Americans already feeling effects of climate change, says report

Originally posted by darthgoober
Yes we see SOME effects, but the scientist keep getting the outcome and timeframe wrong. If they can't get that right, then something within the science they're using is off and I'm not going to panic until there's some evidence that they've figured out what it is/was and accounted for it. I mean Hell, the preachers were probably right at least once or twice about one of the church members getting over cancer or something like that...

Once your prediction about the outcome of something has been PROVEN wrong, you've got to start over from square one and reevaluate the subject not just push back the deadline. And if you've been proven wrong multiple times, you need to start your evaluation from a slightly different direction rather than beginning with the exact same mindset and opening steps.

Another way to look at it, taking measures but nothing happens as it's all just a "Chinese Hoax", means we've made changes and spent money. As a side affect, we probably have less overall pollution. Not doing anything and it turns out all these scientist were onto something and it's all true, future generations are severely ****ed.

I'll give you some credit though, you didn't use the lazy "It's in God's hands!" dismissal.

Was anyone aware all the hottest years have been 12, 30 and 70 years ago?

Originally posted by Robtard
So it seems you're unwilling to do anything until the house is already burned down as a pile of ash is the only proof you'll accept, not the warnings from the fire marshal saying "yeah, don't have so many plugs in a single outlet, it could cause a fire". Not sure that's a good strategy, the ash strategy.

Another way to look at it, taking measures but nothing happens as it's all just a "Chinese Hoax", means we've made changes and spent money. As a side affect, we probably have less overall pollution. Not doing anything and it turns out all these scientist were onto something and it's all true, future generations are severely ****ed.

I'll give you some credit though, you didn't use the lazy "It's in God's hands!" dismissal.

I do understand your reasoning though. A lot of religious people feel the same way "If there's no God then I've lost nothing but the extra effort of living my life religiously, but if there is then I'm covered when I die".

Except of course you're not solely burdening the cost of a power-strip. It would quit literally cost you just a few cents, your life wouldn't change much, if at all :/

Originally posted by Sable
Was anyone aware all the hottest years have been 12, 30 and 70 years ago?

I bet you the Chinese knew when they made up the Climate Change hoax

Originally posted by Robtard
Except of course you're not solely burdening the cost of a power-strip. It would quit literally cost you just a few cents, your life wouldn't change much, if at all :/

Originally posted by Robtard
I bet you the Chinese knew when they made up the Climate Change hoax

But where you aware its cooling off, and the earths hottest years are 12, 30 and 70 years ago?

Originally posted by darthgoober
Hey if they can concretely prove that the measures they want to take will cost me less than an extra buck spent over the course of my entire life I might support them. But between tax increases to make the change and an increase in my utility bill I somehow suspect that's not the case. I have 2 kids and both are low/mid functioning autistics so there's little/no chance of me ever ending up with grandkids. My responsibilities are to them and myself alone, I'm not going to support anything that theoretically takes away from them for the benefit of anyone else's great grandchildren.

The changes proposed now are very gradual and you'd barely feel it, if at all, as noted, no one sensible is saying we're stopping driving cars tomorrow and running factories on rainbows. Waiting until the shit hits the fan though and fecal matter gets flung all around/on enveryone, then changes would be drastic and you'd most definitely feel that along with your autistic twins. Since you only care about yourself as Jesus intended. (kudos though, that autistic part was funny)

Originally posted by Robtard
The changes proposed now are very gradual and you'd barely feel it, if at all, as noted, no one sensible is saying we're stopping driving cars tomorrow and running factories on rainbows. Waiting until the shit hits the fan though and fecal matter gets flung all around/on enveryone, then changes would be drastic and you'd most definitely feel that along with your autistic twins. Since you only care about yourself as Jesus intended. (kudos though, that autistic part was funny)

Originally posted by Sable
But where you aware its cooling off, and the earths hottest years are 12, 30 and 70 years ago?

So it's actually Global Cooling? Are you the Mirror Universe version of Al Gore? That would be Al Gore with a goatee.

Originally posted by darthgoober
My kids are in fact austistic. You don't have to believe me if you choose not to, but it was a fact not a joke. But I never said they were twins. David's 13 and Ariel's 8.

