Do You Believe in Man-Made Climate Change?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, glo135 said:

It truly is a scary thing when it comes to the idea of climate change and people not realizing how our planet is slowing being destroyed by own nature of greed and destruction of this planet's resources. There are multiple sources and evidence that explain how climate change is real and how we can help slow it down before the human race becomes extinct along side other animals.

I would be interested to know how we can help to slow it down.  It appears that so far all attempts to make even the slightest dent in the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has failed. 

We've just been forced into various restrictions that helped clean the air in some of the dirtiest spots on the planet but the effect on CO2 and CH4 concentrations has been minimal. 

The Chinese are leading the way in building new coal fired power plants, and while we could help them out a little with LNG, we are having some trouble getting it to the coast.

[mowich]

On 2/19/2020 at 12:24 PM, Zeitgeist said:

What makes it their territory?  Title hasn't been established.  Unelected chiefs making non-binding calls against elected chiefs.  Seems very dubious.

It is dubious especially considering that the current crop of hereditary chiefs illegally kicked out many of the hereditary matriarchs who supported the elected chiefs.

[mowich]

On 2/20/2020 at 9:19 AM, Rue said:

I isolate the above words. They get to the heart f one of the continuing legal issues. When Canada's non indigenous government created the structure of the myriad of indigenous nations we mixed unelected (inherited, bloodline Chiefs) with elected ones. That in itself has created problems as has a lack of uniformity in approaching business by the Chiefs of each nation. Some take kick-backs and look the other way and do not spent it on their communities but hoard it for themselves. Some engage in actually very creative and constructive alliances with businesses employing people from their nations and protecting their environment and building infrastructure in their communities...and  some do not trust any form of Western business and shun it. Because of that there is no uniform approach and its very complex as technically each nation among the nations is equal in legal authority and there is no strong leader who can unify these nations at this time. As well some nations have unpaid bills from businesses and still seek compensation for  violated treaties while others do not as they have been compensated. 

The nations within the nation of nations are split. That now  requires an indigenous  politician with a backbone to be able to sit down and talk with vision and leadership and rally disparate causes and interests.

Me Z I personally believe the whole reservation system was created because it was an exercise in couching or sanitizing or containing indigenous people in open air prisons and keeping them separate from European settlers. That was then. Dwelling on the past simply prevents moving ahead. Yes the reservation system was part of an exercise to jail people without using walls. Its time to take those walls or reservations down.  Enough already. Its time to  focus on what can be done now to heal any remainingconflicts. It is also  time to deal head on with the corruption within the indigenous self governing structure and with the ineptitude in our own federal government's handing of the indigenous portfolio. The question is will anyone surface from the indigenous and on indigenous communities who can do this?  It certainly won't be Prince Justin of Trudeau or his Band of Merry Men, Bill, Seamus, etc.

 

What it will take is strong Indigenous leadership from bands that have proven to be successful, whose communities have secure employment and the necessities of life.  There are many of them across this country and it is past time they step up and show other indigenous communities that looking forward not backward, working with - not against - provincial and federal governments will help them to attain their goals.

[mowich]

On 2/20/2020 at 10:02 AM, Zeitgeist said:

The truth is that any community that relies on outside funding to remain in a particular location is unsustainable.  Other than transitional funding away from such a location, no matter how "sovereign" one might consider the place, no ongoing outside funding should be provided.  On what basis, being a member of a select race?  It's just wrong.  All conversations about Indigenous issues always end on that note.  No self-determination without self-sustainability.  Those communities that can survive on their own without infusions from the outside, that can collect their own taxes to pay completely for their own services, are indeed independent.  How many such communities are there in Canada that could do that?  I'm also talking about covering the costs of health and education, of course, as currently taxpayers are paying for those for Indigenous.   Independence has to mean independence.  Almost always, when I hear about calls for greater autonomy, there is a request for more programs or funding from taxpayers.  Land claims will continue to go through the courts (unless Canada ceases to exist), but what value does that property have if it can't be privately owned and exchanged?  Reserve land that can't be sold ties Indigenous to one geographic location because that's where the free land and tax benefits are.  Indigenous status cards are another form of race-based privilege that creates pressure to only intermarry within the tribe.  It's retrograde, unhealthy institutionalized segregation and dependence.  No real progress can take place with the Indian Act, status cards, and the current reservation system in my opinion.  My opinion, however, will be construed as "colonial".  The way forward has to come from Indigenous.  

