Donald Trump has failed to make America great enough to make more Americans think life is worth living here. Life expectancy in the greatest nation in the world decreased in 2017 from 78.7 years to 78.6 years. While women stayed steady at 81.1 years, men declined from 76.2 to 76.1.
Many countries that pay for health care the way Senator Bernie Sanders and I want us to pay for health care have life expectancies above 80 years. Canadians, French, and Swedes can all expect to live past 82.
We’re making progress on heart disease and cancer, but we’re losing more neighbors to unintentional injuries and suicide:
A big chunk of those unintentional injuries are drug overdoses:
Tragically, this troubling trend is largely driven by deaths from drug overdose and suicide. Life expectancy gives us a snapshot of the Nation’s overall health and these sobering statistics are a wakeup call that we are losing too many Americans, too early and too often, to conditions that are preventable. CDC is committed to putting science into action to protect U.S. health, but we must all work together to reverse this trend and help ensure that all Americans live longer and healthier lives [Dr. Robert R. Redfield, CDC Director, media statement, 2018.11.29].
In other words, Americans are dying of despair:
CDC officials did not speculate about what’s behind declining life expectancy, but Dr. William Dietz, a disease prevention expert at George Washington University, sees a sense of hopelessness.
Financial struggles, a widening income gap and divisive politics are all casting a pall over many Americans, he suggested. “I really do believe that people are increasingly hopeless, and that that leads to drug use, it leads potentially to suicide,” he said [“CDC Says Life Expectancy Down as More Americans Die Younger Due to Suicide and Drug Overdose,” AP via CBS News, 2018.11.29].
The current White House is mostly ignoring drug overdoses. The White House did sign a bill in August directing the FCC to study updating a national suicide hotline. Maybe we’ll be able to ignore our despair by plunging into the work of building dikes to save Miami, New York, and Boston. But climate change—another real threat that the current White House not only ignores but asserts does not exist—further threatens our life expectancy with increased disease:
The proportion of Earth’s population that’s vulnerable to heat-related death and disease continues to grow around the world because of human-caused climate change, according to a report released this week.
“Climate change is a medical emergency,” said report co-author Renee Salas, a doctor of emergency medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital. “It is truly harming the health of Americans and especially the most vulnerable … children, the elderly, minorities and the poor” [Doyle Rice, “Extreme Heat from Climate Change a ‘Medical Emergency’ Sickening Tens of Millions Worldwide,” USA Today, 2018.11.28].
Rather than investing in environmental and health care, the White House is promoting extractive industries that make climate change and health harms worse:
The health burden of such inaction has been immense, with people in more than 90% of cities breathing polluted air that is toxic to their cardiovascular and respiratory health. Indeed, between 2010, and 2016, air pollution concentrations worsened in almost 70% of cities around the globe, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs; indicator 3.5.1). In 2015 alone, fine particulate matter (ie, atmospheric particulate matter with a diameter of less than 2·5 μm [PM2·5]) was responsible for 2·9 million premature deaths, with coal being responsible for more than 460 000 (16%) of these deaths, and with the total death toll (from other causes including particulates and emissions such as nitrogen oxide) being substantially higher (indicator 3.5.2). Of concern, global employment in fossil-fuel extractive industries actually increased by 8% between 2016, and 2017, reversing the strong decline seen since 2011 (indicator 4.4). At a time when national health budgets and health services face a growing epidemic of lifestyle diseases, continued delay in unlocking the potential health co-benefits of climate change mitigation is short-sighted and damaging for human health [Nick Watts et al., “The 2018 Report of the Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change: Shaping the Health of Nations for Centuries to Come,” The Lancet, 2018.11.28].
The Lancet diagrams multiple pathways between climate change and human health harms:
Things look bleak in Trumpistan. But let’s not despair. Let’s admit we have problems, and let’s look for positive ways to solve them. (And in that spirit, let’s get back to electing role models instead of idiots.)
Related Reading: Strangely, suicide is declining almost everywhere else in the world, including in Russia. Urbanization is lowering suicide in China and India:
That seems counter-intuitive since it is associated with the weakening of the social bonds which, according to Emile Durkheim, a 19th-century sociologist and theorist of suicide, helped protect people against suicidal urges. Yet all over the world, suicide rates tend to be higher in rural areas than in urban ones. Social bonds sometimes constrain people as well as sustaining them; escaping an abusive husband or tyrannical mother-in-law is easier in a city than in a village. And the means to kill oneself are harder to come by in a town than in the countryside [“Suicide Is Declining Almost Everywhere,” The Economist, 2018.11.24].
