Quote:

---

New Orleans is locked into a watery future which could see it surrounded by ocean [url=https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/09/climate/sea-level-rise-melting-ice-sheets][/url]as early as this century, according to a new expert analysis, which says the city must start the relocation process now to avoid chaos.

---

Rising seas will swallow New Orleans. People need to start relocating now, scientists say

This morning on cnn. They're not just going to let this hoax go

Malibu said:

---

MelvinUdall said:

---

Someone walked outside it is hotter, that is solid data.

---

I get the impulse to mock and collect stars, but this is a strawman.

Here's NASA's data, which I'm going to easily predict is going be either dismissed as junk science from politically motivated hacks or confounding for who knows what happens.

https://science.nasa.gov/earth/explore/earth-indicators/global-temperature/

That my actual lived experience matches what the eggheads at NASA have measured was the point of my post, not that my personal comfort is a reliable barometer of climate change.

Again, I'll come back to CO2 being a magic molecule that we can pump as much as we want into the atmosphere with absolutely no secondary or tertiary consequences seems to require a level of faith or motivated reasoning as believing Florida will be underwater by 2030.

---

I know quite a few of those eggheads at NASA...

They're all pretty much left-wing politically...

So, take that as you will...

Malibu said:

---

Current average temperatures are being exceeded year over year for recorded history,

---

I don't believe you.

https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/sherman/average-temperature-by-year

SunrayAg said:

---

Malibu said:

---

MelvinUdall said:

---

Someone walked outside it is hotter, that is solid data.

---

I get the impulse to mock and collect stars, but this is a strawman.

Here's NASA's data, which I'm going to easily predict is going be either dismissed as junk science from politically motivated hacks or confounding for who knows what happens.

https://science.nasa.gov/earth/explore/earth-indicators/global-temperature/

That my actual lived experience matches what the eggheads at NASA have measured was the point of my post, not that my personal comfort is a reliable barometer of climate change.

Again, I'll come back to CO2 being a magic molecule that we can pump as much as we want into the atmosphere with absolutely no secondary or tertiary consequences seems to require a level of faith or motivated reasoning as believing Florida will be underwater by 2030.

---

How much real, accurate, scientifically verifiable data does nasa have?

50 years?

70 years?

Back to the little ice age 150 years ago?

What about the medieval warm period 1000 years ago?

Does their data account for urban heat islands?

That's what I thought…

---

One of the big problems I have, is that "scientists" are reporting changes in data using more significant digits than the sensors were able to measure.

That's something that would get you an F in any engineering class...

Even it were true that it's getting hotter and I am not saying at all that it is, 1)who's to say if that's good or bad ? and 2) the debate has always been based on if it is getting hotter what is the cause ? Maybe anthropogenic has caused some warming but how much of it? The whole concept that we could reverse or even measurably slow what could be all or mostly a natural change was always a huge stretch.

Jmo, it was a theory supported by a lot of cherry picked data that the left picked up on in a big way , mostly disingenuously, to try to reorder power and control. Maybe there were tiny threads of truth embedded therein.

halfastros81 said:

---

Even it were true that it's getting hotter and I am not saying at all that it is, 1)who's to say if that's good or bad ? and 2) the debate has always been based on if it is getting hotter what is the cause ? Maybe anthropogenic has caused some warming but how much of it? The whole concept that we could reverse or even measurably slow what could be all or mostly a natural change was always a huge stretch.

Jmo, it was a theory supported by a lot of cherry picked data that the left picked up on in a big way , mostly disingenuously, to try to reorder power and control. Maybe there were tiny threads of truth embedded therein.

---

The only way man can significantly change the climate for any length of time is via nuclear bombs. Short of that, there ain't much we can do. Anyone saying otherwise is delulu.

techno-ag said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

Even it were true that it's getting hotter and I am not saying at all that it is, 1)who's to say if that's good or bad ? and 2) the debate has always been based on if it is getting hotter what is the cause ? Maybe anthropogenic has caused some warming but how much of it? The whole concept that we could reverse or even measurably slow what could be all or mostly a natural change was always a huge stretch.

