Regardless Tundra seems to claim that the media and the Anointed (intellectuals) distort the truth, and that we aren't smart enough to know the difference. In addition to his claims, which he can't back up, that the data has been manipulated, he suggests that the media falsely reports what is going on. Why? Again they are too stupid to know what the scientists are really saying or have some unnamed motive. But he fails to dispute the facts the climatologists put forth. Instead he attacks, through Sowell and the novelist Michael Crichton, anyone else who disagrees with his unsupported opinions. Why? Because he knows the truth.
Examples, really? Specific examples... I mean, REALLY??? You want me to list stuff that shows up all the time? Why, so you can refuse to look into it and/or seek out some reason to, in your mind, disqualify the source? It's amusing that you ask me to go down this road yet again, in typical fashion. Perhaps ask yourself why these things come up all the time. Perhaps use your powerful investigative capabilities to dig up these "obscure" contradictory opinions and examples. That's what a serious person would do. And then weigh the evidence. But since you're asking for stuff that's prolific and commonly available then my working assumption is that you're not serious.
Attack the person, not the idea. Regular fare. As if some valid argument. All those words, and not one addressing the main precept of the book. Perhaps ask yourself if you've done yourself any favors.
I attack the person because of the false ideas he's deliberately peddling, such as the ones I mentioned. You seem to be saying you can't trust science or any news sources, but you can trust your gut and Sowell, who's a professional propagandist. That puts you beyond the reach of rational argument--like the MAGA crowd that watches only Fox and News Max. Been in the tundra too long?
Well it would be nice if you clarified your position by giving concrete examples. I have no idea what stuff shows up all the time in your investigations; and the source is absolutely important. The source of any climatic data should be from verifiable climatologists. Certainly the source should be a major consideration. If your sources are legitimate you should have no problem providing them. Next we come to the old look up the facts yourself routine. I'm not making any claims as to climate, the scientist have already weighed the evidence. I'm just following the scientific consensus. You are the one making the claim that the scientists, or media, or whatever, are wrong. As you are disputing the accepted scientific consensus it falls on you to state your reasons and sources, and explain why the scientists are wrong...I don't have to prove they are right. I really would like to know what your sources are and what your argument is. Not just that there is no global warming, tell me why you believe that.
In California there's a monster blizzard. In Texas there are huge wildfires because it's too warm and dry at this time of year, though it's still winter. The climate change deniers seems awfully quiet lately! (except for TATT).
You may get some "likes" but that logic is ill-conceived. I trust no one when it comes to this stuff. The only reason I suggested the other guy read that book is because the author illustrates a concept. To be honest with ourselves, we have to know about and weigh competing concepts.
And you, you evaded the question I asked you earlier from your first reprisal. It's not that you're obligated to answer anyone's questions but you leave a lot of talk while dismissing what you said prior.
You need to check the records for the US. This has been the warmest winter on record in the US….period. That’s pretty sobering.
One needn't be an "expert" to be able to spot bullshit. It's amazing what short memories we seem to have when it comes to claims of existential threats. "But this time it's really real! Pinky promise!" How are the polar bears doing? It's really hard to process all this stuff, I get it. Plus, assumptions and hallucinations confuse the issues, too. Like I've ever argued there's no global warming. I haven't, I've only suggested that it is not believable that our people have the ability to measure the temperature of "the earth" to any accuracy close to what many seem to believe is possible. It's just not a thing. We can't know if the entirety of the earth is warming or cooling. We only know what we directly measure at a specific point. The rest is what we call a "SWAG". And whatever it's doing, it's not going to kill us. We'll adapt. You'll see. Might even remember.
Is that what they're saying? Because we've only broken one record high in the last several months. Personally I'm tickled for warmer winters. And it does feel like some winters are worse than others. But we get warm spells and frigid spells every year. Last summer wasn't nearly as hot as some have been. I think we see what we want to see.
“We’ll Adapt”. Really, ????. Sounds like a certain reptile’s thinking as the asteroid came streaking towards the Yucatán about 55 or so million years ago. Oh yeah the green Dino’s likeness did survive on the Sinclair gasoline sign…..appropriate.
