Trump Updates Climate Stance: It's Not a Chinese Hoax!

[luckyshot]

In a characteristically inconsistent 60 Minutes interview dRumpf had this to say about the existential threat of our times:

Stahl sparred with Trump in the aftermath of Hurricane Michael, citing the recent trend of powerful storms. Trump has called climate change a hoax perpetuated by China in the past, but in the interview, seemed to partly reverse his position.
"I think something's happening," Trump said.
"Something's changing and it'll change back again. I don't think it's a hoax," he told Stahl.
"But I don't know that it's man-made. I will say this. I don't want to give trillions and trillions of dollars. I don't want to lose millions and millions of jobs. I don't want to be put at a disadvantage," he said.
"Look, scientists also have a political agenda," he added.

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/15/6574...le-mattis-exit-climate-change-and-kim-jong-un

So there you go. You can rest easy for the remainder of your life knowing that something drastic is happening, but we are not causing it... because if we were, you know, jobs (even though there are enough clean energy jobs available to replace fossil fuel jobs if we had the political will to make it so) and also, nothing that would hurt the interests of the Republican party could possibly be true.

It's not a hoax, but then again, science is fake news, so probably a hoax.

It will probably just change back by itself.

Probably.

Sure.

Future generations will look back at Republicans in the era of climate denial with absolute scorn, and justifiably so.

 

[nac386]

That was one of his worst moments in that interview. He did fine for most of it, even making the reporter seem a bit silly to me at times. But the climate change part he sounded pretty dumb, pulling the old, "Scientists have a big political agenda" card. He acts like scientists are a bunch of Al Gores or something, and not just people who study science. My girlfriend works at the NIH in Bethesda, and believe me scientists are not faking research for political reasons. The closer you are to the situation, the more ridiculous you realize that type of argument is. I think most people that say stuff like that must not actually know any scientists.

 

[HOLA]

"Look, scientists also have a political agenda," he added.

They don't want the planet to become uninhabitable?

 

[m25105]

They don't want the planet to become uninhabitable?

Fucking liberals!

 

[NoDak]

That was one of his worst moments in that interview. He did fine for most of it, even making the reporter seem a bit silly to me at times. But the climate change part he sounded pretty dumb, pulling the old, "Scientists have a big political agenda" card. He acts like scientists are a bunch of Al Gores or something, and not just people who study science. My girlfriend works at the NIH in Bethesda, and believe me scientists are not faking research for political reasons. The closer you are to the situation, the more ridiculous you realize that type of argument is. I think most people that say stuff like that must not actually know any scientists.

There is no political agenda.

The Keeling Curve observatory mentioned in the Exxon internal documents I've posted before - from 1979 - that mention a number of potential ramifications that corroborate with and have been far better fleshed out into the modern scientific consensus in the four decades since... is still a great source of data.

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/

 

[Ripskater]

Man made Climate Change theory is a hoax.

 

[luckyshot]

Man made Climate Change theory is a hoax.

You better hope Jesus ain't grading on smarts... or stewardship of the Earth.

 

[Ripskater]

You better hope Jesus ain't grading on smarts.

He's not. The "grade" is are your sins forgiven?

 

[luckyshot]

He's not.

Idk, if he includes future generations in the whole "love thy neighbor" thing, you're gonna have some explaining to do.

 

[nac386]

Man made Climate Change theory is a hoax.

What evidence do you have to suggest that?

 

[Ripskater]

What evidence do you have to suggest that?

What is your evidence that eating meat and me driving a V8 pickup is changing the weather?

 

[lilelvis]

There is no political agenda.

The Keeling Curve observatory mentioned in the Exxon internal documents I've posted before - from 1979 - that mention a number of potential ramifications that corroborate with and have been far better fleshed out into the modern scientific consensus in the four decades since... is still a great source of data.

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/

Why do they use co2 data from a site next to an active volcano?

I wonder why there are so many critics?

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Once again someone who knows nothing about the science behind climate change is asked about it.
Once again, it's too much to take even a coherent stab at a response.

The fact that it's this dope of a president is just a toothpick on top of the shit sandwich.

 

[nac386]

What is your evidence that eating meat and me driving a V8 pickup is changing the weather?

Causes:
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

Consensus:
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

 

[Ripskater]

Causes:
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

Consensus:
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

Consensus is not proof.

 

[TheGreatA]

Scientists do have political agendas. But we should not rely on a guy like Trump to tell us what's happening or not happening to the climate. Because he, most definitely, has a political agenda.

If you asked him privately about it, he'd probably say, "what the fuck do I know?". But he's the kind of a guy who will always struggle for an answer when put on the spot. Sometimes to his own detriment.

In any case, I feel like we should not even need the concept of climate change, to have the environment on our agenda. You should always strive to conserve the environment for the long-term, most especially as a conservative.

If you leave behind a toxic wasteland for your grand-children, what kind of a "conservative" were you?

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

I for one welcome the mass extinction of our species.

 

[nac386]

Consensus is not proof.

Do you believe the earth is flat?

 

[Ripskater]

Climate change theory makes some people (Al Gore) a lot of money. It would also be a good way for globalists to tax Americans and American companies.

 

[luckyshot]

Causes:
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

Consensus:
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

And here's the other shoe to drop: if climate change is a real thing-- and it is-- how much of our collective political attention should it be receiving?

At this point, I think it is like 60% (and that's only because we still don't have universal healthcare, so that has to take up like 40%, lol).

Arguing whether or not man made climate change is real shouldn't be an issue.

How we are going to co-ordinate an approach to fight climate change should be the issue in politics.

The United States is so regressive on this issue that it is truly tragic.