…while the facilitation of impulse suicides by guns keeps America’s suicide rate anomalously high:
But the main means of suicide in America is guns. They account for half of suicides, and suicides account for more firearms deaths than homicides do. Guns are more efficient than pills, so people who impulsively shoot themselves are more likely to end up in the morgue than in the emergency ward. According to Mr Miller, gun-ownership levels largely explain the variation in suicide rates, which range from 26 per 100,000 in Montana to five in Washington, DC. If America gave up its guns, suicides would crash [“Suicide Is Declining Almost Everywhere,” The Economist, 2018.11.24].
Fewer guns means more Americans.
Cory writes:
Would you mind clarifying what you mean when you say the “White House” asserts climate change doesn’t exist? Do you mean President Trump himself, or some official statement from within the executive branch, or something else?
Be nice to see a story on opioid lawsuits. From what I have seen there are literally thousands of opioid addicted newborns with brain and other damages that will need lifetime care and the lawsuits may leave them high and dry at settlement time.
Drugs are treated like guns. At the first sign of over/misuse flood the market with more of both. No wonder people have lost hope.
Kurt- White House Alters EPA Scientific Document on Climate Change …
https://www.ucsusa.org/center-for-science-and…/white-house-alters-epa.html
In recent years, the White House has often treated climate change less as a … The elimination of the summary statement—non-controversial within the science …
Trump administration climate change report is dead wrong, says …
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/27/politics/donald-trump-climate-change…/index.html
4 days ago – Trump administration climate change report is dead wrong, says Trump … Trump, in an official White House statement, said “our intelligence …
Trump administration will try to ‘ignore’ its own climate change report …
https://www.independent.co.uk › News › World › Americas
5 days ago – A White House statement said the report, started under the Obama administration, was “largely based on the most extreme scenario” of global …
POLITICS: White House plays down climate report’s alarming findings …
https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060107253
5 days ago – In a statement, a White House spokeswoman said the newly … “To better assess the potential future effects of climate change, we need to focus …
WHITE HOUSE: Trump questions global report on climate change …
https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060102157
Oct 10, 2018 – President Trump expressed skepticism yesterday about a major U.N. report on climate change that warned of irreversible warming if the world …
The Latest: US backs G20 statement, except on climate change …
https://www.sfchronicle.com/…/The-Latest-Trump-US-flags-to-fly-at-half-staff-13436…
3 hours ago – A senior White House official says a joint G-20 statement meets many U.S. objectives, most importantly reforming the World Trade Organization
There’s moar.
“mike from iowa” posts:
[links to a bunch of articles]
My questions are about what Cory means. None of the linked articles answer those questions.
Like a shepherd I led you the drink of knowledge. It is up to you to partake of the wisdom offered. Or not.
great links mfi, keep in mind Mr. Evans is under the belief that the earth is like 6,000 years old. So science is just a word.
Mr. Evans, here is another link, one that would save 5.1 Trillion over 10 years, at least. https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2018/11/30/depth-analysis-team-umass-amherst-economists-shows-viability-medicare-all
Just released and shows what you fear the most, healthcare for all. See by doing that, you have an identification card. Each of us would legal identification that could be used for voting as well as for our healthcare. Legal elections, no voter fraud. Scares the hell out of you, doesn’t it.
That’s really a heartbreaking post. Any of the previous presidents of my lifetime, stretching back to DDE and including the one who died today, would have been on the opioid problem on inauguration day. GWB probably would have avoided the climate change problem, on advice of Darth Cheney.
It takes a really sick individual to watch a planet and people die while gleefully making it worse. He is seriously mentally ill, while also being exceptionally cruel.
Thanks for the helpful links, Mike and Jerry.
Climate has been changing since the Earth was created.
There is no reliable scientific evidence humans have an affect on climate change.
Actual scientists seem to disagree with Jason.
