Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 167 replies
  • Subscribers 14 subscribers
  • Views 10061 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

I hope the Climate Activists are proud of the effect their lies are having on the younger generation

Roger B

If this survey is real the messages these young people are receiving are completely wrong.

We need to reduce our impact on our planet but CO2 is a complete red herring. The current ECS (temperature increase for a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere) is centred around 3°C (IPCC AR6). The 2°C will destroy civilisation is simply made up.

 

 

Parents
  • 0

     climate science is far from settled.

    We certainly agree on that.

    www.aier.org/.../

    Ah, yes. The people who organised the Great Barrington Declaration.

    There is a parallel.

    “There really isn't a problem. If you think there is, and that we as a society need to change our behaviour in some way, here are a bunch of impressively-titled people to tell you there really isn't and we really don't.”

    In the case of Great Barrington, it was people claiming some kind of “herd immunity” which manifestly was present nowhere on earth. I take it that the suggestion here is that the contribution of anthropogenic CO2 to global warming is negligible? If there are arguments for that, why don't you give them? 

    BTW, the argument for engaging in countermeasures to global warming does not solely depend on whether or not anthropogenic CO2 is helping warm the biosphere or not. 

     

Reply
  • 0

     climate science is far from settled.

    We certainly agree on that.

    www.aier.org/.../

    Ah, yes. The people who organised the Great Barrington Declaration.

    There is a parallel.

    “There really isn't a problem. If you think there is, and that we as a society need to change our behaviour in some way, here are a bunch of impressively-titled people to tell you there really isn't and we really don't.”

    In the case of Great Barrington, it was people claiming some kind of “herd immunity” which manifestly was present nowhere on earth. I take it that the suggestion here is that the contribution of anthropogenic CO2 to global warming is negligible? If there are arguments for that, why don't you give them? 

    BTW, the argument for engaging in countermeasures to global warming does not solely depend on whether or not anthropogenic CO2 is helping warm the biosphere or not. 

     

Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines