Climate change could mean the extinction of our species

[buttslinger]

I see MrFanti is from Texas, where Oil and Deregulation are practically written into the Pledge of Allegiance. (That and In$urance.)
These debates usually turn out to be exercises in debating skills, prose, and brainpower more than relieving any human misery.
Outside of Earth Science in High School, all I know is what they tell me about Global Warming, but I would lean toward the word of the scientists over the politicians.
Unfortunately, it's kind of like a dozen women accusing Roy Moore of a crime, except Roy Moore is a JUDGE! Empowered by the People.
The Insanely Rich Corporations that pollute the ecosystem know that they are kinda like raping Mother Earth, but they're never going to admit it, and in the USA you have to be very careful when you get between a man and his right to make a dollar. I don't know the numbers, but I imagine lots of science majors work for large corporations. And Lawyers. As much as I love Obama, doing the right thing increased the National Debt by about ten trillion dollars, and while Trump is the worst thing that could have happened, Hillary was going to have to get pretty dirty in her own right to maintain our greatest national resource: CASH.
Because of the divisive nature of politics, each side has to overstate their position to bring the center to a place they can both live with. My brother is a science teacher and he said my sister's Chesapeake Bay Vacation Home would be underwater by now. In this case it is probably better he was wrong.

[trish]

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...nts-180964506/

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/...climate-change

https://www.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cf...e-perspective/

http://www.pnas.org/content/114/48/12681.full

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...7GL075888/full

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10...48-9326/aa9ef2


For the first time climatologists have linked climate change to several specific extreme-weather and oceanographic events. The 2016 Asian heatwave that killed hundreds, the rise of surface temperatures of the Coral Sea (causing the bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef, and Hurricane Harvey which dropped over 51 inches of water on Houston this later September number among the events now connected to climate change.

Current climate models do not predict these events, but they do show that events of this magnitude are well nigh ‘impossible’ (one in a million) in the absence of the climate change. This is accomplished by running comparisons. One run takes the initial conditions of the pre-industrial world (its population, its production of greenhouse gasses, its consumption of forests, its agricultural output as well as the climatological data of the period). A parallel run takes as initial its initial conditions those of the current period. Events of the magnitude as those listed above are not uncommon in the latter model, but are extremely rare to impossible in the former.

These results connecting the magnitude of specific events to global warming are some of the most significant advances in climatology of the past year.

[buttslinger]

Excellent research, as usual, Trishikins, I liked the ScienceNews reader discussion better than our skin site. sigh.....

[Ts RedVeX]

[MrFanti]

Tell you what...
I'll meet you middle road.

I'll acknowledge your facts about global warming and it's dangers and.....
You folks acknowledge the facts about alcohol being deadlier than guns. I've presented enough about that.

Or we can continue to agree to disagree.....

[trish]

If you think facts can be bartered, then you don't know what facts are...but please, if you're going to present your case against alcohol create a thread for it.

[buttslinger]

The fact is the world is a smaller place than 100 years ago, with two world wars under our belt and undeniable pollution. With increased opportunity comes increased responsibility.
There is no thread to tell you the unspeakable things I've done behind the wheel of a car, and I'm not saying we should go back to Daniel Boone times, free in the middle of nowheresville. Most people don't live their lives guided by facts, they live their life in the pursuit of liberty. That doesn't mean that the most common sense approach to guns, alcohol, and yes, pollution and climate change shouldn't be insisted on at your voting booth. A joke is a joke, the truth is the truth, and a vote is a vote.
Having Exxon as your hero is moronic. They used to buy their oil from the Middle East, tank it over here and sell it to US for huge profits. They weren't American Heroes, they were trashing our skies and financing our enemies for personal wealth. When Dick Cheney was in charge gas cost 5 bucks a gallon. That was no accident. We were pawns.
Back when Eisenhower was President the Democrats were the racists and the Republicans were warning us about the Military-Industrial Complex. I imagine ole Ike is spinning in his grave about now.

[MrFanti]

If you think facts can be bartered, then you don't know what facts are...

If you choose to read facts that only support your viewpoint....that's definitely your choice...

I on the other hand like to review from a variety of sources...I'll acknowledge climate change but I won't necessarily acknowledge the root cause as being man induced industrialization until I review all data available. And even then, man induced industrialization as the cause is biased in itself because it eliminates the possibility multiple causes.

[filghy2]

I'll acknowledge your facts about global warming and it's dangers and.....
You folks acknowledge the facts about alcohol being deadlier than guns. I've presented enough about that.

Hilarious. You pretend that alcohol deaths are a more important to you than any other issue, yet:
- you never mentioned the issue until midway through a thread on the Vegas shootings a few months back
- you conceded in another thread that you are not actually in favour of banning alcohol
- you've never started a thread on this issue and only raise it as a distraction from other issues

[trish]

If you choose to read facts that only support your viewpoint....that's definitely your choice...

Thank you for the attack on my personal, intellectual integrity. It's called the ad hominem fallacy.

I will listen to all claims and proposals and eliminate those that those that either contradict observation and evidence, or those that are not falsifiable or which make no testable predictions. I do not barter with claims, believing A if you agree to believe B. I repeat: if you think one can barter in that way with facts, you do not know what facts are.

If you want to persuade reasonable people that claim A is true, then provide the arguments for A, the supporting evidence and rationally address the objections made by those who criticize your hypothesis. Be your own worst critic. Present a case that preserves your personal, intellectual integrity. And please, do it in the appropriate thread.