See e.g.:
https://ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf
Among other facts, the study finds:
Here is something not seen every December- https://abcnews.go.com/US/dozens-injured-22-tornadoes-reported-central-illinois/story?id=59555813
Mother Nature just told climate change deniers to shut their mouths or she will do it for them. I’d listen to Ma if I was you birds.
Headline “Suicide Annual 45,000 DEATHS. USA public yawns.”
Linkey-linkey Jason?
Bear,
They don’t disagree with me.
EXAMPLES OF HOW AND WHY THE USE OF A “CLIMATE MODEL MEAN” AND THE USE OF ANOMALIES CAN BE MISLEADING
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/29/examples-of-how-and-why-the-use-of-a-climate-model-mean-and-the-use-of-anomalies-can-be-misleading/
Having Fun With the Fourth National Climate Assessment Report
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/28/having-fun-with-the-fourth-national-climate-assessment-report/
Scary but fake news about the National Climate Assessment
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/01/scary-but-fake-news-about-the-national-climate-assessment/
Do you really want to get into the science with me Bear?
Long Term Temperature Records Contradict GISS Temperature Record
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/30/long-term-temperature-records-contradict-giss-temperature-record/
An Assessment of the 4th National Climate Assessment
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/28/an-assessment-of-the-4th-national-climate-assessment/
EXAMPLES OF HOW AND WHY THE USE OF A “CLIMATE MODEL MEAN” AND THE USE OF ANOMALIES CAN BE MISLEADING
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/29/examples-of-how-and-why-the-use-of-a-climate-model-mean-and-the-use-of-anomalies-can-be-misleading/
Research From Latest US Climate Report Tied to 2 Major Democratic Donors
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/29/research-from-latest-us-climate-report-tied-to-2-major-democratic-donors/
Earth’s polar regions communicate via oceanic ‘postcards,’ atmospheric ‘text messages’
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/29/earths-polar-regions-communicate-via-oceanic-postcards-atmospheric-text-messages/
Doctored Data, Not U.S. Temperatures, Set a Record This Year
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/06/13/doctored-data-not-u-s-temperatures-set-a-record-this-year/#6922c7166184
None of Jason’s “evidence” explains or justifies the White House’s inaction on suicide and drug addiction.
My posts are telling people that they don’t need to commit suicide or take drugs because man made global warming is a hoax Cory.
Jason, you are irresponsible. You don’t stop people from committing suicide or doing drugs by lying to them.
The science proves me right Cory.
Watts Up With That? is a blog promoting climate change denial that was created by Anthony Watts in 2006. – It’s NOT SCIENCE and Watts is NOT a scientist. So Jason – you are wrong there are no “scientists” that agree with you. There is one guy writing a blog that you agree with.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/watts-up-with-that/
Jason’s links are pseudo science and conspiratorial in an effort to debunk climate change.
RS, my apologies as your post hadn’t shown up until I posted mine- belatedly it seems.
Medicare for all would mostly solve our dilemma of life expectancy, by having healthcare first and foremost to handle our mental and physical needs. While saving over 5 trillion dollars over 10 years, no that is a whole lot of life expectancy. https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2018/11/30/depth-analysis-team-umass-amherst-economists-shows-viability-medicare-all
Richard Schriever wrote:
Watts Up With That? is a blog promoting climate change denial that was created by Anthony Watts in 2006. – It’s NOT SCIENCE and Watts is NOT a scientist. So Jason – you are wrong there are no “scientists” that agree with you. There is one guy writing a blog that you agree with.
Richard,
There are plenty of scientists who agree with me.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_who_disagree_with_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming
Now are intelligent enough to discuss the science in my links or not?
Jason, Cory is right. Your claim of “no evidence” is simply a lie. You are either intentionally trying to deceive, or have been duped into repeating a lie propagated by people seeking to mislead and use you as a tool to spread their false propaganda. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, it looks to me like your beliefs about climate change may be premised on disagreeing with most scientists’ interpretation of evidence available to all scientists, but, unfortunately, you have been duped into characterizing your interpretations as meaning there is “no evidence” for the points you disagree with.
By citing WUWT as an authority you further damage your credibility and your argument is substantially weakened, because, as Richard points out, that is simply a blog by one guy aimed at convincing readers of his theory about climate change. Perhaps focusing on his claimed sources instead would bring you closer to reality than simply citing his blog claims.
