monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Why would I ever want to buy photos or figurines of you or copies of your autobiography "You Must Read Me!"

Rachel Maddow, MSNBC's star player, is enjoying one hell of a ratings run right now.

The cable news network's 9 o'clock host outrated every other primetime show during the week of March 6. Not only did that make her show No. 1 among adults 25-54 in her time slot with an average 624,000 viewers, she even beat cable news' perennial victor — Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly.

This is highly illustrative of the wacky, delusion bubble that you and yours travel in, Baldimo.

Quote:
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

The Catholic Church, the Evangelical Church in Germany, the Anglican Church, ...

the most suspicious “97 percent” study was conducted in 2013 by Australian scientist John Cook — author of the 2011 book Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand and creator of the blog Skeptical Science (subtitle: “Getting skeptical about global warming skepticism.”). In an analysis of 12,000 abstracts, he found “a 97% consensus among papers taking a position on the cause of global warming in the peer-reviewed literature that humans are responsible.”

When David Legates, a University of Delaware professor who formerly headed the university’s Center for Climatic Research, recreated Cook’s study, he found that “only 41 papers — 0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent,” endorsed what Cook claimed. Several scientists whose papers were included in Cook’s initial sample also protested that they had been misinterpreted. “Significant questions about anthropogenic influences on climate remain,” Legates concluded.

A 2012 poll of American Meteorological Society members also reported a diversity of opinion. Of the 1,862 members who responded (a quarter of the organization), 59 percent stated that human activity was the primary cause of global warming, and 11 percent attributed the phenomenon to human activity and natural causes in about equal measure, while just under a quarter (23 percent) said enough is not yet known to make any determination...only 22 percent thought that “all” or a “large” amount of the harm could be prevented “through mitigation and adaptation measures.”

And according to a study of 1,868 scientists working in climate-related fields, conducted just this year by the PBL Netherlands Environment Assessment Agency, three in ten respondents said that less than half of global warming since 1951 could be attributed to human activity, or that they did not know. Given the politics of modern academia and the scientific community, it’s not unlikely that most scientists involved in climate-related studies believe in anthropogenic global warming, and likely believe, too, that it presents a problem. However, there is no consensus approaching 97 percent. A vigorous, vocal minority exists. The science is far from settled.

Since when do you guys use religion to influence politics? I guess as long as you agree with the aims, why not use religion when it fits your cause.

Look at who the major backer is of the climate groups?

Russia vetoes U.N. resolution on Syria attack

UPDATE: UNITED NATIONS, April 12 (Reuters) - Russia again cast a veto at the United Nations Security Council to shield Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, blocking a Western bid on Wednesday to condemn a deadly gas attack in Syria and push the Syrian government to cooperate with investigators.

China, which has vetoed six resolutions on Syria since the civil war began six years ago, abstained from Wednesday's vote, along with Ethiopia and Kazakhstan. Ten countries voted in favor of the text, while Bolivia joined Russia in voting no. (Reporting by Michelle Nichols; Editing by Alistair Bell)

Russia is set to block a push by Western powers at the United Nations later on Wednesday to bolster support for international inquiries into the April 4 toxic gas attack in Syria. It will be Moscow's eighth veto in support of the Assad government since the Syrian war began six years ago.

"To my colleagues from Russia - you are isolating yourselves from the international community every time one of Assad's planes drop another barrel bomb on civilians and every time Assad tries to starve another community to death," U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, told the U.N. Security Council.

During a heated Security Council meeting, Russia's deputy U.N. envoy Vladimir Safronkov told the 15-member body that Western countries were wrong to blame Assad for the attack in the town of Khan Sheikhoun.
"I'm amazed that this was the conclusion. No one has yet visited the site of the crime. How do you know that?" he said.

The attack prompted the United States to strike a Syrian air base with cruise missiles and worsened relations between the United States and Russia.

President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday trust had eroded between the two countries under President Donald Trump, as Moscow delivered an unusually hostile reception to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in a face-off over Syria.

Britain's U.N. Ambassador Matthew Rycroft told the Security Council that samples taken from the site of the gas attack, in a rebel-held area of northern Syria, have tested positive for the nerve gas sarin.
He accused Russia of siding with "a murderous, barbaric criminal, rather than with their international peers."

Safronkov, who demanded Rycroft look at him while he was speaking, responded: "I cannot accept that you insult Russia."

Haley also accused Iran of being "Assad's chief accomplice in the regime's horrific acts," adding: "Iran is dumping fuel on the flames of this war in Syria so it can expand its own reach."

I didn't post anything about politics but just tried to answer to question.

Besides that: religion influences American politics to a degree not seen in other developed countries.

That Forbes article disputes a very specific claim (one that I haven't heard being made anywhere, and feels like a straw man here), that "97% of scientists agree that climate change is real, and therefore we should ban all fossil fuels." That specific claim - framed in that specific way - is, of course false, ludicrous and "cute", as you put it.

What that Forbes article does NOT dispute is the claim that "97% of scientists agree that climate change or global warming is real, and that human activity is mostly (more than 50%) responsible for it". THAT claim stands unchallenged by that Forbes article, and for that matter, by cold objective reality.

If you actually think your link somehow definitively poo-poos what's actually being claimed by the scientific community and people concerned with the environment, that's cute.

Britain's U.N. Ambassador Matthew Rycroft t
He accused Russia of siding with "a murderous, barbaric criminal, rather than with their international peers."

The last time I researched it, and admittedly it was almost a year ago, our government's spending on "Climate Change" had only 8% apportioned to mitigation. The lion's share was devoted to research.

Doesn't that seem odd to you?

If it's so such settled science, why do we need more research?

There is absolutely no rational reason to believe that (assuming a catastrophe is on it's way), as in a Hollywood movie, the world will hire Bruce Willis to pull our global ass out of the fire in the nick of time and so anyone who really believes dire effects are inevitable would have to be in favor of spending a lot more money on mitigation rather than PR nonsense.

Not wacky at all.

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES
Statement on climate change from 18 scientific associations

"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver." (2009)2

AAAS emblem
American Association for the Advancement of Science
"The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society." (2006)3
ACS emblem
American Chemical Society
"Comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem." (2004)4
AGU emblem
American Geophysical Union
"Human‐induced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes." (Adopted 2003, revised and reaffirmed 2007, 2012, 2013)5
AMA emblem
American Medical Association
"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2013)6
AMS emblem
American Meteorological Society
"It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide." (2012)7
APS emblem
American Physical Society
"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now." (2007)8
GSA emblem
The Geological Society of America
"The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s." (2006; revised 2010)9
SCIENCE ACADEMIES
International academies: Joint statement

"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies)10

UNSAS emblem
U.S. National Academy of Sciences
"The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere." (2005)11
U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
USGCRP emblem
U.S. Global Change Research Program
"The global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat-trapping gases. Human 'fingerprints' also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice." (2009, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies)12
INTERGOVERNMENTAL BODIES
IPCC emblem
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen.”13

“Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems.”14