They keep lying.

They only lie in the papers. They're honest in scientific publications. The American Natural History Museum has a recent article where they discuss the ice ages in antiquity, and they recognize that we're still coming out of an ice age that began before written history.

Science by its nature, gets things wrong a lot. That's why it includes the continually testing of hypothesis by trying to prove them wrong and then correct errors when they appear. It's quite different to make an honest error and to lie.

STILL coming out of? It 'ended' (actually this is just an interglacial period withing this Ice Age) near 12,000 year ago with a mini relapse till 10,000 and we're headed to the next in about 2000 years no matter how much we burn.

Oh, and we are still significantly cooler than the previous interglacials though we shouldn't be.
Greenland should be 70% ice free, not 70% covered, and much of Florida should have been inundated, and that's WITHOUT any alleged anthropogenic influence.

Educate yoself fool! The Quaternary glaciation

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2016-06-15/what-is-an-ice-age-explainer/7185002

Educate yourself, you massive moron.
I don't do links, and as I've already stated years whereas you haven't, you may shush your silly face up.
And leave the hippity hoppity talk to the ghetto rats, you're cringey enough as is.

btw, there is no "American Natural History Museum" hence why you didn't post their "recent article where they discuss the ice ages in antiquity, and they recognize that we're still coming out of an ice age that began before written history." It would have said 11,700 yrs ago or 10,000 for starters, and explained what an interglacial period is.

In addition, what part of what I said about Greenland & Florida escaped the vast expanse between your ears? Translation: The previous interglacials were W-A-R-M-E-R than the current one, thus highlighting the fact that Global Warming is a farce.

Sheesh, the depths of your ignorance never ceases to amaze, padre, does it?

Oh yeah, you're brain is at capacity. Shall I quote it for you?

"...in terms of the long history of the Earth we are actually still in an overarching ice age period - known as the Quaternary glaciation - which has been going for the last 2.6 million years. At the moment, the Earth is just in a slightly warmer period, an interglacial."

Sure, global warming is happening - and it's been happening for thousands of years, and will continue for possibly thousands more until it reaches a peak and goes back in the other direction - as it has done a dozen times before (according to the currently known climate record taken from ice core samples).

You may continue your regularly scheduled gibberish and nonsense.

That quote confirms exactly what I said, you befuddled twit. (You neglected to cite the source)
You said the Ice Age ENDED, and fairly recently at that.
I said it did NOT end and we are now in an interglacial period.
Prehistoric goes a bit farther back than antiquity, btw.

Skip your additional improvised bs, padre, you're really bad at it.

"Oh yeah, you're brain is at capacity. Shall I quote it for you?"

your*

Oh, the irony.

Phone autocorrect... shit happens - literally, I typed that while dropping a deuce earlier.

So, you didn't even read it. Take a look at the 10th through 19th words. "we are actually still in an overarching ice age period"

It's from the article you refused to read. In part, it's an interview with Dr Steven Phipps, a climate system modeler and palaeoclimatologist with the University of Tasmania.

Interacting with you is really taxing. You only have beliefs, and they're not even your beliefs - it's something that someone else told you to believe. When confronted with information that contradicts your narrow view, you choose to ignore it, or refuse to even look at it - opting to insult the bearer of what you perceive to be some kind of attack on you.

Because insults are, apparently, the most effective method of communication with you - that is how I will communicate with you (when I must).

"Muh otto core wrecked dit it"

Google "interglacial," you utterly confounded twit.

You keep trying to contradict me by VERIFYING what I had stated, which incidentally, started off with me (intentionally) verifying what you had originally stated albiet with a correction.
Perhaps reading your 'museum article' instead of being such an idiotic contrarian might be of better service.

You can't be this stupid

- oh wait, you are.

This begins to bore me?

Later, fool.

Interglacial simply means that temperatures are warmer and the world is not covered by glaciers. The definition is, literally, "a geological interval of warmer global average temperature lasting thousands of years that separates consecutive glacial periods within an ice age".

Did you catch that? There are consecutive glacial periods within an ice age.

:)

Finally the dimwit catches on. See what happens when you look up what you do not know? It's called learning, padre *pats head*

"within an ice age" It can be interglacial and an ice age at the same time.

By the way, you're the one who said it ended - I never said that. I said we're coming out of an ice age - which may be wrong, we won't really know until the next glacial period begins - long after you and I are dead.

Because I can't screenshot my own statement too, padre?

"VagabondSouffle

STILL coming out of? It 'ended' (actually this is just an interglacial period withing this Ice Age) near 12,000 year ago with a mini relapse till 10,000 and we're headed to the next in about 2000 years no matter how much we burn.

Oh, and we are still significantly cooler than the previous interglacials though we shouldn't be.
Greenland should be 70% ice free, not 70% covered, and much of Florida should have been inundated, and that's WITHOUT any alleged anthropogenic influence."

"VagabondSouffle

within*"

▶️"actually this is just an ⏭️interglacial period ⏩within*⏪ this Ice Age⏮️"◀️

NEXT ASSIGNMENT: Google: "semi-quote," padre.