You are free to interpret the available evidence in any way that makes you feel better, but to deny the existence of such evidence is simply another flat out lie, which, in turn, undermines any credibility your peculiar interpretation might otherwise have had to reasonable readers.
Incidently, Jason, I took a gander at your link to a list of scientists you say agree with you and it seems you are also wrong (or perhaps again lying) about that. Of the listed 2% to 3% of scientists who question whether human behavior causes or contributes to climate change, I saw no reference to any scientist that asserts your “no evidence” claims. They may differ in their interpretations of the existing evidence, but they do not deny its’ existence.
The opioid epidemic is true hell for children. More children are born addicted and more children are being rescued from addicted parents. I’m sure this isn’t an issue only in Minnesota.
http://strib.mn/2E8LKBG
It looks like the perfect place for prolifers to step in. Lobby their congressional delegation, become foster parents, adopt, advocate for treatment programs, etc………………..????????
Bear,
Let’s discuss the science in my links.
If the science can be “interpreted”, it is junk science.
Link me to a model that has been correct using correct temps?
The cheese stands alone.
Yesterday at the G20 conference in Argentina 19 of 20 countries voted to continue support of the Paris Climate Agreement. Donald Trump, isolated himself and said the U.S. would not change its position on climate change.
U.S. Achieves Largest Decrease in Carbon Emissions…Without the Paris Climate Accord
https://capitalresearch.org/article/u-s-achieves-largest-decrease-in-carbon-emissionswithout-the-paris-climate-accord/
Congrats Trump.
Indeed, right up there with CATO, grandpa trump is clearly the spokesperson for oil and gas and all the rest of the polluter’s.
Jason, science can’t be interpreted, so I have no idea how you came up with that argument.
Rather, evidence based on verifiable facts typically is interpreted to support or contradict scientific conclusions.
I don’t understand what sort of “link” you are asking for, but it appears not to have the tiniest bit of relevance to the points I have made about your lie claiming the non-existence of “evidence” supporting human activity as a cause or contributing factor to climate change.
Bear,
I was referring to you talking about interpreting science.
I am saying it’s not a scientific fact if it can be interpreted.
You lack of scientific evidence proving humans affect climate change makes your statement a lie.
I posted many links above. I am not surprised you don’t want to discuss the science I linked to.
More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims
https://www.globalresearch.ca/more-than-1000-international-scientists-dissent-over-man-made-global-warming-claims/5403284
Jason, you might want to review my eariler comments. I discussed your possible interpretation of evidence, not the interpretation of science. see 12:03 “your beliefs about climate change may be premised on disagreeing with most scientists’ interpretation of evidence available to all scientists” (italics supplied).
And just out of curiosity what statement of mine are you referring to that you think was a lie?
“TRUMP: “You look at our air and our water and it’s right now at a record clean.”
THE FACTS: Last year had the most unhealthy soot days since 2011. The number of days with unhealthy smog levels was down from 2016, but higher than 2015, 2014 and 2013.”
Your lie that scientists have proven that man can affect the climate.
Let’s discuss the science in my links.
I just have to laugh whenever I look at Jason’s sources. The last is globalresearch, which has been described as:
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch
By the way, if there are indeed 1,000 scientists that dissent, does that mean there are 97,000 or 98,000 scientists that do not dissent, since the typical ratio objectively reported is 97% or 98% to 2% or 3%?
I have debunked the 97% claim many times on here.
Why are you afraid to discuss the science?
Earth’s polar regions communicate via oceanic ‘postcards,’ atmospheric ‘text messages’
ORVALLIS, Ore. – Scientists have documented a two-part climatic connection between the North Atlantic Ocean and Antarctica, a fast atmospheric channel and a much slower oceanic one, that caused rapid changes in climate during the last ice age – and may again.
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2018-11/osu-epr112718.php
Does that make it better for you Bear?
Same story that I linked to earlier with a different website.
lol.
Jason, again check out my prior comments. I never stated that “scientists have proven that man can affect the climate.”
I would agree, however, that the vast majority of credible published reports I have seen certainly seem to assert that “scientists have proven that man can affect the climate.”
As for me, I am not a scientist nor an expert in climate change, and I have no preconceived bias or pre-conceived notions on the climate change question. I defer to the judgment of people recognized as experts, rather than look for links or outliers that might confirm my bias or pre-conceived notions.
