Thread: Sketchy climate science, and humans not contributing? FALSE! says Politifact

Originally Posted by splansing

You are ignoring the differences in how things are happening now as opposed to how they have happened in the past. I can only assume you are doing so willfully because obviously climate change does not fit your chosen narrative. This stuff is not secret, and if you give it a chance, it's not really even that hard to understand.

What past? The Ice Core records don't tell us how big the polar ice caps were.

Originally Posted by jackalope

Yes, Virginia, the planet IS warming.As the conclusion points out, the deniers will move the goal posts again, the smarter one of the subset already having moved on - either to "Yes, but how much is MAN to blame for it?", or to "Yes, but is it economically WORTH it to do anything about it?".

Figuring out the difference between man's and nature's influence on climate should have been the right question to ask from the beginning? Can you think of a better question?

Originally Posted by kmiller1610

What past? The Ice Core records don't tell us how big the polar ice caps were.

You're so right. They only tell us about temperature and CO2 levels, which march in lockstep. The changes in the ice cap are one of the many potential consequences of warming, almost none of which bode well for civilization. The warming itself is the issue, so try to stay focused on that. Whether or not a localized short-term warm snap in 1922 melted some arctic ice in one area is not really relevant to the discussion. I hope you can see that.

Originally Posted by splansing

You're so right. They only tell us about temperature and CO2 levels, which march in lockstep. The changes in the ice cap are one of the many potential consequences of warming, almost none of which bode well for civilization. The warming itself is the issue, so try to stay focused on that. Whether or not a localized short-term warm snap in 1922 melted some arctic ice in one area is not really relevant to the discussion. I hope you can see that.

Yes, for some reason, which is known, the warming PRECEDES the CO2 spike. Gee, exactly what's happened to date, except, of course, for the failure of AGW Hoaxers to predict the last decade of cooling. (Which is what the phrase "hide the decline" in the Hoaxers e-mails refers to.)

So, so far, nothing out of the ordinary has happened. Do the Chicken Littles account for the fact that the warming trend commenced BEFORE industialization? No, they avoid facts whenever possible.

Gee, what's sacred about the climate of 1952? Or whatever the particular cultist feels is his "ideal" year of global climate? Do they ever pick the time grapes were grown in Iceland? No, they pick a time cooler than those in which humans prospered. They pick a time from their childhoods, or from some Ray Bradbury story.

An ice-free winter channel from London to Seatte? Would be good for business.

Wheat growing late in Saskatchewan? Or Siberia? How awful. What a shame, being able to feed more starving people. (and making profits.)

Oh, no. It's much better that the world be returned quickest to the conditions where ten thousand feet of ice bured Chicago and New York.

As if we had any control over global climate. Ha ha ha. You people.