Until now I've held my tongue (fingers) on Trump, but this is completely moronic!

Shouldn't be much of a shock. Throughout his entire campaign, he has said he was going to eliminate regulations on businesses.

Like a fox guarding the chicken coop.

climate change is a hoax

The only saving I want is less taxes.

I'll be happy in hell and with warmer temperatures here. I hate the cold. Just quit trying to take more of my hard earned money while I'm here.

Links to scientific proof please.

Oh yeah, you don't need proof or science.

You repeat what's told to you like a munchausen by proxy syndrome

Trump will go down in history as the worst POTUS ever. He will be lucky to make it 2 years..

I think its pretty urgent that we need to remove all CO2 from the atmosphere ASAP, or we're all doomed.

You can cry about "CO2 is plant food" all you want. Who cares if all the plants die? They're nothing but decorations anyway, and they serve no real actual purpose to humans or the earth.

You can cry about "we'll all starve to death without plants" all you want. That's BS. Duh, food comes from stores and restaurants. Everyone knows that.

So yeah, that guy was a poor choice.

I can't believe that a majority of Americans are so mentally handicapped

lol. This coming from you is hilarious. The burden of proof is on you believers and so far you have failed miserably. You show me the evidence it exists and I will disprove your evidence. How does that sound? For the record, the house I grew up in and my mother still lives in has had solar panels on it for probably longer than you've been alive. She went to school for computer programming on a Al Gore scholarship. She bought into his global cooling BS back then. My uncle attended Vanderbilt with Al. Remember I'm from his home state. I do know a bit more about the subject and the key player than you think. There's a reason he peddles his snake oil in California and not here.

Links please

What would you like links to? The solar panels on my moms house?

How about that global cooling myth. There's shitloads of links for ya here.

Popular Technology.net: 1970s Global Cooling Alarmism


1970 - Is Mankind Manufacturing a New Ice Age for Itself? (L.A. Times, January 15, 1970)
1970 - New Ice Age May Descend On Man (Sumter Daily Item, January 26, 1970)
1970 - Pollution Prospect A Chilling One (The Argus-Press, January 26, 1970)
1970 - Pollution's 2-way 'Freeze' On Society (Middlesboro Daily News, January 28, 1970)
1970 - Cold Facts About Pollution (The Southeast Missourian, January 29, 1970)
1970 - Pollution Could Cause Ice Age, Agency Reports (St. Petersburg Times, March 4, 1970)
1970 - Scientist predicts a new ice age by 21st century (The Boston Globe, April 16, 1970)
1970 - Pollution Called Ice Age Threat (St. Petersburg Times, June 26, 1970)
1970 - U.S. and Soviet Press Studies of a Colder Arctic (The New York Times, July 18, 1970)
1970 - Dirt Will Bring New Ice Age (The Sydney Morning Herald, October 19, 1970)
1971 - Ice Age Refugee Dies Underground (Montreal Gazette, Febuary 17, 1971)
1971 - Pollution Might Lead To Another Ice Age (The Schenectady Gazette, March 22, 1971)
1971 - Pollution May Bring Ice Age - Scientist Rites Risk (The Windsor Star, March 23, 1971)
1971 - U.S. Scientist Sees New Ice Age Coming (The Washington Post, July 9, 1971)

Maybe you should go to your safe space, lie down in the fetal position, and cry your eyes out

Or...on the other hand...he just might turn out to be the best POTUS in our lifetimes. He will be lucky to get reelected and run this country for 8 years.

Nico, come on man, you think this guy is a good choice? For real??

True, it's a globalist tax grab, now we have nationalists taking control which at least puts a stop to this scam for a bit

When a UK university was hacked, turned out there climate science department were rigging their results to make 'Climate Change' appear a reality, why would they need to do that I wonder?

Providing Insight Into Climate Change

https://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=3

Myths / Facts

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING

MYTH 1: Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate.

FACT: The HadCRUT3 surface temperature index, produced by the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office and the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, shows warming to 1878, cooling to 1911, warming to 1941, cooling to 1964, warming to 1998 and cooling through 2011. The warming rate from 1964 to 1998 was the same as the previous warming from 1911 to 1941. Satellites, weather balloons and ground stations all show cooling since 2001. The mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8 C over the 20th century is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects"). Two science teams have shown that correcting the surface temperature record for the effects of urban development would reduce the reported warming trend over land from 1980 by half. See here.

