ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 7 of 7
« First < 34567
Patteeu Memorial Political Forum>Questioning the Climate-Change Narrative
Marcellus 08:22 AM 05-04-2021
So this guy worked as the Undersecretary For Science for the Department of Energy under the Obama Administration before all the liberals freak out and call the guy who wrote this a RWNJ. Jordan Pederson tweeted a link to this article this morning.

Here is a bit of the article and link to the rest. Basically what this scientist is saying is all the talk about global warming being an economic disaster in the waiting is all a lie and he uses the data to back it up. :-)

Trust the science!!! Boy this all sounds so familiar. Nothing but a money grab clear and simple. Keep in mind he isn't saying "nothing" is happening. He is pointing out how minimal what is happening actually is.

Believe it, don't believe it, your choice to be a fan. :-)

Originally Posted by :
Questioning the Climate-Change Narrative
May 4, 2021 6:30 AM

Editor’s Note: The following are extracts from Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters, by Steven E. Koonin.

From the Introduction

‘The Science.” We’re all supposed to know what “The Science” says. “The Science,” we’re told, is settled. How many times have you heard it?
Humans have already broken the earth’s climate. Temperatures are rising, sea level is surging, ice is disappearing, and heat waves, storms, droughts, floods, and wildfires are an ever-worsening scourge on the world. Greenhouse-gas emissions are causing all of this. And unless they’re eliminated promptly by radical changes to society and its energy systems, “The Science” says earth is doomed.

Well . . . not quite. Yes, it’s true that the globe is warming, and that humans are exerting a warming influence upon it. But beyond that — to paraphrase the classic movie The Princess Bride: “I do not think ‘The Science’ says what you think it says.”

For example, both the research literature and government reports that summarize and assess the state of climate science say clearly that heat waves in the U.S. are now no more common than they were in 1900, and that the warmest temperatures in the U.S. have not risen in the past 50 years. When I tell people this, most are incredulous. Some gasp. And some get downright hostile.

But these are almost certainly not the only climate facts you haven’t heard. Here are three more that might surprise you, drawn directly from recent published research or the latest assessments of climate science published by the U.S. government and the U.N.:

Humans have had no detectable impact on hurricanes over the past century.
Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t shrinking any more rapidly today than it was 80 years ago.
The net economic impact of human-induced climate change will be minimal through at least the end of this century.
So what gives . . .?


I’m a scientist — I work to understand the world through measurements and observations, and then to communicate clearly both the excitement and the implications of that understanding. Early in my career, I had great fun doing this for esoteric phenomena in the realm of atoms and nuclei using high-performance computer modeling (which is also an important tool for much of climate science). But beginning in 2004, I spent about a decade turning those same methods to the subject of climate and its implications for energy technologies. I did this first as chief scientist for the oil company BP, where I focused on advancing renewable energy, and then as undersecretary for science in the Obama administration’s Department of Energy, where I helped guide the government’s investments in energy technologies and climate science. I found great satisfaction in these roles, helping to define and catalyze actions that would reduce carbon-dioxide emissions, the agreed-upon imperative that would “save the planet.”

But then the doubts began . . .

Just Passin' By 02:36 PM 05-06-2021
Originally Posted by Fish:
Critical thinking isn't for everyone. :-)
Indeed. It's obviously not your strength, at least when it comes to politics and science.

Originally Posted by Fish:
You absolutely should go with the scientific consensus. It's just straight ignorant to argue otherwise.

Originally Posted by Fish:
That doesn't guarantee that it will always be 100% correct.

Eureka 02:55 PM 05-06-2021

Eureka 02:57 PM 05-06-2021
Seems Gore got a divorce from Global Warming and is now dating a new sexy thing. Her name is Climate Change.

GloryDayz 07:51 PM 05-06-2021
Originally Posted by Fish:
Critical thinking isn't for everyone. :-)
With the way you'll suck the dick of anybody who bills themselves as a scientist, clearly it's not your strong suit either.
morphius 07:25 AM 05-07-2021
I tend to believe that the quicker moving, and drastically weaker magnetic field can be easily take a large percentage of the blame for any changes in our climate. Being weaker, more high energy particles getting through, we know that has effects on the weather, more chaotic weather, warming, etc, etc. I haven't read much about the effects of it moving are, but logic would tell me that it would change weather patterns. It is also now over the artic ocean instead of land. The was an early paper out of Norway I believe that said that the drop in poles strength matched the warming nearly 1 for 1. Just stuff I find interesting.

I also believe we need to continue to clean up the Earth, but the best way to do that is to have disposable income. Notice it is rich companies Google, Apple, Amazon, etc that are moving the fastest to lower their carbon footprint...
Page 7 of 7
« First < 34567