Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "US Has Warmest May In Recorded History Blowing Past 1934 Dust Bowl" video.

  1. Complete misrepresentation of what he said.
    3
  2. The fear mongering by Kyle is at an Alex Jones level.
    3
  3. Pete Lind, the issue is that politicians, mainly on the left, are using climate change as an excuse to increase taxes and regulations. They are misrepresenting the science for political gain and power. That is a problem.
    2
  4. The hypocrisy exists on both sides. In 2015 Bernie tweeted about it being warm in DC on Christmas using it as an example of climate change. Someone responded about the difference between weather and climate and anther posted temperatures of the past showing there were years where it was just as warm. People like Kyle are silent on that.
    1
  5. Randal Jeffrey, Bernie pointed out how in 2015 on Xmas in DC that it was warmer than usual. He asked if that has ever happened before and made the claim that was the fault of global warming. Someone replied showing other times it was warmer than usual all the way back in the 1800s. Bernie was conflating weather with climate. We have seen warm days during Xmas in DC in the past.
    1
  6. ChrisJ Fox, many on the right know the climate is changing. They just don't see it as a threat.
    1
  7. It isn't settled. The issues are still 1. How much is man playing a role 2. Is it even bad 3. If it is bad, what is the solution Sorry that science is too hard of a topic for you to handle. I suggest you leave science to the scientists, like me.
    1
  8. The Majestic Spider, 100% of scientists are not saying that.
    1
  9. Justin Griffith, I am pursuing a PhD in physical chemistry. So yes, I am a scientists.
    1
  10. Zidneya, no one denies climate change. They question if it is a threat and how much man is playing a role.
    1
  11. Zidneya, the issues still remain. They are 1. How much is man playing a role 2. Is it even a threat 3. If it is a threat, what do we do No one denies that man plays a role. Man does play a role. However, you cannot say how much. Science is driving on doubt and skepticism. It is politicians and people like you and Kyle who are making these hard claims about climate change, not scientists.
    1
  12. Zidneya, there is a reason why scientists still research climate change and evolution. There is a lot of doubt in many areas of it. I question my own ideas as well. If climate change is a threat than we can handle it at that point. However, the earth is over 4 billion years old. The climate has been changing for that entire time and for over hundreds of millions of years the ecosystem has evolved. I have that much evidence on my side where I feel that the ecosystem will just evolve. A lot of scientists take my skepticism seriously which is why you hear no uproar on this issue. Scientists are smart enough to understand that the science is not settled. You say there is a "whole scientific community arguing the danger....". Ok, who? And what exactly are they arguing. Give me the reference and quote so I can read it in proper context as opposed to you misrepresenting it.
    1
  13. solrinin, the cigarette issue is different. We have control experiments of smokers vs non-smokers. We don't have a control experiment on climate change now on this Earth vs another one that is similar.
    1
  14. Randal Jeffrey, there are many who support conservative policies that are not religious.
    1
  15. Pete Lind, when are republicans banning roof solar panels? I do not support oil subsidizes. Try not to change the topic. Coal mines were not allowed to dumb in water for years. What does waste management have to do with that? Those are local laws. You are all over the place in your argument.
    1
  16. Pete Lind, Obama's executive order was right before he left office. It was a pure political stunt made by him so that the future president would look bad when they repeal. I am sure that the waters were just terrible prior to Obama's executive order.....oh wait, they weren't. Nevada is allowing the citizens to vote on energy this year. I cannot say anything for FL. That is their state. However, many midwestern states are pushing for wind where Rockport, MO was the first town to be completely ran on windmills. Also, Exxon help fund for wind farms in CA. CA is forcing citizens to get solar panels. It goes both ways. NV voted for Clinton, how are they a "red state"?
    1
  17. knavishknight, you named two incidents that were spills, thus accidents.
    1
  18. The Last and First Time, taxes are slated to go back to their normal rates because it is required to have an expiration date if you do not receive 60 votes in the senate. Republicans wanted them to be "permanent" (nothing is permanent in government), but the democrats said no. Democrats pushed for a carbon tax on the issue of climate tax.
    1
  19. Nutcase, I have a life and responsibilities.
    1
  20. dave O, Ben Shapiro has said climate change is real. He, like many on the right, question if it is a major threat and do see it as democrats misrepresenting science for political gains.
    1
  21. TerriD D, many people cannot afford a newer car, so yes, it is hard for many to pass a smog test. I lived in a state that did not require it which was great as many cars there would have failed. That means many people would have been without a vehicle.
