5) Climate change is not a threat, it is a movement that is designed to limit your freedom, liberty and autonomy. If you claim to be a car enthusiast then you would be diametrically opposed to any legislation that implemented the climate change agenda since it would lead to the end of internal combustion engines and the elimination of their use as a means of transportation. The climate system on this planet has been in constant flux for billions of years. The models that are making these doomsday predictions of the end of the world due to climate change are only using 150 years of climate data. If you have even an elementary grasp of statistics you would see that the samlple size of your data set would not produce a representative result. They are also completley reliant on scientist who make a living on government grants that only publish data that supports the global warming alarmist cause. Furthermore, if you take the claims of people such as Al Gore and Michael Mann who predicted some 20 years ago that the polar ice caps would be gone by 2014 and that New York would be under water... guess they were right? Nope!
I don't care about items 1 through 4, but others do, that's why I quoted them. With respect to number 5 I do. I've been a scientist since the '70s and following Climate Change since I read some of the original papers from BP and Standard Oil scientists since the '70s. So here's my response to your opinion, because that is what it is, an opinion, and it is not based on facts.
"Climate change is not a threat." Even our military leaders consider it a threat, so I'm not sure what you are talking about here. It is a real threat to a number of our military bases and as a result a real threat to our own protection. That even doesn't take into account the real threat to our environment. The growing season in Iowa with our family farm has increased by almost 2 weeks since I was a kid, which has a definite impact on the future of our farm which has been in the family for over 100 years. The Iowa Department of Agriculture goes into great detail on how it will impact Iowa farming over the next 50 years. Finally, over 10% of the world's protein comes from the ocean. The fish population is collapsing due to increased carbon dioxide and resulting acidity of the ocean waters. That's a huge threat for economies and populations dependent on the fishing.
"It is a movement that is designed to limit your freedom, liberty, and autonomy.": Pure bullshit propagated by the fossil fuel industry. Changing electric production to renewables is not going to limit your freedom, liberty, or autonomy. Inventing ways to feed animals to cut down on methane production is not going to limit anything. The opposite is going to happen. New technologies will be invented that allows more local electricity generation which will allow us to remove our dependency on centralized power generation and I can disconnect my farm from the power grid or at least not have to wait days for repairs to get power back on when storms take out the power. Don't waste your time going down the "renewables are never going to be as cheap as coal or natural gas without government subsidies." The most recent unsubsidized cost analysis demonstrates the "Levelized Cost of Energy Comparison" for utility-scale generation Wind and Solar PV is now less than natural gas and coal. The technology has caught up and it is only going to get cheaper. You can read about it here "
https://www.lazard.com/media/450773/lazards-levelized-cost-of-energy-version-120-vfinal.pdf". I recently read a paper where they have successfully demonstrated a solar panel technology that extracts 90% of the sun's energy spectrum. You can read about it here: "
https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2018/11/23/all-i-want-for-christmas-is-a-90-efficient-solar-panel/".
"If you claim to be a car enthusiast then you would be diametrically opposed to any legislation that implemented the climate change agenda since it would lead to the end of internal combustion engines and the elimination of their use as a means of transportation. ": Opinion again and not based on fact. I've got a lot of other car enthusiast friends who are scientists, believe in the science behind climate change, race cars, and autocross with me. They know over time things change. Cars will change. Methods of transportation will change. We might be racing electric cars in the future, which oh, by the way, will be a lot quicker than the cars we track and autocross now. If you've ever driven a Tesla Roadster or a Tesla Sedan (I have) you will be shocked at the difference in acceleration between our 409 cars and an electric car. I've driven Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Porches, Corvettes, and my favorite monster a 1970 Plymouth Superbird 426 Hemi. None provided the pure amazement generated by the Tesla. Technology will continue to improve the cars we drive, which is why I'm considering a 2-liter combination supercharged, turbocharged, based vehicle for my next track car. The combination turbo and supercharger makes the 2-liter car faster off the line than my 65 409 and gets 30+ miles per gallon instead of the 10 the 65 gets.
"The climate system on this planet has been in constant flux for billions of years. The models that are making these doomsday predictions of the end of the world due to climate change are only using 150 years of climate data. If you have even an elementary grasp of statistics you would see that the samlple size of your data set would not produce a representative result. ": Yes, the climate system has been in flux for billions of years and will continue to change, but there is a lot of research to investigate the source of those changes. Some of those changes were due to cataclysmic events (asteroids, volcanos, ...). I do have a firm grasp of statistics and this is another misdirection that climate deniers use to make it sound like all of this research is based on a one to two hundreds years of data. There are actually hundreds of thousands of years of data. Scientists have been using ice core samples which they can correlate to specific time periods and use that data, along with other data surrounding cataclysmic events to further refine their models. The focus on the last one to two hundred years aligns with our industrial age and the associated cataclysmic event initiated by humans. Climate deniers will also use that results of the ice core in an attempt to prove their point, but they conveniently leave out all the related research that points to sources of the changes over time. In other words, they cherry pick the data, which is a common tactic with climate change denial papers that attempt to provide data to prove their point.
"They are also completley reliant on scientist who make a living on government grants that only publish data that supports the global warming alarmist cause." Actually, the original papers I read regarding climate change were from BP and Standard Oil scientists, but yes there is a lot of research from government grants. It was government funded research that led us to discover lead additives in gasoline were killing us, ddt was wiping out the bird population, fluorides in aerosols were wiping out the ozone layer, ... They also rely on non-governmental organizations that contribute to research too, and here's a list of NGOs involved in climate change
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Climate_change_organizations.
"Furthermore, if you take the claims of people such as Al Gore and Michael Mann who predicted some 20 years ago that the polar ice caps would be gone by 2014 and that New York would be under water... guess they were right? Nope!" I'll quote you here, "Nope!" Another attempt by climate deniers to discredit two very visible proponents of research and action related to climate change. So your statement is false because their claim was related to sea ice, not the ice caps. A lot of people are not aware the ice caps cover the artic and Antarctic land masses and in some places, the ice is thousands of feet thick. Surrounding those land masses is sea ice located over the ocean. Their prediction was for summer sea ice, not the ice covering the land masses, and it wasn't their prediction, but the prediction from scientists who have been documenting the decline of summer sea ice and the prediction of an "Ice Free Summer' ranges from pre-2020 to pre-2050. You can read about it here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_sea_ice_decline.
Your denial of the facts and you provided none, isn't going to change the fact our climate is changing due to our use of fossil fuels and other human-related activities. So, you can keep your incandescent bulbs (I've reduced my electric bills by 50% by switching to LED bulbs over the last 10 years), but new technology, funded by capitalism is going to be the demise of the fossil fuel industry and the world will be a better place. There will be less pollution, it will cost less to heat and light our homes, we will have safer and more efficient automobiles, and contrary to what you think, I will still be able to take my gas powered 409 or track car out on the weekends. The gas might be a little expensive though.
GLM409
Practice what your preaching !! 