# You know, we should chat about global warming **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 21, 2015, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365 "2015-10-21T16:32:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/301 "2015-11-11T17:34:31Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Especially since my mother is blind, crippled, and dead.☹ And yet still surprisingly hot in the sack. ---
**Author:** ![Smeghead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f1d935/32.png) [@Smeghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smeghead)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/302 "2015-11-11T17:56:06Z")
> [@andros](#): > > And yet still surprisingly hot in the sack. That’s the crematorium effect. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/303 "2015-11-11T21:28:43Z")
Perhaps Mr. **hinge** would care to read this short article from [_Scientific American_ and recognize that he is not particularly well-informed on this issue: > **[Record Levels of CO2 Herald the Future of Climate Change](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/record-levels-of-co2-herald-the-future-of-climate-change/)** > > Global warming has become a 1-degree Celsius reality, making progress at climate talks in Paris even more imperative Perhaps not. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/304 "2015-11-11T21:37:15Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > Perhaps not. No perhaps about it. I’m sure he’s been exposed to the information over and over again. He _chooses_ to be misinformed, while deluding himself it’s because he’s smarter than all the experts instead of being a dupe of political and financial interests. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/305 "2015-11-11T22:24:38Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > Perhaps Mr. **hinge** would care to read this short article from [_Scientific American_ and recognize that he is not particularly well-informed on this issue: > > [Record Levels of CO2 Herald the Future of Climate Change | Scientific American](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/record-levels-of-co2-herald-the-future-of-climate-change/) > > Perhaps not. [QUOTE=Scientific American] Already, China, the European Union, and U.S.—the world’s largest polluters, together responsible for more than half of global pollution—have agreed to limit future greenhouse gas emissions. Compared with 1997 … or 2009 … the prospects for a global effort to combat climate change have never been better. When climate negotiations get under way in Paris later this month, there is a real chance for a comprehensive set of actions from more than 190 nations around the world, all to restrain global warming. [/QUOTE] May we assume that all the GOP candidates have pledged to rescind any agreement if elecgted? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/306 "2015-11-11T22:51:20Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > May we assume that all the GOP candidates have pledged to rescind any agreement if elecgted? Seeing that a few of the candidates are from congress it is a good bet that that is the case: [http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/gop-congress-climate-pact-paris-213382](http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/gop-congress-climate-pact-paris-213382) > [@](#): > > Top Republican lawmakers are planning a wide-ranging offensive — including outreach to foreign officials by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s office — to undermine President Barack Obama’s hopes of reaching an international climate change agreement that would cement his environmental legacy. > > The GOP strategy, emerging after months of quiet discussions, includes sowing doubts about Obama’s climate policies at home and abroad, trying to block key environmental regulations in Congress, and challenging the legitimacy of the president’s attempts to craft a global agreement without submitting a treaty to the Senate. > > A top policy aide to McConnell (R-Ky.) has had conversations with a select group of representatives from foreign embassies to make it clear that Republicans intend to fight Obama’s climate agenda at every turn, sources familiar with the efforts say. > > Sources say the aide, Neil Chatterjee, hasn’t tried to persuade other countries to oppose a climate deal, though he is informing them about the GOP’s options for undercutting it. He has had conversations with officials representing both developed and developing countries. Environment & Energy Publishing first reported on his efforts. > > McConnell himself warned foreign leaders last spring to "proceed with caution before entering into a binding, unattainable deal” with Obama, noting that “two-thirds of the U.S. federal government” — Congress and the Supreme Court — hasn’t signed off on the president’s plans. > > Republicans have no direct way of interfering with December’s climate summit in Paris, and Obama’s domestic climate strategy relies almost entirely on executive branch regulations that don’t require Congress’ approval. But the resistance could threaten to gum up progress in carrying out Obama’s policies, making it easier to undo them if the GOP retakes the White House in 2016. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/307 "2015-11-11T22:56:54Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > Perhaps Mr. **hinge** would care to read this short article from [_Scientific American_ and recognize that he is not particularly well-informed on this issue: > > Perhaps not. Has Madeleine Thomas read this ground breaking article? Is that why she chose to associate Camille Parmesan with Al Gore. Is this why Parmesan is depressed? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/308 "2015-11-11T23:01:07Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Has Madeleine Thomas read this ground breaking article? Is that why she chose to associate Camille Parmesan with Al Gore. Is this why Parmesan is depressed? Again, nothing in anything that you posted shows that. You are still only producing more evidence of partisanship from your part regarding a scientific issue. But that should be enough for many readers to get it: Save your environment and preserve jobs, do not vote Republican any more until they do get a clue on this issue. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/309 "2015-11-11T23:12:21Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > No perhaps about it. I’m sure he’s been exposed to the information over and over again. He _chooses_ to be misinformed, while deluding himself it’s because he’s smarter than all the experts instead of being a dupe of political and financial interests. If only you were convincing enough to overcome the distrust so many people have about the UN/IPCC and man-made-CO2-is-evil crowd, your carbon regulation of all manufacturing would already have been established. In the past, the public worked together to push thru clean air and clean water regulation. Scientists had provided believable information and data to the public. Now, the man-made-CO2-is-evil crowd relies on name-calling to shout down any opposition, questions, and debate. After all, the man-made-CO2-is-evil crowd has always claimed that the science is settled as they continued to search for conclusive proof. Why continue the search if the science is supposed to be settled? Doesn’t that suggest that the science isn’t actually settled? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/310 "2015-11-11T23:15:41Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > If only you were convincing enough to overcome the distrust so many people have about the UN/IPCC and man-made-CO2-is-evil crowd, your carbon regulation of all manufacturing would already have been established. > > In the past, the public worked together to push thru clean air and clean water regulation. Scientists had provided believable information and data to the public. > > Now, the man-made-CO2-is-evil crowd relies on name-calling to shout down any opposition, questions, and debate. After all, the man-made-CO2-is-evil crowd has always claimed that the science is settled as they continued to search for conclusive proof. Why continue the search if the science is supposed to be settled? Doesn’t that suggest that the science isn’t actually settled? The science is very strongly showing that it’s happening. The vast majority of experts agree. They continue the science to refine the image of what is going to happen. To prepare us for it. You think that your ignorance is better than their knowledge. You’re a fool. I mean shit, you can’t even reason properly, you think the lack of 100% public buy-in means something. All it means is that the liars you vote for are persuasive. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/311 "2015-11-11T23:21:05Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Again, nothing in anything that you posted shows that. You are still only producing more evidence of partisanship from your part regarding a scientific issue. > > But that should be enough for many readers to get it: > > Save your environment and preserve jobs, do not vote Republican any more until they do get a clue on this issue. Apparently your eyes are going bad. That’s unfortunate. And unbelievable. “Shows that”??? Shows what? How dare anyone ask a question. Or three questions. I guess the science is settled and all questions have been answered, according to people like yourself. Has Madeleine Thomas read this ground breaking article? Is that why she chose to associate Camille Parmesan with Al Gore. Is this why Parmesan is depressed? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/312 "2015-11-11T23:24:35Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > …You think that your ignorance is better than their knowledge. You’re a fool. I mean shit, you can’t even reason properly, you think the lack of 100% public buy-in means something. All it means is that the liars you vote for are persuasive. You’re the one trying to change the status quo. You need to build an actual consensus of voters if you expect that to happen. It’s not going to build itself. Your failure is not my responsibility. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/313 "2015-11-11T23:29:15Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Apparently your eyes are going bad. That’s unfortunate. And unbelievable. > > “Shows that”??? Shows what? How dare anyone ask a question. Or three questions. I guess the science is settled and all questions have been answered, according to people like yourself. Ah, yes, it is not my problem that you are only sowing to all how much of tool you are. > **[RealClimate: Unsettled Science](https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/12/unsettled-science/)** > > RealClimate: Unusually, I'm in complete agreement with a recent headline on the Wall Street Journal op-ed page: "The Climate Science Isn't Settled" The article below is the same mix of innuendo and misrepresentation that its author normally writes,... > [@](#): > > Unusually, I’m in complete agreement with a recent headline on the Wall Street Journal op-ed page: > > ``` > “The Climate Science Isn’t Settled” > > ``` > > The article below is the same mix of innuendo and misrepresentation that its author normally writes, but the headline is correct. The WSJ seems to think that the headline is some terribly important pronouncement that in some way undercuts the scientific consensus on climate change but they are simply using an old rhetorical ‘trick’. > > The phrase “the science is settled” is associated almost 100% with contrarian comments on climate and is usually a paraphrase of what ‘some scientists’ are supposed to have said. The reality is that it depends very much on what you are talking about and I have never heard any scientist say this in any general context – at a recent meeting I was at, someone claimed that this had been said by the participants and he was roundly shouted down by the assembled experts > [@](#): > > But no scientists would be scientists if they thought there was nothing left to find out. Think of the science as a large building, with foundations reaching back to the 19th Century and a whole edifice of knowledge built upon them. The community spends most of its time trying to add a brick here or a brick there and slowly adding to the construction. The idea that the ‘science is settled’ is equivalent to stating that the building is complete and that nothing further can be added. Obviously that is false – new bricks (and windows and decoration and interior designs) are being added and argued about all the time. However, while the science may not be settled, we can still tell what kind of building we have and what the overall picture looks like. Arguments over whether a single brick should be blue or yellow don’t change the building from a skyscraper to a mud hut. > [@doorhinge](#): > > Has Madeleine Thomas read this ground breaking article? Is