Dear Not_Now.Soon,

You are so ignorant it is unbelievable. Not only have you shown yourself to be a pseudo-scientist but now you are acting in your capacity as a pseudo-philosopher. If there was a land of Know-all-know-nothing Wannabe you would be the King of Know-all-know-nothing Wannabe.

To Mr. Opinion

As an environmental socialist, are you good at answering questions, finding and researching answers for questions among the public, or even public relations as a whole?

The answers to issues and criticisms of climate change would be what I'd expect from a profession that has "environmental" in it's title. Someone who is able to talk to others without needing to insult or deflect criticisms and issues would be a skill I'd expect with "socialist" in the title.

If you insist on staying in this conversation, why not make yourself useful. Show that title isn't as worthless as you've shown your comments to be so far. Start by looking at the link I provided. If there is no merit to the "con" arguments in the link for climate change, then you should be able to provide some feedback outside of political accusations, insults, and deflections.

Has anyone read the discussion piece in Forum posting 9/9/19 from http://catallaxyfiles.com/2019/09/08/no-warming-in-australia-since-1876/

From a former Global Warming activist who did the research.

No warming in Australia since 1876? And Tony Thomas exposes the love romantic relationship of the ABC and Al Gore
Posted on 8:56 am, September 8, 2019 by Rafe Champion
A heads up from Jo Nova to check out a study of the Australian records. There are 25 locations in Australia with daily temperature data going back before 1890. A visual display shows all 1,389,419 daily maximum temperature readings at those locations since 1876.

We can probably say the Global warming campaigners on this site are devout listeners to the ABC.

The current records of heating are recorded in populated areas where extra heat is generated.

I just heard a rumor that Pauline Hansen and ScuMo are working on a plan to build lots of dams to be used for putting out fires caused by global warming and its consequential climate changes. And they are going to send the bill to the global warming activists because they reckon that those who are most worried about global warming should be the ones who pay the most. We have some really incredibly smart people in our parliaments.

Dear NNS,

Sigh.

Critical thinking was not part of your upbringing it seems.

This is from the same site; http://vaccines.procon.org/

There are going to be pros and cons for virtually any topic. 99% of people believe vaccines are beneficial to individual and community health and well being. This doesn't mean the respective arguments have any equivalence. They don't in the case of vaccines and they don't in the case of global warming.

But tell you what, if there was one of the arguments on the 'con' side that you deem to be top of your list I will undertake to step through it with you.

But please stop running the line that this is not a political discussion because that is just rubbish. Of course it is and it should be noted that many fundamentalist Christians of which you appear to be a member are cranky because they find themselves on the losing side of the greatest moral question of our age.

Hi SR,

Sorry, my questions were not meant to be definitive statements, but only questions: are those reports of temperature and sea-level rises accurate ? If you're up with it all, perhaps you can clear up my doubts ? Or not ?

If they are completely out of whack, and temperatures have risen, say, five degrees, and sea-levels by half a metre, that sort of rise, and taking obvious causes such as the urban heat-island effect, and distorted readings of formerly rural and remote measuring stations now surrounded by urban development and asphalt into account, then I'd be happy to run with the greenhouse-effect hypothesis, and start panicking.

Over to you :)

Joe