Liberals Panic as EPA Removes Climate Change Website Page

I was studying climate change before Gore came along, back in the 60s’ when it was discovered. I could care less about what he does.
As for anti-capitalist, green tech is creating more jobs than all the carbon fuel jobs we have in the US. Coal is on the way out because it can’t compete in price with solar energy prices. With natural gas we have boom or bust economies as supplies are either too much or too little and thus the price swings widely. Because of the boom back a couple of years ago, many drill sites had to be closed with jobs being lost. Solar doesn’t have that happen.
No liberals are not pushing us closer to communism. The problem is that conservatives don’t understand what communism really is. It has never been practiced in the world so there is no way to even measure whether communism would work.
What liberals do push for is responsibility from businesses to not pollute every thing we need to live. For businesses to pay fair wages instead of non-living wages while someone makes billions off the work of people who can’t get by on what they make. For fairness and equality, where all people are treated decently.
The whole idea of US capitalism is a fair wage for work provided. But that has never happened for the majority of people in the US as businesses have the ability to name what wages they want. In fact the economy is run so that businesses can pay the least amount of money in wages. So the ave worker can have no say in how much they can get. That is not fairness.
The whole reason why middle aged white men are suffering in job loss and wages is because of the stranglehold that businesses have on wages. They are now suffering what many other people have been suffering for decades. We have an economy beholden to the rich, not to the rest of us. They write the laws to benefit themselves in taxes and business practices.
In this country when somebody picks your pocket, you call the police. But the rich pick the pocket in so many ways and conservatives yell when somebody goes after them for it. Do you really like having to pay a higher % of taxes than the rich, cause you do. Do you really like getting paid a shitty wage while they get richer off YOUR work? Do you really enjoy breathing dirty air, drinking dirty water, because businesses don’t care if you do. Do away with the laws and they will pollute like crazy, just like they use to do.
I have lived during the time when businesses could do what they wanted with their toxic waste. As someone who studied the ecology, I saw firsthand the harm done by these businesses. I still see the effects of that pollution in lakes, rivers, the land. We have a spot next to a poisoned lake where the land is so poisonous, that 60 yrs later, nothing grows on it. So they built a shopping mall over the poisoned ground. And the shopping mall is sinking into the toxic waste below. It seeps into the bottom of the mall at times, esp with a lot of rain.
Freedom is not being poisoned by somebody else. Freedom is being paid a fair wage for the work I do. Freedom is not having everything dictated by what the rich want. Only peons accept what little the rich dole out and never speak out. You are the peon, believing the BS that they put out.

Um no, it is science. I started studying science long ago. It is called facts and reality. Hogwash is the belief that that nothing humans do affects the world. Hogwash is believing that facts are not real.

Try drinking plain water. Then add a little salt, just 4%. It becomes difficult to drink. That is the problem with balances, it doesn’t take much to change the balance and swing it. The problem is that the scientific illiterate don’t understand how the environment is balanced and how life adapts to the balance. Change the balance even a little, like 1 degree C as we have done so far and life that was adapted for that degree lower has trouble surviving.
Or change the PH of the oceans and shellfish can’t form shells as well. The environment is like a well tune car, change the adjustments a little and the car doesn’t run so well.
That 4% is every year for about 150 yrs, back when the industrial age started the CO2 level was 240PPM. Now the level is just over 400PPM. And the rate of CO2 goes up every year, a while ago it was 3.4 %, and now it is 4% and rising.
We are on track that we will hit 500PPM in about 25 yrs, with a possible rise in temp after that of 3 degrees C. Now it won’t suddenly happen, the temp will just keep rising until it gets there. But since we are not slowing the rate of increase, but speeding up, then it will be 600PPM and on. With a rising temp to go along with it.
That is what is happening. It doesn’t take much poison to kill you if it is lethal enough. 4% of certain metals can kill you, but adding 4% onto 4% for a long enough time can make any poison kill you. And that is what we are doing, slowly adding poison.

