It got one question this time.
It’s been zero before. Trump ignored it and talked about tariffs.
The corrupt demon has met a righteous angel?
It was a low IQ debate
Not really, it was a practical servant/leader at the top of her game. The straight and direct “taking it to the people” to the audience.
Harris always began her court arguments with: “Harris, for the People”, and she meant it.
How about the debates on this site. It must be over a decade now that debates of Climate Change were hot and heavy on this site. One of the main issues in the beginning was CO2 data from the Ice Core data showing the CO2 was following the heat. Or was the heat following the rise in CO2? A very simple answer which the public cannot to this day come to agreement on because of political influence.
The term “Climate Change” has political as well as factual and legal meanings that are not at all understood by the public. Thus, having any debates on Climate Change would have to be classified as platitude debates.
Thank God for the Chevron deference ruling. As that ruling kicks in, we may be able to see realistic debates on Climate Change.
That’s just you who has that problem
Are you trolling me? Just follow the math of Climate Science for the last decade. Where did all the missing heat go? To the ocean. No, proven wrong. To the upper atmosphere? No, that was wrong too. The upper atmosphere was cooling.
I do have a problem with agreeing to political views that are based upon false facts.
Example: you say, “Do you know how much this has been studied and how many scientists agree?”.
You put that question out to the public because it is a political viewpoint that has worked in the past.
No different than Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation claimed by 51 intelligence officials.
The facts are, there are 8.8M scientists. So, there are 0.16% of scientists that agree with the IPCC views.
What I would like to know is how many of the 0.16% received or hope to get a grant. Or that are working in an educational or government institution?
How many of these 0.16% agreed with the point of no return dates that never came to be?
The numbers do not play well for the political facts.
Unfortunately our pal is dedicated to politics and he hates taxes and anything that might cause increases in taxes, and he’s to intelligent and informed to be call anything but a deliberate LIAR, because he’s been offer real information plenty of time, but instead stick to the MAGA script of me, me, me.
But the answers are out there, you just need to care enough to take the time to learn about it.
That is because our Global Heat and Moisture Distribution Engine, isn’t a simpleton lab top experiment - it is an extremely complex system of dynamic webs of interconnected influences.
- Global Warming: Understanding the Forecast, a textbook for non-science major undergraduates, Blackwell-Wiley, 2006 with Second Edition 2011. The book is supplemented with a web page of =on-line interactive models which provide the basis for exercises in the book.
- The Warming Papers: The Scientific Foundation for the Climate Change Forecast, co-edited with Ray Pierrehumbert, 2010, Wiley-Blackwell.
- The Global Carbon Cycle (Princeton Primers in Climate), 2010, Princeton University Press.
- The Long Thaw: How Humans are Changing the Next 100,000 Years of Earth’s Climate, published by Princeton University Press, 2009.
- The Climate Crisis: An introductory guide to climate change, December, 2009, Cambridge University Press.
Free Open-access Online Classes (MOOCS)
- Global Warming I: The Science of and Modeling of Climate Change, on Coursera.org. Open now for anytime, “on demand” enrollment. The class uses the same web page of on-line interactive models as is used in my UChicago classes.
- Global Warming II: Create Your Own Models in Python or Fortran
Online Interactive Models
- Climate and Carbon Cycle Models teaching suite
- SpongeBOB basin-scale deep sediment carbon cycle model movies
- Muds early diagenesis model
Videos
- Near Miss: The importance of the natural atmospheric CO2 concentration to human historical evolution. 2016 - 7th annual UW-AOS Robock Lecture, Madison, WI, 2016.
- “The Long Thaw”, April 9, 2013, Notre Dame University
- Class lectures from PHSC 13400, Global Warming for non-science majors, Fall, 2009, as well as the videos from the Coursera class
Since you started that line of attack - let me correct you:
You are the willfully ignorant and deliberately dishonest troll.
That is not a fact, it is a farce.
Sure. Yeah. I’m the troll.
The Dems are so on board with the science of CC so concerned about the outcomes of a warming planet so much better in CC policy than the republicans, that they are willing to give fracking the tick of approval
I don’t want fracking, but you sure do have a lot of hate in you. Why do you hate so much?
