Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "" video.

  1. The fear mongering of climate change is to simply for the government to gain more control. That is why they push a 16 year old girl from Sweden on stage as opposed tog actual scientists. And why scientists refuse to speak at these climate change rallies.k It isn't about the science.
    2
  2. So Bernie vs Trump? I agree. Bernie, at least, wants to mess up this nation.
    1
  3. This is dumb and why the far left won't gain traction. The border wall is to control illegal immigration where that harms our economy. Bernie's GND is like a watermelon, green on the outside, red in the middle. It isn't about science with Bernie but control of the economy.
    1
  4.  @LittleAl016  , how should we combat climate change? No one knows because so little is known about climate change.
    1
  5.  @LittleAl016  , let the free market handle it. Very little is known about climate change. Forcing change will do harm to the economy. The reality is that this isn't about the science when it comes to Bernie. This is why no actual scientist is willing to speak at these rallies. Myles Allen of the IPCC was asked to speak at a climate strike in Oxford. He refused because he does not agree with the rhetoric and actually finds it disturbing.
    1
  6.  @LittleAl016  , not true. Technology is expanding because of the free market. Exxon Mobil donated money to build a wind farm in CA. Mike pointed to China who have almost no regulations. Thus they can easily mine for f-elements which are used in building solar cells. Our regulations hinder us from doing. The irony that regulations designed to alleviate pollution hinders us from investing in renewable energy. Leftists eat their own.
    1
  7. You can't claim a national emergency on climate change as so much is not known.
    1
  8.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , uh, no. Very little is known about climate change. It has been happening for over 4 billion years, and man does play a role. But beyond that we know very little. This is why the left has to push a 16 year old girl from Sweden on stage as opposed to actual scientists, and why scientists refuse to speak at these rallies. It isn't about the science.
    1
  9.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , I am not ignoring the scientists. You haven't been listening to them. None of them are saying what Bernie is saying. I recommend you read the book entitled "Why We Disagree About Climate Change" by Prof. Mike Hulme. Also read Myles Allen's opinion on the IPCC report and how it is being presented by people like Bernie. Allen is one of the authors of that report.
    1
  10.  @TheUndeadslayer221  so you have read the book I recommended?
    1
  11.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , which one? I would like to read it.
    1
  12.  @TheUndeadslayer221  Cook isn't a scientist
    1
  13.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , Cook is not a scientist, he is a cartoonist. Even at that nowhere in his paper does it give an analysis of the threat of climate change or how much man is playing a role. I suggest you read the Popular Technology article entitled "1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarmism" You give on paper, I am giving you a list of over 1300. Cook had this to say about it "I do confess a degree of fascination with Poptech's list..." - John Cook, Cartoonist at Skeptical Science
    1
  14.  raserianfald  , Greta is 16 years old and brainwashed. Why are you not putting actual scientists on stage? What potential risks are there of climate change? We don't know. Maybe they are severe, maybe they are nothing. So with such doubt that exists we can't make radical changes to the current structure of the economy. If we do we destroy the economy. Say we do implement the GND, which will destroy the economy, and nothing improves. Now we have two problems on our hands. And who denies climate change? When did I ever deny climate change? And who is being the scientific illiterate one? I am the one that is pointing to actual scientists where you are pointing to a 16 year old girl.
    1
  15.  @TheUndeadslayer221  "The publication and his contributions say otherwise." Uh, no. He has never done any research in science. And again, check out the popular technology article. it gives over 1300 publications. Also read Mike Hulme's book entitled "Why We Disagree About Climate Change". He is an actual scientist, worked for the IPCC, earned a PhD in applied climatology, and still publishes papers including recently in the journal Nature Climate Change.
    1
  16.  @TheUndeadslayer221  http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html There is the link. Again, you are citing one paper written by a cartoonist. I am citing many scientists.
    1
  17.  @TheUndeadslayer221  ,it isn't a genetic fallacy. Also, Cook praised that popular technology list I cited with over 1300 papers on climate change. Why are you ignoring that part?
    1
  18.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , so ignore all other studies? Why are you anti science?
    1
  19.  @TheUndeadslayer221  how am I denying science? I pointed you to over 1300 articles by scientists
    1
  20.  @TheUndeadslayer221  ,they are not "pseudoscience", they are in peer reviewed journals. If they are "pseudoscience" then I recommend you publish an article in one of those journals saying that.
    1
  21.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , why are you anti science?
    1
  22.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , it will be fun to see how you explain why you are anti science.
    1
  23.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , no, I am posting peer reviewed papers from scientists and you are calling the "pseudoscience". Did you even read one of those 1300 articles? If not then you are anti science.
    1
  24.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , you are citing a cartoonist in Cook, I am citing actual scientists. Cook even praised that list from Popular Technology. Here is what he said ""I do confess a degree of fascination with Poptech's list..." - John Cook, Cartoonist at Skeptical Science" So your boy Cook even praised the list you are dismissing with no actual reason. Why do you continue to be anti science?
    1
  25.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , that cite gives a list of the papers from peer reviewed journals for you to read. So either you accept the science or you don't. Cook accepts the list. So what it is? At this point you are clearly anti science as you refuse to read what scientists actually wrote. Why do you do that?
    1
  26.  @TheUndeadslayer221  " Cook actually gathered papers from actual climate scientists " And so did that popular technology cite. So why do you have a double standard as well?
    1
  27.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , how am I lying?
    1
  28.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , uh, I am citing a website with over 1300 peer reviewed papers. So again, you have a double standard. And I have addressed your cite. Nowhere does it say to what degree man plays a role in climate change nor do they give the risks or how much of a threat it is, if it is a threat at all. I actually support the papers you are citing. Why? Because I am not anti science where you are. How many of those papers have you actually read?
    1
  29.  @TheUndeadslayer221  , what is incorrect with the cite I pointed to? The site I posted gives a list of over 1300 peer reviewed papers for you to read. Why do you deny science? And no, the NASA papers don't go against what I cited. And nowhere in your sources does it state the effects of climate change. Again, why are you anti science? You gave me two sources, I gave you over 1300 sources to read but you refuse to. You won't reply anymore because you literally refuse to read these papers.
    1
  30. This is how the far left thinks. They want to use government force to attack things they don't like no matter what the outcome is.
    1
  31. He is a radical that wants to destroy the economy.
    1
  32.  @crapwithanopinion2919  , M4A, the GND, tuition free college just to name a few.
    1
  33.  @LittleAl016  , no they won't.
    1
  34.  @LittleAl016  , what studies?
    1
  35. Bernie's climate plan is extreme and is not based on science.
    1
  36.  @LittleAl016  , I have. It isn't based on science but instead fear mongering to gain more power.
    1
  37.  @LittleAl016  , I have. There is no actual science in it as scientists are not saying what Bernie is saying.
    1
  38.  @LittleAl016  , ok, and? I what is going on a threat? What is causing it. What route should we take? We knew climate change has been happening, that is not the question. None of them are saying what Bernie is saying
    1
  39.  @LittleAl016  , no, I have actually read the studies. I recommend the book "Why We Disagree About Climate Change" by prof. Mike Hulme.
    1
  40.  @LittleAl016  when have I denied climate change?
    1
  41.  @keirfarnum6811  , oil companies are investing in other forms of energy. Let the market take care of it. They are much smarter than our politicians. Bernie doesn't even understand the science.
    1