Whitehouse urges action on climate change


#1

browndailyherald.com/2014/04/15/whitehouse-urges-action-climate-change/

What’s your opinion?


#2

As with previous editions, the new report is an alarmist document designed to scare people and build political support for unpopular policies such as carbon taxes, cap-and-trade, and EPA regulatory mandates.

Also in keeping with past practice, the latest report confuses climate risk with climate change risk.

Droughts, storms, floods, and heat waves are all part of the natural climate. Our risk of exposure to such extremes has much more to do with where we happen to live than with any gradual climate changes associated with the 1.3F – 1.9F increase in average U.S. temperature since the 1880s.

Since even immediate and total shutdown of all carbon dioxide-emitting vehicles, power plants, and factories in the U.S. would decrease global warming by only a hypothetical and undetectable two-tenths of a degree Celsius by 2100, it is misleading to imply, as the report does, that the Obama administration’s climate policies can provide any measurable protection from extreme weather events.

The Assessment is flat out wrong that climate change is increasing our vulnerability to heat stress. As hot weather has become more frequent, people and communities have adapted to it, and heat-related mortality in the U.S. has declined.

Cities with the most frequent hot weather such as Tampa, Florida and Phoenix, Arizona have practically zero heat-related mortality. That is the most probable future for most U.S. cities if global warming continues!

foxnews.com/opinion/2014/05/06/national-climate-assessment-report-alarmists-offer-untrue-unrelenting-doom-and/


#3

Check out what Jesse Ventura has had to say about global warming.


#4

Aw, shoot, I thought you meant the White House. This is just a US senator named Whitehouse. :o

Did you even read the article posted? It’s not about a “new report” or an “alarmist document.” It’s about a senator’s lecture at a Brown University event focusing on health and the environment. I think Senator Whitehouse stuck close to the topic, discussing public health issues related to climate change/global warming. Which specific points of his lecture do you disagree with?

Why? Does he have something new to contribute to the debate?


#5

By executive order, using his pen and phone, The president should direct the EPA to place strict limits on solar activity.

Jon


#6

75 people is a “crowd”?


#7

“Alarmist document”? It’s one man’s speech.

The Assessment is flat out wrong that climate change is increasing our vulnerability to heat stress. As hot weather has become more frequent, people and communities have adapted to it, and heat-related mortality in the U.S. has declined.

Cities with the most frequent hot weather such as Tampa, Florida and Phoenix, Arizona have practically zero heat-related mortality. That is the most probable future for most U.S. cities if global warming continues!

At least in the parts quoted in the article, he doesn’t even mention heat stress.

:confused:


#8

The only thing unusual about the weather we’re having is that it’s cyclical.
Here’s an example of my meaning:

cnn.com/2014/05/12/us/severe-weather/index.html?hpt=hp_inthenews

[quote=http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/12/us/severe-weather/index.html?hpt=hp_inthenews ]
Higher mountain elevations could see 1 to 2 feet of snow, with isolated pockets of up to 3 feet. Denver could get up to 5 to 10 inches of snow.
Although snow might seem unusual this time of year, it’s actually not record-setting for the Mile High City. Denver received an inch of snow on May 11, 2011, and even recorded snow as late as June 12 in 1974.

[/quote]

At present the temperatures from north to south along the Rocky Mountain states from Montana to Colorado are below freezing due to the snow accumulation in the mountains through the winter and by the late noon hours central time, those mid-western states like Kansas and Oklahoma will get temperatures close to the 90s …
That makes for wild weather when that cold air comes rushing down under that hot air, gets trapped and then funnels up as tornados.

The term mini-ice age was first introduced to me by my college meteorology professor back in the mid 60s and sure enough we had weather like we’ve been having now back in the 70s …
Mini ice ages come and go every 20 to 30 years or so, that is, I’m not speaking of an ice age like the ones that lasted 1000 years or longer.

rex


#9

Scare tactic, just like it was for tobacco, lead, asbestos, DDT and many other things we took for granted.


#10

Actually, I’m mistaken because it’s really hot air that gets trapped by cold air and it’s that hot air that funnels up into tornados when an opening occurs.

rex


#11

They can start with their hot heads and cold hearts.

Or are WE the ones who are supposed to change?

God’s weather is fine by me.


#12

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.