Delano

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/ https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ There's one from both sides.

Ok @Troy

Well said Cynique. That's why i say there aren't any facts.

My favorite Feynman books Surely you're joking, Mr Feynman! and What do you care what other people think.

The answer should be obvious.

Al Gore has a colossal carbon footprint. BTW I have already looked at Trump. He literally has hundreds of businesses. Most of which are licenses of his name. Troy it won't be long before Al Gore and Climatologist are seen for being frauds. A lot foundations are ways to pay yourself and your cronies. The Trump's Clinton's Obama's Bush's Reagan's all have foundations. Al Gore has a not for profit it raised about $26 mil $18 is for programs. Which is another way of saying salary.

Domination is more about aggression than intelligence.

search Al Gore Income.

Do a search on Al Gore Income. OR Will Al Gore be the first Climate Change Billionaire. Figures don't lie but every liar can figure.

If mathematics was created instead of discovered. Then all of science which is dependent on mathematics is chimerical. The philosophy of mathematics discusses said issue. It is unresolved amongst mathematicians. I think its a creation like all symbolic languages . Which are imbued with meaning by the users. Numbers have no intrinsic value nor a basis in reality. Punny.

Troy I tagged the people who contribute yo yhe discussion. There's no pecking order. I generally dont agree with Pioneer. However his opinions resonate with some if your audience. I will ask a question or make a statement to some one with more knowledge. Some technically train people assume have knowledge in one sphere makes them knowledgeable in others. Stephen Hawking says astrology is rubbish. Richard Feynman asks how does it work. So unless you can show its efficacy. Let's use science.

@Mel Hopkins I am more interested in thinking and discussion then climate change. Richard Feynman Nobel Laureate, contributor to the Manhattan project as a lead physicist. Found why the Space Shuttle blew up. Bongo player. Strip club frequenter Would answer questions in the mail by non Physicists. His daughter published a book of his correspondence.

Ok Troy

I have given up trying to reason with you. I am done.

Guest Britt I agree some areas are cooling and some are getting warm. in closing you mention the increase of CO2. So is the increase of CO2 resulting in decreases in temperature? Uou can't have it both ways. You can't say the wide variation in temperature is due to CO2. You can only say that about the increase. If you did you wiykd be saying increasing CO2 results in the temperature going both up and down. You are inferring that in your argument. Climate Change says man made carbon is causing more extreme weather. I can see hirw more carbon increases temperature but how does it decrease temperature?

Let me restate my position and how i arrived at it. I didnt have an opinion one way or the other. I analysed the data first hand. My reasoning oddly enough aren't the same as people who don't believe in climate change. I was just as unsuccessful with them. Troy I have no interest in people agreeing with me. i prefer disagreement and the person is thinks about my points. Than agreement without thinking. I saw that clip with Neil Tyson DeGrasse. He was using anecdotal evidence not statistics. They argument that climate change is using is about numbers and their relationship. That is my issue. Which noone wants to or is capablable of discussing. Refute the points he makes with reasoned arguments. Global warming is a fiction and the solutuons wont have any effect because it isn't a problem.

That sounds right. I gave it a bit more thought. I am thinking of the conversations I have now versus twenty years ago. I think the rise of conservatives and fundamentalists signaled a shift. Specifically Fox news and the right. This may have been a symptom not a cause. It is similar to the mindset of some religious people. We are saved and special you are not. It is next to impossible to have a reasonable conversation. You also have they same problem with liberals. People seem to have an ad hominen approach instead of attacking the idea. Sadly I have noticed myself doing this in some of my discussions here. Questioning the person's mental or emotional capacity. I am not the sole person doing this either. Actually Sarah Silverman the comic nailed the problem. She said we used to have discourse and there could be differences of opinion. Its gone from this is wrong for me to this is wrong for everyone.

Here's a video. Have a listen its a Nobel Laureate making the same arguments that I am. So @Troy do you know more than a Nobel Laureate?

Troy my post about climate change aren't for you. Troy they don't have a credible statistical model. Your argument is that people have psychological blind spots. How can you be so blind?

@Troy do you really believe that video has answered any of my bullet points?

Troy I am watching the video i am hearing psychological reasons. not statistics. i knew there wouldn't be any statistics. Troy I am not using psychological reasoning. I am using statistics. the statistics don't support their arguments. I am saying they aren't presenting any credible statistics. So you have yet to respond to my bullet points. You consistently side step questions you can't or dont want to answer. Does the video addresses the numbers or Any statement i made. Also i use less resources than most people always have. The whole video is about psychology my statements are statistical. You asked me to listen before addresing my bulket points and the statements about the Union of Concerned Scientists. i await your response. and like you said people are watching. So you can admit you cant counter any if the statistically based arguments. You can say its not as important as solving the problem. Yiu can say I have a resistance to facts. i know no matter what your answer. You will not address any of my bullet points. I challenge anyone to find a statistically significant model that links production to climate change. Thats a big statement and you nor anyone has been able to disprove.

Troy can you stop the monologue. Before asking a question answer the questions I posed to you.

Its a bit arrogant to speak for me and worse to misrepresent my position. To put it simply i have conducted a statistical analysis of the data . I looked at over 200 years of data. The data doesn't match the story. What analysis have you done Troy? Have you looked at and understood the data. Until you can answer yes we can't discuss this rationally. In ten years the temperature won't match the predictions. Why do you think they changed the name from global warming to climate change. Some places were getting colder.

hey Troy how about you respond to the three slides?

Troy if you don't believe in race. Why say a white racist? . I assume you are talking about the white race. If there is only one race you can't be a racist. You aren't being consistent in your use of race. in the implied sense "white" or the explicit sense "racist ". Too means also you should Too or two. I could complain about your gramar and lack of logic. hee hee hee But I won't.