I hear crickets when ever I ask certain questions of people such as those you mention here.
For example, I get no response or babbling, when I mention that we have seen sustained global warming which caused the end of various ice ages in Earth’s history. So then, wasn’t some global warming a good thing, I ask of some people I talk to.
Crickets or babbling is the response.
Isn’t the fact that we have seen climatic shifts in Earth’s history, happening well before the Industrial Revolution, clear evidence that there are natural cycles happening, which we probably don’t understand and have no control over anyway.
Again, no coherent response.
And again, I get no coherent response, to questions about, even if the worst happens, won’t we adapt to such changes?
also ask them “If CO2 from man is driving climate change, why do ice core samples ALWAYS show rising temperatures first, and then, 800 years later, show an increase in CO2?”
To claim CO2 is causing climate change when CO2 doesn’t rise for 100’s of years after the temperatures rise is like saying that someone who never ate sugar of any kind- at all, who got diabetes, and had it for 70+ or so years, then one day eats sugar, and the science community comes along and says that it’s the sugar that caused the 70+ years of diabetes in this person
I suppose they only consider information from when “records” started being kept. Anything before that doesn’t count. Or something. You know how libs like to erase history.
The vikings used to farm in Greenland.
If we want a simple method to reduce CO2 levels, plant more trees. I have heard that the clearing of the rain forest has done the most to allow the CO2 levels to increase.
Plants more trees that sequester the most CO2: horse-chestnut, black walnut, American sweetgum, ponderosa pine, red pine, white pine, London plane, Hispaniolan pine, Douglas fir, scarlet oak, red oak, Virginia live oak, and bald cypress. This is an action that even idiots can understand.