Climate Change Deniers among our Elected Representatives

[SSDD]

Clean Energy Sector Employs More Than 10 Million For The First Time

Clean energy is building a new American workforce

Renewable Energy Industry Creates Jobs 12 Times Faster Than Rest of U.S.

Well, it does take a great number of people to keep those piece of shit machines going...

 

[SSDD]

You may now apologize for bearing false witness against me.
.

Then next time I post something that's obviously self-explanatory, don't come along with a stupid question like- duh- "what's your point ?"

What is obviously self explanatory is your inability to provide even one single piece of observed, measured data that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability.

 

[Pilot1]

We have so much oil, and natural gas under the ground and off shore in the United States it should be considered like a renewable. There is no reason to penalize, especially the poor, and the middle income earner with much higher energy, and product costs as well as possible loss of their jobs, and income.

 

[bripat9643]

"What would you think if your government didn't believe in gravity? If your senator alleged that, because they couldn't see it, perhaps it didn't exist. To many, this might seem absurd—the science is enough to know that it's real."

The Climate Change Deniers in Congress

"Almost 30 years ago, a NASA scientist named James Hansen pleaded with Congress, under the Reagan Administration, to accept the evidence and do something about it. "It is already happening now," Hansen said before a Congressional committee in 1988."

"Fast-forward three decades, and the United States is facing one of its most anti-science Congresses in history. Many members of the Senate and House of Representatives have gone on-record to denounce climate change as a hoax. Others have proven through their votes that regulating greenhouse gas emissions is not a priority. And still, some state representatives claim to believe in human-made climate change, but consistently support policies that would erode initiatives to combat it."

The colors used here are no mistake. The alignment between a representatives position on AGW and his political party is almost perfect. And you can see many instances of the same reasoning you'll find here on this forum, in the halls of our Congress. The most common answer seen from our representatives is that the Earth's climate has always been dynamic and that the changes over the last century and a half are simply Mother Nature at work. Unsurprisingly, that reasoning is as easily refuted as all the rest. Of course the Earth's climate is dynamic, but through its very long history, that dynamicism has resulted in changes orders of magnitude slower than the changes we are witnessing now. And the various variable factors that naturally control our climate: ex solar irradiance and orbital mechanics, indicate that we should be cooling now. But, of course, we are not.

So, once again, would you vote for a representative that didn't believe in gravity? What if he thought we were all actually held down by magnetism or by wee demons trying to drag us to Hell? Would you vote for a senate candidate that believed the Earth was flat, that humans had never traveled to space, much less the moon? Would you vote for a presidential candidate who believed that modern medicine was an evil to be eliminated from modern society? The belief that the rate of warming we are currently experiencing is a natural climatic change (or a lie constructed by thousands of corrupt scientists) and that human GHG emissions have no involvement, is just as false and just as dangerous.

Your claim that AGW is on the same plain as the law of gravity is obvious horseshit. The rest of your post is a waste of band width.

 

[skookerasbil]

• Politics

Media Coverage Of AOC Has Led To Tanking Poll Numbers – Epic Meltdown
March 18, 2019 Tim Brown


https://americauncensored.net/media-coverage-of-aoc-has-led-to-tanking-poll-numbers-epic-meltdown/

 

[skookerasbil]

https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2019/03/18/whos-the-boss-now-new-ny-poll-shows-aocs-favorability-tanking-guess-that-means-shes-sitting-in-the-cheap-seats/



Crick predicts she'll be our next president!

 

[Wuwei]

I am here to talk about the science...

Really? That's odd. You have said countless times you don't believe the fundamental tenets of basic physics that are in all textbooks.


.

 

[the other mike]

What is obviously self explanatory is your inability to provide even one single piece of observed, measured data that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability.

Every post you make is "self-explanatory" and very predictable.

 

[jc456]

I can observe gravity. that would be rather uneducated if anyone made such a statement. throw a bowling ball and watch the direction it will go. Now, you post up the same kind of observed evidence that AGW is real. ready your turn.

 

[Crick]

https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2019/03/18/whos-the-boss-now-new-ny-poll-shows-aocs-favorability-tanking-guess-that-means-shes-sitting-in-the-cheap-seats/



Crick predicts she'll be our next president!

The public likes here tax proposal.
Poll finds broad support for Ocasio-Cortez’s 70% top-tax-rate proposal

I thnk she'll make a good president when she's had a little more experience. And, besides, the current office holder would be blown away by a stuffed poodle missing one eye and her tail.

 

[Cellblock2429]

https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2019/03/18/whos-the-boss-now-new-ny-poll-shows-aocs-favorability-tanking-guess-that-means-shes-sitting-in-the-cheap-seats/



Crick predicts she'll be our next president!

The public likes here tax proposal.
Poll finds broad support for Ocasio-Cortez’s 70% top-tax-rate proposal

I thnk she'll make a good president when she's had a little more experience. And, besides, the current office holder would be blown away by a stuffed poodle missing one eye and her tail.

/——/ Gee if the poll was valid how come they don’t say how many were polled? Was it 100? 350? How many?
The latest Hill-HarrisX poll was conducted online among a demographically representative sample of registered voters and has a sampling margin of error of 3.1 percentage points.

 

[the other mike]

 

[Cellblock2429]

/——/ Flight time 1 hour 30 minutes. See ya

 

[Crick]

/——/ Gee if the poll was valid how come they don’t say how many were polled? Was it 100? 350? How many?
The latest Hill-HarrisX poll was conducted online among a demographically representative sample of registered voters and has a sampling margin of error of 3.1 percentage points.

You missed the numbers. From the same location it read

This survey was conducted online within the United States from January 12-13, 2019 among 1,001 registered voters by HarrisX. The sampling margin of error of this poll is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

 

[the other mike]

... Flight time 1 hour 30 minutes. See ya

Average drive time ( most common mode of travel )between Washington DC and Boston ( half the distance of Beijing to Shanghai ) 8 to 10 hours on a good day. Later....

 

[gfm7175]

So, once again, would you vote for a representative that didn't believe in gravity? What if he thought we were all actually held down by magnetism or by wee demons trying to drag us to Hell? Would you vote for a senate candidate that believed the Earth was flat, that humans had never traveled to space, much less the moon? Would you vote for a presidential candidate who believed that modern medicine was an evil to be eliminated from modern society? The belief that the rate of warming we are currently experiencing is a natural climatic change (or a lie constructed by thousands of corrupt scientists) and that human GHG emissions have no involvement, is just as false and just as dangerous.

Gravity is NOT a theory, Crick... it is a fundamental force...

 

[Markle]

Gravity is NOT a theory, Crick... it is a fundamental force...

Gravity is one of FOUR fundamental forces. How is that important to the topic?

 

[gfm7175]

Gravity is NOT a theory, Crick... it is a fundamental force...

Gravity is one of FOUR fundamental forces. How is that important to the topic?

Crick said that gravity was a theory. I'm telling him that it isn't, that it is rather a fundamental force.

 

[Markle]

Gravity is NOT a theory, Crick... it is a fundamental force...

Gravity is one of FOUR fundamental forces. How is that important to the topic?

Crick said that gravity was a theory. I'm telling him that it isn't, that it is rather a fundamental force.

Gravity, without the other fundamental forces, is described as both Newton's THEORY of Gravity and the LAW of Gravity. You're wrong.

Why this is relevant, to anyone, is something only a kid on the kindergarten playground.

 

[Crick]

Your claim that AGW is on the same plain as the law of gravity is obvious horseshit. The rest of your post is a waste of band width.

The percentage of scientists who accept each are almost equal. But if you do not want to otherwise participate, I will not complain.