TRENDING NEWS

POPULAR NEWS

How Much Of Global Warming Can Be Attributed To Conservative Talk Show Hosts

Why do many American conservatives believe climate change to be a hoax, but in the rest of the world is commonly accepted amongst Conservatives?

It’s not necessarily a conservative/liberal thing, but it tends in that direction due to its tie in with with the classic orientations of “productive business” vs. “protective regulation” and general concerns about and belief in general environmentalism and the seriousness of human impact on the world’s environmental systems. (Funny thing about that split: go back a bit in time and culture and it’s the NRA/hunter type folks who were ID’d as environmentalists while the pre-yuppie liberals were all for expanding suburbias and the “modern lifestyle.”)Additionally, we’ve Americans have been treated to more awareness of the craziness of politically-driven scientific hoaxes with the craziness of the media-driven spread of ungrounded hysteria and “secondhand,” “thirdhand,” and “seventeenuppyethhand” tobacco smoke. Thirty to forty years or so ago most of us had a largely unshaken faith in the pronouncements coming from the scientific/medical/environmentalist community. But being warned that our babies were being killed by “thirdhand smoke” only to later find out that it would take literally trillions of years of dedicated daily floor-licking for a child to pick up the requisite dosings of the headlined poisons pretty much demolished that faith for anyone who actually examined the science — even from a basic layperson’s level.In a sense it’s like what we’ve done to our current generation of children: Tell them loudly and repeatedly enough that smoking is deadlier and more addictive than heroin and you eventually end up with kids who think the warnings about popping/snorting/shooting heroin at weekend parties can simply be laughed at.Science should be science. It should never be politics.Otherwise it’ll end up being laughed at and ignored when its messages might actually have some weight behind them.MJM, who’s been yelling about this problem for quite a while…

The Big Bang Theory and Global Warming?

I watch a lot of science shows on TV... shows about astronomy, chemistry and physics. What Im hearing more and more, is that the Big Bang Theory is now being doubted. 10 years ago, there was almost a 100% scientific consensus, but over the last 10 years, physicists are starting to believe the science isnt right.

How could this be, literally 10 years ago,it was almost fact, few scientists doubted it, there was no politics to make somebody research it one way or the other, it was just fact. Now I will add, the BBT doesnt appear to be dead, but, scientists alternative research is accepted, nobody discredits a scientist who publishes a paper that counters it.

So, now to AGW; Im not suggesting that AGW is not happening, Im just reaching out to you, could the science be wrong? I mean, theres so much in politics with this theory, there could be real motivation to build the science around the idea.

What is the reason why President Trump thinks that global warming, due to a constant huge release of greenhouse gases all around the world, is scientific nonsense?

Donald Trump does not think anthropogenic global warming is scientific nonsense. In fact, most of the GOP do not think it is scientific nonsense.When you are an elected official, it’s not about what you believe, it’s about what your constituents believe. Many Republican voters slowly turned away from the scientific evidence of anthropogenic climate change when Democrats began the proactive campaign to fight it.Between Fall of 2008 and Fall of 2016, only 6% of Democrats believed there was no evidence that humans are accelerating global warming. During that same time frame, a whopping 35% of Republicans believed there was no evidence. Those Republican numbers are much worse in 2018, with nearly 60% stating there is no evidence. It is so widespread now that in order to be a successful Republican elected official, radio show host, journalist, or public figure, you are basically REQUIRED to take some stance against either the evidence, the scientific consensus, or the solutions to anthropogenic climate change.The more unhinged, less credible Conservatives like Donald Trump, Candance Owens, or Steven Crowder simply deny or throw doubt on the science. The more “rational” Conservatives like Ben Shapiro will say they accept the science, but reject the methods of curbing the effects despite the evidence that not utilizing those methods is far more disastrous to the economy and environment. Regardless, you have to take any stance that would prevent policies that effectively tackle anthropogenic climate change if you want to be a mainstream Republican, irrespective of how extreme or moderate that stance is.Donald Trump is not beholden to liberals, scientists, or scientific consensus. He is beholden to Conservatives and wealthy corporations. Donald Trump 100% knows that humans are accelerating the Earth’s warming, but the reason what he knows and what he says are two different things are due to the following:His supporters don’t believe it.Oil corps, Russia, and Saudi Arabia don’t want people to believe it.He doesn’t care.So the question is not why Donald Trump thinks the science on global warming is nonsense. The question is why Donald Trump accepts the science, but refuses to publicly do so.

Do you believe human interference is causing global warming?

Global warming is a scam.

I think the best way to understand this scam is to read Harold Lewis' letter of resignation from the American Physical Society (APS). I quote from that letter here.

"It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist"

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chairman of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President's Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)
Source(s):
http://www.thegwpf.org/ipcc-news/1670-ha...

TRENDING NEWS