I can see why you wanted to be a priest.

Laterz, chump.

ey padre, hablas español, porque es chistoso quando americanos stan pretendiendo que ellos hablan español

"MaybeABigSomeonejr.

Ay, esto niño piense que el hablas español, yo no preocupa por gramático no es muy importante, tu eres un viejo que preocupa por gramático eres como un perdedor compañero. En Mexico mis compañeros no preocuparse con gramático porque eso no es muy importante. Tu eres una viejita chica blanca que preocupas con gramatica."

Your words, no, tacito?
In Mexico your compañeros ain't in the USofA.

But your triggered jealousy makes me smile.
Do continue.

Because I visit Mexico you twit, then go back to the USA, is it a crime to be bilingual?

"MaybeABigSomeonejr.

Trumps wall is suiting me great. Just because I am Mexican doesn't mean I can't be conservative. You libtards are very funny, you say Conservatives are racist white males, but you (a libtard) just proved that you are a racist asshole. Go to Taco Bell and stuff your fat asshole with all the tacos you want f**ktard"

Your words, no, vatito?

Now go make them tacos.

Being bilingual is called being educated, now go salty brit and drink some more tea, that is what you guys do best

Aww, a Mexicana? How's La Pared Del Trump suitin' ya?

You got something in common with Dimber then (other than his nutsack in your mouth) he ain't Gringolian either, tee hee.

Laterz, chump. I'll call you when I quiero mi Taco Bell, k?

Trumps wall is suiting me great. Just because I am Mexican doesn't mean I can't be conservative. You libtards are very funny, you say Conservatives are racist white males, but you (a libtard) just proved that you are a racist asshole. Go to Taco Bell and stuff your fat asshole with all the tacos you want f**ktard

ok boomer

Triggered much?

Tu y tus compañeros in Mexico are on what side of the wall, vato?

You can call me what you like, just remember I'm what none of yous jealous losers will ever be, and that's American. That's "Americano" si tu hablas español as
almost as well as yourself.

Now go make them tacos.

I was born and raised in America, my mom is Mexican and my dad American you dipshit. I go down to Mexico every once in a while but I am a conservative American who wants the wall to be built. Now go take your shemale British ass back to Britain where you belong brit. You may think you are American but remember, we gained independence from you losers. So go and pour tea up your asshole because its teat time (4:00) British loser.

Americanos*

Mine is bad, but your Spanish 101 needs work, Sra Smith

"stan"? Do you mean "están"?
Ain't you mean to say "Se hablan"?

You also need to catch up on Clint Eastwood movies to catch the drift on "padre," ese.

Ciao.

Ay, esto niño piense que el hablas español, yo no preocupa por gramático no es muy importante, tu eres un viejo que preocupa por gramático eres como un perdedor compañero. En Mexico mis compañeros no preocuparse con gramático porque eso no es muy importante. Tu eres una viejita chica blanca que preocupas con gramatica.

Do you require someone to traducir to you what "MaybeABigSomeonejr. .... Just because I am Mexican" means in el Espanolialien?
Or is being a complete ignoramous a necessary part of ye olde los Hispanos package, you daft twit?

Seriously, why IS it that Mexico is a Third World dumpster when land we stole from you lot is so productive? California is the world's FIFTH largest economy. Oil, silver, gold, arable land, and y'all gotta come here to labor in the lands we took from you just so you can live in ghettos that are still way better than your flea bitten pueblos. $35 for 8hrs shift on a cot in a packed slum apartment in the South Bronx is really that much better than your own casita en Puebla?
Why is that?

Mexico is a dumpster you twat, I am a bilingual American who's family moved from Spain to Mexico in the 1900's. I didn't make it a dumpster. In Puebla, my great grandmother had 5 servants per floor of her house, we are a very affluent family. My grandmother moved from Puebla to America when she married an Italian American from New York. So really that land wasn't taken away from my ancestors, at the time they were living in Spain.
Now you daft twit (who says this anymore, only British boomers say this) go back to Britain where you belong and drink some tea there. Maybe see a dentist because you most likely have ugly ass teeth and go to a plastic surgeon elephant face.

within*

I know, it's always 10-12 years and we'll be doomed.

At least they give us time to pack.

Why are you putting a meme here about Christianity?

Because Scientology sounds too much like science.

and Islam sounds too much like lamb?

https://youtu.be/zSDLRm3jhc8

The ice age was coming in 1978...acording to Leonard Nimoy 😜

When it comes to climate change, precise predictions of when specific events will happen are extremely difficult and in the end not really possible. We are talking about a system as large as the globe.

The difficulty of making predictions doesn't make the underlying science wrong. The salient points are:

1. The world is warming; 2. polar ice is melting; 3. sea levels are rising as a result. Whether the Maldives or whatever island chain disappears under the ocean in 2000, 2050, or 2100 is not really the point. By the time it happens, it'll be too late. We need to take corrective measures now.

If it's so difficult to predict, perhaps angry idiots like Ocasio-Cortez shouldn't yell at us and tell us we're going to die in 10 years.

