• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.

Despite the Evidence, Nearly 15% of Americans Deny Climate Change

Sereni-tea said:
Your first 2 links are not what I asked for. You claimed that the metrics for the subjects Frank posted had improved and not worsened. I asked for data for that. Your NASA link was more interesting, and encouraging.



You misjudge me. The op provided a link to his initial claim. Other assertions he made I was already familiar with, so why ask for evidence I was already aware of? Your assertions that metrics were improving I was not familiar with, so asked where you obtained that information. I was trying to further my own knowledge; not accuse you.



Yes, of course. Apologies for my poor wording.



Yes, fossil fuels is a generic term that includes gas, crude oil, petroleum products as well as coal. And you are exactly right - we are all contributing to these industries from our taxes. This is where we need to put pressure on our governments.



You said "The only firm item in the bullet list is the sudden extreme increase in CO2 and other "greenhouse" gases but it's not known whether this is a cycle, or how much may be cyclic, and how much is due solely to human causes."
There is a lot of data that shows what is from 'natural' causes and what is from human causes. It is well established that the increase is from human causes.



I am not one who buys into the idea of the great tribulation. However I do believe that we humans have the capacity to improve the current climate crisis, but not through control, but through adoption of cleaner energy sources.



Glad to hear it.



Please calm down. I wrote that you were decieved because you indicated that "it's not known whether this is a cycle, or how much may be cyclic, and how much is due solely to human causes." when in fact it is quite well known. This was not meant as a personal attack - just a simple correction.



We need to encourage all governments to transition away from fossil fuels to cleaner energy sources.
Click to expand...

There is no current climate crisis but there is a Club Of Rome climate crisis social change plan. Is that what you actually mean?
 
EarlyActs said:
Models are not science. Haven’t you noticed the models don’t get a week right, but are to be trusted about things 50 years out?
Click to expand...
There is such thing as a scientific model. The problem isn't the existence of a model but it's speculative nature. And in the case of "climate change" there are additional problems of selectively used data and politicized information (most people do not understand the difference between data and information. sometimes even scientists interchange the two words inappropriately, especially when in public political environs).
 
Each year from 2023 to 2030, climate change sustainable development goals will cost every person in economies such as the United States $2,026, the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development estimates. In lower-income economies, the per-person annual cost ranges from $332 to $1,864.
In total, the global price tag comes to about $5.5 trillion per year.
It also found that the “annual climate finance needed” from 2031 to 2050 is more than $10 trillion each year.
“If emissions of CO2 stopped altogether, it would take many thousands of years for atmospheric CO2 to return to ‘pre-industrial’ levels,” the Royal Society states in a report on its website. The organization describes itself as a “fellowship of many of the world’s most eminent scientists.”
“Surface temperatures would stay elevated for at least a thousand years, implying a long-term commitment to a warmer planet due to past and current emissions,” the report states. “The current CO2-induced warming of Earth is therefore essentially irreversible on human timescales.”
Epoch News
 
Frank Robert said:
I was wondering how does the climate change denial resonate with conspiracy theories in general.

Conspiracy Theories and the Paranoid Style(s) of Mass Opinion

New research by Eric Oliver and Thomas Wood at the University of Chicago find that 50 percent of the country subscribes to at least one of these conspiracy theories. So 19 percent of Americans believe the U.S. government was behind the 9/11 attacks. 25 percent believe the recent financial crisis was caused by the small cabal of Wall Street bankers. 11 percent of people believe the government is mandating a switch to compact florescent light bulbs because the light bulbs make people obedient and easy to control.​
​
​
Evidence of climate change has been mounting, including science which has shown that climate-related natural disasters are growing in frequency and intensity sooner than originally predicted, researchers said. Which shows that:​
climate change is still not wholly accepted as fact in the United States. To assess climate change denialism in America, researchers analyzed Twitter (now X) data from 2017 to 2019, using AI techniques to track how social media has spread such denial. In effect the 15% of climate change deniers fits neatly as a conspiracy theory.​
​
Also of interest from the study:​
​
Analysis of the tweets showed that belief in climate change is highest along the West Coast and East Coast, and that denialism is highest in the central and southern parts of the United States.​
​
In fact, more than 20% of the populations of Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama and North Dakota do not believe in climate change, results show.​
Belief in climate change also can vary widely within each state, researchers added.​
For example, less than 12% of the population of California does not believe in climate change, but northern California’s Shasta County had denial rates as high as 52%.​
​
The researchers also found a strong connection between climate denialism and low COVID vaccination rates, suggesting that these folks have a broad skepticism of science.​
​
"What this indicates is that communities with a high prevalence of climate change deniers are at risk of discounting other science-based health or safety recommendations," said lead author Dimitrios Gounaridis, a research fellow at the University of Michigan's Center for Sustainable Systems.​
​
Click to expand...
The climate changes all the time. Anyone who denies that has his head in the sand.

