Why are Trump supporters so vehemently opposed to the notion of global climate change?

Ke7 wrote:

Climate change is now "global warming", but a few decades ago the threat was "global cooling" and an incoming iceage. This is part of the reason why many aren't just taking these researchers at their word. Show me some science.

Global cooling was a potential side effect of pollution, that is to say, high concentrations of particulates in the atmosphere could block sunlight, cause a "dimming" effect which if left unchecked, leading to cooler temps. Those particles were also a factor in acid rain. Clean air legislation and scrubbers on coal plants cleaned up our air, and this is no longer seen as an issue.

Much like the ozone hole which isn't a problem anymore because we banned certain CFCs and reversed the problem.

Science and responsible legislation FTW on both accounts!!

Do hot chicks believe in climate change? Do not so hot chicks deny climate change? Not sure it matters, since Americans are getting fatter, thus more women are not looking good in bikinis. This would seem to be a urgent national problem that needs to be solved.

Our FLOTUS, Melania looked good even in a flood. More American women need to take her lead. I thought she showed sound judgement by wearing high heels when the water is still rising.

MAGA

As Houston suffered, climate activists' response was that maybe, if the Industrial Revolution never happened, the storm would have been 15-30% weaker.

Al Gore said the ice cap could be gone by 2013.

ABC ran a dystopian documentary showing cities burning and $9 gasoline, by 2015.

Dr. Michael Mann of Penn State was caught fabricating a bunch of data and still has a job. We expect that from their football team, not a "science" department.

NASA says plant life has increased 20% thanks to more CO2.

If every nation held up their end of the Paris Accord (lol), it would only prevent 3 millimeters of sea level rise over the next 100 years. It's a transfer of money from the USA to third world kleptocrats.

Same story for the Obama EPA's unconstitutional energy regulations.

Many environmentalists oppose nuclear plants, because a small Ukrainian village was displaced.

The Freakonomics author determined it's not economically feasible to prevent climate change. He could be wrong or biased, but climate activists never respond with economic models of their own.

If climate change isn't a problem, why do people exaggerate?

Short answer, the leaders of the movement are fanatical socialists. The UN Climate Change Conference invites guys like Hugo Chavez and mass murder Robert Mugabe to lecture us on the evils of capitalism to the rest of the world's political leaders. The peaceful majority are good people though. They're sold on 'green' marketing and want to believe their minor lifestyle changes have a bigger purpose. Sadly it is now a religious cult and if you question any of it you're a "denier."

The data in that chart are 'adjusted' due to a variety of reasons given. A better set of data to look at are the data measured from satellites which do show that we are warmer now than many decades ago, but pretty much unchanged over since the 90s.

Sally Vv, Can you support *any* of what you are saying here? This is the crux of my OP --- clearly you are vehemently opposed to the concept of global warming, but you haven't given us any facts or studies. Is it a religious thing?

Thank you for actually showing something "scientific". I see that this measures temps in the lower atmosphere. Not sure if that correlates with temperatures measured on earth.

theold geezer wrote:

Sally Vv, Can you support *any* of what you are saying here? This is the crux of my OP --- clearly you are vehemently opposed to the concept of global warming, but you haven't given us any facts or studies. Is it a religious thing?

I am just stating the facts, i.e., the Earth's temps have remained relatively flat in the last 2 decades. This is not me picking figures out of my a.., but just going with scientific evidence. Evidence, by that way, has been proven to have been manipulated, falsified and cherry-picked. Despite all that, the Earth's temps have been steady for the most part since 1998.

Re: your third point, substitute "flooding" instead of burning . . . .

And gasoline is $9/gallon in many parts of Europe.

Re: Al Gore's prediction, are you saying that the global ice caps aren't shrinking?

Again, I'm trying to dig past the knee jerk reaction that global warming is simply fake.

theold geezer wrote:

Could you be more specific?

If you look at the average global temps for say the last 30 years, you will see an obvious increase in temps. So how has the prediction been wrong in a 30-year longitudinal sense?

Similarly, if you look at the rate of polar ice cap melting, again, the ice caps are shrinking. So can you explain how the predictions are wrong?

And what do you mean by raising taxes? Be specific.

Pssst- pssst- the polar ice caps have been melting- get this- SINCE THE LAST ICE AGE. I bet where you are sitting, there was at least a mile of ice 10,000 years ago. That is a scientific fact. A mile of ICE. ICE. Where you were sitting.

With regard to the latest politically-driven hysteria, here's something for you to help put things in perspective:

But on the topic of temperatures, the predictions have fallen out of the lower end of the original confidence interval on almost a yearly basis for the last 5-10 years.

Basically, stop being political pawns and enjoy your life while you can.

Hardly anyone denies the Earth is warming; the question is why?

