Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Compilation Of Fox News' Abysmal Climate Change Coverage" video.

Is Kyle a scientist?
1
@g1370 , what does he cite?
1
@mecher3k , funny considering how I study science for a living and disagree with Kyle. I bet I read more scientific literature in a given day than Kyle and his fans do in an entire year.
1
Khashon Haselrig , no. If he was he would have a moderate approach on this. If he took an extreme view on this than yes, I will say he has an agenda. Scientists are, after all, still human.
1
@mrjollyguy25 , when did I ever deny climate change?
1
@georgekraft1401 , it is legit. Kyle isn't a scientist either. So why should we listen to him?
1
@g1370 , I am pursuing a PhD in physical chemistry. I specialize in studying vibrational states using non-linear techniques. As for Kyle's sources, I see none. Besides, science is very complex, we know very little. To make strong claims like Kyle does is very foolish.
1
@mrjollyguy25 , how do they deny science?
1
@g1370 , it is much more complex than that. Do you even know what the consensus is?
1
@mrjollyguy25 , they don't deny climate change
1
@mrjollyguy25 , i did watch the video
1
@mrjollyguy25 , very few deny it and those that do are essentially nobodies. The reality is that they are skeptical on if it is a major threat. And they also feel that government is not the solution. I, myself, want to keep government out of it and leave it to the scientists.
1
Khashon Haselrig , never said man did not play a role. We do play a role. The issue is how much? Climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years. So how much does man play a role we don't know. Also, is it even a major threat? The ecosystem has evolved for over 4 billion years, what makes you think it will stop? And if it is a threat, what is the solution? I feel government politicizes things way too much so I want government out of it and rather leave this issue with the scientists.
1
@g1370 , that isn't what the consensus says. Climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years. We don't know if it is a major threat or not and we don't know how much of a role man plays.
1
@g1370 , not saying NASA is lying, the issue is if it is a threat. Is it a threat? If so, than how? And what do we do? The issue is very complex.
1
@g1370 , we don't.
1
@g1370 , they may be exaggerating the issue. We have seen major changes like this in the past and life still flourishes. We just have to adjust.
1
@anticorncob6 , how is it bad?
1
Khashon Haselrig , you can't ask me to prove a negative.
1
Khashon Haselrig , to start, what is a "climate scientist"? The climate involves a broad part of science including physics, chemistry, ecology, astronomy, etc. An ecologist will view something completely different than a physicist would. I, as a physical chemist, view the world from a molecular viewpoint and see how little we know in how molecules act in different temperatures, pH, concentration, etc. We know very little about photosynthesis and evolution where a biologist will look at it from a macro viewpoint, I will look at it from a molecular and quantum viewpoint. We know very little. So with all that said, you will be very hard pressed to find a large group of scientists who will make the strong conclusion that current climate change is a threat. It is an area we should look into much like looking into how diabetes occur. But to say it is a major threat is something very few scientists will say and those that will have an agenda and a huge ego to where you will find that in every field. As for it being man made, man plays a role. Now how much is the question. We don't know as we have on control to compare to. So again, you can't ask me to prove a negative.
1
Khashon Haselrig , again, climate science is a broad field that covers a lot of areas in science. Reality is that no one is that smart to fully understand all the areas that well to draw a strong conclusion. Again, we don't even know how photosynthesis takes place. Now show me who knows how the photosynthesis process will change when the climate change? No one can as we don't even now how it occurs to begin with. We are hardly scratching the surface when it comes to science.
1
Khashon Haselrig , i bet people from that list will support me.
1
Khashon Haselrig , as someone who is a year away from getting their PhD in physical chemistry, who has 4 peer reviewed papers, and has given talks at conferences, I bet you if I were to have a discussion with those individuals they would agree with my view points in many ways. You see, I work with scientists for a living. I know how they think. You can believe what you want but fact is that I understand how they think. Why are we not hearing actual scientists being vocal about this issue like Kyle is? Because scientists understand how little we know.
1
Khashon Haselrig , ok, which "climate scientists" are being vocal? Also, my experience is stronger than yours, so I will go with that.
1
That, also is current climate change a threat? And if it is, what is the solution?
1
Kyle is a hack. He doesn't read studies either. The fact is that in science we are hardly scratching the surface on these issues. To make a strong conclusion like Kyle does is very anti-science.
1
They aren't. The issue with climate change is that 1. How much does man play a role? 2.Is it a threat? 3. If it is a threat, what is the solution? Is government really the source to solve this problem?
1
@73151cb , China dominates the market due to low regulations. For example, f-elements are used in solar cells. China cornered the market in them because you can open a mine very easily where in the US it takes years and a lot of money. The environmental regulations the left supports hinders progress.
1
@73151cb , scientists are not saying that. The reality is that very little is known and we don't know what the end result will be. As a scientist myself I lean right on this issue and want to leave this issue with the scientists, not politicians.
1
@73151cb , have you even read the peer reviewed studies? I doubt it. There is so much we don't know. We don't even know how photosynthesis works at the quantum level. We don't know how proteins and RNA folds on itself and how the changes in the environment will influence that (I know about those issues because my research is related to it). We don't know how the current climate change will influence the ecosystem. So there is no actual scientist who is saying that current climate change is a major threat because we don't know. We don't know how the ecosystem will evolve. The climate has been changing for over 4 billion years and the ecosystem evolved, what makes you think it will now stop?
1
@73151cb , a town of 70,000 is able to go to renewable because of their small size. You can't expect an entire nation of 320+ million people to do it. Reality is that if we are to go to more renewable it should be done at the state and local level. Rockport, MO, a rural area that votes red, is ran completely on wind. If the federal government we to stay away from this issue we would be able to go to more renewable sources quicker. That is the issue the right has. They want to get the federal government out of this issue and leave it in the hands of the private sector and in the hands of state and local governments.
1