Agreed in full. Very well put.

[oops]

On 12/7/2020 at 4:17 PM, glo135 said:

It truly is a scary thing when it comes to the idea of climate change and people not realizing how our planet is slowing being destroyed

You might want to get up to speed on carbon capture.

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, oops said:

You might want to get up to speed on carbon capture.

Did you post about environmentalists being against carbon capture ?

[oops]

The poster said  "It truly is a scary thing when it comes to the idea of climate change and people not realizing how our planet is slowing being destroyed." I was trying to lead him to information about work being done on a solution that might provide hope for the planet. I assume that you take issue with that.

Edited January 1, 2021 by oops

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Did you post about environmentalists being against carbon capture ?

That was me.

https://theconversation.com/capturing-carbon-to-fight-climate-change-is-dividing-environmentalists-110142

 

Some 626 environmental groups, including Greenpeace, the Center for Biological Diversity and 350, recently laid out their vision in a letter they sent to U.S. lawmakers. They warned that they “vigorously oppose” several strategies, including the use of carbon capture and storage – a process that can trap excess carbon pollution that’s already warming the Earth, and lock it away.

 

 

Edited January 1, 2021 by bcsapper

[oops]

While the many are wandering hopelessly in despair saying that man made climate change will kill us all, there are the few who are working on a solution.  The solution might be to make carbon reduction profitable.

https://thebossmagazine.com/algae-carbon-capture/

Like other plants, algae take in carbon dioxide during photosynthesis. In fact, really all that’s required for algae to thrive are CO2, light, and water. AI company Hypergiant has designed the EOS bioreactor to be a self-contained carbon capture machine. By controlling water flow and light exposure, AI regulates the algae growth so it doesn’t spill out of the container, which doesn’t need constant supervision. Operating at peak efficiency, the EOS bioreactor can take as much CO2 out of the air as an acre of trees.

Users can harvest the algae for use in fertilizer, animal feed, and even human dietary supplements. Hypergiant’s plan is to bring to market a bioreactor that users can assemble themselves, with all the units sharing information with each other to improve efficiency.

 

https://davidsuzuki.org/what-you-can-do/carbon-offsets/

What is a carbon offset?

A carbon offset is a credit for emissions reductions given to one party that can be sold to another party to compensate for its emissions. Carbon offsets are typically measured in tonnes of CO2-equivalents and are bought and sold through international brokers, online retailers and trading platforms.

 

If companies could use carbon capture to produce saleable products, and also earn carbon credits which major emitters would be required to purchase, we could make serious progress toward aaddressing the problem.

 

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, oops said:

While the many are wandering hopelessly in despair saying that man made climate change will kill us all, there are the few who are working on a solution.  The solution might be to make carbon reduction profitable.

https://thebossmagazine.com/algae-carbon-capture/

Like other plants, algae take in carbon dioxide during photosynthesis. In fact, really all that’s required for algae to thrive are CO2, light, and water. AI company Hypergiant has designed the EOS bioreactor to be a self-contained carbon capture machine. By controlling water flow and light exposure, AI regulates the algae growth so it doesn’t spill out of the container, which doesn’t need constant supervision. Operating at peak efficiency, the EOS bioreactor can take as much CO2 out of the air as an acre of trees.

Users can harvest the algae for use in fertilizer, animal feed, and even human dietary supplements. Hypergiant’s plan is to bring to market a bioreactor that users can assemble themselves, with all the units sharing information with each other to improve efficiency.

 

https://davidsuzuki.org/what-you-can-do/carbon-offsets/

What is a carbon offset?

A carbon offset is a credit for emissions reductions given to one party that can be sold to another party to compensate for its emissions. Carbon offsets are typically measured in tonnes of CO2-equivalents and are bought and sold through international brokers, online retailers and trading platforms.

 

If companies could use carbon capture to produce saleable products, and also earn carbon credits which major emitters would be required to purchase, we could make serious progress toward aaddressing the problem.

 

No argument from me.  I think carbon capture is a great idea, and I don't care who makes money, or how much, from doing it.

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, oops said:

 I assume that you take issue with that.

Are you posting to me ?  

I will ask again: 

Did you post about environmentalists being against carbon capture ?

[oops]

50 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Are you posting to me ?  

I will ask again: 

Did you post about environmentalists being against carbon capture ?

Yes I was posting you. You quoted me responding to a post from someone else, so I assumed that you took issue with that post. I was in  fact not post about environmentalists being against carbon capture. I was actually saying that their fears might be lessened if they looked at carbon capture and the promise it holds for addressing the problem that is causing them distress. If you actually read the post I don't see how you missed that.

[oops]

7 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Some 626 environmental groups, including Greenpeace, the Center for Biological Diversity and 350, recently laid out their vision in a letter they sent to U.S. lawmakers. They warned that they “vigorously oppose” several strategies, including the use of carbon capture and storage – a process that can trap excess carbon pollution that’s already warming the Earth, and lock it away.

It doesn't surprise me that greenpeace opposes carbon capture and storage. They also oppose removing the stored carbon from the earth and releasing it. Have you ever heard them being for something? I hear they are opposed to world peace, and respecting your elders.

[Michael Hardner]

4 hours ago, oops said:

Yes I was posting you. You quoted me responding to a post from someone else, so I assumed that you took issue with that post. I was in  fact not post about environmentalists being against carbon capture. I was actually saying that their fears might be lessened if they looked at carbon capture and the promise it holds for addressing the problem that is causing them distress. If you actually read the post I don't see how you missed that.

I saw it once and couldn't find it again.  It seems clear from what you are saying.  

[WestCanMan]

On 1/26/2020 at 2:04 PM, ProudConservative said:

I'm starting to doubt that climate change is a hoax. We have had an usually warm winter in Kitchener, where many day's are above freezing. 

Climate change isn't a hoax. It's a well-documented scientific fact, going well back into pre-history. An example of a hoax was the hockey stick graph.

The only thing that's up for debate is whether climate change is because of the yachts & private jets of the people who are pontificating to us about man-made climate change or if it's caused by the exact same things that caused climate change for the last 100,000 years.

Maybe it was warm in Kitchener but we barely had a summer here in BC. There wasn't any 'shorts and t-shirts' weather here until July 12th and even after that summer was just like a spring with a bit less precipitation. 

If they don't have 2020 recorded as the coldest year on record in the Fraser Valley of BC then they're lying, period.

Another thing, we're actually at the start of another grand solar minimum that's supposed to last until the '50s. I'm not counting on wearing shorts through September in my lifetime.

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

1. An example of a hoax was the hockey stick graph.

2. The only thing that's up for debate is whether climate change is because of the yachts & private jets of the people who are pontificating to us about man-made climate change or if it's caused by the exact same things that caused climate change for the last 100,000 years.

3. Maybe it was warm in Kitchener but we barely had a summer here in BC. There wasn't any 'shorts and t-shirts' weather here until July 12th and even after that summer was just like a spring with a bit less precipitation. 

4. If they don't have 2020 recorded as the coldest year on record in the Fraser Valley of BC then they're lying, period.

5. Another thing, we're actually at the start of another grand solar minimum that's supposed to last until the '50s. I'm not counting on wearing shorts through September in my lifetime.

1. No, that's not a hoax.  You are being deceived by paid-for propaganda media.
2. It's not up for debate, it's for the first one
3. People who are NOT you (ie. people who know about climate change) use things called data, in the form of graphs.  It's better than you comparing two regions of Canada for summer 2020 and what people were wearing July 12th.
4. It's global climate change, there's no asterisk on the graphs for 'Fraser Valley'
5. 

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201908

People like you have to grow up, and learn the limits of your understanding ask questions and so on.

[oops]

New hope for man made environmental change that will help the Sahara produce more oxygen, and deplete more carbon.

TAP has designed a continental fresh-water pipeline to cross the Sahel area of Africa, beginning in the west in Mauritania, and culminating in the east at the Red Sea. TAP's pipeline is the first and only permanent solution to perennial drought throughout the Sahel and will mitigate the encroachment of the desert. Currently, thousands of hectares of land are lost to desertification every year across the Sahel countries of Africa.

Conceived and launched in Toronto, Canada, the Trans Africa Pipeline Inc. is a not-for-profit organization working in collaboration with the 11-country Pan African Great Green Wall (PAGGW) agency. TAP is also working with individual Sahel countries and with our U.S. charitable organization, the TAP Foundation U.S.