1st off neither article states what the CO2 levels have been. According to the evidence we have not had 300PPM for at least a million yrs. It has ranged from 185 to 250 in that time period.
But 300PPM is not the problem, 400PPM is. And it is the increasing amount that is the worry. If we had stayed at 300PPM, we would probably be ok. But we didn’t.
I would agree that the computer models are not completely accurate. In fact they have failed to predict the faster melting of the pole ice than what is happening. The computer model was too conservative in their predictions. But we don’t rely upon one computer modeling, there are many different models and they give a range of possible outcomes.
But none of those outcomes are good for humanity, whether they come in 50 yrs or 200 yrs. And with the speed of the warming, events are more likely to happen earlier.
Yeah I look at denier sites and then I lok at where they get their money and it all comes directly or indirectly from fossil fuel companies who have a huge invested interest in burning fossil fuels. Just like when the tobacco industry hired doctors to say tobacco smoking was not harmful. In fact the fossil fuel industry hired many of the same people from the tobacco industry to lie to people.
And people like you buy their lies. These people get paid big bucks to lie to you, they get paid far more than the scientists who do the real work. One thing I learn is who profits off of something and the people who profit are the deniers. By the estimates of just oil, there is 40 Trillion $ worth out there yet to be sucked out. That is a lot of money for someone to ignore, no matter what it does to the rest of us. And that is just for oil, natural gas is about the same and coal is easily double all of both.
So when I look at who profits, well 160 trillion $ is what the fossil fuel people stand to gain. Compared to what a climatologist makes, which they will make whether climate change is real or not, their fortune won’t change, they will still make the same. as the old saying goes if a man’s livelihood depends upon lying, he will lie. The climatologist will not lose their job if climate change was false, they could say it was false and still go on. But the denier’s job depends upon them denying, always denying, just like big tobacco did for decades. because if we switch to green tech only, they lose their job.

Well you obviously don’t understand that increasing the amount of something will eventually lead to bad things happening.
Lots of quotes, nothing of real importance. I don’t bother reading what somebody like an al gore says. I study for myself what is happening. I understand the science behind it. I trained as a biologist and ecologist and I understand the environment and how it works. Lots of people will say stupid things, I could care less. Try listening to the real scientists who actually study what is happening. Read the data they present. That is how science is studied.
Plus you take quotes out of context, reading the whole quote leads to a whole different meaning than the one you try to present. They are saying they know the dangers of climate change, but how does one get society off it’s ass to actually do something. And the only thing that people understand or react to is fear. So some of these media people use fear.
It’s not a tactic I advocate, but then again, facts don’t seem to be able to do anything, but bounce off of people’s heads. But when the people who destroy for profit speak, boy do they soak it up.

And again, quotes taken out of context? Those ARE the entire quotes, unless you have another bit of verbage to add, or are you also comprehension challenged? Sheesh. Bought any bridges or prime swamp real estate lately? Real scientists? Are you unaware that just last year there were over 2,200 peer-reviewed papers saying AGW was in error? Or that many of the signatories of the IPCC report sued the UN to have their names removed from the report because their objections were altered or ignored? Damn. What king of science have you been reading when the government funds for climate change have grown to well over 4 billion a year- it’s not science- it’s a cottage industry with thousands of “Scientists” making a living off climate change- and if you don’t buy into the swindle, your grant money disappears. Are you so gullible you can’t see the motives behind this? I guess not because to sheeple like you, science does not matter, it’s a religion now, the cult of the arcane CO2 that you don’t understand and could care less. Sad to see determined ignorance in play.

Who said we were putting that much CO2 into the atmosphere? Last count I saw indicated mankind’s contribution was about 4%. Hardly enough to maintain a global warming headline.

Only the Bush and trump appointees who were all anti-epa in the 1st place.
50,000 people die from air pollution every year and the EPA has tried to enforce rules to stop it. But business insists that 50K people dying every year is ok, because profit would be hurt if they had to install silly filters that would save lives.
That is how business operates.
Oh and by the way moving the goalposts doesn’t help your nonsensical arguments