Jmo, it was a theory supported by a lot of cherry picked data that the left picked up on in a big way , mostly disingenuously, to try to reorder power and control. Maybe there were tiny threads of truth embedded therein.

---

The only way man can significantly change the climate for any length of time is via nuclear bombs. Short of that, there ain't much we can do. Anyone saying otherwise is delulu.

---

Don't give the Democrats any ideas.

The South and midwest would be their obvious first targets.

Jack Squat 83 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

Even it were true that it's getting hotter and I am not saying at all that it is, 1)who's to say if that's good or bad ? and 2) the debate has always been based on if it is getting hotter what is the cause ? Maybe anthropogenic has caused some warming but how much of it? The whole concept that we could reverse or even measurably slow what could be all or mostly a natural change was always a huge stretch.

Jmo, it was a theory supported by a lot of cherry picked data that the left picked up on in a big way , mostly disingenuously, to try to reorder power and control. Maybe there were tiny threads of truth embedded therein.

---

The only way man can significantly change the climate for any length of time is via nuclear bombs. Short of that, there ain't much we can do. Anyone saying otherwise is delulu.

---

Don't give the Democrats any ideas.

The South and midwest would be their obvious first targets.

---

Just remind them of all the blacks and trans people who live in the South. That will temper their enthusiasm for it.

halfastros81 said:

---

Even it were true that it's getting hotter and I am not saying at all that it is, 1)who's to say if that's good or bad ? and 2) the debate has always been based on if it is getting hotter what is the cause ? Maybe anthropogenic has caused some warming but how much of it? The whole concept that we could reverse or even measurably slow what could be all or mostly a natural change was always a huge stretch.

Jmo, it was a theory supported by a lot of cherry picked data that the left picked up on in a big way , mostly disingenuously, to try to reorder power and control. Maybe there were tiny threads of truth embedded therein.

---

With all the questions it sounds like you're pretty ignorant on the topic. Why not do some research first before sharing an opinion on a public forum?

agclassof2012 said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

Even it were true that it's getting hotter and I am not saying at all that it is, 1)who's to say if that's good or bad ? and 2) the debate has always been based on if it is getting hotter what is the cause ? Maybe anthropogenic has caused some warming but how much of it? The whole concept that we could reverse or even measurably slow what could be all or mostly a natural change was always a huge stretch.

Jmo, it was a theory supported by a lot of cherry picked data that the left picked up on in a big way , mostly disingenuously, to try to reorder power and control. Maybe there were tiny threads of truth embedded therein.

---

With all the questions it sounds like you're pretty ignorant on the topic. Why not do some research first before sharing an opinion on a public forum?

---

The floor is yours to give all a primer about how the data is not cherry picked by so called scientists.

Local variability and shorter term climate cycles like El Niño/La Nina mean that the individual human experience with climate change is a pretty useless anecdotal data point. The changes you individually experience in a place over years or decades could be driven largely by factors that are regional or that are a consequence of other climate shifts mostly attributable to natural factors. You can have regions get warmer or cooler, water or drier and it be shorter term climate variability.

It is possible in your specific location that over a human lifetime you can observe changes related to CO2 driven warming, but it is more possible that what you observe is not primarily CO2, on a human time scale. We can go back just a few decades or a couple of ventures and find climate trends that could not have yet been CO2 driven yet but that occurred noticeably on a human timescale due to other factors in the region.

Malibu said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Malibu said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

Malibu said:

---

A more nuanced take:
Burning fossil fuels at the scale we are doing so is releasing quantities of CO2 at the scale massively more than the Earth would naturally release on its own. CO2 is not the one magical molecule we can put in the atmosphere at whatever quantities we want with no second and third order consequences. Current average temperatures are being exceeded year over year for recorded history, and declaring the hypothesis that human caused CO2 additions in the atmosphere has something to do with that, as models and science predicted it would, shouldn't cause thoughtful people to erupt in a deep belly laughter for being absurd liberal propaganda.

Yes, someone selling a fatalistic picture of Florida being underwater in 10 years was selling something or trying to increase their personal power. Sensationalism and doom attracts more eyeballs than a more balanced approach. We should be skeptical of worst case scenario claims.

---

The emboldened is based on falsified data.