The Trans Africa Pipeline (TAP) project involves constructing an 8,000 km. fresh water pipeline (1.2 m to 1.5 m diameter) crossing 11 countries in the Sahel region of Africa. TAP's mission is to provide a sustainable supply of clean water for people and agriculture and support the goal of the Pan African Great Green Wall agency that involves the planting of millions of trees across a land corridor established by the 11 member countries.

https://transafricapipeline.org/inside.php?page=about

[WestCanMan]

7 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. No, that's not a hoax.  You are being deceived by paid-for propaganda media.
2. It's not up for debate, it's for the first one
3. People who are NOT you (ie. people who know about climate change) use things called data, in the form of graphs.  It's better than you comparing two regions of Canada for summer 2020 and what people were wearing July 12th.
4. It's global climate change, there's no asterisk on the graphs for 'Fraser Valley'
5. 

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201908

People like you have to grow up, and learn the limits of your understanding ask questions and so on.

The people who are pushing climate change are the exact same people who are caught lying to us over and over again. I have absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe a single word that comes out of the mouth of Trudeau or Lisa LaFlamme because they're scum.

If people like you didn't condone media disinformation and even defend their lying then maybe we'd have a media that we could trust instead of the boy who cried wolf.

[Michael Hardner]

33 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

1. The people who are pushing climate change are the exact same people who are caught lying to us over and over again.
2. I have absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe a single word that comes out of the mouth of Trudeau or Lisa LaFlamme because they're scum.
3. If people like you didn't condone media disinformation and even defend their lying then maybe we'd have a media that we could trust instead of the boy who cried wolf.

1. That's meaningless.  You don't trust people with degrees so you put them all together in a group maybe ?  Dunno.
2. Which one of those two told the American government agency NCDC to make that fake graph ?  Trudeau or Laflamme ?
3. That's rich.  People like YOU have lied that the election was stolen and told each other than over and over again and told each other that the MSM lies.  I don't *trust* the media, exactly, but I know that every MAGA idiot repeats lies with almost every breath.  Sorry that is a generalization I realize.
 

[WestCanMan]

On 1/9/2021 at 12:51 PM, Michael Hardner said:

1. That's meaningless.  You don't trust people with degrees so you put them all together in a group maybe ?  Dunno.
2. Which one of those two told the American government agency NCDC to make that fake graph ?  Trudeau or Laflamme ?
3. That's rich.  People like YOU have lied that the election was stolen and told each other than over and over again and told each other that the MSM lies.  I don't *trust* the media, exactly,
 

1) We hear things like "All climate scientists agree that blah blah blah" but we never see actual climatologists say anything of the sort. 

2) Can you show me an updated version of the hockey stick graph? Are there any cute, cuddly polar bears left?  

3) People like you knew that the election was 100% legit right on election night because they said it over and over on CNN, right? 

Don't you find it the least bit odd that the DNC and CNN told us for 4 straight years that the 2016 was definitely stolen, and then they somehow knew by 10 pm on election night that the 2020 election was guaranteed free from fraud? 

How did they know that MH? They were the world's foremost skeptics as of Jan 02 2020, and then suddenly within 24 hours they believed in the integrity of elections like Eric Swallwell believes in the integrity of Chinese spies.

Are Dem supporters really in a position to act like it's crazy to doubt the results of an election? We're 4 months and 4 days away from May 16 2021. Seems like we still have lots of room to cast doubts.

Especially when you consider how many times the Dems were caught actually cheating on recent elections, and their penchant for voter-fraud-friendly regulations.

Did you know that the Dems were trying to implement the mass-mailing of ballots long before covid? And that they successfully pushed through laws which removed the need for people's signatures to match the signatures on file for them at the state? And that they think that requiring ID at the pooling boots is racist? 

With all of their new laws, how could they possibly believe in election integrity?

What do you think prevents me from going through people's mailboxes and grabbing their ballots in a state where the signatures don't have to match? 

 

If the Dems were just some party that you never heard of before from Lithuania then you'd instantly see through all of their bogus election scams, but because you believe orange man bad you pre-emptively endorse all of the Demonrats' questionable election law changes before the ink is dry, don't you.

 

[Michael Hardner]

25 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

1) We hear things like "All climate scientists agree that blah blah blah" but we never see actual climatologists say anything of the sort. 

2) Can you show me an updated version of the hockey stick graph? Are there any cute, cuddly polar bears left?  

3) People like you knew that the election was 100% legit right on election night because they said it over and over on CNN, right? 

4) 5) Don't you find it the least bit odd that the DNC and CNN told us for 4 straight years that the 2016 was definitely stolen, and then they somehow knew by 10 pm on election night that the 2020 election was guaranteed free from fraud? 