How about you, are you a scientist or expert in climate change? Do you have any published peer reviewed papers on the subject that you wrote and can refer me to, that we can use as a basis to discuss your research and conclusions on whether human beings have impacted or can impact climate change?
WUWT disses Eurekalert.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/29/eurekalerts-lack-of-press-release-standards-a-systemic-problem-with-science-and-the-media/
I have the ability to read scientific studies and discuss them.
Let’s discuss the reports you are referring to.
Link to them so we can discuss them.
Jason your eurikalert link is interesting – thanks! Unfortunately I saw nothing in the link to support or document your “no evidence” claim regarding human activities and climate change. Perhaps that is shown by your own peer reviewed research paper or papers instead?
I never said that link was about human activities.
I’ll be back later to see if you have linked us to your reports.
Jason, please refocus. The issue we have been discussing is whether you lied when you asserted there is “no evidence” of human activity that affects climate change. I have looked at your links, and none support your claim. I have asked for your own research and now you seem to suggest that you are not a scientist, only a reader of other people’s work, yet have identified none supporting your claim. You have called me a liar, but I pointed out I had not said the statements you claimed I lied about, which shows you have just added more lying to your comments on this thread.
I am not sure what else you want to discuss, but it seems that you offer nothing to rebut my claim that you have lied with your “no evidence’ statement. And since I am not a scientist nor expert in the area, I simply defer to those who are. It seems that does not include you.
I do recall your attempt to debunk the 97% report. Although the published evidence did not support your debunking attempt, it appeared that if you had actually been accurate that would have left around 90% instead of 97% of scientist who issued peer reviewed work showing that human activity affects climate change.
Jason, I think this is the study you want to review. It concludes:
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024
And if your earlier debunking source was correct, then the number of scientists agreeing is reduced to only 90%, still a fairly substantial number.
Whether 90% or 97%, if these scientists are correct then the life expectancy of future generations faces severe threats if we do nothing to reverse the current patterns. I think we owe it to our children, grandchildren and future generations to listen and learn from the experts and adjust our behavior accordingly.
Good points bearcreekbat, did you by chance read this that is being worked on in New York City?
“A top New York City lawmaker unveiled landmark legislation Tuesday to dramatically decrease emissions from big buildings, the city’s largest source of climate pollution.
If passed, the bill would set a new standard for cities around the world and mark the most aggressive climate action yet taken by the nation’s largest and most financially and culturally influential city.
“We know New York City has to act and has to act quickly,” City Councilman Costa Constantinides, a Queens legislator who leads the council’s Committee on Environmental Protection, said on the steps of City Hall Tuesday afternoon. “What happens in New York City is emulated everywhere else.”
He said the bill, expected to be introduced Wednesday, Nov. 28, could “start a revolution” in cities around the world. Councilman Peter Koo, a lawmaker from the Flushing area of eastern Queens, said he would be the bill’s first co-sponsor.” https://www.climatedesk.org/politics/2018/11/20/new-york-city-just-unveiled-a-historic-bill-to-cut-its-biggest-source-of-climate-pollution
We, here in America, can lead on many of these issues without the Paris agreement. However, that agreement was historical because we were all on the same page in the world except for Nicaragua (weird) and now, the United States (weird trump).
Thanks Jerry, I hadn’t seen that story yet. Every little move forward can help.
We have a failed “War on Drugs” Bush senior doubled down upon sending marijuana users away for years sometimes life and pushing medical subscriptions toward dangerous opioid addiction when much safer alternatives could have been developed from cannabis. It’s not just Trump.
https://reason.org/commentary/marijuana-legalization-can-help-solve-the-opioid-problem/
Electing idiots is our future as high profile celebrities like republicans Reagan, Schwartzeneger, Ventura, Palin (maybe more in line with other VPs) and Trump, Ravensborg, Noem, and even Kavenaugh, essentially talking heads that have been successful vote getters from apparently gullible republican voters. Al Franken, a student of politics, the exception on the Democratic side.
Settled Science: A new study published in a peer-reviewed journal finds that climate models exaggerate the global warming from CO2 emissions by as much as 45%. If these findings hold true, it’s huge news. No wonder the mainstream press is ignoring it.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/global-warming-computer-models-co2-emissions/
https://niclewis.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/lewis_and_curry_jcli-d-17-0667_accepted.pdf
The Stunning Statistical Fraud Behind The Global Warming Scare
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-stunning-statistical-fraud-behind-the-global-warming-scare/
Bear,
Link me to the scientific evidence proving humans can affect the climate.
