Jesus, Der. I'm sorry to hear that you have died four times. Hang in there.

Wow what a negative out look. Are you basing this on climate models?

I deleted my comment here, it was too negative and distracting.

Right on Tommix, fracking in this country has completely fuct our water tables...but I don't trust most scientists on climate change cause they work on government grants and if they don't go along with government agendas they lose their grants AKA their jobs. In the 80's I was told due to "global warming" where I lived, Roosevelt Island would be under water in 20 years...well it's close to 35 years and the sea level has risen about an inch.

I don't trust most scientists on climate change cause they work on government grants and if they don't go along with government agendas..

Except that that is not Trump's agenda and he is cutting the grants because he believes climate change is a hoax. So what will the scientists do now? Try to convince everyone climate change doesn't exist so funding will continue? Oh, the irony..

Personally I'd trust a scientist over a business man..

In the 80's I was told due to "global warming" where I lived, Roosevelt Island would be under water in 20 years...well it's close to 35 years and the sea level has risen about an inch.

There are parts of the world that are genuinely under threat of sea level rises; Jakarta, Shanghai, some Pacific islands for instance. That doesn't directly affect you and it doesn't matter how long it takes in your own lifetime but we need to think about future generations.

Anyone who doubts climate change can continue to live in a world of ignorance, that's fine by me. Most of them, like Trump, won't be around long enough to realise or care anyway.

I don't doubt climate change but I believe it's exaggerated due to agendas. My main point was it's the fracking industry that's the main culprit. It's poisoning our fresh water tables and what you never hear, it's the leading factor in methane being released into our atmosphere not cows and the bullshit they push. Not a Trump supporter, didn't vote for him.

Ah fine, but it just sounded like you doubted it or were at least sceptical about it with your reference to Roosevelt Island not being under water yet. Probably true what you say about fracking being the leading factor in the release of methane over the farming of cows. I don't believe it is used to such a large extent here in the UK although many energy companies companies are pushing hard for it. Scotland has banned it outright but it's definitely a concern for the future.

Didn't think you were a Trump supporter.

What's wrong with doubts? Is everyone simply supposed to believe 100% what the fear mongering left are brow beating you into believing? That is such a monolithic way of thinking and will kill individualism.

It is fine to have doubts but personally I will take the word of scientists over politicians yes, 100%. But of course you can carry on believing global warming is just fear mongering or a hoax because that's what your expert President says it is. It doesn't bother me as fortunately you are in the minority, a bit like Flat Earthers.

WTF?!...are you telling me the Earth isn't flat?












Jk!

I wonder what a Flat Earther calls Global warming, it it's not.. you know, a globe.

We don't use the term "Global Warming" any longer due to it no longer fits the agenda. We now use "Climate Change" and Neil Degrassi(Jr. High) Tyson is on record saying Earth is not actually a globe per se.

You are acting as if no one had doubt before Trump. The president has nothing to do with the doubts I have. My doubts stem from a NASA scientist admitting to fudging his work to make is fit what Obama wanted. That and the incompletion of climate models. Modern computers don't even have the ability to replicate data types that can even begin to model our atmosphere. They get as close as they can on somethings, and ignore others. Creating a compltely inacurate representation of our climate over time. Which is why every prediction for 50 years has been wrong.

sources?

I first became aware through the documentary films Gasland and it's sequel Gasland 2 but it's been reported about virtually everywhere ever since. The reason you don't hear about it so much is it's reporting is suppressed due to the fracking industries lobbyist groups who donate huge amounts to both the Democrats and Republicans parties. It's big business. I believe the scandal involving Biden's son and the company he was on the board for is a natural gas/fracking company in Ukraine.

That' Josh Fox right? The guy that couldn't remeber if his $100,000 offer for his gas rights came in 2006 or 2008, or wait to not him and maybe but not certianly to a different reporter he heard about second hand and decided to lie and make a movie about? He made that film independantly right? Oh wait no wasn't it produced by the Park Foundation? An openly partisan group with a clear anti-fracking agenda? You know the foundation ran by Park's kids who worked for Duncan Hines and now P&G, a company actively converting all of its vehicles too natural gas... Seems like a big smokescreen to me.

That may all be right and true...I've not researched the guy like you apparently have but there's no doubt when faulty drilling equipment fails and leaks methane into the ground water and eventually up to the surface, it's a problem. I've met enough people from Pennsylvania first hand that their well water is contaminated and undrinkable and their property is virtually unsellable. What are you saying exactly?...we have a methane problem screwing up the atmosphere. You with AOC's following that this problem is from cow farts and we have to all become vegetarians?!

So is the issue fracking or faulty equipment? It's sounds to me like we just need to invest more into making fracking more secure.

So your arguement is that those scientists can't be biased because the person they disagree with is cutting their funding? That makes for totally fair findings. Any government funded research is skewed.

And when you say "most of them... won't be around enough to realise or care anyway" I take away 2 things. First isn't it convinient that all of these predictions are centuries in the future. Second, on the same note, let's say you are wrong and those you listen too are wrong. They too will be dead before they can take any blame, yet meanwhile they have whipped everyone into a panic for their own gain while they are still alive, again convinient.

https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions