[sum-r breeze]

Originally Posted by PaugusBayFireFighter

You seem to think because I listen to the U.S. Academy of Science, The Royal Society, NASA and NOAA that I also embrace what some dolt politician like Al Gore says, I don't. When it comes to science, I listen to scientists. I don't get my info from FOXNEWS, MSNBC or CNN or a politician with an agenda. I do my own research. When the ultra vast majority of the scientific community agrees on something, I embrace it. The same people who put people in space and predict hurricanes are the people I listen to when it comes to climate change. I'm not a tree hugger nor do I care about what I can't change.
I'm skeptical about everything. I don't believe in ghosts, psychics, gods of any name shape or form, conspiracy theories, magnetic healing bracelets, crystals, homeopathic drugs, etc. I dismiss all of those based on science. Maybe some believe in a few of those supernatural things I listed. That would explain why they would ignore science in the arena of climate change. I am consistent.
Again, not my opinion. Not a news report. Not a political ad. Peer reviewed scientific data.

You say you were in a dinosour park. I'm sure they gave you facts about the age of the earth, when dinosaurs roamed, etc. This is based mostly using carbon dating, a scientific method. Carbon dating is pure science. Undisputed science that some still say is wrong, that humans walked along with the great lizards only 5,000 years ago when it was created by a god. (You can visit such a whacko facility in Kentucky called the Creation Museum) Do you believe carbon dating and the scientific consensus that our rock is actually 4.6 billions years old? I do. I know very little about how they carbon date things but I embrace it because the ultra vast majority of scientists agree carbon dating is accurate.

These links, which back my consensus claim, are from:
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
The US National Academy Of Science
The Royal Society

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
http://nas-sites.org/americasclimatechoices/
https://royalsociety.org/policy/climate-change/
https://www.climate.gov/

Not to get into a pi$$ing contest but at least 3 out of the 4 sources you site are government funded research entities. When the temperatures didn't agree with the "settled science"....magically the terminology changed from Global Warming to Climate Change. And Liberal changed to Progressive like that was supposed to make us all believers. These entities get their money from the liberal leaning enviro-nazis who want to ban all fossil fuels and have us hamstrung by their EPA regulations. Meanwhile China Russia Mexico and a whole host of other countries have never heard of catalytic converters or clean coal technology or any other emission control device. Are we the only country who has a responsibility for pollution control? Or is it just another way of income redistribution from the trust fund left do as I say not as I do. Our secretary of state flying in on a military transport plane (jet engines times 4) plus his entourage of black suburbans (at least 4 of those) for his broken leg. He's one man....how much fossil fuel did that little trip waste? I have a hard time believing ANY thing these politicians tell us because the whole bunch of them have a serious problem with the truth. Just my 2 cents

The Breeze
Wave 'cuz i'll be wavin' back