The polar ice caps melt and shift all the time. Have been doing so since the beginning. There's actually more ice on the caps then there have been in a long time.

You're being fed a lie.

I will readily admit that not everyone on the Left is a literal climate scientist who is able to recite all the facts with 100% accuracy and with all the data at their fingertips. AOC is not a climate scientist. I’m certainly not one myself, although I have made efforts to really understand the science behind it, since it does seem that important.

I agree with you that the earth’s climate has gone through shifts before, of course, over the billions of years that the planet has existed. Life had to change and adapt radically in response.

If you read about extinction events, they are wrenching. Life continues, and I have no doubt humanity will survive most scenarios, but a whole lot of organisms and species pass away when climate shifts radically.

The current pace of climatic changes over a period of decades seems slow by the standards of our lifetime, but is the blink of an eye in geologic terms. Previous climatic shifts tended to occur over thousands of years (unless prompted by a sudden catastrophic event like a meteor strike). A shift that takes place over just a century or two gives a lot less time for organisms to adapt.

These sudden changes today are being caused by humans: specifically our industrial activity. We have to find a way to reconcile our industry and technology with the ecological limits of the globe. That is all this is about. I’m not trying to tell you that you can’t eat hamburgers or drive a big SUV or whatever. Individual consumer decisions don’t count for much. But frankly, need to do a whole lot more than that to really solve this.

If you've actually studied previous climate shifts then you know that no matter what we do it is going to happen anyways. Instead of crying about the fact that it's changing and trying to stop the unstoppable we should be preparing for the inevitable change. This whole movement is as stupid as it gets.

This is different from all previous climatic shifts in that the changes this time are being caused by human activity. That means we can do something about it -- at least stop the worst changes from occurring. If we can limit the warming to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, then that will be a much better world than on that is 4 degrees Celsius hotter.

Maybe we will fail in the end, but we need to try.

China, India, etc. will get on board with fighting climate change if we do. Their governments have problems, but they are at least led by technocratic people who understand science. They have a billion people who stand to be impacted severely by climate change. They don't want a violent revolution.

China's been investing a whole lot more in green energy and public transportation than we have, by the way. Yes they emit more greenhouse gases overall than America but that is mainly because they have 4x our population. Their per-capita emissions are much lower.

They don't have to listen to us. Their own scientists deliver them the same message.

Admittedly, a billion of them driving is going to happen and it's going to be a problem unless we can succeed in making cars clean. So, let's work on it instead of prematurely declaring defeat.

I told you before. Give more of YOUR money but leave mine alone. I am cool with that.

The scale and complexity of this problem are such won’t ever be solved by people like sitting down, studying the science, and then voluntarily making decisions about their own lifestyle and taxation rates. That’s why we have government, to coordinate resources and solve problems that we can’t do individually. Like building infrastructure and winning wars. Climate change is the war of our times.

In this case we need public policy to provide a nudge, whether that’s in taxes or green energy investment or auto emissions regulations.

I doubt they will do much to combat climate change. Their air has been so polluted so long it’s causing immediate and noticeable respiratory problems with the public. Yet they are reluctant to do anything to reverse their local air pollution, much less global climate change.

The whole doomsday mantra from the left about climate change is what skeptics disagree with. Instead of reducing CO2 emissions in a vain attempt to reverse natural and unreversable global climate changes, we should be doing it for our own immediate health needs. But I guess a global doomsday crisis gets more attention - especially from a population where so many people intentionally suck smoke and vapors into their lungs.

We can walk and chew gum at the same time, and we can tackle both localized air pollution and global CO2 levels at the same time.

And sorry to be “doomsday” about this issue but honestly, that is where the science leads us. We have X amount of years left (and whether that’s 10, or 20, or 50 years is not all that important) in which to act to stop the worst effects, and we are basically doing nothing. In fact, global greenhouse gas emissions are *still rising* year over year when they need to be falling and fast.

We are humans, we are smart and we can solve this problem just as we overcame other obstacles in the past. But the skepticism, dismissiveness, and defeatism from the Right certainly isn’t helping.

That’s what I’m talking about. The leftist matter-of-fact attitude that climate change is caused my man and, thus, reversible by man. If we focus on cleaning the air we breath instead of the fantasy of global climate control, there would be more people on board with the effort.

I heard that, even if the entire United States were to somehow produce zero emissions, the effect on the global climate would be insignificant. The climate is going to change no mater what humans do.

Nothing’s stopping you from supporting the environmental movement in its efforts to clean our air, even as it pursues other goals such as fighting climate change.

What you say about the U.S. reaching zero emissions and not significantly impacting the climate is true as far as it goes, but does not support the proposition you cite it for. That fact illustrates why it’s going to require a multilateral effort by the United States, Europe, China/India, and every other country on earth. A diplomatic process which is ongoing, by the way: and which I am quite certain you don’t support.

I would support the diplomatic process if it wasn't such a money grab from the US. Too many nations are just looking for us to give them more money and resources to help them implement environmental friendly uses. But they end up using little if any of it to actually clean the air. The US and a few other countries lowering emissions isn't going to do anything to change the climate