There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.

MYTH 2: The "hockey stick" graph proves that the earth has experienced a steady, very gradual temperature decrease for 1000 years, then recently began a sudden increase.

FACT: Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time. For instance, the Medieval Warm Period, from around 1000 to1200 AD (when the Vikings farmed on Greenland) was followed by a period known as the Little Ice Age. Since the end of the 17th Century the "average global temperature" has been rising at the low steady rate mentioned above; although from 1940 ? 1970 temperatures actually dropped, leading to a Global Cooling scare.

The "hockey stick", a poster boy of both the UN's IPCC and Canada's Environment Department, ignores historical recorded climatic swings, and has now also been proven to be flawed and statistically unreliable as well. It is a computer construct and a faulty one at that. See here for more information.

MYTH 3: Human produced carbon dioxide has increased over the last 100 years, adding to the Greenhouse effect, thus causing most of the earth's warming of the last 100 years.

FACT: Carbon dioxide levels have indeed changed for various reasons, human and otherwise, just as they have throughout geologic time. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased by about 120 part per million (ppm), most of which is likely due to human-caused CO2 emissions. The RATE of growth during this century has been about 0.55%/year. However, there is no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO2 levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this causal relationship. There is solid evidence that, as temperatures move up and down naturally and cyclically through solar radiation, orbital and galactic influences, the warming surface layers of the earth's oceans expel more CO2 as a result.

MYTH 4: CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas.

FACT: Greenhouse gases form about 3% of the atmosphere by volume. They consist of varying amounts, (about 97%) of water vapour and clouds, with the remainder being gases like CO2, CH4, Ozone and N2O, of which carbon dioxide is the largest amount. Hence, CO2 constitutes about 0.04% of the atmosphere. While the minor gases are more effective as "greenhouse agents" than water vapour and clouds, the latter are overwhelming the effect by their sheer volume and ? in the end ? are thought to be responsible for 75% of the "Greenhouse effect". (See here) At current concentrations, a 3% change of water vapour in the atmosphere would have the same effect as a 100% change in CO2.

Those attributing climate change to CO2 rarely mention these important facts.

MYTH 5: Computer models verify that CO2 increases will cause significant global warming.

FACT: The computer models assume that CO2 is the primary climate driver, and that the Sun has an insignificant effect on climate. Using the output of a model to verify its initial assumption is committing the logical fallacy of circular reasoning. Computer models can be made to roughly match the 20th century temperature rise by adjusting many input parameters and using strong positive feedbacks. They do not "prove" anything. Also, computer models predicting global warming are incapable of properly including the effects of the sun, cosmic rays and the clouds. The sun is a major cause of temperature variation on the earth surface as its received radiation changes all the time, This happens largely in cyclical fashion. The number and the lengths in time of sunspots can be correlated very closely with average temperatures on earth, e.g. the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period. Varying intensity of solar heat radiation affects the surface temperature of the oceans and the currents. Warmer ocean water expels gases, some of which are CO2. Solar radiation interferes with the cosmic ray flux, thus influencing the amount ionized nuclei which control cloud cover.

MYTH 6: The United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has proven that man?made CO2 causes global warming.

FACT: In a 1996 report by the UN on global warming, two statements were deleted from the final draft approved and accepted by a panel of scientists. Here they are:
1) ?None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.?
2) ?No study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to man?made causes?

To the present day there is still no scientific proof that man-made CO2 causes significant global warming.


MYTH 7: CO2 is a pollutant.

FACT: This is absolutely not true. Nitrogen forms 80% of our atmosphere. We could not live in 100% nitrogen either. Carbon dioxide is no more a pollutant than nitrogen is. CO2 is essential to life on earth. It is necessary for plant growth since increased CO2 intake as a result of increased atmospheric concentration causes many trees and other plants to grow more vigorously. Unfortunately, the Canadian Government has included CO2 with a number of truly toxic and noxious substances listed by the Environmental Protection Act, only as their means to politically control it. The graph here shows changes in vegetative cover due to CO2 fertilization between 1982 and 2010 (Donohue et al., 2013 GRL). A major study here shows that CO2 fertilization will likely increase the value of crop production between now and 2050 by an additional $11.7 trillion ($US 2014). See here for more discussion.


