Two Princeton, MIT Scientists Say EPA Climate Regulations Based on a ‘Hoax’

[Cypress]

What these scientist arev saying is the Democrats are doing great harm to our country and our way of life for a poltical scam it has nothing to do with science


https://www.theepochtimes.com/artic...oReport&src_src=partner&src_cmp=BonginoReport

"Two scientists"?

That's hardly convincing. How many scientists signed off on the findings of the international IPCC reports?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Except the vast vast vast majority of scientists who specialize in this very topic think it is very very real.

Let's say you are down to your last $5000. You could go home and pay your mortgage or you can go to Las Vegas to bet it all and become a millionaire. The odds are astoudningly low that you will become a millionaire in Las Vegas.

When you, yourself, have no expertise in this subject siding with the minority scientists who do question climate change vs the ginormous number of scientists who think it is real is like thinking you'll go to LV and become a millionaire.

Instead you'll lose your house.

Except the track record of 'climate science' when forced into legal proceedings has been abysmal. The bulk of the raw data isn't available for independent review (see Hansen et al. and court cases).

As far as it goes, we have no data to compare changes in climate to. There is no second system we can observe to determine how these effects are really being caused. That is to say, the Earth's temperature has been warming longer than any attribution to human activity can be applied. We know in the past the Earth has been warmer too, and that CO2 levels have varied considerably and have been higher in terms of the geologic past as well.

It is entirely possible that the current changes are naturally, not anthropogenically driven. Given that climate science is relatively new, and that the field has gotten so much wrong in the past decades, it should be natural to approach anything offered with a great deal of skepticism.

I'd also add that the proffered solutions to this problem are all politically driven ones rather than scientifically driven. For example, wind and solar are pushed as virtually the ONLY solution to energy generation when these two are the absolutely WORST way to generate reliable, mass electrical power there is. Politics, not science or sound engineering is why that is.

That's but one example of how the whole anthropogenic CO2 issue smacks of politics first, science third. You can go ahead and bet on the climate scientists if you want, but their track record to date really sucks and is almost a sure bet they're wrong in whole or part and their solutions, politically driven, are going to be a disaster for humanity.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Actually we are in an interglacial. If the Milankovich Cycles are the driver for that we are now BEHIND SCHEDULE for the next glaciation event and going in the wrong direction temperature-wise. Why would that be?

Because we don't know shit about the climate of planets relatively speaking.