    1
  22. Fuh Que, the "permanent" tax cuts on the rich were not individual income taxes. That requires 60 votes. It is on the corporate taxes. Read the actual bill and understand the law, just don't go off of talking points.
    1
  23. Fuh Que, "Trickle Down Economics" is not even an economic term. Also, our corporate taxes are higher than those European countries Bernie and his fans love to point at.
    1
  24. Fuh Que, the rich pay the vast majority of taxes to begin with. Any tax cuts was going to favor them.
    1
  25. Fuh Que, "trickle down economics" was created by a the political left in the late 1800s early 1900s. It is not an economic term and is used by politicians as an appeal to emotion statement or by economic illiterates who have no desire to discuss the issue. I am staying on topic. The corporate tax cuts were put in place to create a tax rate to compete with the rest of the world.
    1
  26. Fuh Que, the phrase "trickle down economics" was created by a democratic politician. Learn your history.
    1
  27. Fuh Que, the top 10% earn 40% of the income but pay around 70% of the federal income taxes. Also, they possess a lot of wealth because beyond owning a home the average person has little to no wealth. Not many people have the desire to run a major corporation and thus be the major shareholder of that company. There is also the issue of debt where a lot of people, like me, have debt and thus negative wealth. That is a good thing as it means we allow people to take steps back to buy larger things before going forward such as a home or a college education.. As for the remark on saying that they will be fine after you tax them more, that is very shallow. They have completely different financial responsibilities. I worry about paying rent and bills. Someone with that $100 million is worrying about running a major company, paying employees, investing to expand, charities, and other major expenses. Different lifestyles. You tax them more that is less money for them to invest. Sure, they may be fine, but their companies suffer. That means less jobs and less innovation. The republicans gave tax cuts to the poor and middle class.
    1
  28. Mr. Moderate, I did cringe when I listened to Shapiro talk about this issue, but I do on both sides with the exception of Crowder (minus his 5 myths video that was cringe worthy). The issues of climate change is this, and this is where Crowder lies as well 1. How much is man playing a role? Yes, man is playing a role, but we do not know by how much. We have no control experiment to compare to and the ecosystem is too complex to give a hard value on how much man is playing a role. 2. Is it even bad? The ecosystem has evolved and has done so through other climate change for millions of years. Why would it stop? 3. If it is bad what is the solution? Many on the right feel government isn't and the issue needs to stick with scientists. The whole consensus studies are poor to look at. To start, they are cherry picked and vague in the conclusion. Next, they are misrepresented. So it is a combination of them not really giving any sort of conclusion on top of the political left misrepresenting them. They are not saying man plays a major role and they are not saying that it is bad for humanity. They do suggest that man can be playing a major role and that there are some consequences we need to possibly address, but nothing too certain as the political left makes it out to be. Both sides are not presenting the climate change issue well. As I said, with the exception of the 5 myths video, Crowder does it the best because he presents it in the viewpoint that there is a lot of doubt and uncertainty in science and we cannot draw hard conclusions.
    1
  29. Mr. Moderate, there was a time where Neil deGrasse Tyson was on Bill Maher and the topic of climate change came up. Maher and someone else were discussing and Maher looked towards Tyson for his input. Tyson did not give a hard conclusion on the issue but instead said that we need to invest in new technology as that is the way we progress in innovation. That is how most scientists approach the issue of climate change. They have no hard conclusion but instead push to do more research. We are hardly scratching the surface in science and our knowledge. To make a hard conclusion that current climate change is bad and man is a major driver in it is not wise to do.
    1
  30. Fuh Que, correlation does not equal causation. I agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but you cannot just relate current climate change to just that. There are a lot of moving parts here. That is why you are no t seeing scientists giving a hard number on how much man is playing a role. What you are showing is a CO2 rate increase and a temperature increase. The ecosystem is not that simple.
    1
  31. Fuh Que, where the term originated is key. "Trickle down economics" is a term used by politicians to appeal to emotions or economic illiterates who have no argument against their opponent. It is not a defined term in economics. Also, people who lean right do not support welfare for corporation, you are creating a strawman at that point. Tax cuts is not welfare. Small businesses do not have the ability to move like corporations do. That is why cutting corporate taxes is a way to attract corporations in coming to the US and investing in the US.
    1
  32. Fuh Que, temperature readings are only around 150 years old. And again. correlation does not equal causation. Population has also been increasing during that time, and overall life expectancy. Just saying.
    1
  33. It is fear mongering as no one knows if climate change is a major threat. As for food prices going way up, that is extreme. We have the ability to produce mass amounts of food year round. Food prices are not going to triple.
    1