Climate sceptics - help me understand?

[stratford]

Are you denying climate change, or just humanities impact on the environment?

Where are you getting your facts from?

Do you cross check your sources for a balanced view?

Genuine questions so I can understand your perspective.

Updates

1 y

A lot of sceptics are making very strong assertions that climate change is a scam or not caused by humans, but so far not a single one has provided a credible source of evidence.

[FunkyMonkee]

What's there to understand? It's like god, it doesn't exist! End of story!!
The Sun is kinda like a woman; it has periods. Every so often, it starts to heat up. And, every so often, it cools down a bit.
You're too young to remember but, back in the mid `70's, they were telling us we're heading for a 2nd ice age in about 8 years!! OBVIOUSLY, that never happened or we'd all be popsicles!! If anything, it got warmer!!
They've been monitoring the climates on some, if not all, of the other planets and they say Saturn & Jupiter are warming up! Now, do you HONESTLY BELIEVE that what WE'RE doing here on THIS planet (driving cars burning gasoline, etc.) is ACTUALLY changing the climate on those planets, too?
Now, put THIS in your pipe & smoke it! About 15 years ago, this guy, Seth Meyers, invented a way to BURN WATER!! You know what a blow torch is? It's a very strong flame that can cut through metal! It's powered by propane or some other kind of flammable gas. Seth built a blow torch that can do the same thing but, it burns water instead gas! The other cool thing about it is that you can wrap your hand right around the nozzle and the flame will not burn you!
Next, he invented a car engine that burns water instead of gasoline!! The other cool thing about both of these is that the run-off from each of them is just steam! If you can collect the run-off, you can put it right back into the tank and use it again!! Fill your tank with 20 gallons of water and you can probably drive non-stop for at least a week before needing a refill, as long as you keep reusing the steam. Unlike gas cars, there's no gases in the exhaust except the steam so, there's NOTHING to harm the environment! So, as we HAVE this technology, if they're SO WORRIED about "climate change/global warming" WHY haven't we started mass producing Seths cars? MONEY!! The oil companies can't make a DIME if we use water-burning cars! So, if THEY'RE not worried about this climate change bullshit, why would you?
And furthermore: do you remember a t. v. show from the early `60's called, "The Jetsons"? Remember how they'd fly around in these anti-gravity space cars? We already had the tech to be able to do that back in the mid `50's! So, why aren't we?
Also, most scientists will tell you there's no such thing as global warming, etc.. The "hockey stick model" is bullshit!!

[Twalli]

Actually mistake scientistscsay it does exist and we're causing the increase that is happening. A volcanic eruption does more than we can do in a lifetime, but we've been using oil snd natrual gas for over a lifetime. So we're not tgr dole vehicles to blame, but we do have an wff3ct on it. As for whey the companies don't care 1) The effect is not huge 2) Chances are that environmental impacts will not happen in their lifetime 3) It's money

[FunkyMonkee]

@Twalli Only an EXTREMELY SMALL percentage of them do because either they're shills or are just as stupid as anybody else that believes the bullshit! It was hotter than this back in the `30's and nobody was crying climate change!
Yeah, sure we are! I guess we better stop driving around in our gas cars on Jupiter, then!!
Okay so, do something about the volcanos and stop worrying about the gas!
What is "tgr dole"?
Oh, you mean, because we fart sometimes? What about all those cigarettes everyone smokes? SURLEY, THEY contribute a LOT to the heating up of the planet but, I don't see ANYONE banning them!! And NOBODY SEEMS TO GIVE A FUCK about the smokers using EVERYTHING as their ashtray and dropping their used up filters wherever they stand!! Almost every day, I go out front and find 2 or 3 filters in front of MY house and I've never smoked a day in my life!! Why do I have to clean up after THEIR bad habit? But, if my dog shits on THEIR property, LOOK OUT!! They'll have to police come and make ME pick it up!!
Okay, well, if the effect is not huge then stop worrying about the gas! Do you ACTUALLY think that electric cars are gonna help? They're going to CONTRIBUTE!! To make electricity, guess what? You have to burn COAL!! Without fossil fuels, NO ELECTRICITY!! The batteries in them are DANGEROUS!! They can explode at any time!! They die fairly quickly and have to be replaced which is EXTREMELY expensive!! And discarding them means more garbage and more hazardous waste which will, eventually, fuck up the planet! IN THE MEANTIME, Co2 is what feeds plants!! The more plants get, the faster they grow and the more AIR THEY PRODUCE!! In as such, BECAUSE of the Co2, there's been large patches of desert lands that have turned back into the rain forests they used to be! So, burning fossil fuels is HELPING the planet!!

