If I were to tell you that when we tick over to the year 2000 that the world was going to end, then it didn’t. I lose credibility.
Trying to attach the so-called Y2K problem to the scientifically proven climate change case is just dumb. Y2K was a computer problem which had to be addressed and yes some pundits predicted serious problems if nothing was done at the time. However, it was nothing to do with climate research science.
If I told you in the 70’s that we were going to freeze to death in the next couple decades, and we didn’t. I’d lose credibility.
This is an absolute myth and the fact you believe it shows you are reading climate science denialist literature and right wing nut bar propaganda. Here are links to reviews of what the actual science said at the time.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
https://arstechnica.com/science/201...ate-science-really-call-for-a-coming-ice-age/
Between 1965 and 1979 there were just 7 scientific papers that predicted cooling. In contrast there were 42 papers predicting global warming, so even back then there was an overwhelming consensus that climate change was going in a warming direction, just as we see now!
https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-intermediate.htm
If I told you that the polar caps would be gone by 2014 and they were still there, one is even bigger. I lose credibility.
The fact that predictions have been made about the dates of ice free Arctic summers which were too pessimistic does not negate the science or the data. The late August Arctic ice extent between 1979 and 2018 shows a steady decline of 10% per decade.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
The Arctic will be ice free in the summer eventually; the only question is how quickly?
I can keep going and going and going with the absolute lies that you guys seem to keep lapping up. The ever present hysteria and doomsday tales you seem to love. The ability for you to be able to look down your nose at fellow citizens and humans, I feel, makes you giddy with delight.
Au contraire, you can keep going telling us lies and mis-representations like those above because you are member of a cult that believes it knows better than all the climate scientist throughout the world. You are a super glaciologist, atmospheric physicist, geologist, and sedimentologist all rolled into one. Why I don’t know why you haven’t won a Nobel Prize since you know so much!
Bah! Your nauseating ability to dismiss all of the published science and by implication all of the scientists working for such organisations as NASA and NOAA is nothing more than the worst kind of “ad hominem” attack.
Since you are ignorant of the science and have not informed yourself of what it actually says, you resort to trying to denigrate the messenger.
The projections have ALWAYS been wrong. The models are ALWAYS wrong. Your cult is so gullible it takes local anecdotal evidence of increasing human population and sucks up the propaganda because IT MAKES YOU FEEL SUPERIOR. Sorry for the caps, but sheesh.
On the contrary again. For over thirty years the consensus has been that the world would get warmer and that weather events would get more unpredictable and extreme. And this is exactly what has happened!
Again for you to dismiss scientific evidence and data such as this-
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
and this:
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/climate-change-in-ten-graphs
and this:
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature
is just an incredible delusional effort of denial that it is on par with holocaust denial.
Why wasn’t any opposition science allowed at the Paris accord???? I’ll tell you why, because this is POLITICAL. They don’t want an honest debate. They sure as hell don’t fund any scientists that go against the pre ordained results they want to see.
You don’t even know what the Paris Accord was about. It was not a “debate” because you cannot debate facts and evidence that is overwhelming. The facts and data are in. The world is warming and politicians from every country in the world know that because they understand what the science is telling them. The “debate” is what to do about it, and when. Decisions around that formed the work which led to the Paris Accord.
As for that funding myth fed out to the gullible who don’t know how science works, it is laughable. Science is funded to gather data and do research. The conclusions follow from the evidence and the data, not the other way round!! Peer reviews and further research by other scientists then either confirms the conclusions or revises them over time. Science is self correcting and that is it’s strength. Science is also very competitive and if a body of evidence was built up that cast doubt on climate change we would know about it. Instead the evidence for climate change just grows and grows and gets stronger every year
If after all this time, after all the fails that climate “scientists” have given us, you still BELIEVE, like this **** is a religion or something, then we really can’t have an honest discussion.
In fact you are the religious fundamentalist because you are denying the science, just like the Catholic Church denied the work of Galileo and evangelical nut bars deny the work of Darwin and thousands of other scientist providing evidence for evolution.
We cannot have an honest discussion because you simply cannot and will not recognise the evidence presented before you out of sheer devotion to your right wing cults and a world view shaped by false stories and propaganda.
I’m a skeptic by nature, but give me the real deal and I’m happy to swing either way. This climate movement, as far as I can see, is flawed to the bone and if you don’t have reservations, your not paying attention. Either that, or your just looking for an opportunity to look down your nose at people.
The opposite is true. The denialists and the right wing cult media are the fanatics here. They refuse to see facts and evidence in front of them. Some are simply ignorant because they don’t understand the science. Some are wilfully ignorant because what is happening goes against their interests of larger profits or continuing with industrial development that will make our planetary climate warmer still.
So they obfuscate, they deny, they spread myths and falsehoods and make up conspiracy theories about “socialists” or they demonise “environmentalists”.
In fact the “business as usual” forces are the dangerous radicals, because they ignore, lie about and deny overwhelming scientific evidence collected over three decades by thousands of scientists from all over the world. History will prove what dangerous and deluded radicals the climate change denialists were!