Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Trump Admin ADMITS Global Temp Will Rise Up To 7 Degrees By 2100" video.

  1.  @berjanbeen7188 , how is current climate change a threat? The ecosystem has evolved through other climate changes in the past. What makes you think it will stop? Or do you deny evolution?
    2
  2. Something like 96% of the atmosphere of Venus is CO2, we are nowhere near that.
    2
  3. By 2100 technology will have advanced a lot. Also, that is plenty of time for the ecosystem to evolve.
    2
  4. As a scientists I support getting politics and federal government out of science. Leave science to the scientists.
    2
  5. Uh, republicans have been saying for years climate change exist. The issues are 1. How much does man play a role 2. Is it even a threat 3. If it is what is the solution
    1
  6.  @lickit8096 , that's call weather. Two years ago was one of the coldest winters I have experienced. That, too, is called weather.
    1
  7.  @TheEbonyEngineer , polling shows a lot of things. They are unreliable. Also, Exxon paid to put windmills up in California, so what's your point?
    1
  8. Kyle, what is the proper rate of change, and why?
    1
  9. Berjan Been, what makes you think man can't adapt? We have adjusted to many severe situations all throughout history. Evolution has a lot to do with it. One driving force of evolution is climate change. Unless you feel evolution will just stop what makes you think the ecosystem won't adapt?
    1
  10. Kyle, define "normal change". And why are they normal? What standard do you go off of? I do study science for a living. So I understand how scientists think.
    1
  11. LunaticThinker, you did not provide any sources. I know how scientists think and the reality is that they don't come with hard conclusions due to how little we know. This is not to say that the issue of climate change is not important, it is. It requires research. But the reality is that we know very little about it and can't come up with a strong conclusion like the media and politicians are.
    1
  12. Describe to me the "normal rate" of evolution and why.
    1
  13. Space Wizard, how do you determine that "normal rate"? Evolution has no set time scale. It can be fast or slow depending on the conditions.
    1
  14. SkyTech, species have died all throughout life for many reasons. I don't deny evolution. I appreciate how complex it is and how little we know. That is why I study science for a living.
    1
  15. Trent, and Bernie Sanders pointed to the temperature in Washington DC claiming the warm weather was due to climate change despite there being other periods in the past of DC being warmer. It goes both ways bud.
    1
  16. kutnersuicide, very few fully understand evolution. We hardly understand biological systems. That is what makes this topic so challenging. My research is involved in studying biological systems and the dynamics of them depending on pH levels and temperatures. This is what bothers me is that many feel the science is settled and that we know what will happen. The science is far from settled. We don't even know how photosynthesis works but we teach it in a 7th grade class room. You say I don't understand evolution and I can agree, i fully don't. And neither do you. But I do understand science.
    1
  17. kutnersuicide, I support doing research in climate change like I do in all fields of science. The issue is that we have to appreciate how little we know. Scientists do which is why you are not hearing scientists making these radical claims about climate change and how it is a major threat and we need to make drastic actions. You hear it from the media and politicians. Also, the studies don't come up to a strong conclusion. The studies actually bring up more questions than answers.
    1
  18. Space Wizard, evolution and climate change are related. Fact is you can't decide what is the "normal" rate of either as many factors influence that. It isn't leaving me "wiggle room", it is accepting the fact that the science is not settled and there is so much we don't know. Thus we can't make a strong conclusion on this issue.
    1
  19.  @dzarko55 , why not? What do you base that off of?
    1
  20.  @TheBlazersfan22 , politics poison everything. Politicians have hindered scientific progress on both sides. I support getting federal politics out of science.
    1
  21.  @schloops8473 , wow, nice response. .Really changes my perspective on things.
    1
  22. Jo Pao, the Paris Agreement was a bad deal for the US. Also, democrats have politicized science as an excuse to gain power and raise taxes. The problems go both ways.
    1
  23. Selarom Ogeid, there is a desire to have government funds in science. I want it ran locally. At the federal level you have corruption and bureaucracy which hinders progress.
    1
  24. Jo Pao, climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years. Why is it all of a sudden bad? The ecosystem evolved during that time. To me it comes down to you either support climate change or you support evolution. I support both, what do you support?
    1
  25. Jo Pao, how do you know the climate has not changes faster in the past? There is more to the climate than just temperature. What is the rate of evolution? We don't know. It can be fast or slow, it all depends. In reality we know very little about evolution especially at the quantum level. You clearly don't support science as you have little clue about the issues.
    1
  26. Jo Pao, the climate changes in more than just temperature. Also, you need more than ice core samples. There is more to climate than just temperature. There is participation for example. So ice cores influence how organisms evolve? Uh, I did well in my graduate level quantum course. Also, the quantum level is important. I like how your response to all of this is "ice cores", "you are a moron", "quantum is irrelevant".
    1
  27. Jo Pao, I will take this as I have won this debate.
    1
  28. When have I been debunked?
    1