Let's just say that most of the papers presented on this subject today represent "cooked data."...and political dogma. Legitmate research would probably have merit.
Their claims are similar to suggesting that puppies around the world will die if we don't enact these policies. It is nonsense of course but they get to call those who disagree with them as puppy haters. The stupidity of the claims doesn't seem to matter to some. They just go with it. Taking money from producers to give to non-producers almost never actually helps non-producers. If you give a man a fish, he only has only one meal but if you teach him to fish, you will have created a serial liar (OK sorry, that was a lame joke I read in Vermont a couple weeks ago on vacation and couldn't resist, but I think you probably got my point anyway).
Yes......I'm still trying to figure out why Taxpayers are still being robbed of $Billions every year for "studies" regarding an issue where the "Science is Settled".
Scientists/Universities that are taking MY tax dollars for these Bogus studies are definitely Immoral/Criminal!!
What does that even mean, "...adapt to climate change in the present"?
EDIT: I don't really understand the point you're making. Are you admitting that the climate is changing and we should just give up trying to prevent it and just prepare our infrastructure for it? That's an extremely costly thing to do. And the U.S. spends way less than a billion dollars a day on climate change, and the vast majority of that is NOT on climate change research. Who then is spending all this money on research?
Your "vast amount" spent on climate-related stuff amounts to about $3/citizen/year, most of which is spent on observational instrumentation. Ignorance of even one tropical storm path costs more than that.
Research generally pays for itself many times over, in the long run. Money spent on research tends to lead to, well, a better tomorrow.
If u want your grandchildren to live on a better world, the answer is NO .
What is unscientific and immoral is to get all your scientific news from a site which categorically rejects 99% of world's climate science over reasons of a pure political nature.
And where exactly does the New Testament say that?
And most of the money goes to weather stations and satellites. Cutting these will mean no more warnings about storms.
https://celebrity.yahoo.com/news/weather...
This article says so http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/02/icsc-ipcc-focus-on-stopping-global-warming-and-extreme-weather-is-unscientific-and-immoral/
Global warming is nothing more than a jobs program for wantabe weathermen. It's better then them flipping burgers
don't expect to be taken seriously with WUWT. Somehow spending trillions on wars is ok
Yeah! definetely!
no, harming the environment is