---

I go outside and I've been on the planet awhile. It's hotter here than it was when I was a kid. Maybe I'm in on the conspiracy too.

---

This comment is about as data driven as the climate movement.

---

I can't be the only person on in the US that is seeing repeatedly higher temperatures in my locale than when I was kid and noticing that the AC is on more and being outside in the summer sucks more. Global temperatures = giant hoax. My lived experience = pshhh, you're imaging things. ETA: TexAgs courtesy, will be offline for awhile. Happy Sunday.

---

Sounds like science!!!!

Daniel Swain RCP8.5 Reflections

I'd recommend watching this video which is a recent live stream from Dr. Daniel Swain giving his thoughts on RCP8.5.

I'd recommend finding something productive to spend an hour and a half doing rather than watching a climate change propaganda video.

"Dr. Swain" and his fake science are not for long.

bobbranco said:

---

"Dr. Swain" and his fake science are not for long.

---

bro looks like the shooter from Sandy Hook with grey hair.

agclassof2012 said:

---

Daniel Swain RCP8.5 Reflections

I'd recommend watching this video which is a recent live stream from Dr. Daniel Swain giving his thoughts on RCP8.5.

---

If hes still pushing this, he's already been debunked by his own team.

Give it up, man.

I don't really understand why libs care that much about climate change to begin with. Most are not having kids. So what do they care?

regardless of what they say, most libs are complete hypocrites or outright liars about their carbon footprints and resource use anyway.

Let those of us with kids, grandkids, and legacy, worry about it. Trust me, we're concerned about our families. But any notion of climate change doesn't even rate.

Urban Ag said:

---

I don't really understand why libs care that much about climate change to begin with. Most are not having kids. So what do they care?

regardless of what they say, most libs are complete hypocrites or outright liars about their carbon footprints and resource use anyway.

Let those of us with kids, grandkids, and legacy, worry about it. Trust me, we're concerned about our families. But any notion of climate change doesn't even rate.

---

I think it partially goes back to the whole toxic empathy thing where left wing women project that onto other issues because they don't have kids.

I listened to the summary. What I heard was in his opinion we are in a range of emissions that leads to something between the lower presupposed and higher presupposed ranges and we don't really know what it means in terms of impact on global temps or impact on the planet. The models are a guess and take into account a number of unknown variables such as vegetation die off in the rain forests for example. His comments are no surprise to me . Doesn't change my opinion of anything. Worst case scenarios are what were touted by the extremists and they have not been shown to be true and therefore the climate change industry has generally suffered a loss of credibility. His comments are no game changer imo and certainly no reason to move heaven and earth to change world order. Do you think otherwise?

halfastros81 said:

---

I listened to the summary. What I heard was in his opinion we are in a range of emissions that leads to something between the lower presupposed and higher presupposed ranges and we don't really know what it means in terms of impact on global temps or impact on the planet. The models are a guess and take into account a number of unknown variables such as vegetation die off in the rain forests for example. His comments are no surprise to me . Doesn't change my opinion of anything. Worst case scenarios are what were touted by the extremists and they have not been shown to be true and therefore the climate change industry has generally suffered a loss of credibility. His comments are no game changer imo and certainly no reason to move heaven and earth to change world order. Do you think otherwise?

---

I think Dr. Swain's comments on RCP8.5 highlight why this thread is sort of pointless. My main takeaway from his comments on RCP8.5 is that the climate is warming somewhere between a modest warming scenario and a hypothetical worst-case scenario that was never considered especially likely in the first place. That's not exactly a groundbreaking conclusion. I do agree that RCP8.5 was used to generate attention-grabbing headlines, and that's unfortunate because it often distracted from more nuanced discussions.

Personally, I'm an outdoor enthusiast and spend most of my free time enjoying public lands with family and friends. I don't need news articles or political talking points to convince me whether a rapidly warming climate is good or bad. Many of my friends work for Fish & Wildlife, the Forest Service, wildland fire crews, and conservation organizations. There is a broad consensus among these communities that the rate of warming observed over the past several decades is already affecting ecosystems in noticeable ways and in many instances negatively impacting.

Those ecosystems are important to me, so I choose to make personal decisions that support a lower-emissions future where I can. I'm certainly not perfect, and I don't claim to have all the answers, but I've decided that ignoring the warming trend altogether isn't the right approach either.

