Search results

No, we are not doing enough. The experts say this. American Geophysical Union "Human‐induced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes."...

Cut back on CO2 emissions (and other greenhouse gasses) as much and as soon as practically possible. I thought that was obvious. And no, we are not currently doing nearly enough nor is it likely that we will in the near future. An ignorant conservative electorate in the US is a big impediment.

Turkeyed. Since I am not supposed to post this chart again because it is too good of an argument against the denier morons, check out this link...

Anomaly is the difference from an average. No, other things don't explain it. It's from CO2 and other greenhouse gasses. You DO know CO2 is a greenhouse gas right? Of course you don't. You are the typical ignorant conservative spewing shit about something you know nothing about except what...

Here's one from NOAA. You HAVE heard of NOAA right? They are the most authoritative source on climate in the world. It stands for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Idiot, there are FOUR charts there, all by different sources. Try reading. It is not "blindly picked" . They are ALL valid. It is from a NASA website. Seriously get a fucking clue.

Certainly not yours. You are obviously a moron. Your grammar, spelling and ignorance is on full display. I tried patience with you but I've run out.

Here's the idiot's idea of "not warming"

Ok. You are wrong AND an idiot. However, this turkeyed guy is even dumber than you are so by comparison you look merely like a moron. LOL

The sad reality is that you are an idiot.

Sure crazyboy. Take your meds. Climate change will cause a reduction in agricultural output. It is already causing problems.

a string of subsequent studies by a number of scientific groups from around the world have all yielded essentially the same result. Most recently, a paper published in the journal Nature Geoscience this week — co-authored by 78 experts from 60 scientific institutions from around the world —...

Since GWB doesn't read well and seems to prefer cartoons for his science.......

I am not the one denying science, common sense or that there was enough evidence to convict OJ. You are.

No one is saying to suddenly stop using fossil fuels. Taper off yes. No, it is not 60/40, it is 97%. I highly suggest reading this if you really wan't to know the truth.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

Did you see that Dr. yet?

Yes, and the blinders help a lot also.

No, it doesn't work that way.

If we burn all the fossil fuels we will doom the planet. We can't do that. At least not without carbon sequestration.

What "other side"? Did you not just read the statements of the science orgs? None, zero, nada dispute it. There IS no other credible "side" within the climate science community. The consensus is 97%. The other less than 3% work for the fossil fuel companies and related interests or are...