No it is quite rational. When greed and profit is figured into it. Air pollution kills 50000 americans every year according to the AMA. Most of this comes from burning coal. The EPA wnats coal burning plants to install better filters to cut down the deaths. But the coal industry says no, profits would be hurt if they installed costly filters.
So what happens? Every year 50000 americans die from air pollution. When I was a child, I watched a lake die. Not a small lake, Lake Eire. Couldn’t drink the water, swim or fish in the lake anymore. Everyone knew the lake was being poisoned, it took many years for this to happen. But it would cost money to stop it, so it continued for a long time. I live near another lake now, same thing, it is poisoned badly, but hey, profits were made. so what if the lake got poisoned?
When money is concerned, logic and reasoning go out the window. I haven’t seen a corporation yet be willing to cut their profit to stop polluting unless there was a law to stop them.
So you see if the world was a rational logical place, they wouldn’t destroy the environment. Just look at Enron which did a study back in 1971 which found that global warming was happening. they hid the report and have fought global warming ever since. And the reason is that there are tens of Trillions of dollars still out there to be extracted. And if global warming was really happening, they would have to stop. So yes they are like james bond villains in that they are greedy bastards who don’t care. Money is the ultimate motivator in our capitalist society.
I have seen what greed does to the environment and how little they care what damage they do. And if you think they care, it is you who is irrational and insane.

Bush filled the EPA with pro business hacks. And they have killed real studies that show how business pollute. So I go with the scientists who have nothing to gain. Actually the deaths are much higher for all forms of air pollution, about 200000 people die from all sorts from cars to coal plants.
But industry fights such data because it means that profits come 1st before people lives.
And linking to the economist a pro-business, get profit no matter the cost rag means nothing.
That’s the problem, you get your info from those whose business is to lie about the negative effects to the environment. It is like asking the fox whether the chickens are in danger. Of course the fox says no.
When the scientists who are not tied to big business nor have an agenda speak, those are the people I listen to. Not somebody whose profit depends upon lying. That is common sense. Listening to people whose career depends upon being able to destroy the environment is irrational. Of course they will tell you that everything is fine. That is like how environ buried their report of global warming and spent hundreds of millions on denying. It is like how tobacco lied about smoking for decades and hired doctors to tell people that smoking was good for them. Telling the truth is bad for business.

Normally climate does change at a slow rate. That is the problem though, our climate is not changing at a slow rate. And we know what happens the few times it has changed at a rapid rate, extinction.
Well I don’t know what paleoclimatologists you follow, but the majority say that what has happened in the past is happening now with an extinction coming on. According to paleoclimatology, doubling CO2 doubles the temp by 3 degrees C. When we hit 500PPM, we have doubled. Right now we have gained 1 degree C in 150 yrs, which is a rapid rise.
And paleoclimatologists agree that when rapid changes happened in the past, it has been devastating for life.
I study this, been studying it since the 60s’. And except for a few outliers, most scientists who are experts in the field of paleontology, climatology, and paleoclimatology all agree with climate change and how bad it will be. The only unknown is how fast and how bad it will be. And so far it has proven to be faster than predicted.

What does an astrophysicist know about climatology? Totally separate fields. And paleoclimatologists would tell you, that you are full of shit. Those scientists may have no financial stake, but they also don’t have any expertise. That is the problem with your list of scientists, they are in totally separate fields requiring expertise.
It would be like asking a climatologist to do the work that a bio chemist does. They couldn’t.
The problem is that you think these climatologists have a vested interest in saying global warming, climate change is happening. They don’t. Their salary does not depend upon what they find, they will get pay no matter what they find. The only ‘scientists’ who have a financial stake are the deniers who get paid by the carbon industry to deny. And they get paid far more than the climatologists do, about 50% more. Plus bonuses.
The 97% is that out of all the scientific papers that have been written, 97% support climate change, while only 3% do not. In science when the majority agree, you better have some real good proof that everyone is wrong and so far no one has been able to do that.
There have been 12000 peer reviewed papers published on climate change. 97% of them stated climate change was happening. Over 90% of the climatologists, the real experts agree that climate change is happening. In the scientific field that is about as good as it gets in whether the science is settled or not.
Science takes the best proof they have to say something is this or that. Unless someone can come along with proof that everyone else is wrong and so far as I said, no one has been able to do that. Science can be cutthroat because everyone wants to make a name. Thus if you can prove someone’s paper is wrong, you score brownie points. So everyone who peer reviews the papers has something to gain if they discover something wrong and can prove it.
That is how science works, your paper better be good or else it will be ripped to shreds. I don’t know where you get your made up numbers from, probably some denier site that takes things out of context.