I have noticed that in the summers it gets hot. The climate changes around here every darn year. I have therefore decided not to worry about it.

agclassof2012 said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

I listened to the summary. What I heard was in his opinion we are in a range of emissions that leads to something between the lower presupposed and higher presupposed ranges and we don't really know what it means in terms of impact on global temps or impact on the planet. The models are a guess and take into account a number of unknown variables such as vegetation die off in the rain forests for example. His comments are no surprise to me . Doesn't change my opinion of anything. Worst case scenarios are what were touted by the extremists and they have not been shown to be true and therefore the climate change industry has generally suffered a loss of credibility. His comments are no game changer imo and certainly no reason to move heaven and earth to change world order. Do you think otherwise?

---

I think Dr. Swain's comments on RCP8.5 highlight why this thread is sort of pointless. My main takeaway from his comments on RCP8.5 is that the climate is warming somewhere between a modest warming scenario and a hypothetical worst-case scenario that was never considered especially likely in the first place. That's not exactly a groundbreaking conclusion. I do agree that RCP8.5 was used to generate attention-grabbing headlines, and that's unfortunate because it often distracted from more nuanced discussions.

Personally, I'm an outdoor enthusiast and spend most of my free time enjoying public lands with family and friends. I don't need news articles or political talking points to convince me whether a rapidly warming climate is good or bad. Many of my friends work for Fish & Wildlife, the Forest Service, wildland fire crews, and conservation organizations. There is a broad consensus among these communities that the rate of warming observed over the past several decades is already affecting ecosystems in noticeable ways and in many instances negatively impacting.

Those ecosystems are important to me, so I choose to make personal decisions that support a lower-emissions future where I can. I'm certainly not perfect, and I don't claim to have all the answers, but I've decided that ignoring the warming trend altogether isn't the right approach either.

---

You think leftist climate change writers admitting they deceived the public for 20 years is a pointless thread? It validates what many have been saying for years and reinforces the reality that we've been lied to about the entire movement.

I'm an outdoor enthusiast as well (although I'm coming back to it after a few years hiatus) and I'm concerned with environmental changes. However, being lied to and scapegoated as the primary cause for all environmental change with no regard to natural cycles and change is negligent and irresponsible. I'm confident there are policies or changes we all probably could agree on to address real issues. But the whole movement got hijacked by Marxists and transitioned it to wealth redistribution.

Until you cull "climate change" of the far left, we are always going to butt heads over it. But good luck doing that.

That's a responsible approach and I take no issue with it. Do what you can to personally impact what you believe is a risk. Imo, that doesn't change the fact that politicos hijacked the issue and sensationalized it to scare people for purposes of trying to gain power and control. Over the long haul they did the concept that human activity may be changing the climate and the environment negatively no favors by sensationalizing it.

YouBet said:

---

You think leftist climate change writers admitting they deceived the public for 20 years is a pointless thread? It validates what many have been saying for years and reinforces the reality that we've been lied to about the entire movement.

I'm an outdoor enthusiast as well (although I'm coming back to it after a few years hiatus) and I'm concerned with environmental changes. However, being lied to and scapegoated as the primary cause for all environmental change with no regard to natural cycles and change is negligent and irresponsible. I'm confident there are policies or changes we all probably could agree on to address real issues. But the whole movement got hijacked by Marxists and transitioned it to wealth redistribution.

Until you cull "climate change" of the far left, we are always going to butt heads over it. But good luck doing that.

---

Valid point on the being lied to but just because people leveraged RCP8.5 to push an agenda doesn't invalidate global warming is my point. I felt that some folks on this thread were interpreting the original post as that.

I understand that the general public is lied to from all directions and that the truth often lies somewhere in between political extremes. So yes, while extreme leftists are warning of global demise, the far-right is also portraying global warming as a non-issue. Both opinions are probably wrong. But I will be honest, I have a bigger problem with treating it as a non-issue because if we're wrong, I think there's too much at stake to lose. That's a risk I don't want to take.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/failed-climate-prediction-timeline/

Reality invalidates catastrophic anthropogenic climate change.