6) Did you know that the Dems were trying to implement the mass-mailing of ballots long before covid? And that they successfully pushed through laws which removed the need for people's signatures to match the signatures on file for them at the state? And that they think that requiring ID at the pooling boots is racist?  With all of their new laws, how could they possibly believe in election integrity?

7) What do you think prevents me from going through people's mailboxes and grabbing their ballots in a state where the signatures don't have to match? 

8) because you believe orange man bad you pre-emptively endorse all of the Demonrats' questionable election law changes before the ink is dry, don't you.

 

1) You are right.  No climatologist would say ALL scientists agree on the current prevailing theory because they don't.
2) The 'polar bear' thing is separate.  I don't have a recent copy of the temperature graph.  They're easy to find though so what is your point ?
3) "People like you" Stop you right there.  If you are putting me in some box other than "people who disbelieve Trump" please clarify.  I don't doubt US elections or elections in the west, generally.  We have a mature (generally) political system with observers and so on.  I know because I have worked at polls before.  
4) You're comparing apples and oranges.  Nobody thought that the actually ballots were tampered with, at least nobody in the mainstream, nobody in the major press, none of the leaders.
5) Pelosi said the election was hijacked, which I think refers to mass social media involvement by foreign powers
6) Ok.  If you say so.  Why were they doing that ?
7) To do so on a mass scale would be detected.  How would you get the 1000s of votes needed to swing a state that way?
8) I don't know why the election law changes happened.  That's a fine topic but it's not believable that the election was hijacked by a conspiracy to steal votes this way.

[WestCanMan]

34 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) You are right.  No climatologist would say ALL scientists agree on the current prevailing theory because they don't.

Not according the CBC and CNN.

Quote

2) The 'polar bear' thing is separate.  I don't have a recent copy of the temperature graph.  They're easy to find though so what is your point ?

No, the polar bear thing was irrefutable proof of global warming. 

And what do you need a graph for? CNN's foremost expert on climatology and race relations, Great Thunberg, already addressed the issue. 

Quote

3) "People like you" Stop you right there.  If you are putting me in some box other than "people who disbelieve Trump" please clarify.  I don't doubt US elections or elections in the west, generally.  We have a mature (generally) political system with observers and so on.  I know because I have worked at polls before.  
 

1) I'm putting you in the basket that you said you belong in: the basket of 2020 born-again election believers. 

2) If you think that election observers are important then why do you have no sympathy for the election observers in the states who testified that they were harassed, bullied, lied to, wrongfully removed from polling stations, and otherwise prevented from performing their election duties?

If Infidel Dog, Dog on Porch and I kick you out of a polling station and you filed an affidavit and testified in court should the MSM call you a liar? I guess you'd be ok with that, right?

Quote

4) You're comparing apples and oranges.  Nobody thought that the actually ballots were tampered with, at least nobody in the mainstream, nobody in the major press, none of the leaders.
 

No, I'm comparing people who loudly proclaimed for 4 years that they believe in the bogeyman with the same people who suddenly don't believe in the bogeyman less than a month later, after hundreds of people testified in court that they saw him.

Quote

5) Pelosi said the election was hijacked, which I think refers to mass social media involvement by foreign powers

Oh sorry Michael, I didn't know that there was only one possible way to cheat on an election. My bad. 

Quote

6) Ok.  If you say so.  Why were they doing that ?

The same reason that the DNC rigged the Primary for Hillary when the rest of the country thought that it was a democratic process.

The same reason that CNN and Hillary conspired to cheat during the debates.

The same reason why the Dems say that illegal immigrants can vote. (How easy is it for people with no official records to register two or tree times to vote? Or register in multiple states under different names? Who could keep track? What do people with nothing to lose have to lose if they get caught? You know damned well that their citizenship won't be revoked by Dems so don't even go there.) 

The same reason that the Dems say they believe that people should not need to show ID to vote. (It's got nothing to do with racism, because people need ID to buy cigarettes and take out library books too).

The same reason why the Dems believe that signatures on ballots don't need to match with signatures on record at the state.

The same reason why the Dems pretended that they had proof of collusion for 4 years when they were eventually found to have none at all.

They're cheaters, and they like election scams, so they like voter-fraud-friendly systems.

The majority of GOP voters are working class people who can't risk jailtime just for a few votes. Not so for the Dems, who sucked in the welfare voters. Do you think any of those Antifa losers have a house or car to lose if they go to jail? At best they have skateboards.