Wasn't aware, thought you were using an extreme example to illustrate a point.

Still, what I said doesn't change. Now is more sensible than waiting until it's too late. To go back to the fire comparison. A power strip is cheaper than rebuilding a house that wasn't insured.

Originally posted by Robtard
So it's actually Global Cooling? Are you the Mirror Universe version of Al Gore? That would be Al Gore with a goatee.

Al Gores movies have completly flopped. Supposidly according to polls a majority of people believe in global warming but when presented with a movie that caters to them, they dont support it. His latest movie was a flop.

Originally posted by Robtard
So it's actually Global Cooling? Are you the Mirror Universe version of Al Gore? That would be Al Gore with a goatee.

No, he's just incorrect.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/1934-hottest-year-on-record.htm

"Climate change skeptics have pointed to 1934 in the U.S. as proof that recent hot years are not unusual. Choosing the year 1934 is an obvious example of "cherry-picking" a single fact that supports a claim, while ignoring the rest of the data. In fact they have to cherry pick both a location (the U.S.) and a year (1934) to find data that is far from the global trend. Globally, the years 2014, 2015 and 2016 are the hottest on record, so far."

Originally posted by Sable
Al Gores movies have completly flopped. Supposidly according to polls a majority of people believe in global warming but when presented with a movie that caters to them, they dont support it. His latest movie was a flop.

I'm sure Al Gore is devastated by this news. But his first film made around 50 million on a 2million budget. Not too shabby.

2005 was the hottest year.

Originally posted by Robtard
Wasn't aware, thought you were using an extreme example to illustrate a point.

Still, what I said doesn't change. Now is more sensible than waiting until it's too late. To go back to the fire comparison. A power strip is cheaper than rebuilding a house that wasn't insured.

Originally posted by darthgoober
My name is David.
I'm 36 years old.
2 kids, both autistic(and most in my life suspect that I'm somewhere on the spectrum as well).
Joined the forum 11 years ago
I created the Battlezone top to bottom and won the first BZ ever.
Former tourney champion.

And I'mevryone's favorite poster whether they want to admit it or not 😛

When they can actually show me that there's something to be alarmed about within my kids lifetimes, I'll worry. But again, they've been wrong repeatedly so I'm not about to voluntrily alter my lifestyle in any way that make our lives more difficult/complicated than they already are until they show that they have the science down pat on the subject. I altered my lifestyle for years when I was younger because of all the eco friendly cries about things like deforestation, recycling, and global warming only to later find out that a lot of the stuff they were saying was BS. I'm not about to do it again now that I have disabled children to look after in the present.

Originally posted by BackFire
global trend.

"global mean temperature" is the term. since they are unable/unwilling to comprehend it's meaning, they declare victory.

😂

Originally posted by darthgoober
No it's true here's another quote from me just so you don't think it's something I'm making it up on the fly...

When they can actually show me that there's something to be alarmed about within my kids lifetimes, I'll worry. But again, they've been wrong repeatedly so I'm not about to voluntrily alter my lifestyle in any way that make our lives more difficult/complicated than they already are until they show that they have the science down pat on the subject. I altered my lifestyle for years when I was younger because of all the eco friendly cries about things like deforestation, recycling, and global warming only to later find out that a lot of the stuff they were saying was BS. I'm not about to do it again now that I have disabled children to look after in the present.

I believed you the first time you explained.

Okay then. Good talk regardless.

Originally posted by BackFire
No, he's just incorrect.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/1934-hottest-year-on-record.htm

"Climate change skeptics have pointed to 1934 in the U.S. as proof that recent hot years are not unusual. Choosing the year 1934 is an obvious example of "cherry-picking" a single fact that supports a claim, while ignoring the rest of the data. In fact they have to cherry pick both a location (the U.S.) and a year (1934) to find data that is far from the global trend. Globally, the years 2014, 2015 and 2016 are the hottest on record, so far."

Hmmm. What a weird thing to lie and cherry pick about.

Is 2017 on the path to be the hottest? Cos if so, I see an odd trend and I'm not even a real super-scientist