The hard data shows the world is growing greener, crop yields are increasing, death and damage do to severe weather is decreasing. The world has never been a more comfortable place for humans to live and we have fossil fuels to thank for a large portion of that.

8.5 was insane fear mongering, but even most of the milder warming projections are bogus.

Quote:

---

Valid point on the being lied to but just because people leveraged RCP8.5 to push an agenda doesn't invalidate global warming is my point. I felt that some folks on this thread were interpreting the original post as that.

I understand that the general public is lied to from all directions and that the truth often lies somewhere in between political extremes. So yes, while extreme leftists are warning of global demise, the far-right is also portraying global warming as a non-issue. Both opinions are probably wrong. But I will be honest, I have a bigger problem with treating it as a non-issue because if we're wrong, I think there's too much at stake to lose. That's a risk I don't want to take.

---

So the fear mongering lie has worked on you. Okay. Got it.

Don' care. Knock yourself out spending your money and the money of other like minded people who donate (not taxpayer money) to do something, other than crippling civilization to tilt at that windmill.

It's a combination of my personal observations and my interpretation of the science that has formed my take on global warming, not the fear mongering.

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Reality invalidates catastrophic anthropogenic climate change.

The hard data shows the world is growing greener, crop yields are increasing, death and damage do to severe weather is decreasing. The world has never been a more comfortable place for humans to live and we have fossil fuels to thank for a large portion of that.

8.5 was insane fear mongering, but even most of the milder warming projections are bogus.

---

This is a shared planet. Yes, humans can adapt fast to environmental challenges, but wildlife and natural ecosystems don't have that same luxury. Many species are already dealing with habitat loss, and a warming climate adds another layer of stress.

I agree that a lot of climate messaging has been exaggerated, but pointing to human prosperity alone doesn't tell the whole story. The decline in biodiversity and the loss of healthy ecosystems are real issues, and I think that's unfortunate regardless of your views on climate policy.

agclassof2012 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

You think leftist climate change writers admitting they deceived the public for 20 years is a pointless thread? It validates what many have been saying for years and reinforces the reality that we've been lied to about the entire movement.

I'm an outdoor enthusiast as well (although I'm coming back to it after a few years hiatus) and I'm concerned with environmental changes. However, being lied to and scapegoated as the primary cause for all environmental change with no regard to natural cycles and change is negligent and irresponsible. I'm confident there are policies or changes we all probably could agree on to address real issues. But the whole movement got hijacked by Marxists and transitioned it to wealth redistribution.

Until you cull "climate change" of the far left, we are always going to butt heads over it. But good luck doing that.

---

Valid point on the being lied to but just because people leveraged RCP8.5 to push an agenda doesn't invalidate global warming is my point. I felt that some folks on this thread were interpreting the original post as that.

I understand that the general public is lied to from all directions and that the truth often lies somewhere in between political extremes. So yes, while extreme leftists are warning of global demise, the far-right is also portraying global warming as a non-issue. Both opinions are probably wrong. But I will be honest, I have a bigger problem with treating it as a non-issue because if we're wrong, I think there's too much at stake to lose. That's a risk I don't want to take.

---

I'm not going to definitively say that some global warming is not happening. The problem I have with it is being blamed for it. I'm not sure what you can even do to combat it. What are you personally doing to make you feel better about it?

It's far more likely that we are just experiencing normal cycles the earth goes through in which case there is nothing we can do about it. Warming is also way the hell better than cooling so enjoy it while you are still on this planet because when it starts going the other direction (and it will), mankind is going to go through a world of hurt.

agent-maroon said:

---

Quote:

---

New Orleans is locked into a watery future which could see it surrounded by ocean [url=https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/09/climate/sea-level-rise-melting-ice-sheets][/url]as early as this century, according to a new expert analysis, which says the city must start the relocation process now to avoid chaos.

---

Rising seas will swallow New Orleans. People need to start relocating now, scientists say

This morning on cnn. They're not just going to let this hoax go

---

While New Orleans will most likely end up under water eventually, it wo t be from rising sea levels. It will be because it was built on a much nastier swamp than what Houston is built on and is continuously sinking.

It was 88 degrees in Phoenix today so I loved climate change.