One side argues it is due to human activity while the other side says it is something that has always occurred.

Humans have only been on Earth for about 200,000 years, or 1/30,000th of the lifespan of the universe. The Earth has heated up and cooled many, many times over the passage of time.

THE RELIGIOUS CULT IS THE DENIERS WHO CITE THE BIBLE AS EVIDENCE THAT MAN CANNOT DESTROY THE CLIMATE BECAUSE MAN CANNOT DESTROY GOD'S CREATION. GERMANY HAS BEEN ONE OF THE STRONGEST LEADERS IN FIGHTING CLIMATE CHANGE.

Because they are stupid, which is dangerous when it gets mixed with confidence.

Trump2020OP-the real one wrote:

Do hot chicks believe in climate change? Do not so hot chicks deny climate change? Not sure it matters, since Americans are getting fatter, thus more women are not looking good in bikinis. This would seem to be a urgent national problem that needs to be solved.

Our FLOTUS, Melania looked good even in a flood. More American women need to take her lead. I thought she showed sound judgement by wearing high heels when the water is still rising.

MAGA

She did look good. There were also a slew of good looking women (who weren't fortunate enough to marry a guy who inherited a $250mm company) who are now in homeless shelters, and not looking too good.

But don't you worry, the elites who fund the commercials that tie climate change to the devil in hopes to shift popular support away from climate regulation (that would hurt them financially) - they'll be just fine! They'll relocate to another mansion while the forgotten man stays in the shelter. Good luck!

I was alerted to this thread because the OP called and wanted it restored and it seems like a reasonable thread to be up.I think the real issue with climate change is no one has an honest debate about it or discuss the nuances of it, but that's not what you're really asking.

theold geezer wrote:

I see so many posts on Letsrun from Trumpsters /Republicans who believe that climate change is a hoax, despite the overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary

I think your question only addresses part of climate change. I see three main points for discussion:

1) How much is the earth warming?

2) How much is man causing the warming?

3) Should we/can we do anything to stop #1 and what should it be?

Your statement only addresses #1 and #2.

I think the bigger question is #3, but to answer that you need some agreement on #1 and #2.

But in terms of people being "vehemently opposed to the notion of global climate change" I don't think there are a lot of people like that. Much of the US used to be covered by glaciers right? so pretty much anyone would say the climate is changing. Climate change isn't really the issue, it's really how much should man do to keep the climate as is or even at some point in the last couple of decades? I think if it was free to keep the climate as it, you wouldn't have any debate.

Now sometimes instead of debating #1, #2, #3, climate change is presented as an imminent global catastrophe that is coming with no nuance so when it's presented as a black or white issue some of these Trump supporters as you call them just sort of fall into, "hey you can't prove #1 or #2" . Some may not care what the science is as it becomes an emotional debate of us vs them and it's presented as there are only 2 sides to this issue.

I've read your post and agree with point number 1.Trump has been in office for 8 months and there has been no shortage of stories, childish and volatile tweets, his alleged scandals, his inability to communicate peacefully and rationally, and his fractured cabinet.How, on earth, can you still support him? Even if you agreed with every one of his policies, do you not feel disgusted by who he is and how he communicates as a human being?i mean, how can you justify him as a leader or your support of him?! he pretty much embodies all parts of the white race i would eliminate if given the choice. i'm white.

ice ice baby wrote:

Hardly anyone denies the Earth is warming; the question is why?

One side argues it is due to human activity while the other side says it is something that has always occurred.

Humans have only been on Earth for about 200,000 years, or 1/30,000th of the lifespan of the universe. The Earth has heated up and cooled many, many times over the passage of time.

Are you aware that the concern about global warming started because the cause of such (the "why" as you put it) was known? WHY the Earth should be warming has been well known for well over 100 years.

So no, your statement does not hold. It is merely a talking point put out by those against science. I am saddened to think that you apparently bought into this talking point. But you could educate yourself if you had an interest in developing an understanding.

Here is a simple timeline. Note that the physics behind global warming (the WHY) was brought to the attention of the world far before anyone started measuring the simple fact that yes, indeed the Earth is warming.

More details can be found here:

Or you could just shout, "Fake News!" and save yourself the trouble.

Well, there are other options. He could shout:

"There is no such thing as consensus in science!"

or

"The Earth is really, really old!"

or perhaps the ultimate:

"Al Gore!"

Let us not limit our options here.

Sally Vv, while you are ostensibly "just stating the facts," could you give me some citations to peer-reviewed scientific papers that support your point?

And what do you think of NASA's own study (by the way, I wouldn't call NASA a group of tree-hugging freaks) which shows a dramatic rise in global temps:

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

Not sure why anyone cares. Climate change is only killing the people who don't believe in it.