Why does so much of Jason’s “settled science” come from biased Investors.com editorials?
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/investors-business-daily/
Investors bias is near the extreme right edge.
Although IBD mostly reports on economics and finance they also allow lobbyists and PR reps for right wing think tanks like the Heartland Institute and the Competitive Enterprise Institute to write pseudo-scientific propaganda.
The New Farm Bill legalizes HEMP ag producers. You can make a lot more money and have a lot less headaches (see what I did there) by producing hemp. South Dakota legislators will probably follow the Jackley jackboot approach to CBD though. That Jackley is like a tick on a new dog now in civilian Pierre.
“River North-based Cresco Labs, Illinois’ largest cannabis cultivator, is expected to go public in Canada on Dec. 3 after carrying out a reverse takeover of an existing company.
Cresco signed a binding agreement in October to take over Randsbug International Gold Corp., which explores and acquires mineral property interests in Canada. Cresco sealed the deal after issuing 12,624,054 subscription receipts for a total of $107.3 million earlier this week, according to a statement from the company.
While Randburg was listed on the NEX board of Canada’s TSX Venture Exchange, Cresco will list its shares on the Canadian Securities Exchange under the symbol “CL.”
“Our public listing represents the culmination of nearly three years of unmatched success in winning state licenses in the most competitive, highly regulated cannabis markets and firmly establishing Cresco as an early leader in this emerging industry,” Cresco CEO Charlie Bachtell said in a statement.” https://chicago.suntimes.com/cannabis/pot-topics-cresco-to-go-public-in-canada-farm-bill-includes-hemp-legalization/
George Bush Sr. only did what the majority told him to do. So, it did not work out for him and he lost the election, but Clinton and Bush did the same. Obama was not to keen on the legalization of hemp either, but the public showed him otherwise.
For what it is worth, the Veterans Administration, driven by the Disabled American Veterans is pushing for more cannabis treatments for pain and PTSD for us veterans. That is settled science.
Bias is EVERYWHERE people love confirmation. Readers might like the documentary “The Brainwashing of My Dad” about how right-wing media changed her father from a life-long, nonpolitical Democrat into an angry, Rush Limbaugh loving right-winger but the more amazing thing was how she and the reviewers who liked the film couldn’t see how it was simply confirming their own biases just as Cory and the majority of posters here do for one another this place is a Bias Factory made for Republican haters with zero objectivity it’s a local phenomenon that should be studied. I find it amazing and amusing every time I’m here!!!
Jason, here is article that identifies several of the factual evidentiary findings relied upon by scientists studying human activites and climate change:
https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/science/human-contribution-to-gw-faq.html#.XARyhuhKgdU
The article covers:
-Unprecedented warming
-Direct evidence of human contribution to atmospheric CO2
-Natural and human factors that influence the climate (known as “climate drivers”)
-Natural drivers + human drivers best match reality
as well as “Solutions within our reach.”
You are welcome to quarrel with scientists’ interpretation of this factual evidence, but you have no basis for your earlier false claim that no such evidence exists.
The pushback against global warming, which I do think is real unless I’ve been too easily influenced, is that even “scientists” like all human beings are prone to bias and groupthink. They learned the scientific method we should all employ, have peer review, but our human nature seeks acceptance, it’s a survival instinct going way back in our DNA, tribal members get food and protection not everyone has f-you money most need that paycheck etc.
Bias is a thing. For right wing nutters it is a useful tool, like the tres troll amigos that darken Cory’s doorstep with argumentative distractions.
Bias is a useful thing for all nutters. Who was it who said “some of us just can’t get enough DFP?” Imo the question to ask yourself is why you need so much bias.
I’m just here to learn things I don’t know and have fun.
I wish that were true Mike. You called Republicans retarded almost everything you say is a slam on “Republicans” who are people by the way. You have a need to hate.
Yes, everyone has bias. Some are well trained to limit their bias, especially scientists. The purpose of rigorous scientific study and peer review is to weed out biased studies. It’s not perfect, but it is very, very good and definitely the best we humans have.
