Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

House Directs Pentagon To IgnoreClimateChange


ninjadude

Recommended Posts

Australian website, we do not fund Australian research. not to mention it really shows nothing useful. might as well link me to google front page, same difference.

as for political commitment, they wont commit to myth, and more waste, and i can't blame them,

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Australian website, we do not fund Australian research. not to mention it really shows nothing useful. might as well link me to google front page, same difference.

as for political commitment, they wont commit to myth, and more waste, and i can't blame them,

The research is unequivocal, it is pure denial of empirical reality going on here.

Lets not forget that the pentagon - not usually prone to hysteria, rather more careful in their assessment - fully accepts the reality of climate change and its likely effects on national security. Of course David McKinley knows better :tu: How does he know - he just knows with all the conviction of his own brain.

It is you who believe a myth.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

global warming is a myth, climate change is real and natural. and we can't do much about it, we can only adopt to what is gonna happen.

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

global warming is a myth, climate change is real and natural. and we can't do much about it, we can only adopt to what is gonna happen.

Not according to the Pentagon who did considerable research into the risk presented to the USA. Your belief in its unreality is pure myth.

The position that climate change is natural and always happens is obvious - but the particular phase of climate change we are currently in cannot be explained by any natural forcing. Only atmospheric greenhouse gases account for it. If you think I am wrong what exactly is causing the hundred year upward trend in global temperatures. Be specific, go into detail, give us some evidence.

Br cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not according to the Pentagon who did considerable research into the risk presented to the USA. Your belief in its unreality is pure myth.

The position that climate change is natural and always happens is obvious - but the particular phase of climate change we are currently in cannot be explained by any natural forcing. Only atmospheric greenhouse gases account for it. If you think I am wrong what exactly is causing the hundred year upward trend in global temperatures. Be specific, go into detail, give us some evidence.

Br cornelius

are we looking at earth alone? you do know it is part of the universe, and we do not fully understand how it works, not to mention what makes us think, same has not happen 100,000 or more years ago? the way i see it, we can spend trillions finding out why, and by the time we find it, (if we do) it will be useless. if you know flood is coming, do not waste time and money looking why, or who is to blame, use money and time to prepare for flood. because none of the climate research would stop inevitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are we looking at earth alone? you do know it is part of the universe, and we do not fully understand how it works, not to mention what makes us think, same has not happen 100,000 or more years ago? the way i see it, we can spend trillions finding out why, and by the time we find it, (if we do) it will be useless. if you know flood is coming, do not waste time and money looking why, or who is to blame, use money and time to prepare for flood. because none of the climate research would stop inevitable.

invoking the magical "other" unknown quantity to explain the trend is just a cop out. It is not that there is no external influence that can account for the change - it is the fact that there is empirical evidence which shows that increasing CO2 in the atmosphere causes changes in the climate. Iit is not just an absence of one thing that proves AGW it is the presence of elevated CO2 and its known effects.

We can do nothing about it only if we choose to do nothing about it,

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well you are not from usa, it seems your country's findings should not be affected, so what do you care? you have funds, keep looking, than tell us how it went,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can do nothing about it only if we choose to do nothing about it,

Br Cornelius

oh please billions wasted proved that you really can not do anything

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well you are not from usa, it seems your country's findings should not be affected, so what do you care? you have funds, keep looking, than tell us how it went,

Since you are a member of the country with one of the highest per capita emissions levels in the world - you made it my problem.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh please billions wasted proved that you really can not do anything

The science is there to tell us what to do, it sets out strategies and technologies and mitigations. It did its part of the bargain - please do not blame the scientists for doing their job. Its time that the politicians did there job to. It is guaranteed that if they fail it will cost the US government many billions more in cleaning up the mess that accelerating climate change will cause. Do you know how many billions is costs to clear up after a major flood/firestorm/tornado.

Doing nothing is not cost free.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well if we do not waste billions on more useless research, we will have some saved up for clean up, which will happen anyway research or not, you can't stop it, that is the fact.

despite of billions wasted you still do not know why it happens, are you sure it is usa that is the worst polluter?? not china?

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you are a member of the country with one of the highest per capita emissions levels in the world - you made it my problem.

Br Cornelius

\

isn't it natural? and that would mean per capita emissions levels have nothing or little to do with it, or you have 100% proof that it does? if you do, than it is man made, something that not even many scientists agree.

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

well if we do not waste billions on more useless research, we will have some saved up for clean up, which will happen anyway research or not, you can't stop it, that is the fact.

despite of billions wasted you still do not know why it happens, are you sure it is usa that is the worst polluter?? not china?

We can stop it if we modify our emissions. Thats a statement of fact - not speculation.

We know why it happens because we spent billions on researching it. STOP DENYING THAT REALITY.

