GeorgeRux

Math guy. Proponent of using data and the scientific method. Skeptical about use of “appeals to authority” and “ consensus.” Conservative Constitutionalist.

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@greenheroaf What data do you have to support your opinion “the rising risks we face today are just as clear?” You don’t have any? Do you know what scientific evidence is?

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

It is evident human activity has had an impact due to urbanization, deforestation, and burning of fossil fuels. But the magnitude is unknown. Most importantly, there is no evidence the gradual warming has had any detrimental impact on human flourishing. While we might not have much of an impact. Let’s keep up the good work!

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

Interesting observations.

But the observations breaks down when evaluating the differences.

Weather models are scientific forecasting changes within bounds of uncertainty. Sadly the Climate Science Alarmists are not scientific when they don’t acknowledge the uncertainty of the assumptions of the two major factors in their forecasts:

1) What is the percentage impact and the uncertainty of the impact of human burning of fossil fuels ( as opposed to natural changes) increasing CO2 concentrations ? 2) What is the percentage impact and the uncertainty of the impact of Increased CO2 concentrations ( as opposed to naturally occurring CO2 ) increasing global temperatures?

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

Is there any published science demonstrating that 1) human burning of fossil fuels ( as opposed to natural changes) is responsible for more than 50% of observed increases in CO2 concentrations ? 2) Increased CO2 concentrations ( as opposed to naturally occurring CO2 ) is responsible for over 50% of the increase in global temperatures? This isn’t “crackpot leeching.” You don’t know do you? Your flaws understanding the scientific method are obvious

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@medialens Arsonist. Weak analogy. There is evidence when an arsonist sets a match. There is no evidence human burning of fossil fuels has an appreciable impact on increasing global temperatures. Are you unable to see the difference?

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@ChrisGloninger 4.5 mm per year. So in a thousand years we can expect an increase of about 5 meters? OMG we’re all going to die! lol

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@HannoKlausmeier If you define better as most cost effective to the consumer, both are inferior. Which is why adoption of EVs and heat pumps remain paltry

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@terrychristian @DavidUllrich202 Oh No! MAY! We “may” be doomed!

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@medialens The models are just as accurate as a straight line drawn with a crayon. Big deal

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@PikettyWIL @anmol_smnch Wow! A three day conference of mostly wealthy leftists to whine about inequality! Hope the hors d'oeuvres were excellent!

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

Heat is added and subtracted mostly due to orbital cycles as documented by Milanovitch. Yes, it’s likely human burning of fossil fuels has increased warming slightly. But so what? There is no evidence of any harm to humans the past century during which average temperatures increased 1C.

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@M3othra012 @SocialHypocris1 Perhaps you will. But, don’t you agree, the vast
Majority of the time they are patriots voting Republican.

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@M3othra012 @CO2Coalition Why do you treat it like one?

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@AukeHoekstra @mzjacobson Do you have any evidence wind and/or solar can provide firm power?

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@terrychristian You get territorial easily.

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@CoppockRog62072 Was it a vote? And so what? The world has been gradually warming for the past few centuries

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@ryankatzrosene What’s wrong with 2C warming ?

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@terrychristian Tens of thousands of scientists are not lying. But A handful of climate scientists are frauds ( e.g. Michael Mann)

[GeorgeRux @CAGWfool]

@Meredith_Bae_ Would the IRS have been better under Harris?