The problem is the hysterical claims of "global boiling", allegedly caused by man, and treating Carbon (upon which all life is based) as if it were a pollutant. This is clearly disingenuous propaganda, aimed at creating fear, and compliance with draconian rules, in the name of "climate change".
 
David1701 said:
The climate changes all the time. Anyone who denies that has his head in the sand.

The problem is the hysterical claims of "global boiling", ......................in the name of "climate change".
Click to expand...
Come on, now. Get your labels right. It's "global danger," not global boiling. 🤪
 
Josheb said:
Come on, now. Get your labels right. It's "global danger," not global boiling. 🤪
Click to expand...
"Global boiling" is the latest hysterical label that's being used, presumably since "global warming" was not having enough psychological effect. It's hard to see where they go from here: perhaps "global incineration"?
 
When you can explain the levels of CO2 from volcanoes being multiple times higher than any kind man made CO2 emissions, then you might be taken seriously
 
Frank Robert said:
They are stating a fact from their research. Perhaps you didn't find it interesting while other like myself did.


I don't disagree that there have scientists and others who lie. However I think for the most part scientists have have been honest about climate change. While there may be differing opinions and interpretations of climate data, the overwhelming consensus among climate scientists is that climate change is happening and is primarily caused by human activities. What you may be referring to are the way the news is spread. Current news needs to be sensational and perhaps many of the lies come for over zealous reporters.

Scientific evolves continually:

Here are some of today's most obvious markers of climate change include:
  1. Rising Temperatures: Global temperatures are increasing, leading to more frequent and intense heatwaves, and impacting various ecosystems and human health.
  2. Melting Ice and Rising Sea Levels: The melting of glaciers and polar ice caps is contributing to rising sea levels, which pose a threat to coastal areas and island nations
    Changes in Precipitation Patterns: Climate change is altering rainfall patterns, leading to more intense and prolonged droughts in some regions and increased precipitation in others.
  3. Extreme Weather Events: The frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, storms, and wildfires, are linked to climate change.
  4. Ocean Warming: The warming of the oceans is affecting marine life, sea levels, and weather patterns
  5. Greenhouse Gas Concentrations: The concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as carbon dioxide and methane, has reached unprecedented levels due to human activities.
These markers provide clear evidence of the ongoing changes in the Earth's climate and their far-reaching impacts on the environment and society. Perhaps that's why there are only 15% who don't agree. Do you find any of the above to be overboard?


The reason why the percentage of deniers is declining is that the disinformation from the fossil fuel industries is becoming easier and easier to recognize when measured against what is taking place in reality. I reside in FL and my home insurance is likely to go up another 50% on top this year's 50% increase and my home is not in a critical weather area.

Go to google news any day of the week and do a search on climate change, you will come up with multiple stories. Some are likely to be overboard but most are not.
Click to expand...
The "hockey stick" graph was proven a made up fraud. There is plenty of proof in the emails of the scientists who admitted to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Fossil Fuel Industry Knew Of Climate Danger As Early As 1954
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
759
Josheb
Josheb
Hobie
The Winds of Strife being Released
Replies
9
Views
178
EarlyActs
EarlyActs
C
God Is Causing Global Warming; Not Carbon Footprints
Replies
11
Views
117
EarlyActs
EarlyActs
Hobie
Digital Currency, will it be used to control buying and selling?
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
2K
TATII
T
EarlyActs
Kinds of mysteries
Replies
2
Views
42
Mr GLee
M
Back
Top