[FunkyMonkee]

@Twalli We have enough oil right here under the ground of this country to keep us in gas for the next 300 years!! Same goes for Alaska! What happens if one of your volcanos finds a way to get to that oil before we do? It'll burn the oil and probably cause a HUGE explosion destroying most of the country and maybe blotting out the Sun, putting us back into another ice age.

[Twalli]

You think volcanoes have independent thought or the ability to move around?

[FunkyMonkee]

@Twalli LMAO!!

[FunkyMonkee]

@Twalli NOW you're worried about independant thought?

[Twalli]

No, but I don't see volcanos as having such

[Dargil]

Man caused climate change (anthropomorphic global warming) is an hypothesis, not even a theory. Its a guess some are trying to create a narrative for.

I am unconvinced that:

1. Human caused carbon emissions are is altering the weather measurably.

2. Increasing CO2 ppm in the atmosphere increases temperatures on its own.

3. Humans are capable of changing world climate except for mass Nuclear war.

I believe that carbon ppm:

1. Is increasing from immeasurable forces.

2. Doubling it will reduce or even eliminate world hunger by increasing crop yields.

3 Doubling it will work toward reforestation and OXYGEN ppm.

I believe the climate always changes due to multitude of forces including solar, earth axis, plate tectonics and ocean currents.

I believe we are in an interglacial period and that Milwaukee will be under a mile of ice in 30 thousand years. Wait and see!

I believe that anthropomorphic climate change is the greatest Hoax in human history ahead of and related to Communism.

I believe that human authorities will be working toward INCREASING carbon ppm in the future.

I will not spoon feed you backup of this. If you want backup, look for it and be skeptical of any fact that cannot be independently tested without a computer model. AGM IS A SCAM.

[stratford]

Please can you answer the final question about where you get getting your facts from? Can you quote from a scientific journal or other trustworthy source please?

[Dargil]

I'm not here to plead a case to or debate you. The facts are there if you look for them. My purpose is to summarize what I have concluded so readers can question the propaganda they have heard. You are free to believe what you want to believe. Bear in mind that scientists live in grants. They will protect them with whatever they need to.

[Anonymous]

There's no doubt that humans have affected and disrupted the environment and there is always knock on effects but what are the knock on effects of wind turbines, hydroelectricity, solar plants, electric cars etc. Often wildlife is an important factor in climate change, even the tiniest creatures.

[Opinion Owner]

A good example is an Asian mussel in Loughborough erne in Ireland. Ships from abroad sailing up the canal emptied their, not sure what you call them but water pumps and they were carrying Asian mussels from wherever they picked them up. Basically they made extinct the lough erne mussel which lives nowhere else and now the lake has changed completely, ots less dark than it was meaning native fish has nowhere to hide and breed or lay eggs. Pike fish are everywhere now.

[msmissydc]

Not a climate sceptic but I can answer you question, where are they taking their facts from?
Thes are not! Thats their whole reason for existance. If they would argue based on facts they aould not exist.

[lightbulb27]

climate is changing, always changing. degree of human impact... not so sure we understand.

It's a no brainer we are using fossil fuels and it has impact, but how much and if we cut back, what benefit?

I've listened to both sides but spent little time on it.

My personal view is our mode of life should go back towards how our grandparents were, just in case... our prudction/waste/planned obsolsecnse is great for economy and harsh on resources.

getting off fossil fuel is a good idea so we are energy independent. probably best using nuclear for now and making each home a generator. as battery tech is better, each home can store energy.

something like that.