MYTH 8: Global warming will cause more storms and other weather extremes.

FACT: There is no scientific or statistical evidence whatsoever that supports such claims on a global scale. Regional variations may occur. Growing insurance and infrastructure repair costs, particularly in coastal areas, are sometimes claimed to be the result of increasing frequency and severity of storms, whereas in reality they are a function of increasing population density, escalating development value, and ever more media reporting. See here for graphs and discussion of extreme weather.


MYTH 9: Receding glaciers and the calving of ice shelves are proof of man-made global warming.

FACT: Glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for hundreds of years. Recent glacier melting is a consequence of coming out of the very cool period of the Little Ice Age. Ice shelves have been breaking off for centuries. Scientists know of at least 33 periods of glaciers growing and then retreating. It?s normal. Besides, changes to glacier's extent is dependent as much on precipitation as on temperature.


MYTH 10: The earth?s poles are warming and the polar ice caps are breaking up and melting.

FACT: The earth is variable. The Arctic Region had warmed from 1966 to 2005, due to cyclic events in the Pacific Ocean and soot from Asia darkening the ice, but there has been no warming since 2005. Current temperatures are the same as in 1943. The small Palmer Peninsula of Antarctica is getting warmer, while the main Antarctic continent is actually cooling. Ice cap thicknesses in both Greenland and Antarctica are increasing. North polar temperature graph here. South polar temperature graph here. See here for sea ice extent.

I think he's the best choice from the last decades, at least. He has broken the chain of establishment slaves (everyone before him) and corrupt family dictatorships (the bushes, the clintons).

I'm talking about Scott Pruitt.

You're talking about Trump himself.

I'll repeat, Nico, do you really think SCOTT PRUITT is a good choice to head the EPA?

It has been proven and is undeniable at this point--you are the only one left here. Your argument is that you grew up in Al Gore's state? That's impressive.. I guess you didn't go to Vanderbilt?

it shouldn't matter if you "believe" in climate change or not. we should all want to pollute this earth as little as possible. if you don't, you're just a short sighted asshole.

https://www.google.com/search?q=SCOTT+PRUITT

did the voices in your head tell you that? probably not healthy to listen to those.

It hasn't been proven. Show me your proof. Make me a believer.

I don't know him so i can't tell, i'll have to look into it.

The old way of believing that you have to lie to the masses to accomplish a goal are gone. This was key to Hillary's loss. The MSM is grasping at straws as well trying to understand why their lies don't work anymore.

Pay less tax, expect more debt.

It costs a lot of money to run a modern civilised country. Which is why the US is slipping down the ladder.

The voices in my head told me all about Climategate, I looked it up after you expressed doubt, turns out they are right

Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation - Telegraph

'proof' isn't a term that's used in science.

empirical evidence is, the totality of which indicates that our behavior is causing conditions that will render the planet inhospitable to humans

I honestly think the disconnect for many is rooted in a misunderstanding of how scientific knowledge is produced. I dunno if having a stronger focus on science in schools would change that, suspect it might be a start.

BTW do you know what Al Gore went to Vanderbilt for? Divinity School. He attended one of the most prestigious Universities to learn how to spread myths and fool masses.

Empirical evidence doesn't exist to backup the 'Climate Change' narrative, so instead they go with 'consensus', that should ring all the alarm bells, as science isn't about consensus.

In schools they need to teach how science is bought and paid for, 'results' are often fictional, just to make sure a scientist gets paid.

A good place to learn more https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0

im not sure what that has to do with what i said. lets say climate change doesn't exist for sake of argument. wouldn't you still want to keep the earth in the best condition possible? not just for the future but for now? so you don't have to inhale and drink more toxic pollutants, so you can still have greenspace, so you can slow down extinction of species?

I can.

It's better to look after this planet for sure, but that's not what 'Climate Change' is about, it's about taxes for the globalist, it's simply a tax grab

you are asking a loaded question, of course everyone wants to preserve the environment... the real question is more like, would you rather pay $2/gallon for gas or $3/gallon with slightly stricter environmental controls... if phrased correctly it becomes a debatable issue...

https://www.google.de/webhp?hl=en&gw...in+4+000+years

The world doesn't revolve around your tiny bubble.