“Republicans” who are people by the way. You have a need to hate. Prove any of this. Prove all of it.
And don’t give me none of yer Happy Camper bias BS or I’ll hate you.
You need a new moniker, btw. Might I suggest Sourpuss?
Mr. happy camper, as you may have noticed, Mr. mike is from Iowa. Most of the out-of-state name-callers who frequent Mr. H’s blog are filled with hate, as their bloggings reveal.
Mr. Coward Grudz, what is your real name and where do you really live?
Grudzilla is a liar. I love my Grands and Great Grand Daughter. You, however, not so much. I notice Mr Happy Camper can call names with the best of them.
grudznick hails from Alabama and longs for the snowy white winters we have here in South Dakota.
All your out-of-state goats are belong to us.
Your out of state goat too, coward.
Spoken like a true Alabamian, made no sense whatsoever bubba grudznick.
Happy Camper
When you Google Dakota Free Press you are directed to directory that says, “Dakota Free Press, South Dakota True Liberal Media”.
Anybody should know what they are getting into when they sign into DFP, just as I know what will greet me if I login into Dakota War College.
Quit being thin skinned Happy Camper, you’ve demonstrated your ability at name calling and hurling insults on these pages over the years.
grudznick has no business questioning or commenting on anybody’s home state until he can prove conclusively where he lives.
debbo, mfi and others from out of state that post on DFP at least have the courage to state where they live. grudznick lacks that courage.
I thought fondly of you this morning as I was shuttled away from breakfast at Tally’s, Mr. C, and we turned south there on 5th by that Hardees you like.
grudznick, who we don’t know his real name or from which state he hails surely should know that I don’t patronize any Hardee’s restaurants in Rapid City. I detest fast food.
I could look at Google maps and make claims like Mr. Pseudonym just did.
The point is not that you have to provide your real name, any more than anyone else does. The point is that you try to disparage those who share their real name and location while hiding your own. You have nothing to stand on, other than being small and petty. You put yourself in the same class as OS, Jason and Kurt when you do childish things like that.
The prevalence of bias does not justify hunkering down in a false worldview… or spreading that worldview.
The rest of the world accepts the reality of climate change and signs onto the Paris agreement. The rest of the world sees suicide decline and life expectancy rise. Hooray for American exceptionalism?
Here’s One Global Warming Study Nobody Wants You To See
A new study published in a peer-reviewed journal finds that climate models exaggerate the global warming from CO2 emissions by as much as 45%. If these findings hold true, it’s huge news. No wonder the mainstream press is ignoring it.
In the study, authors Nic Lewis and Judith Curry looked at actual temperature records and compared them with climate change computer models. What they found is that the planet has shown itself to be far less sensitive to increases in CO2 than the climate models say. As a result, they say, the planet will warm less than the models predict, even if we continue pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.
As Lewis explains: “Our results imply that, for any future emissions scenario, future warming is likely to be substantially lower than the central computer model-simulated level projected by the (United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), and highly unlikely to exceed that level.
How much lower? Lewis and Curry say that their findings show temperature increases will be 30%-45% lower than the climate models say. If they are right, then there’s little to worry about, even if we don’t drastically reduce CO2 emissions.
The planet will warm from human activity, but not nearly enough to cause the sort of end-of-the-world calamities we keep hearing about. In fact, the resulting warming would be below the target set at the Paris agreement.
This would be tremendously good news.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/global-warming-computer-models-co2-emissions/
The Stunning Statistical Fraud Behind The Global Warming Scare
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration may have a boring name, but it has a very important job: It measures U.S. temperatures. Unfortunately, it seems to be a captive of the global warming religion. Its data are fraudulent.
What do we mean by fraudulent? How about this: NOAA has made repeated “adjustments” to its data, for the presumed scientific reason of making the data sets more accurate.
Nothing wrong with that. Except, all their changes point to one thing — lowering previously measured temperatures to show cooler weather in the past, and raising more recent temperatures to show warming in the recent present.
This creates a data illusion of ever-rising temperatures to match the increase in CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere since the mid-1800s, which global warming advocates say is a cause-and-effect relationship. The more CO2, the more warming.