On a per capita basis (ie emissions per person) America has 10x the emissions China. China has just inched ahead of the US in total emissions - but has considerably higher population. If all Americans had China's emissions levels then the world would be in a lot better place right now.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

\

isn't it natural? and that would mean per capita emissions levels have nothing or little to do with it, or you have 100% proof that it does? if you do, than it is man made, something that not even many scientists agree.

It is not natural, the atmospheric co2 levels directly track the human emissions increases over the last 100years. That is proof positive that mans emissions are the primary cause of increasing atmospheric CO2 levels.

97% of climate related scientist agree that anthropogenic global warming is real. All national science bodies agree that AGW is real, the majority of other scientists agree that AGW is real. The majority of Americans agree that AGW is real. It is only a tiny minority of informed technical people who disagree with the fact that man has caused climate change and is continuing to effect the climate.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

great, now you found the problem, emissions, that is it, you've done your part, now you do not need funds anymore, now it is up to implementing it, lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well duh why should the department of defense pay for it? We have multiple environmental related agencies, its only common sense that the environmental agencies should be the ones doing research on climate change, if anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well duh why should the department of defense pay for it? We have multiple environmental related agencies, its only common sense that the environmental agencies should be the ones doing research on climate change, if anyone.

They should be allowed to finance research aspects of climate change which relate to state security - this bill prohibits that.

This bill is specifically motivated by a denialist agenda that attributes climate change to a political conspiracy.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

great, now you found the problem, emissions, that is it, you've done your part, now you do not need funds anymore, now it is up to implementing it, lol

That would be like driving at night in a forest and then turning the headlights off - stupid.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be like driving at night in a forest and then turning the headlights off - stupid.

Br Cornelius

why is that?? isnt trimming down emissions is what you are talking about?

and what would be a smart thing to do? waste more billions?? no thanks, you can continue to do it on your dime if you wish, we wasted enough.

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

why is that?? isnt trimming down emissions is what you are talking about?

and what would be a smart thing to do? waste more billions?? no thanks, you can continue to do it on your dime if you wish, we wasted enough.

if you try to effect change in the environment but stop monitoring for those changes you have no way of knowing how effective your actions are been. It effectively makes your actions blind and doesn't allow you to assess their effectiveness. All effective management systems have monitoring and feedback mechanisms to enhance effectiveness. To not monitor outcomes is almost to guarantee ineffective action and more wasteful use of resources.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say we leave science to the scientists and not the generals.

If there is some possible threat to the military by Climate Change, I suggest farming out that question's research to some other part of the government. Perhaps one that is sanctioned to investigate weather related issues and has specific experts on staff..

The threat will be great to the miltiary in 30 years when they're getting wiped out fighting over water because of climate change. "Sorry guys, we didn't want to spend on climate change to prevent this, so you're all gonna die because of our lack of funding." Irony at it's best.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

great, now you found the problem, emissions, that is it, you've done your part, now you do not need funds anymore, now it is up to implementing it, lol

Yet some would say that the research is false, therefore we would be back to square one if nobody can agree on what the cause actually is. What I'm saying is that the research shows the cause, humans, and we need to implement it, but some will dispute the research and no implementation will ever occur.

You're guilty of it, as your one of the people who doesn't even believe that it's happening. And btw, global warming and climate change are the same thing, but with different names. Kind of like a bk bigfish and a filet of fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're guilty of it, as your one of the people who doesn't even believe that it's happening. And btw, global warming and climate change are the same thing, but with different names. Kind of like a bk bigfish and a filet of fish.

you are one of the people that can't read apparently, go reread what i believe and what i do not believe , and no, GW and CC are not the same, and i pointed out differences before, damn, i really do not feel that god about usa, if you are its future

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Climate Change is the natural change of a climate, be it local or world-wide. It is real and it happens all of the time. It can't be stopped, and to do so would be altering the course of nature itself. Not a good idea.

Global Warming is the name given to a false set of 'progressive" scientific studies put into place with the only intention of fleecing as much money out of the citizens as possible. It is based on a lie that humans are somehow destroying the planet.

I remember when global cooling was the rage back in the day. I also remember the ozone depletion scare. They were the same attempts to do what the GW liars are trying in the present.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Climate Change is the natural change of a climate, be it local or world-wide. It is real and it happens all of the time. It can't be stopped, and to do so would be altering the course of nature itself. Not a good idea.

Global Warming is the name given to a false set of 'progressive" scientific studies put into place with the only intention of fleecing as much money out of the citizens as possible. It is based on a lie that humans are somehow destroying the planet.

I remember when global cooling was the rage back in the day. I also remember the ozone depletion scare. They were the same attempts to do what the GW liars are trying in the present.

Denial at its best.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.