Personally, I think it's too late to do anything. Food and water are the first things that are in short supply. Hasn't reached America yet, but it will and the price rises will make many sit up and wonder why nothing was done.

Coastal flooding is already with us. As is mass migration from regions unable to sustain themselves.

When it comes to climate change I'm well aware how it's produced. By falsifying said "empirical evidence" and attacking anyone who disagrees.

we already pay more than 3 dollars per gallon for gas here in canada so its not much of a concern for me but if it comes down to money, the environment will lose every time. there has to be some way to discourage polluters, tax breaks for those who use more renewable resources, who can reduce their carbon footprint. there has to be some incentive to pollute less because its always cheaper (right now) to stick with the old ways.

So how would you penalise those poisoning your environment?

I'm not sure what tax rises, beside Carbon Tax, are applied in the US. How much do you pay in Carbon Taxes?

That is what you get if the other candidate is even worse. Than you just eat some bulshit about certain points cause at that moment in your life that is less important. The climate problem can wait 4 years, just like some other points.

I am in favour of sustainable energy. Best way to prevent oil wars. And everybody knows in the end it is better to use clean energy. When there was a Bangokok shutdown and no cars allowed in the center, the air was great and i stayed 4 weeks longer in the city. Imagine how that would be in every metropole, clean air!

Meet the new Surgeon General;
Dr. Jack

I doubt if he will be good. I'm willing to give him a chance. Here's what some are hoping he can turn around.



That's US jobs, companies, profits, $$$$, taxes, etc. Flowing out of the US. In 15 years China has quadrupled its hold over America. In the next 15 years, most of you will find it hard to find Americans with enough money to spend. Not only because of the increasing lack of disposable cash. The added problem is all the Third World Affiliates trying to drink out of your trough.

Will Trump stop that? We don't know.

Would Hilary have stopped it? No, she's part of the reason the US is dropping behind.

Here's the problem. Neither of them are powerful enough to make the changes. It needs Americans to stop voting for people dedicated to making America economically weaker. By exporting jobs and importing the goods once made in the US.

The hard part is a lot of Americans can;t stomach the idea of paying more for goods to keep their country strong. That will cost Trump the next election.

To a Trumper Change = Better nothing else matters

You do realize the term "greenhouse gas" is used because green houses pump extra CO2 into the green house to make plants grow faster.?.. Given that, if you're concerned about food what do you think is better more CO2 or less? If you were someone who believed there are too many people on earth and you wanted them to have less food and shorten their lifespan and decrease that amount what would you do? Would you try and convince them what is actually good for them is bad?

CO2 is not a pollutant and anyone who claims it is, is a liar spreading false information. Most idiots that believe in this myth confuse carbon dioxide with carbon monoxide.

"I think he's the best choice from the last decades" So you said this without even knowing who you were talking about? Point...Proven

They also pump it in to make it warmer, thus growing in the winter. CO2 is not a pollutant, it is a gas with an affect. Plants love CO2, however we keep cutting down plants by the millions of acres. Am I making sense.

you make it sound like this is a no-brainer, because this is all just a bs message board discussion... but if some politician came around and said "I want to increase taxes by 20%, we'll use those funds to improve environmental protection"... I'm pretty sure you would debate if having $1000s less income each year is worthwhile for a vague promise of "improve environmental protection"...

I'm not suggesting that there should be no environmental protection, but there needs to be a balance that will support robust economic growth, while preserving the environment the best we can...

It's not gonna happen. Every fucking pick he's made for his cabinet has been a lobbyist or a cronie. This EPA pick of his has absolutely zero experience in the field. His only fucking experience with the EPA is suing them.

Seriously don't be a dung beetle eating up the BS Trump is feeding you. Even you have to come to a point where it's very obvious he lied to you. His rambling of "draining the swap" you used to champion is just him laughing his ass at you.

He is filling his cabinet with lobbyist. That is the swap he was talking about doing away with. The simple fact if you aren't outraged about his picks as a so called former "drain the swap" supporter, means you simply didn't ever give a fuck and are just a troll.

Don't be like the MSM. I was talking about Trump - and you know it, spindoctor.