Challenge to Democrats/Leftists: If you believe climate change is an existential crisis, prove it

They seem to lack the ability to take more than one variable into account.
They think people can just pack up and move for free.

 

Look up Maunder Minimum. And that’s my last reply to you. I won’t waste time on people who are smug in their lack of knowledge.

 

Do you always believe everything you hear from a 17 year old girl?

 

The assertion seems to be that scientists, though they have formed a consensus that climate change is actually occurring, that it’s not so great, and that mankind is at least accelerating it, aren’t precise enough. Therefore, random non-scientists who pretend to giggle a lot know more than scientists, and are correct in stating,well, things and stuff.

 

Ironic.

Tell me about the Sun getting hotter. That sounds very scientific.

 

The current best hypothesis for the cause of the Little Ice Age is that it was the result of volcanic action

 

Jeez. Where to begin...

The claim is that a 1 degree C increase in temps following a doubling of CO2 after three hundred years is not going to result in feedbacks that will make humans go extinct.

Next, Earth has .04% CO2 in its atmosphere. Venus has 96.5% CO2. Is it necessary to explain further?

 

Exactly.

 

From the Left’s debate toolbox: When you can’t win with facts use snark.

 

This is too much. The Maunder Minimum was caused by the sun having an extended period with no sunspots.

 

You’re the guy who claimed that all “liberals” get their science from Greta. It’s hypocrisy to whine about “snark” when you’re the source of that goofy claim, isn’t it?

 

Wrong again:

https://skepticalscience.com/print.php?r=448

"The bottom line is that the sun and the amount of solar radiation reaching Earth are very stable. Even during the Maunder and Dalton grand solar minima, global cooling was relatively small - smaller than the amount of global warming caused by human greenhouse gas emissions over the past century.

A new grand solar minimum would not trigger another LIA; in fact, the maximum 0.3°C cooling would barely make a dent in the human-caused global warming over the next century, likely between 1 and 5°C, depending on how much we manage to reduce our fossil fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. While this is equivalent to about a decade's worth of human-caused warming, it's also important to bear in mind that any solar cooling would only be temporary, until the end of the solar minimum.

The science is quite clear that the human influence on climate change has become bigger than the sun's."

 

Well, that's this thread.

Science---1.

Ideology---0

 

I believe in Global Warming. But the Global Warming Industry isn't in "vested interests"
but rather in UN panels, govt agencies, media groups, Hollywood, schools, scientists
and so on.

 

Here is a whole list of what we could expect with 1.5 & 2 C change.
I found it interesting.
https://interactive.carbonbrief.org...degrees/?utm_source=web&utm_campaign=Redirect

 

Then why don't you stick to the science?

 

Remember that the doubling of CO2 take three centuries, so that 1 degree of warming is spread out over time. So the assumption of 1.5 degree C minimum could be high, which is in keeping with how the scenarios usually are.

 

That’s the first funny thing I’ve ever heard a Leftist say. And here I thought they didn’t have a sense of humor.

 

Source?

 

In the OP

 

Naw. We got 1 degree in 50 years and the rate is increasing.

 

Source?

 

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature

 

Thanks for the link.

 

Nice.

I’m going to go to bed. Tomorrow we will take this up.