that why she chose to associate Camille Parmesan with Al Gore. Is this why Parmesan is depressed? Again, Madeleine Thomas is not showing anything that your ignorant mind is pushing here. In reality the depression is just the same as many biologists encounter when they do notice how many creationists are in the USA. And it is not related to following any politician because no politician discovered evolution. Educators though know what is going on and groups that defend evolution in academia had to add also the defence of climate science as virtually the same clowns that deny evolution also deny climate science. [http://ncse.com/climate](http://ncse.com/climate) ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/314 "2015-11-11T23:40:10Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > You’re the one trying to change the status quo. You need to build an actual consensus of voters if you expect that to happen. It’s not going to build itself. Your failure is not my responsibility. > **[Many Conservative Republicans Believe Climate Change Is a Real Threat...](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/us/politics/survey-of-republican-voters-shows-a-majority-believe-in-climate-change.html?_r=0)** > > Echoing a number of other recent surveys, a significant number of Republicans believe the climate is changing and mankind plays a role in that change. > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON — A majority of Republicans — including 54 percent of self-described conservative Republicans — believe the world’s climate is changing and that mankind plays some role in the change, according to a new survey conducted by three prominent Republican pollsters. > From Our Advertisers > > The results echo a number of other recent surveys concluding that despite the talk of many of the party’s candidates, a significant number of Republicans and independent voters are inclined to support candidates who would back some form of climate action. It may also point to a problem facing Republicans seeking their party’s presidential nomination: The activists who crowd town hall meetings and Republican presidential caucuses and primaries might not reflect the broader attitude of even the Republican electorate. BTW, it is true that all that is not turning to votes, but the reality is that the propaganda has kept a lot of Republicans in the dark about what their congress critters are doing in their name; sooner or later it will be reflected in the votes, in the meantime all have to realize that even on the matter of consensus in the public a lot of conservatives are not aware of what is going on. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2015, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/315 "2015-11-12T00:30:32Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > You’re the one trying to change the status quo. You need to build an actual consensus of voters if you expect that to happen. It’s not going to build itself. Your failure is not my responsibility. That has nothing to do with whether climate change is real or not. Your inability to understand that, shows how inept you are at thinking. Which explains your beliefs in general. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2015, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/316 "2015-11-12T00:35:19Z")
Like teaching algebra to an aardvark. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2015, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/317 "2015-11-12T07:44:17Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Has Madeleine Thomas read this ground breaking article? Is that why she chose to associate Camille Parmesan with Al Gore. Is this why Parmesan is depressed? No one said the article is ‘ground-breaking’; in fact, the point is that it not at all ground-breaking. I only mentioned it because it is a convenient summary of why many scientists believe that human-caused climate change is a significant issue. I was also proposing you read it to get your take on why the editors of _Scientific American_ would want to lie to you, which I’ll admit would be purely for my own amusement. As for the snipes at the people named in your post, if that’s what you are doing, I don’t have the slightest idea what you think your point is. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2015, 8:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/318 "2015-11-12T08:00:00Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Oh my! Parmesan had been associated with Al Gore. Little wonder that she’s depressed. Pro-tip for **Mr. Hinge** : It’s too late at SDMB of course, but if you want to try posting at a different board and not have them know what a fool you are, avoid the facile and meaningless connection of Gore to AGW. (Where do dolts like **Unhinged** get their Gore meme? Is it a Limbaugh or Hannity talking-point? Are they so isolated from reason they think Limbaugh/Hannity are the key intellectuals of modern America?) ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2015, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/319 "2015-11-12T15:12:38Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Is it a Limbaugh or Hannity talking-point? Are they so isolated from reason they think Limbaugh/Hannity are the key intellectuals of modern America?) Yes and yes. It’s an article of rhetorical faith on talk radio. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2015, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365/320 "2015-11-12T18:17:20Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > …Again, Madeleine Thomas is not showing anything that your ignorant mind is pushing here. > > In reality the depression is just the same as many biologists encounter when they do notice how many creationists are in the USA. And it is not related to following any politician because no politician discovered evolution. (post shortened) It was Madeleine Thomas who associated Camille Parmesan with Al Gore. It was also Thomas who claimed that Parmesan is depressed. I can understand why some of the man-made-CO2-is-evil zealots could become depressed over the numbers of the public who simply find the claims of the MMCO2IEZ to be unbelievable. I also understand how being associated with Al Gore could be depressing. You’re now claiming that biologists are depressed because there are creationists. Good luck trying to sell that story. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-know-we-should-chat-about-global-warming/735365.md?page=17)