Quote

7) To do so on a mass scale would be detected.  How would you get the 1000s of votes needed to swing a state that way?
 

That's just one example of a mail-in scam.

Another is just to print ballots that get counted without any observers present. If you don't fill out the down-ballot you can check those off in a hurry.

Quote

8) I don't know why the election law changes happened.  That's a fine topic but it's not believable that the election was hijacked by a conspiracy to steal votes this way.

Every time the Dems open their mouths about elections they have a new voter-fraud-friendly scam to roll out.

What was the last thing they ever said about elections that made sense?

"Russians stole the 2016 election after our beloved Barack Obama refused to listen to warnings from Republicans on the House Intel Committee who told him 'Russia plans to interfere in our next election'"?

Obama even went on to brag about how American elections were impervious to interference before the 2016 election. Then the Dems whined about outside interference for 4 years. Then at 10:07 pm on Jan 03 2020 election interference was suddenly deemed impossible again lol. The dems can't make up their minds. They are a huge joke.

Edited January 12, 2021 by WestCanMan

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, WestCanMan said:

1) Not according the CBC and CNN.

2)No, the polar bear thing was irrefutable proof of global warming. 

3) And what do you need a graph for? CNN's foremost expert on climatology and race relations, Great Thunberg, already addressed the issue. 

4) I'm putting you in the basket that you said you belong in: the basket of 2020 born-again election believers. 

 

1) Do you have a cite where they say that there's no dissent on climate change ?  That would be something you could complain about.  Now I KNOW you aren't talking about the term "consensus" which is entirely different and acceptable.
2) From whom ?  If it was some enviro troll then who cares.  Just like I take the Trump cult's behaviour as somewhat different than the leadership.  Don't follow trolls.
3) Greta Thunberg isn't a climate scientist... you are starting to muddy the waters here and I am not at all interested in trying to separate out issues with you if you do that.
4) Off topic and I addressed that>

The rest of the post was easy - it's off topic so I just deleted it.  @ me on an election thread if you have something for me to look at.  But, basically, I'm not interested in chasing down individual allegations of election fraud.  The idea that there was a mass fraud is a 9/11-truth scaled conspiracy theory.  To commit election fraud across many counties and many states under the noses of poll watchers would be possible but I haven't seen any evidence.  I'll give you a token for ONE FREE discussion point - but you have to use it on an election thread by '@'-ing me.

Have a just-below-average day  
 

[Infidel Dog]

On 1/9/2021 at 4:52 AM, Michael Hardner said:

1. No, that's not a hoax.  You are being deceived by paid-for propaganda media.
2. It's not up for debate, it's for the first one
3. People who are NOT you (ie. people who know about climate change) use things called data, in the form of graphs.  It's better than you comparing two regions of Canada for summer 2020 and what people were wearing July 12th.
4. It's global climate change, there's no asterisk on the graphs for 'Fraser Valley'
5. 

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201908

People like you have to grow up, and learn the limits of your understanding ask questions and so on.

That whole post is so disingenuous.

You're reacting to somebody who said the Hockey Stick Graph specifically was a hoax not the general idea that climate changes. He was reacting to somebody who claimed he'd changed his mind about climate change because Ontario got warm for awhile. The fallacy of that was pointed out. Climate Changes. Always has. But climate is not weather. In Ontario or BC. That was his point. 

Then you appear to be doing that thing where you guys claim to be the ones who own science or something. You post a graph that shows climate changing since the end of the little ice age. Good for you, but nobody denied that.

I notice you weren't so quick to post "the data" back when you were doubting the hoax element of the hockey stick graph that goes back to the Medieval Warm Period. Go ahead though Science Guy post your "data" showing how the Medieval Warm Period didn't exist and I'll give you more data than you can choke down showing you it did.

In other words this isn't the first time climate has gotten warm. If you have this data showing conclusively that man is responsible for it this time post that. 

[Infidel Dog]

On second thought don't bother.

Later in the conversation here there seems to be a push to deny the connection between the hysteria and the data or lack of it that's supposed to support it.

If you want to exclusively talk data, go there then. I'm your Huckleberry. But if you want to insinuate there is a crisis of human caused warming without actually supporting this idea with your claimed data, then claiming, and I quote, "2. It's not up for debate",  then you are on the side of Greta and Gore, which I'm not objecting to, only noticing the obvious. We can debate both those aspects.

I'll go first but I have somebody to speak for me on the intertwining of those 2 debates: