Sunday, April 20, 2014

Republican calls man made climate change democratic ploy

                                                      Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL) addresses a town hall meeting in Gainesville, Florida.
  Congressman Denies Manmade Climate Change, Calls It ‘An Agenda-Driven Science’: Yoho’s rejection of mainstream climate science, similar to the climate denial of many of his Republican House colleagues, had not been previously reported. His obstinance on the issue could have disastrous consequences for Florida. In fact, A University of Florida study found that the rise in extreme weather caused by climate change could cost the state up to $345 billion by the end of the 21st century.
Read about the catastrophic methane gas release alone due to man's interference with the gas wells. In that instance alone methane is 1,000 times worse than we thought. What the hell is wrong with these people?

This One Simple Graphic Explains The Difference Between Climate Science And Climate Politics but is anyone telling the truth?

CNN Ignores Major Climate Report, But Fox News Does Something Even Worse

-science-vs-climate-politics-graphic/  If you follow the news on climate change, you hear it over and over again: 97 percent of climate scientists agree that global warming is real and caused by human activity.On Tuesday, geochemist James Lawrence Powell took that rhetoric even further, releasing a study finding that out of all 10,855 climate studies published in peer-review journals during 2013, only two of them explicitly rejected anthropogenic global warming.

 Put another way, that’s
roughly .02 percent of published research that denies outright the existence of man-made climate change.If those numbers sound staggering, it’s probably because of how little they affect the intense, non-scientific debate that often surrounds climate change in the political realm. Politicians tasked with making crucial decisions on national energy policy and air pollution have a propensity for ignoring the science.

Top Climatologist Slams Science Magazine For Getting Extreme Weather in the future totally Wrong

No comments: