While I despise statistics, I guiltily resort to them from time to time; the rest of the time, I come to my own conclusions from what I see on a wide variety of network news and cable opinion news (both MSNBC and Fox). By training I draw threads of evidence together and reach a conclusion, which is precisely what any decent lawyer does in court or when arguing an appeal. I have reasoned and hunched that most climate deniers are right of center and dogmatically dedicated to mostly evangelical and fundamentalist religions.
Only recently a segment of a show was dedicated to an attempt to reconcile science and religion with regard to climate change (no longer called global warming because too many deniers held that term absurd, just look at the blizzard in New York City. (Reminds me of the evolution deniers. They claim that God put the fossils in the earth "to fool Darwinists"!) The white preachers who joined some scientists on a junket to Juneau left the conclave clinging to their denier beliefs. (I was tempted to italicize the last word of that sentence: Boobical nuts hold in deathgrip their sacred texts, and since God is omnipotent He can be a bit capricious with climate phenomena; after all, He works in mysterious ways.) But one African-American pastor said he had changed his mind; he now believed in climate change.
Anyone who would believe that God put fossils in the earth to fool evolutionists is beyond the pale. There is no help in him. He must insist that climate change is a socialist Godless plot to turn the U.S. into a third world country by shutting down its coal burning gas guzzling manufacturing and consuming habits, including gluttonous gobbling up of precious hydrocarbonous resources. (The nuclear family goes to church on Sunday in a Suburban, which gets about as good mileage as a Sherman tank, while the rest of the week Mom does her shopping in the same vehicle, going across town and back...alone.)
Politically, these folks tend to be Republicans. A lot are tea party. They like Palin and Beck and their ilk. They are basically misguided boobs who might mean well in some disordered mind, but who propel us forward to their version of the Rapture, since ignoring climate change can only result in Bloomberg's Nightmare coast to coast. We will end up spending money we do not have just to save us from a Century of Catastrophes. Naomi Klein got it right when she pointed up the race between the Jihadists and climate deniers to end what was once called America. Perhaps the world itself.
woa, yet another expert on climate science spouts out. sure are a lot of them.
and what is that ice cube was above the glass, not in the water, and it melted? would the water in the glass rise then? You know, like the Greenland, Artic and Antartic ice sheets? not to mention the glaciers - all of which are "above" the water.
You should contact the IPCC and share your expert opinion on climate science. I'm sure they could use your expertise.
Ah yes, the melting glaciers are what will turn the earth into a 'waterworld' starring Kevin Costner. The total volume of the worlds glaciers is 101817 cubic kilometres.
The total volume of the worlds oceans is approx 1.37 billion cubic kilometres.
So, the worlds total glacial volume of ice (not water, remember water expands when it freezes) is 7.43%. Justifiably then, if all the worlds glaciers melt then sea levels probably will rise... but the juxtaposition of this is that if global temperatures warmed to that extent, humidity would increase, and so would rainfall on land, expanding lakes and rivers...
Evidently though, any argument based in actual scientific fact is lost on a sales manager who has already swallowed the kool-aid, especially one who considers the IPCC to be a credible scientific source. I pigeon-hole the global-warming believers such as yourslef in the same box as the thiests, believing in something with no actual proof.
Shit, maybe I don't fit here after all...
Here’s a link to composite video satellite images of Climate Change.
Forgive me for the following story.
As an onocologist maybe you'll get itl
Rapunzel was in the second story of a hospital. A prince wanted to visit her, but she was on the second floor. The hospital was closed. Razunzel threw out her locks so the prince could catch them.
The prince grabbed her locks, and fell to the earth because - low and behold Rabunzel had cancer and was undergoing chemo treatment, sadly her hair was a whig
I hope no one takes this banter seriously.
You're right, I have bought off on the IPCC being a credible scientific source. They are, afterall, an internationally accredited scientific organization consisting of thousands of contributing scientists.
So, if they are wrong about the climate, "serving kool-aid" as you suggest, what is their motive for doing so? To bring in more dough so they can continue to pad their pockets? A one world govt? to expand socialism?
What is the reason for their promoting the myth?
You are the one who sees the myth.
There is no myth.
I'd like to see Peetpeet's response to this question. He seems to think it is a myth and that the IPCC is "serving koolaid".
I would be interested in why he thinks that he is right, and that the IPCC is wrong.
He apparently has found the "truth" and we are all gullable sheep. I'd be interested in how he came to his conclusions.