But the actual measured temperature record shows something different: There have been hot years and hot decades since the turn of the last century, and colder years and colder decades. But the overall measured temperature shows no clear trend over the last century, at least not one that suggests runaway warming.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-stunning-statistical-fraud-behind-the-global-warming-scare/
Speaking of stunning statistical frauds, how ya doing this morning insecure dude.
“In review, Investors Business Daily primarily reports on economics, markets and investing. They also report on politics, especially through their editorial section with a very strong right wing bias. There is moderate use of loaded language in their articles that significantly favors the right, such as this: Democratic Socialism: Who Knew That ‘Free’ Could Cost So Much? For the most part IBD sources their market information to credible mainstream and government websites, however they occasionally utilize factually mixed sources such as the Daily Signal.
Investors Business Daily strays from the consensus of science in regards to climate change and they have made outrageous and false claims, such as Stephen Hawking would be dead if he lived under England’s Government health care system. This is a false propaganda statement as Stephen Hawking is a citizen of the UK and lives there. Hawking claims the British Healthcare system saved his life and kept him alive to old age.” https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/investors-business-daily/
More quackery from a quacker, only an insecure male would stay up all night to find this kind of fraudulent nonsense.
Let’s discuss the study Jerry.
https://niclewis.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/lewis_and_curry_jcli-d-17-0667_accepted.pdf
BTW, Happy, I did not call wingnuts retarded in the sense you mean. I explained myself- adequately at the time. You must have missed the memo.
https://www.factcheck.org/2015/02/nothing-false-about-temperature-data/
Jason’s climate denier buds are climate deniers- every one of them. And their studies are climate deniers as well.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it is the quackery of Jason, the duck. There is nothing to discuss with you on this tomfoolery.
Why work so hard to stop efforts to reduce the burning of fossil fuels? Why work so hard to prop up an unsustainable energy source and a dying technology (see John Tsitrian’s commentary on the death of the internal combustion engine? We do nothing but good for the environment and for humanity in moving to cleaner forms of energy.
The only people with a stake in denying climate change are the folks who make money extracting and burning fossil fuels.
And no one here has denied the strange fact that America’s life expectancy and suicide rates are moving in the wrong direction, even as our Führer pretends to be making us “Great” again.
Mike,
Factcheck.org is not a reliable source.
Jason, you be wrong again. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/factcheck/
Factcheck.org provides well sourced unbiased fact checking. Quite simply, Factcheck.org can be trusted to provide accurate fact checks with minimal bias. Factcheck.org is used by Media Bias Fact Check as a resource to check claims when reviewing sources. They are on our Top 10 Fact Checker list.
Overall, Factcheck.org is a least biased and credible fact checker that is Very High for factual reporting due to impeccable sourcing of information. (7/6/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 10/31/2018)
Source: http://www.factcheck.org/
Lol
Well that settles that then…..
Where is the sarcasm button?
as opposed to your failure to provide anything credible?
Hit the eject button while you are at it. Your mission here is complete, replete with defeat.
Some good news on the opioid epidemic front. The fired CEO of Insys Therapeutics, Alex Burlakoff, is pleading guilty to a pile of charges including bribing doctors with cash, travel, prostitutes, etc, to prescribe their drugs. He’s cooperating with prosecutors so more top dogs will probably become bottom dogs, so to speak.
https://goo.gl/T9KZDX
Grdz, your post is RACIST @20:59 on 12.02. I know it. You know it.
Harddees and I go back to 1983, late, late nights learning to drink coffee working thru those many nights. I know what game you are playing.
There is nothing cute about the person underneath this “grudsnick” character.
How’s this for despair- https://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-finds-schools-sheriffs-officials-had-no-constitutional-duty-to-protect-parkland-students/
Law enforcement has no constitutional duty to protect students during a shootout. Could’ve fooled me.
Actually, Mike, I can see the judge’s point. The plaintiffs tried to contort their complaint into a Constitutional argument, contending that the school and police had deprived them of their civil rights under the 14th Amendment by not doing more to protect them from a mass shooting. The judge, rightly, I’d say on first glance, said the 14th Amendment is about protecting us with due process from the state, not from third parties.
The lawsuit’s argument actually makes me uneasy. I would not want a court to rule that our school officials have a Constitutional obligation to turn our schools into armed bunkers to prevent any bad actor from entering with any potential weapon. We do too much security theater in school as it is.