists are falsely accused of manipulating data according to factcheck.org, snopes, skeptical science, arstechnica, Washington post, science insider and the guardian.

 According to union of concerned scientists, there is a  war on science by government that wants to make policies based on ideology instead of evidence.  However people trust scientists far more than politicians.

According to E&Enews, whistleblower Bates admits no data fraud in NOAA research and climate change deniers misused his complaint about protocol.  Besides, research is rigoriously reviewed by different scientists and supported by multiple independent studies that reach similar conclusions. 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2017
Posts: 334
Posted: #33
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:

Scientists are falsely accused of manipulating data according to factcheck.org, snopes, skeptical science, arstechnica, Washington post, science insider and the guardian.

 According to union of concerned scientists, there is a  war on science by government that wants to make policies based on ideology instead of evidence.  However people trust scientists far more than politicians.

According to E&Enews, whistleblower Bates admits no data fraud in NOAA research and climate change deniers misused his complaint about protocol.  Besides, research is rigoriously reviewed by different scientists and supported by multiple independent studies that reach similar conclusions. 


Sorry, but that's just plain wrong and a bit naive.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4192182/World-leaders-duped-manipulated-global-warming-data.html

...But the whistleblower, Dr John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data...


 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2017
Posts: 334
Posted: #34
https://www.climatedepot.com/2015/07/06/nobel-prize-winning-scientist-who-endorsed-obama-now-says-prez-is-ridiculous-dead-wrong-on-global-warming/
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2017
Posts: 334
Posted: #35
https://www.newsmax.com/LarryBell/CATO-DQA-MIT-NOAA/2016/02/01/id/712153/
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2015
Posts: 6452
Posted: #36
From Wikipedia:

Surveys of scientists' views on climate change - with a focus on human-caused or anthropogenic global warming (AGW) - have been undertaken since the 1990s.[1] A 2016 paper (which was co-authored by Naomi Oreskes, Peter Doran, William Anderegg, Bart Verheggen, Ed Maibach, J. Stuart Carlton and John Cook, and which was based on a half a dozen independent studies by the authors) concluded that “the finding of 97% consensus [that humans are causing recent global warming] in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies.”[2]

***

Anybody can reject the evidence just like Creationists and members of The Flat Earth Society freely do.  They just can't be right when they do so, and people who wallow in ignorance and exult their delusions will garner little respect from the educated, well-informed logical thinkers who acknowledge reality.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2015
Posts: 21593
Posted: #37
Quote Originally Posted by TheGoldenGoose:

People always buy waterfront.Oceanfront, Lakefront, Riverfront.People gravitate to water.

Always nice when plastic ahress wash up on shore gives a chance for more raking opportunities in the Hamptons .feel like I am plunging down rabbit hole with out a life line. Again. Wish me luck it starting to get a little warm up here.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2017
Posts: 334
Posted: #38
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams:

From Wikipedia:

Surveys of scientists' views on climate change - with a focus on human-caused or anthropogenic global warming (AGW) - have been undertaken since the 1990s.[1] A 2016 paper (which was co-authored by Naomi Oreskes, Peter It's got to be nice to be a Liberal/Democrat...Doran, William Anderegg, Bart Verheggen, Ed Maibach, J. Stuart Carlton and John Cook, and which was based on a half a dozen independent studies by the authors) concluded that “the finding of 97% consensus [that humans are causing recent global warming] in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies.”[2]

***

Anybody can reject the evidence just like Creationists and members of The Flat Earth Society freely do.  They just can't be right when they do so, and people who wallow in ignorance and exult their delusions will garner little respect from the educated, well-informed logical thinkers who acknowledge reality.


Your source lacks much needed details. Why don't you explain in detail the measurements that go along with your agenda driven analogy?

https://www.perceptions.couk.com/glacials.html
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2015
Posts: 21593
Posted: #39
Are you in a mirage snokleing in the hazards ponds in a golf course is simply not allowed.
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2004
Posts: 10739
Posted: #40
Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaSlim:



Wordsmyth,ever notice how Leftist embrace and believe science .....Until it tells them that fetuses have unique DNA, a heartbeat, and brainwaves ?

Was science involved in your job?
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #41
Wordsmyth - is to close minded to have a conversation with. He feels that his agenda and opinion is stringer that science and data driven research. Pretty cool
 
Covers Rehab
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 35511
Posted: #42
Quote Originally Posted by darkhorse12:


Was science involved in your job?


If, you consider alchemy a science.........
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2004
Posts: 10739
Posted: #43
Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaSlim:



If, you consider alchemy a science.........

Sure do and I also consider any and all math a science.

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2017
Posts: 334
Posted: #44
Quote Originally Posted by mattbrot:

Wordsmyth - is to close minded to have a conversation with. He feels that his agenda and opinion is stringer that science and data driven research. Pretty cool


This is quite laughable since you neglected to come at me with measurements and facts that counter what I've presented. Talk is cheap. Anyone can say another is closed minded and you can get high fives from your buddies but smart people see through that BS.

I'll give you more time to find some facts...how's that?
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2015
Posts: 21593
Posted: #45
How is it that, A conservation minded naturalist such as Thoreau has no place in the conservative movement. Is it that Republican principles are so asscued that they can only find room to address their livestock their pets and livestock should be the only ones to have space here on this planet and everyone and everything should just suck it for their scorched earth initiatives and then say that the environmental concerns they might have for their interests for their concerns family pets and livestock still does not matter cause these are end days and earth is gone.

I must agree this is a mattbrot principle and these monsters vote was bought by special interests common sense States you live in a defined space . earth. And you need to exist on the environmental platform earth. And you required to oversee the good stewardship of the temple of earth were hairless wingless monkeys was given to oversee.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2015
Posts: 21593
Posted: #46
Final argument .
Why would the lord of hosts or god of all
Allow such a specie to repopulate the earths of heaven with this practice better to end that virus behavior here no sense in dispersing this in sane behavior throughout the heavens and now you know the rest of the story- Paul Harvey rip
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #47
Wordsmyth - I do not need to find the stories and "facts" for you. They are everywhere. A simple google search will reveal what the science says. It has been posted on here many many times. It is not my place to rehash all of those links and do your google search for you.

Feel free to stock with your agenda and personal beliefs. I will always put my money on science.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2017
Posts: 334
Posted: #48
Quote Originally Posted by wordsmyth:

6500 years ago it was hotter than now at 16 degrees Celsius.

Roughly 500 years passed and it cooled down to 14.5 degrees Celsius.

For the last 6000 years there have been 6 cooling cycles and 6 warming cycles.

Anyone who is alarmed by any current warming cycles is an idiot and needs a tin foil hat.

The Holocene Climate Optimum was much warmer than it is now.


                                  ^
                  Science and Facts above!
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 33937
Posted: #49

Quote Originally Posted by wordsmyth:



                                  ^
                  Science and Facts above!

The Global Warming Scam is just another example of the close-mindedness of the Liberals. There are plenty of articles with scientific backing that make valid points against the man-made warming scare, but Liberals do not want to read or know about those. These are examples that show the science is simply not there.  As the lady from the UN just recently said, it is about trying to eliminate Capitalism.  As the one article says---it is not science; it is POLITICS.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/19840-is-global-warming-a-hoax

https://www.express.co.uk/news/clarifications-corrections/526191/Climate-change-is-a-lie-global-warming-not-real-claims-weather-channel-founder

https://www.newsmax.com/MKTNews/global-warming-hoax-facts/2014/10/17/id/601458/

https://townhall.com/columnists/jackkerwick/2017/03/16/climate-change-and-fake-science-n2299921

https://townhall.com/columnists/jackkerwick/2017/03/16/climate-change-and-fake-science-n2299921


 
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 33937
Posted: #50
Copied last one twice---but you get the general idea.  There are plenty of articles on this.  Roy Spencer is maybe the most prominent scientist, I guess, to read and follow links about it. So, to the Liberal above---you can stock your agenda with either view---but you cannot say it is science and settled.  
All Forums | Politics
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gambling
Betting Sites
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
810,221
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 30 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
21+
Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER
Help Privacy Terms of Service Cookies Sitemap Forum
Covers is verified safe by:
Evalon Logo Logo GPWA Logo GDPR logo Logo GeoTrust logo Logo PCI DSS logo Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2026 CS Media Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.