[KostasKouvalis]

1. Human impacts on the environment

2. There are both written and geologic records showing that there were ancient and even medival cities that were on the coast, that are now inland. And there were islands that are now spits/peninsula. Like the Hel Spit. There is plenty of evidence to show that sea levels fluctuated.

There are also geologic records indicating the shifting of the earth's equator and the tropical regions. There are ancient pictographs in the Sahara depicting animals that live on the savanna. There are evidence of mini ice ages coming and going. There's also evidence of humans almost going completely extinct 900,000 years ago, possibly due to a volcanic eruption. Now, as far as I know, we had no factories or cars back then, so how can anyone say climate change is human caused?

I don't know what cross checking is

[genericname85]

climate changes. that's a thing. anthropomorphic climate change however. I don't know maybe to some degree.

so for me what the scepticism is really about is: look at the policies around climate change. what do they do? they don't reduce co² emissions. all they do is give the government more power to interfer with the free market ranging from industrial regulations down to litterally each individual by trying to coerce us to behave how they like. that's what it is. they're not trying to save the planet. they're trying to control us. it's very obvious.

the probhlem is they're not doing the things that WOULD safe the planet. they're just trying to stuff their own pocket acting as if they wanna do that by taking tax payer money and sinking it into "green enterprises" aka their own pockets.

[genericname85]

like if you REALLY think that government has an interest in being good for the environment, i really envy your positive and idealistic world view but man that's naive as a child. that's not what's going on at all.

[genericname85]

by the way science is a great tool to gain knowledge. but as soon as a scientific field is interesting to the government cause they can use it to gain control and power, you should immediately stop trusting it. the government isn't your friend.

[genericname85]

you need an example? look at what happened around covid 19, the lockdowns and the mandatory vaccinations. all lies and corruption where science was abused to tell a fake narrative.

[exitseven]

The climate has been changing for thousands of years. It is a periodic shift from a cooler to a warmer climate and after a few years the trend reverses. Recently money has become a big part of this. All the people who scream the loudest are making millions on this global warming scam. Al Gore, John Kerry and even Greta have been making millions with this scam.

[stratford]

Please provide evidence to back up your statements.

[msmissydc]

Your money argument is invalid, because much more people with more government influence are making money when we ignore climate change. That's one of the main reasons we haven't done much at all against climate change.

[msmissydc]

Also life's of the rich would change most when they would take more responsibility. The top 1% cause 15% of worlds carbon emissions. The bottom 50% are only responsible for 7% of emissions. (Oxfam and the Stockholm Environment Institute, 2020)

[BTigers96]

Let me get this straight, you think the earth heats and cools because men make it so?

Please help me understand the ice age? Which men made that happen? Or, why none of the predictions from 30 years ago stating because of "Global Warming" the entire U. S. eastern seaboard would be under water never materialized?

You're brainwashed. There's your perspective. 🤣

[AviatorTom]

Climate change is a natural phenomenon. The question is how much we humans have affected it, and can we do anything about it. That's where the scientific community has differing views. It's debatable if humans can change climate. Having said thst, it is reasonable to try to reduce the human effects on climate.

[NaultD]

These are people with object permanence difficulties. If it's not right in front of them right here right now it's in some non existing void.

[shortster]

I question the apocalyptic nature of it. I also started questioning the reliability of the data; since the report came out that out of 302 weather stations in the UK 103 were completely fake.

[shortster]

Kind of hard to source what I learned in highschool and college science courses. Especially since I don't have a lot of the text books from then.

[seeyounexttuesday]

Climate change has happened since the Earth was formed. I don’t think me paying more taxes will affect it.

[CubaPirate]

When China and the USA start taking it seriously then so will I

[genericname85]

hey, i'm not an American but the thing is we only ever talk about "co² emissions". we aren't talking about carbon sinks like forests, grasslands, swamps, lakes, soil and oceans. if you isolate the emissions and compare countries, then yeah. usa and china look bad cause they do have high emissions per capita. but these countries have low population density. they have huge carbon sinks. in this entire discussion, we're just ignoring that factor. there's no metric that would account for sinks.

like i find it crazy that in this entire debate pointing fingers, we do not even know the net emissions of any given country. we only know the emissions. not how much they actually bind.