False Dichotomy Fallacy. We could also adhere to logic, science, and mathematics and recognize that "man made global warming" is a hoax. Define what you mean when you say 'pollution'? What pollution, specifically? Splendid. I agree with you. I don't want bags of trash thrown everywhere either. We don't use fossils for fuel. They don't burn very well. Okay. Which resources? You do know that oil and natural gas are renewable, right? They both form underground naturally... Whenever I hear this one, my first thought is always "care to lead by example?" Nobody wants to do that for some odd reason... It's always "somebody else" who should have to suffer for the greater good... What "abuse"? Continued false dichotomy. See beginning of response. See beginning of response. We're all gonna be dead in 12 years anyway, remember?
If you are quoting 'AGW' then you must accept that Earth's climate is changing either caused or exacerbated by humans. Therefore, ALL ACTIONS by humans which contribute to AGW are the things we should be talking about and mitigating as possible. What this basically means is it's not up to YOU to decide what is 'real pollution'. ALL pollution created by mankind, that contributes and/or exacerbates AGW, needs to be in the discussion and actions taken...
I'm not interested in discussing your dismissal of AGW. I'm not interested in bickering with you about the obvious.
You obviously do accept AGW and if not why do you quote it? I'm also curious how you possess more knowledge than the combined scientific community to adamantly oppose their findings and theories?
I also quote the Koran, doesn't mean I believe it. The combined scientific community does not believe man's C02 contribution is a pertinent factor in climate change. That's a myth perpetuated by the alarmist. Only a minority of scientist think man is a significant factor in climate change while the vast majority thinks man has a contribution but it's insignificant in the scheme of things. The alarmist ask scientist if they think man's a factor and when the answer comes back yes the myth pushers extrapolate that to mean they believe man's a driving factor and is putting our planet in peril. Even the much hated by alarmist Judith Curry would be counted as agreeing with the AGW hypothesis in that way of counting.
Unwilling to consider opposing viewpoints on the issue? That's the sign of someone being a fundamentalist of their religion... See above.
I have done so many times for you and you simply ignore the data in preference of spewing your ignorance repeatedly. To do so even one more time is clearly playing your Troll game and would be pointless, considering you have as much access to information as I do in this instance. I will however do a simple google search for you to ignore if only to prove my point, which everyone here already knows. https://www.google.com/search?sourc...35i39j0i13i30j0i13i5i30j0i8i13i30.cwWlHbZaWuE Just three words..."Climate change consensus".....You can copy and paste if those words are too hard.
Science is not a community. It is a set of falsifiable theories. The theories behind the laws of thermodynamics are quite clear, and "greenhouse gas" models all reject those laws...
Lol........... https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/20114 Looks like we can add science, on top of logic, as topics you know nothing about.
As I thought you could not disprove my statement on how the so called consensus falsley counts scientist like Judith Curry as believing man is the primary reason for climate change just because they believe man may have some minor input. The 97% myth is debunked in this article. "Surely the most suspicious “97 percent” study was conducted in 2013 by Australian scientist John Cook — author of the 2011 book Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand and creator of the blog Skeptical Science (subtitle: “Getting skeptical about global warming skepticism.”). In an analysis of 12,000 abstracts, he found “a 97% consensus among papers taking a position on the cause of global warming in the peer-reviewed literature that humans are responsible.” “Among papers taking a position” is a significant qualifier: Only 34 percent of the papers Cook examined expressed any opinion about anthropogenic climate change at all. Since 33 percent appeared to endorse anthropogenic climate change, he divided 33 by 34 and — voilà — 97 percent! When David Legates, a University of Delaware professor who formerly headed the university’s Center for Climatic Research, recreated Cook’s study, he found that “only 41 papers — 0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent,” endorsed what Cook claimed. Several scientists whose papers were included in Cook’s initial sample also protested that they had been misinterpreted. “Significant questions about anthropogenic influences on climate remain,” Legates concluded." https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/10/climate-change-no-its-not-97-percent-consensus-ian-tuttle/
Man is the species which manipulates his surrounding environment as much as he possibly can to live a fat and easy and physically effortless life. That's what man does and he cannot be changed. We're not going to demolish the cities and get rid of electricity and petrochemicals to mitigate climate change. What we're going to do is whine and biatch and continue to live amicably with climate change.
I notice you put the caveat of peer reviewed in there. Climate gate showed that any dissenting scientific articles were not peer reviewd and we're instead thrown in the trash. Nice try.
Okay....would it be better if we said 90%? By the way, you mentioned two of the thousands and decided to go with the extreme "Man Made" version of climate change.....Do ya at least agree the planet is warming and humans play a part in that?
1.6%, Not 97%, Agree that Humans are the Main Cause of Global Warming "Mark Bahner, a commenter on my previous post on global warming and on David Friedman’s post, has sifted through the data behind John Cook’s statement that 97% of climate scientists who stated a position believe that humans are the main cause of global warming. Recall that Bedford and Cook lumped together those who believe that humans are the main cause with those who believe that humans are a cause. Cook et al did not report the percent of abstracts in which the scientists said that humans are the main cause of global warming. But Bedford and Cook (the same Cook), citing Cook et al, misrepresented the results of Cook et al." https://www.econlib.org/archives/2014/03/16_not_97_agree.html