What question was that? In other words, you think we have to be familiar with leading proponents on both sides of a controversial issue in order to hold an intelligent opinion? I agree. I read the book. Have you? Have you ever read a book by an author from an opposing point of view from your own? If not, I could suggest a few on the climate issue you might find challenging. You might start off with George Marshall's Don't Even Think About It: Why Our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change and Amitav Gosh, The Great Derangement: Climate Change and the Unthinkable. Both of these books deal with folks like you manage to rationalize their climate skepticism. Marshall, a communications expert, does this by analyzing the psychology and sociology behind it: " the forces of genetic and cultural selection have not created brains capable of looking generations ahead." (Pg. 47) and "The in-group loyalties and defensiveness that evolved to support small hunter-gatherer groups may be an obstacle when dealing with a universal shared threat." (Pg. 48) Ghosh deals with the ego defense mechanism of triggered by a potential catastrophe of such magnitude that humans can't handle it. Those books might give you some useful self-insights. Once you finish those, you might move on to Storms of My Grandchildren: The Truth About the Coming Climate Catastrophe and Our Last Chance to Save Humanity by Dr. James Hansen, astrophysicist and former director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies; Naomi Klein's This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Planet; and/or Nathaniel Rich's Losing Earth: A Recent History. When you finish, maybe we can have a meaningful discussion.
I think you do! see what you want to see, that is--like the Flat Earther who looks out his back window and sees no roundness for as far as he can see!. Don't they have weather reports in the tundra? Maybe things are different in the there, but California has been having record blizzards and floods. We're talking extreme weather events. They've been happening a lot lately--floods and blizzards in California, wildfires in Texas and Oklahoma, tornadoes in the Midwest and Great Lakes. https://www.itv.com/news/2024-03-04...nd-blizzards-us-hit-by-extreme-weather-events https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2024/01/04/us-extreme-weather-snow-tornadoes-flooding/ https://www.axios.com/2024/03/02/fe...-comes-next-after-the-hottest-year-on-record/ Extreme Weather | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet The top 10 global weather and climate change events of 2021 » Yale Climate Connections Climate change: Extreme weather events are 'the new norm' The Texas wildfires are the largest in the state's history--burned nearly 1.3 million acres in a week, and killed tens of thousands of livestock! I'd call that an historical record. Arizona sends help to fight biggest Texas wildfire in state history https://www.wdef.com/texas-panhandle-wildfires-have-burned-nearly-1-3-million-acres-in-a-week-and-its-not-over-yet/ BTW, it isn't just Texas. Parts of my state. Oklahoma, burned, as well. 100, 000 acres burned and the towns of Shadock and Gage were evacuated.MSN As for California,Powerful California blizzard shuts down roads and ski resorts as heavy snow and fierce winds slam mountains | CNN Photos: California towns buried under more than 10 feet of snow | CNN How that compares with the 40 year record set last year remains to be determined. Snowfall in California breaks 40-year record Keep paddling up that long river in Africa, but watch out for the crocodiles!
I concede your expertise in that area of B.S. Apparently, not well. MSN https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/12/polar-bears-and-climate-change-what-does-the-science-say/ https://www.worldwildlife.org/pages/polar-bears-and-climate-change Polar Bears Are Starving Because of Global Warming, Melting Sea Ice, Study Shows LOL. Everything you've said so far on this post has been a one-sided Pooh-poohing of climate change. You're right, you've never really "said" much of anything you're willing to defend with arguments and evidence. You mainly insinuate, and attack others. Hmmm. That's pretty much the behavior of a troll.
You may call it that. Scientists call it sampling: taking measurements from a large number of points around the earth and drawing statistical conclusions. https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2743/the-scientific-method-and-climate-change-how-scientists-know/ https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/34/what-types-of-data-do-scientists-use-to-study-climate/ How Do Scientists Study Climate? | Ask A Biologist The Science of Climate Change Explained: Facts, Evidence and Proof how do scientists measure climate change - Yahoo Video Search Results Your willingness to continue making pronouncements about matters you seem to know little or nothing about suggests a certain lack of self-insight. Are you familiar with the Dunning-Kruger effect? Dunning-Kruger Effect Dunning-Kruger Effect: Why Incompetent People Think They Are Superior An Introduction to the Dunning-Kruger Effect In the immortal words of Alfred E. Neuman of the late, great MAD Magazine: "WHAT, ME WORRY?