Then better not support the Dems
I’m sorry, but that’s the only issue I have with them, unlike the Repugs in which I can’t stand a single thing they stand for. So, I will support the Dems given that is the ONLY issue I have with them. One more thing, don’t tell me who I should not or should support. That isn’t your place. I will vote for Kamala Harris, despite the fact I disagree with her on fracking. I do agree with her concerning abortion and other reproduction rights. I do agree with her on medical care in general. I do agree with her concerning housing, immigration, equality, etc etc etc. I do NOT agree with the Repugs on the things they stand for, because they stand for nothing but poverty and death, especially when it concerns women and minorities. The Repugs are NOT pro-life. They are pro-death. Kamala is more pro-life with her stance on abortion and other women’s health care. To deny a woman the right to women’s health care, which includes abortion, is nothing more than pro-death, not pro-life. So don’t tell me who I should not support. I WILL support Dems because they do support things I do stand for, even if I don’t agree with them on fracking. I sure as hell do not agree with anything the Repugs stand for.
1 Like
The Dems are developing electric vehicles that can be charged on solar power so that we no longer NEED oil to power the combustion engines around the world.
The Republicans are opposed to developing electric vehicles. They want to “drill, baby, drill” until all the sequestered CO2 is gone from the earth and floating around in the troposphere, where it does the most damage.
Carbon monoxide
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts
What effect does carbon monoxide have on the environment?
Pollution in Australia comes from many different sources. Some is a result of industrial activity but there are also sources of pollution that are not industrial, like cars, woodheaters and even lawn mowers.
When carbon monoxide is emitted into the atmosphere it effects the amount of greenhouse gases, which are linked to climate change and global warming. This means that land and sea temperature increases changing to ecosystems, increasing storm activity and causing other extreme weather events.
People and animals can be exposed to high levels of carbon monoxide during bushfires. When we are exposed to high levels of carbon monoxide, it can make us ill and make it more difficult to have babies.
How might people be exposed to carbon monoxide?
Levels normally present in the atmosphere are unlikely to hurt you, but people can be exposed to carbon monoxide in the following ways:
- By breathing in contaminated air.
- Using equipment that has not been maintained, or is not working properly.
- Smoking, or breathing in other people’s cigarette smoke.
- Living near industries that emit carbon monoxide, or near freeways and busy roads.
- Using non-electric heaters, like wood heaters.
- Working in a job where carbon monoxide is produced or used.
https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/protection/npi/resource/student/carbon-monoxide#
Instead of complaining about the use of fossil fuels, why don’t we wholeheartedly support the development of environmentally friendly renewable energy (electricity).
I voted for Harris because she supports the development of environmentally friendly electrical vehicles. We don’t want to go back to days of horse and buggy.
We want to go forward with a clean modern transportation system.
1 Like
The dems are developing jack
Guide to Federal Funding, Financing, and Technical …
U.S. Department of Energy/Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy: Clean Cities: Clean Cities offers a variety of technical assistance for the purchase and use of advanced technology and alternative fuel vehicles, including plug-in electric vehicles. The program works with nearly 100 coalitions across the country.
Guide to Federal Funding, Financing, and Technical …
Funding and Financing Opportunities This guidance document was collaboratively developed by the U.S. Department of Energy and Department Transportation to highlight examples of federal programs that support funding and financing for plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) and charging infrastructure. For further information the Department of Energy’s Alternative Fuels Data Center provides a comprehensive database of federal and state programs that support plug-in electric vehicles and infrastructure: Making government services easier to find | USAGov.
1 Like
Smoke and mirrors. Still drilling on and offshore. Do you think everyone is stupid?
Everyone is addicted to the smoke of oil. How long do you think it’ll take to switch every combustion engine driven vehicle on earth with electrical vehicles.
My guess is about 20 years , when oil will already be at exhaustive states of production.
A bright new market for renewable solar, wind, and hydropower electrical conversion manufacturing systems in the future is well-received by the population.
Recoverable oil will begin to show signs of exhaustion in a few more decades, regardless of how well we prepare for that inescapable eventuality.
Reality?
We are running out of oil! Whether we like it or not. Think about that for a bit.
And who is responsible for these trends and how to meet future demands in the face of a Republican Congress that has put it’s faith in the imagined reality of a clinically psychopathic narcissist?
1 Like
Its so easy to counter your shtick
Maybe you should run for President.
From link you linked:
Biden’s administration has not been able to do those things without support from Congress.
Harris has a greater need to attract voters from states like Pennsylvania
“The task isn’t that hard,” she added, because Trump “has made it so clear he will do exactly what oil and gas executives want him do.”
1 Like