Carbon drought ..

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Thanks for addressing my concerns Chuck. It is certainly handy that the science denier websites are thoughtful enough to spoon feed ready made generic rebuttals for fellow cult members to regurgitate word for word.

But in order for us to have an intellectual discussion on the topic, could you perhaps actually watch the video, and address the specific points that you disagree with, in your own words, using your own powers of critical independent thinking. After all, in your attempts to discredit Happer, you gave the impression that you must be much smarter and more informed on the subject than he is, so it shouldn't be hard for you to do, but will require more effort.

[furrowtickler]

I highly doubt he even watched it . His response was up almost as fast is the video was uploaded lol .
Chucky you should watch the other one as well .
Neither one is a climate change denier , just a different view of climate change .

Kinda like the cult .. Scientology, no one dare have their own opinions of it .. lol

[malleefarmer]

Yeah im a climate change sceptic not denier not believer possibly a studier... just have to see how 19 pans out i guess.

But if we have another crap year here might well have to change my thought process a little.

Since 2000 weve had 5 years of average or above and im meant to be in a "low but reliable area"

[FarmJunkie]

Chuck, name one alarmist event that has actually come true.

Exactly right! These educated brainiacs need some way to justify the money governments pay them to do all the scientific studies. Do this don’t do that. Then ten years later it’s the opposite. Waste of money. We can’t change the weather. Only the sun can. Without it we are nothing.

[jimmy]

Global warming cooling what ever is next is the new religion, the world is going to end unless you give to the collection plate the more you give the more you will be saved.

[dmlfarmer]

OCT 9, 2016 12:27
Time to cry WOLF WOLF WOLF!!!

Nice list Radical, however proves nothing. There as always been disagreement an contrary opinion in science and always will be, even when there is claims that the science is settled. It is human nature to discount anything against our personal belief. Or to seek to profit, regardless if it is moral or fact based.

The other thing to consider is how many of the "proof" of your point on your list are actual peer reviewed science and how many are simply opinion pieces by someone seeking the limelight or profit.

Here is my list:
Scientists long believed the earth was flat. Today science says the world is round but there are still flat earthers who stick to old science. So does this contrary belief mean earth can't be round?

Evolution is considered science, and has been debated in science for generations. Yet there are still creationists. Since there are creationists, does this mean evolution can't be believed?

Science says GMOs, Glyphosate, and Vaccicines are safe. Yet there are other scientists who dispute the safety of each of these. So who should the public believe. The science that produced these products or the claims they are dangerous and should be banned?

Science put man on the moon, yet there are still claims the lunar landing was fake. Since some people do not believe the lunar landings happened should we refrain from teaching moon landings in schools?

In the 1940's and 50's doctors were appearing in ads promoting cigarettes. So should we ignore all science that claims today that smoking is bad for your health?

I could go on and on. But the question I want you to answer is to name one recognized SCIENTIFIC BODY THAT DISPUTES MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE today. I am not talking about an individual scientist, or some lobby group, or a collection of opinions, I want you to name a real scientific organization national or international.

And as you are thinking about this you may want to consider the following Wikipedia statement: Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement,[24] no national or international scientific body rejects the findings of human-induced effects on climate change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

[Guest]

https://mashable.com/article/earth-day-2019-climate-change-carbon-dioxide.amp

[blackjack]

How many times do you climate change zealots got to be told everyone knows there is always change.How the governments go about is the problem.

[dmlfarmer]

How many times do you climate change zealots got to be told everyone knows there is always change.How the governments go about is the problem.

So it sounds like you do not dispute man is having an impact on climate then. So what do you think governments should do to MINIMIZE that impact.

[littledoggie]

You have heard of google and the internet? Sorry couldn't resist.

https://www.thecreepyline.com/

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[blackjack]

Taxing the working man in our society is about as dumb of a solution as one could pick.Are you a bureaucrat dmlfarmer?

[dmlfarmer]

Taxing the working man in our society is about as dumb of a solution as one could pick.Are you a bureaucrat dmlfarmer?

no I am not, now how about answering my question. What do you think government should do?