More Americans and most Republicans now believe in climate change

Humans are pathogens infecting the earth?

Thats as crazy as the liberal professor at UT in Austin telling audiences that the best way to save earth is for a plague to wipe out 90% of humans

How can liberals engage in such warped thinking?

 

Read the DNI/CIA/FBI report. The one that obtained unanimous agreement from every trump intelligence officer.

 

Your second sentence is precisely what is reported by the OP.

So why is it fake again?

 

Stop with the bullshit translations of my posts or I will just ignore you.

 

Nope.

This is how fake news works. They claim that 8 in 10 Americans believe climate change is happening.

Then, they say...

Americans, however, remain divided on what is the main contributor to climate change. A plurality, 37%, say human activity and natural changes in the environment both contribute equally to climate change. Democrats more than Republicans and independents think human activity is mainly to blame.[/]

So, only 37% believe that it's man made.

But the article is drafted to make it sound like an overwhelming majority believe its man made, mainly in an effort to make those who doubt the claim of man made global warming feel like they are in the minority, when in fact they are in the majority.

Read the article again to witness false journalism first hand.

 

Stop with the gross generalizations that purport that the inexperienced idealistic youth are somehow superior or validated... when in fact they are just louder.

 

You have terrible reading comprehension then.

 

Lol.

Dude. The article doesn't say what you want it to say. Sorry that's inconvenient.

 

I am sure your mind is not completely closed.

"This was a year for splashy headlines about retractions, after some much-ballyhooed findings were pulled. Some prominent scientists each retracted multiple papers in 2015. And, of course, the last 12 months saw more and more cases of faked peer review. Here, in no particular order, are our picks for the top 10 retraction stories of 2015."
THE SCIENTIST, The Top 10 Retractions of 2015, A look at this year’s most memorable retractions, By Retraction Watch | December 23, 2015.
https://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/44895/title/The-Top-10-Retractions-of-2015/

Fake Science is common.

 

I'll take that as a "yes." They did write the dossier to help Hillary.

I recognize that Russians are not united and some did take out some Facebook ads for Hillary, but as Rosenstein has said, there is no evidence that the effort changed a single vote.

 

Where does this strawman come from? I don't think I've ever seen anyone on this forum or anywhere actually deny that climate changes.

And wouldn't it be fair to say that anyone with 3 working synapsis in their brain acknowledges that there's always a reason why climate changes?

Yeah, it was warmer 60 million years ago even though the Sun was dimmer. How about that eh?

I wonder...how could that happen? Oh wait...CO2 concentrations were above 1000 ppm.

Now consider what would happen if CO2 concentrations went above 1000 ppm today with the Sun providing an additional 2.0 W/m2 of extra force that wasn't available 60 million years ago.

 

The article does not say what I want because I want more Americans to recognize and accept the two basic tenets of AGW - 1) that the climate is currently changing (warming) and 2) humans are a significant factor. I said as much in the OP.

According to the article, three years ago, less than half of Republicand even accepted that the climate is changing. Now that number sits at 64%. That is improvement, but we have a long way to go.

But at no point did the article mislead or state anything false. Sorry if that is inconvenient for you.

 

Did the report say they wrote the dossier? Then dont take my suggestion to read the report as a "yes."

 

Link?

 

Which part? The report itself or the fact that trump's intelligence officers agree completely with the report?

 

Comedy Gold! So tell us what caused warming so great herbivore Dinosaurs were 1,200 miles from the North Pole with food to eat?

 

Liberals win few arguments by telling the truth

Fake News, aka lies, are their best weapon

 

If the report was the last word, there would not still be an investigation. We could proceed directly to prosecution and impeachment. But the report doesn't stand up. So we don't.

But we all know for certain that Steele obtained lies and innuendo from the Russians and funneled it through Fusion GPS to the Hillary camp. That has been nailed down, documented and buried for years. Apparently colluding with Russians and British agents is not against the law or someone would have been charged. But that we know as well. Collusion isn't a criminal offense. Obama openly and publicly colluded with the liberal factions in Israel to try to prevent the election of Netanyahu. He sent a team to Israel to help with the campaign.

I know we hate the Rooskies, but there is only one side of the 2016 campaign that colluded with them, and that is Hillary. She was deep in the urine-stained bed with the Russians and no doubt promising more uranium sales.

 

Anything related that is factual and not just a TDS ranting.

 

...yea, that made no sense. I'll just link both.

Here's the joint report:
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections - Office of the Director of National Intelligence
PDFhttps://www.dni.gov › ICA_2017_01

Here's the transcript from the National Threat Level Assessment Meeting where all five of Trump's intelligence officers said they agreed completely with all aspects of the report: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ify-before-the-senate-intelligence-committee/

 

First, continental drift caused land masses to move north. For example, Greenland used to be where present day France and England were over 60 million years ago. So even if the Earth weren't warmer back then this still would have been a temperate region.

Second, greenhouse gas concentrations were much higher over 60 million years ago.

Third, the Arctic region wasn't as land locked back then as it is today. This allowed ocean currents to transfer more heat from the lower latitudes into the Arctic zone.

 

You have a link to that speculation don't you? Post it.

 

This is simply more liberal misdirection and misinformation. Nobody ever denied that climate changes, what happened was trashy liberals started substituting climate change for 'global warming' in the winter months, when such egregious claims went ignored...

 

Those who reject science often deny that climate changes. All you have to do is google for global warming hoax and you'll find lots of people who deny that the climate is changing.

Also, "climate change" was first used in scientific literature in the 1950's while the first appearance of "global warming" didn't occur until the 1960's. Ironically it was climatologist Murray Mitchell who coined both terms. So no, "climate change" was not substituted for "global warming". Plus they have subtly different meanings anyway. Many deniers do not understand the context in which these terms are used so instead of admitting that they don't understand they make up myths like these to further rationalize their broad and erroneous denial of the science.

 

Nobody denies that climate changes, they reject the notion that its totally man made or that man is doing anything adverse at all. Since there is in fact no comprehensive model to suggest man has anything to do with climate change, rejection is logical. The substitution I'm talking is recent. Ever since the many, many, many failed predictions by the global warming death cult were proven wrong, year after year...